fulness, the simplicity, the noble-heartedness, the sincere and provident sympathy, these and suchlike qualities, in which the spirit of the real gentleman consists-or that spirit is not worth caring for are the natural and necessary fruits of a right Catholic moral education, and may exist, and do exist, among those to whom the term "English gentleman" presents no practical idea distinct from its accidental inclusion in that which is habitual to them. Of course, I don't mean that Christianity will teach a man, at least directly, how to make a graceful bow, or carve a haunch of venison in the most approved manner; that it will of itself secure all those minor features in the character of a gentleman, in which that character is very commonly in England supposed to consist. These will come naturally, as the effect of early habits and association with persons of a certain class of society, and, especially since many of them are real instances of kindness, will graft quite easily upon the Christian plant. But they are the externals, not the essence -(pp. 21, 22).

Secondly, Canon Oakeley is of opinion that this Catholic College should

be administered by a single agency rather than by a body consisting of various elements. By a single agency I do not mean necessarily a single individual (certainly not a layman) as the ultimate authority; but, at any rate, a power representing one spirit and one mind. If I might venture to express an opinion upon a point of detail, I should say that some Religious Community, versed in education, and comprising among its prominent members persons who could bring to the work of instruction or government the advantages of a pre-Catholic experience, would seem to me the most likely instrument of carrying out the normal idea with success (pp. 26, 27).

This is a minor matter, on which we have not entered in this article, and have no wish to enter. One thing, however, is noteworthy: Canon Oakeley considers, apparently, that there is at this moment a superabundance of material at the disposal of our bishops, from which to select the superior and teachers of a Catholic higher College. We sincerely hope that he is well informed on this head.

It is on his third proposition, however, that the chief divergence takes place between the writer and ourselves. To our mind, the most vital question of all is whether the Catholic higher education is or is not to be given at a Protestant University; but Canon Oakeley thinks this question "quite a secondary one" (p. 27), and is inclined rather than otherwise to favour the proposal of a Catholic College at Oxford or Cambridge. It will be necessary, therefore, to consider how far anything contained in the pamphlet before us may tend to invalidate the grounds on which we rested our adverse opinion. They were chiefly two.

Our first argument rested on a premiss for which in its turn we gave our reasons. The higher education of Catholic youth, we

had said, will be a signal benefit or a deplorable calamity, precisely according as it may or may not be thoroughly imbued with Catholic principles: the mere imparting of Catholic instruction will be far from sufficient; what we absolutely require is, that such instruction shall be practically regarded by its recipients as the one supreme and authoritative element of all. This, however, we proceeded to argue, is simply out of the question in a Protestant University and we must say that Canon Oakeley has himself supplied us with an additional reason for our judgment; for he mentions as the chief advantage of such an University (p. 27) its "examinations and degrees." The "Catholic layman" was precluded from this argument, because he depreciates altogether the advantage of examinations (pp. 12-15); but we quite concur with the implied opinion of Canon Oakeley, that the various mental exercises involved in preparing for an examination constitute an admirable intellectual discipline. The real question, however, is not whether the intellectual discipline be admirable as such, but whether it will tend to penetrate the intellect with Catholic truth; and as no specially Catholic knowledge can possibly be tendered for examination, our answer to the question must be very confidently in the negative.. F. Newman says most truly that "nothing will be found to impress and occupy the mind " of students but such matters as they have to present to their examiners." In like manner, nothing which is prepared for a purely domestic and family examination will impress and occupy the mind even commensurably with those studies, proficiency in which will be displayed before an University audience, stamped with University approval, and rewarded by University renown. If any one expressly wished to devise a plan whereby Catholic truth should hold the last and lowest place in the practical estimation of Catholic young men, he could not hit upon one more effectually conducive to that end, than by teaching them to prepare for the public examination of a Protestant University as the very climax of their academical course.

Our second argument was addressed to the "Catholic layman's" proposal, that most free and unrestricted intercourse should be encouraged with Protestant undergraduates. Canon Oakeley agrees with us in thinking this most dangerous; but he considers that the College authorities would in this matter "have the reins very much in their own hands" (p. 28). We are a good deal surprised that he can acquiesce in this view. A young Catholic, of active and energetic mind, comes up to

*“Lectures and Essays on University Subjects," p. 177.

Oxford; of course he eagerly desires to acquaint himself and interchange ideas with other active and energetic minds; and, unless he is already almost saintly, he greatly prefers their society to that of his more orthodox but more humdrum fellowCatholics. The charm of novelty is superadded: he has known Catholics all his life, but Protestant society is an untasted excitement. How can he be prevented from gratifying that wish? or how can he gratify it without incurring those disastrous consequences on which we have commented? As one illustration out of a hundred, Canon Oakeley has mentioned (p. 29) the University debating-club. He cannot surely intend that Catholic students shall be forbidden to enter it; yet let an able and thoughtful youth be but enrolled on its list, he is at once launched freely into the most intelligent Protestant society.*

Our arguments apply directly to youths of considerable intellectual power; but we have already more than once pointed out that the more ordinary young men who really take an interest in the studies of the place (and if they do not, every one would admit that they are better away), will always look up with unquestioning veneration to the unanimous utterances of those energetic thinkers with whom they are brought into contact.

There are Catholics who seem to be under the impression that, at all events, excellent instruction in certain secular matters is given by the University professors. Of course, if this were so, our reasoning would not be in the slightest degree affected; but we believe the notion to be quite mistaken. We have speaks of seen how disparagingly the "Catholic layman Oxford professorial instruction; and Canon Oakeley (p. 28) has "heard upon good authority, that the public lectures of the University are in general by no means first-rate."

We are bound, then, to say frankly, that we can find nothing in the pamphlet before us to modify in the slightest degree our views as previously expressed.

Canon Oakeley mentions (p. 29) that when he was at Christ Church, But this was due to their Christ Church men mixed very little with others. contempt for other Colleges; and it must not be forgotten that (unless our memory deceives us) there were at Christ Church nearly 200 undergraduates -many men of conspicuous ability-from whom any individual could choose his society. This exclusiveness, moreover, did not continue. The writer of this article was at Christ Church some ten years later than Canon Oakeley, and all his chief friends belonged to other Colleges.

402

ART. VI.-CHRISTIAN ART.

The History of our Lord as exemplified in Works of Art; with that of the Types, S. John the Baptist, and other Persons of the Old and New Testament. Commenced by the late Mrs. JAMESON; continued and completed by Lady EASTLAKE. 2 vols. London: Longman. 1864.

HE series of works on Christian Art brought out by the late Mrs. Jameson, and which earned for her so high a reputation as an art critic, was conceived upon a plan of progressive interest and importance. From "Sacred and Legendary Art," published in 1848, she passed to the special legends connected with Monastic Orders, and in 1852 gave to the public her most charming volume entitled "Legends of the Madonna." The series was to have closed with the subject of the volumes now before us, and some progress had been made by Mrs. Jameson in collecting notes on various pictures, when, in the spring of 1860, death cut her labours short. The work, however, has passed into hands well able to complete it worthily. We may miss some of the freshness and genuine simplicity with which Mrs. Jameson was wont to transfer to paper the impressions made on her mind and heart; but Lady Eastlake, while bringing to her task the essential qualification of earnestness and exhibiting considerable grace and force of style, is possessed of a far wider and more critical acquaintance with the history of art, than her amiable predecessor either had or pretended to have. It is pleasant to find in these pages, as in those which preceded them, the evidence of a desire to avoid controversial matter; and that, without compromise of personal conviction, care has been generally taken not to wound the feelings of those who differ from the writer in religious belief. The primary object of the work is æsthetic and artistic, not religious; and it is seldom that the laws of good taste are transgressed in its pages by gratuitous attacks upon the tenets of the great body of artists who are the immediate subject of criticism. Indeed, considering that these volumes are the production of a Protestant, we think that less of Protestant animus could hardly be shown, at all consistently with honesty of purpose and frankness of speech. That no traces of the Protestant spirit should appear, would be next to an impossibility; and affectation of Catholic feeling, where it did not exist, would be offensive from its very unreality. So much self-control in traversing a vast extent of delicate and

dangerous ground deserves all the more hearty acknowledgment, as it must have been peculiarly difficult to a person of Lady Eastlake's ardent temperament and evident strength of conviction. If, therefore, in the course of our remarks, we feel bound to point out the evil influence which Lady Eastlake's religious views seem to us to have exercised on her critical appreciations, it will be understood that theories, not persons, are the object of our animadversions. It is at all times an ungrateful task to expose the weak points of an author; it would be especially ungenerous to be hard upon the shortcomings of one who has done such good service to the cause of truth, in proving, however unconsciously, by the mere exercise of persistent candour, the identity of Christian and Catholic Art. Catholics, indeed, do not ordinarily stand in need of such proof. If they know anything of Art, the fact of this identity must be with them an early discovery; but it is gratifying, especially in a time and country in which scant justice on such matters is too often dealt out to us, to be able to adduce a testimony the more valuable because given in despite of an adverse bias. It is quite possible, indeed, that the writer has not perceived the full import of her work; but no one, we think, can study her examples or weigh the force of her criticism without coming to the true conclusion upon this subject.

But, before establishing the correctness of this assertion, we must draw attention to one point upon which we are at issue with Lady Eastlake: a point, moreover, of no small importance, as it vitally affects the value of a large part of her criticisms. A question arises at the outset, what standard or test of Christian Art is to be set up; and Lady Eastlake makes an excellent start in the investigation. There is, perhaps, no principle so steadily kept in view throughout the work or so often and earnestly insisted on as this, that genuine Christian art and true Christian doctrine are intimately and essentially connected. Art is bound to depict only the truth in fact or doctrine (vol. ii. p. 266, note). Departure from sound theology involves heresy in art. Now, no principle can be more true than this, or of greater importance towards forming a correct judgment upon works professing to belong to Christian art. Beauty and truth are objectively identical, for beauty is only truth lighted up and harmonized by the reason; and to supernatural beauty, which Christian art essentially aims at expressing, supernatural truth must necessarily correspond. For here we have nothing to do with mere material beauty, "the glories of colour, the feats of anatomical skill, the charms of chiaroscuro, the revels of free handling." Admirable as these are in them