Newspaper Page Text
Vol. 3. rHEvtn?xmK^rST-tCHICAGO AND CINCINNATI, SATURDAY, -JULY 17, 1886._ ] T' \G>K XXX*?X.V No*29,‘ f No. 29.
siTIge TWgsulist. A RELIGIOUS AND FAMILY WEEKLY. Universalist Publishing House, PUBLISHERS. CHARLES CAVERLY, General Agent. Issued by Western Branch. 69 Dearborn St., Rooms 40 and 4l, CIIICib.G-0, 21 La. LORD & THOMAS, MANAGERS ADVERTISING DEPARTMENT. Terms: Postage Paid, #2.50 A Year, in Advance. Sample Copies Free. Western Advisory Board: Wm. H. Ryder, D. D., Hon. John R. Buchtel, 0. A. Pray Rev. W. S. Crowe, Cmas. L. Hutchinson. Entered at the PostofBce as Second-Class Mail Matter Speciul Gontributors. A PRINCE IN BALTIMORE. By Rey. R. H. Pullman. (Baltimore, Md.) By a decree of the Roman pontiff, Leo XLII, James Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, has been created a prince of the Roman Catholic church. The ceremonies of his coronation were very imposing and regal. The red beretta was placed upon his head by Arch bishop Kenrick, of 8t. Louis, at the ca the.ral, in the presence of an immense throng of people. The magnificent robes of bishops and archbishops, and other dignitaries, added to the splen dors of the pageant. The venerable building, vast in proportions and rich with associations of great Catholic events, was ablaze with dyes of cardinal blue and purple, and precious gems in the regalia of the prelates. Sitting amid the crowd and gazing upon this bewildering display, our sim ple republican tastes were not a little disturbed. We called to mind the dig nity of the fathers of the Republic in Congress assembled, affixing their sig natures to the Declaration of Indepen dence, and the contrast was not favor able to the glitter and show of this churchly assembly. In imagination we placed in the center of this pageant the form of Jesus of Nazareth, in whose name these ceremonies were preten tiously conducted, and what a rebuke the imaginary picture administered ! Simply clothed with a seamless robe, there stood the Son of God, with not one single jewel to indicate the dignity of his office. The words he once uttered -—“The kingdom of heaven cometli not with observation”—sounded upon our ears in utter condemnation of the whole scene. When all was hushed, and at the ap pointed time, Archbishop Williams, of Boston, approached from the sacristy, wearing his purple cassock, white sur plice, scarlet vestments of the mass, and a gold mitre. Ilis gloves, hose and slippers were of scarlet; the episcopal ring was displayed on his right hand. Approaching, he saluted the Cardinal, who sat in stately dignity upon his princely throne, and passed on to the altar, and making the sign of the cross, he began the mass. Into a gilded cen sor tilled with live coals he thrice sprinkled incense. As the little cloud arose he perfumed the altar and the cross. The bishops rising and bowing, according to rule, as the ceremonies proceeded, and the ministers assisting at the altar, grouped themselves in such constant changes as to present living pictures of wonderful suggestiveness. At the elevation of the Host there came the sound of a tinkling bell, and instantly utter silence fell upon the vast and brilliant assembly. Every head was bowed, for it was now that the Archbishop was supposed to be changing the bread and wine into the literal tlesh and blood of Jesus Christ the Lord. So with this monstrous cannibalism of the doctrine of transubstantiation, believed in by the whole Catholic mem bership, the ceremonies of crowning a cardinal were inaugurated. A native boru American citizen becomes a prince and sits upon a throne! In the lan guage of Archbishop Ityan—the orator of the occasion,—referring to the Car dinal, “we behold one who takes his place as a prince in the kingdom of God on this earth—the church of Jesus Christ.’’ The Homan Catholic church is essen tially monarehial in the spirit of its government. It has not one single pulse of sympathy with Republican ideas, yet Archbishop Ryan claimed in his address that “there *s no antagonism betweeu the Catholic church and our (republican) political institutions, but that,on the contrary, she is nowhere on earth more perfectly at home than in this free land.” Very bold and mis leading are these words. The Homan Catholic prelates are shrewd managers, and know very well how to cover the cat’s paw in the meal. While they boast of the sympathy of their church with our principles of government on great occasions like this, it is but the trick of the wire-pulling managers of au organ ization, to deceive the masses of the American people. History rises up in emphatic rebuke of the boast. The whole spirit of their church government is against individual liberty. We have more to fear for our common school system from this church than from any other danger that threatens it. They would utterly destroy the system, had they the power. And he is but a dull thinker who does not know that the destruction of our school system would be a death blow to our American lib erty. We should be on our guard, and should know that “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” This ostentatious pageant occurring so near the time of our national jubilee, irresistibly draws the contrast between the symplicity and manly dignity of republican manners, and this sicken ing vanity of ostentatious display. It is the old idea of kings and aristocracy to tickle the masses with shows, to im press the ignorant and the foolish with the grandeur and power of princely courts. The chief magistrate of the republic dresses like a common citizen; his cab inet Haunt no purple robes; the splen dor of costly regalia, enriched with pre cious stones, are not used to attest the dignity of American senators; the repre sentatives of the people are not distin guishable by their garbs from other free citizens; only the judges of the Supreme Court are ridiculously robed. These great men of the nation are men of simple tastes, but these churchly dig nitaries—these who should be, as fol lowers of Jesus, examples of modesty in manners and robing, who should avoid display—outshine even the gay butterllies of fashion in the magnifi cence of their official toilet. The pure white robes of righteousness, and the gems of temperance, brotherly kind ness, meekness, and faith in character, should distinguish the Christian, rather than the purpled silk of his regalia. We have nothing to urge against the religion of this anti-republican church, any more than we have against the re ligion of the so-called orthodox church es, for there is very little to choose between them ; neither have we other than profound admiration for the vir tue and moral worth of individual Cath olics, but agaiust'Tho mbiiarchial ideas in the government of the Roman Cath olic church, and its excessive vanity and love of show in the name of the religion of the meek and lowly Jesus, we have nothing but stern republican contempt. WHAT UNIVERSALISM IS NOT AND WHAT IT IS. By Kev. M. H. Houghton. (Storm Lake, la.) Passages from a tract written and circu lated by this pastor: Universalism is not that religion which says God has been defeated in any of his endeavors. It respectfully declines to worship at the shrine of a disappointed God, a de feated Saviour, and a victorious Devil. Universalism does not believe in the thousand and one excuses orthodoxy makes for its God of weakness. God either has the power to save the world, and not the disposition, or the disposition and not the power, or the power and disposition combined. Which of these three positions, in view of all the facts of nature and rev elation, do you think is most likely to be the true one V You must certainly have some idea whether he is limited in power, or wanting in disposition to save the en tire race of Adam. If he does not save all, there must be some cause for the failure, and this, in the last analysis, applies either to his power or his disposition. If we say man is a free agent, and can either accept or resist divine grace, in the particulars that he resists, is not his force superior to God’s V What is it he resists, if it is not God, and if he finally succeeds in his resist ance, does he not, just so far, limit God’s power ? Think it over and see. Again, if it he said God can over come all resistance, even the rebellion of the rinite will, and does not do it, neither in this world, nor in the world to come, then is not his disposition. Just so far as he fails, imperfect ? Is there any flaw here ? Don’t shut your eyes and turn away, but open them, think and decide for yourself. Now the lirst of these propositions, viz.:—that of the power of God to save all, and not the disposition, is Calvinism. The second, the disposition to save all and not the power, is Arminianism. The third, viz.:—the power and the disposition to save all, is Universal ism. Calvinism is not Uuiversalism, be cause it denies God’s disposition to save all men. Arminianism is not Univers alism, because it denies God’s power to save all. Methodism, Presbyterianism, Congregationalism, Episcopalianism, Adventism, and the denomination known as Baptists, and others not men tioned. are not Uuiversalism, because they are either Calvinistic or Arminiau in their professions of faith. Universalism does not teach the fall of the race in Adam, in any such sense as implies inherent and never ending rebellion to God. It does not say we are in every part and power depraved. It realizes the good as well as the evil side of human nature, and will not fel lowship with those doctrines which de clare that the divine image in humanity is endlessly lost. Universalism does not believe in vi carious atonement, that is to say, it re jects the doctrine that one person can suffer punishment for another, in the sense that the guilty party goes free. Universalism does not believe in a final judgment day, when all the dead will at once appear before the heavenly throne to be judged. Such a picture savors of our earthly tribunals, and is not in keeping with the government of an Infinite God. Universalism does not accept as true, the belief of an end less hell for any person. It rejects the idea of the physical resurrection. It disbelieves in a personal devil, and questions the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures. It rejects the oft repeated saying that “Honesty is the best policy;” it should not be a policy, but a principle, and it has little patience with the assertion that sin goes unpunished. These are a few of the many things Universalism is not. Will you now give me your attention while I endeavor to state what Universalism is. It is that science of religion which seeks to bring all the facts of the uni verse into harmonious relations, and to destroy the idea of contradiction any where in the works of God. It believes in the unity of truth, whether found in nature or revelation. God’s laws are immutable and eternal. Among all the shining stars of heaven there is one law governing throughout the whole. It is the great law of com pensation,—so much for so much. This applies to all departments of being, and in the long run is everywhere real ized. Universalism is this divine equi poise. It seeks justice everywhere, and says at last, it will be done. It does not limit its visions to this world. It seeks in a large way to bring the entire field of life into view, and to declare that truth which is consistent with it all. It looks upon this world as only a primary school, in that great system of education which stretches on through out eternity. Its chief reliance is in God, who sees and knows all things ; who works by means, and who has never known de feat. It believes life is planned on a larger scale than most churches preach. What seems defeat to man, is only as the hollow space in the links of the great chain whereby God is accomplish ing his purpose. Universalism says God has the power, the disposition, and the time to save the world. Jesus Christ in the brightness of his glory, came to assist the Father in the work of redemption. He does it, not by receiving the pun ishment due the offender, but by teach ing the guilty how to live in order to avoid the dominion of sin. Christian ity is a life, says Universalism, and they who live it in accordance with God’s laws and commands, realize the great est happiness, both here and hereafter. Those who disobey will receive the punishment due the violated law, ex actly so much and no more. We do not pay for Adam’s sin, but for our own. Religion is a personal matter, between the individual and his God. Nothing can ever intervene to make it otherwise. Universalism says the divine image may be hidden or veiled by sin, but can never be lost, because it is divine. The God-like cannot forever be cast aside. It will assert itself at last. The atonement signifies At-one-ment with God. When we are Christ-like we are one with our Creator. Christ’s life illustrates how this may be done. It is by love, charity, duty, humility, honesty, fidelity and all the Christian graces. If these are present as great moving forces in the life, then are we saved. If these are absent, just so far are we lost. Universalism says, however, that the soul of man is so planned that it will eventually tire of rebellion against the good ; as it is the final experience of the sinful, that the way of transgres sion is hard. Universalism and the Rible teach, now is the judgment of this world, and instead of waiting to call the children of earth together all at once, in the far away future, we are judged every day of our lives here, and deserved punish ment is received in this world or the world to come. We are positive it will scourge the sinner sooner or later, not because of God’s anger, but for the leason he loves us, and desires our ref ormation. “Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth.” —The maladministration of law often works us grievous wrongs us the grossest violation. While it is sought to compel obedience from the citizen, the courts and police officers should be held closely to h fair and impaitiul interpretation and 1 execution of the law. -— SAVONAROLA. -- y By Rev. L. J. Dinsmoue. (Columbus. Wisi) X. ' I One of the strangest and most won derful of shapes that appear in the back ground of Protestant S^story, is the gigantic character knowntas Savonarola, the priest, the agitator, tne reformer, of Florence. He sprang fiom obscurity, rose into world-wide prominence, and was soon overpowered hy an irresisti ble flood of hate, slander and angry passions. For long yeays he was ex alted as a saint, or villified as a hypo crite. Even now Lis character is scarcely understood. But it isfboming to be generally thought that he was a plain, honest man, of noble spirit and high intentions, and was carried on not only by the intensity of his o'frn convictions, but by the fevered society about him. The world was in commo|ion, old things were passing away, an<j the new and better world of modern thought was rising from the waste of|medifeval big otry and ignorance. Social life, scholas tic learning, art, music, Sbetry, war and government were in the ferment of transformation. The rr^ddle ages had come to an end, and hhe world was waking to a better life under the inspi ration of the charmed Renaissance. Here is the wonder spot Of modern his tory. In learning it war the return to classic simplicity; in art it was the restoration of Greek fidelity to nature, and in religion it was fte re-discovery of conscience, and the^eassertion of individuality. More justly speaking it was not so much a revolt against any dogma of the church, as It was the pas sage of the human mind over into new fields of thought and action. Men were • hardly aware that their new ideas were antagonistic to their old ones ; they I supposed they could both at once be 1 good Catholics and devout pagans. One great immediate cause of this was the fall of Constantinople in 1453, and the consequent wide dispersion of Greek scholars into western Europe, especially iuto Italy. This migration produced immense results. It opened up all the wonders of Greek literal ire to the eye of the student. And t^o;i»er and Plato, i and the-tragie poets cntft/TO occupy the western mind. Upon Italy the effects of this new birth were marked and immediate. A great crowd of mighty geniuses arose in all the chief cities of the northern portion of the peninsula, masters of art and song, skilled in the sciences, deeply read in classic learning. There were Dante, and Petrarch, and Boccaccio. Dante lifted the curtains and disclosed at once the deep blackness of the habi tations of guilt, and the transcendent glory of the home of the righteous. And he sung to the common people in their own tongue. Petrarch called up the wonders of the old classic world for the delight of the scholar, and the edu cation of the race. And Boccaccio sang of the world, not as the abode of sorrow, but as a scene of mirth and sunshine. And there were Michael Angelo, and Mirandola, and Folezeano—what a long list of illustrious names might be gath ered from the records of the opening years of the Renaissance! Into this strange struggling world, feeling its way blindly to the future, but with every sense awake, and every nerve throbbing with the keenest life, Jerome Savonarola was born in the city of Ferrara, Sept. 21, 1452. He was of honorable family, and his grandfather a distinguished physician. In his foot steps the family desired the young man to follow; but he elected otherwise. The splendor and the shame of the Renaissance culminated as he approach ed maturity, and corruption reached the flood tide of evil in the reign of Pope Alexander VI. The purest learn ing, the most exalted art, were often joined to the most monstrous moral de pravity, and there seemed decreed at once the death of faith and the utter decay of morals. Of a sensitive dispo sition, and keenly alive to the profound misery of hearts empty at once of faith and morals, all the thoughts of the young man turned to the priesthood as his only hope of comfort and peace. There he thought he could withdraw from the world, and far from its sin and shame, could dwell in a spiritual world of prayer, fasting and meditation. Accordingly, in his 24th year, he en tered a monastery, that he might es cape from himself, and in utter seclu sion from the great and busy scenes of human activity, he might dwell with God alone. But his superiors soon de tected the wonderful genius of the lad, and could not consent that the world should lose him. They set him to the study of theology. For seven years he was learning how to preach. Some of his library labors of this time remain, among them a poem on “The Ituin of the World,” closing with the refrain, “Weep, and be silent.” Well might he weep. Over the fair Italian cities had (lowed a great wave of corruption, and poisoned society at its very ceuter. And the church wasdetiled in itsinner j most places with the evil of the times, j A preceding l'ope had bought the I papacy, and a following me secured it ' by assassination. Thes- were the hor rors of the youth of Savonarola. And upon him they wrought a singular ef fect. They infused his spirit with a deep and all-pervading melancholy. His heart was sad, his hearing pro foundly dejected, and his eyes frequent ly full of tears. But he also felt that in some way he was to redeem Italy and bring again the days of faith and purity. When he felt the conscious ness of such a mission his whole bear ing was changed ; hiseyes flashed with the intensity of his thought, and “his voice rang like the call of the augel of the last day.” In 1490 he was sent to the monastery of St. Mark’s, in Florence, as chapel preacher. Florence was lifted up to the loftiest heights of literature, art and song. And under the Medicis it had become the center of a brilliant, stirring, half pagan life. It was the brightest spot in Italy, and even the passage of four centuries cannot wholly destroy the memory of its brightness, gladness, and wild abandon in the de lights of the physical and material. This vast interplay of moral and im moral forces was to confess him its master, and his influence was to be greater than that of a dictator. The first beginnings of Savonarola’s public ministry were humble enough and gave no promise of the brilliant success he was afterward to achieve. Indeed, his first public preaching was a sad failure. He attempted to follow t o the letter the instructions of his teach ers, and was so unnatural and artificial, that he could not carry it through. And so in sad dejection he returned to his monastery. But the spirit within must find expression. He had a prophet soul and must speak. And presently the surging tides of feeling, strong con viction and moral intensify swept aside the feeble barriers of conventional re straint and timidity, and the strong man was made manifest, and the orator of the fourteenth century revealed. As chapel preacher at St. Mark’s, he modestly began his great ministry of only eight years, but brim-full of great events, and touching half a world in its wonderful course. He assembled the monks under a damask-rose-tree, and lectured to them on the themes of the hour. For a time all went on quietly; then, as his spirit, stirred to its depths with great thoughts, began to shape more eloquent speech, the monks from other establishments came to hear him, and by stress of very numbers he went into the chapel. But an ever-growing audience necessitated the use of the Cathedral, an immense building always packed to its utmost capacity when ever he was to speak. Men and women went at midnight that they might se cure places for the early morning ser vice. His tongue was that of the com mon people; he used their words, employed their illustrations, and ap pealed to them like a brother. Against the sins of the masses he thundered and ilamed with the heat of a new judgment. Against gaming, avarice, licentious ness, and dishonesty, he struck fearful blows. He was absorbed with the idea of righteousness. That seemed to him the only object of life, to be right, not only in matters of religion, so called, but daily duties and life-labors. CHURCH PEWS. After many years’ discussion, the church pew question remains still un decided in the minds of men. There are those who believe that the system of renting pews offers a simple and easy way of meeting church expenses, and is convenient to trustees and parish committees who are charged with the duty of seeing that funds are secured. A large expense must be met some how ; that is settled. Those who have had experience with general collections know how hard it is to get money that way. It is a warm, genial day when the hat that has been sent around on a collecting tour comes back with a quar ter of the funds needed and asked for. Most people who attend church reg ularly like to occupy the same pew al ways ; they like to feel that they have a right to it, and nothing so comforta bly assures this right as the fact that the pew has been paid for. Faying for what is got is the custom among inde pendent people in America, and the principle of it applies as well to church pews themselves as to the dry goods and jewelry that are worn therein. Free churches are an old country idea, where it is said the rich maintain them in order to keep the poor contented. On the other hand there are many advocates of free pews. The auction or tax business causes classes in churches, divides up congregations, and cools friendly enthusiasm. There are many churches now, many rival denomina tions, and each must light for its pros perous existence. It is no longer, as of old, essential to respectability to be an attendant on public worship. There is much entertaining reading and public speaking outside of the church, and where a church has not an attractive preacher, its pews are with great ditli culty kept rented and tilled. A sign may be stuck out at the door that “all are welcome,’’ but that does not bring i in outsiders, who have the notion that ,n a taxed pew church they are not wel corned. See how slim are the church congregations, and see how people thick to a public hall to hear a common talk er, humbug though he may be. They feel that they are at home there, that they have the same right as any one else to be there. Some good men say churches should be not only free, but should be less Due and costly ; that they should be meeting-houses, for use not as churches are now used, one day in seven, and then closed up cold and dark and tight, but every day and for all sorts of useful purposes, such as lec tures, politics, entertainments, etc. If the capital locked up in expensive church buildings were used in employ ing good preachers at decent salaries, and providing good music and other at tractions, the churches would succeed better in their work of doing good.— Cincinnati Commercial Oazette. DISCOVERIES AT ZOAN. Zoan was the seat of the Pharoah of Joseph, the scene of the miracles of Moses, being situated in that pastoral district, which in the hieroglyphic rec ords, as well as in the Hebrew Chroni cles, bore the name of “the field of Zoan and which, uuder its classical name of Tanis, continued so late as the times of the Ptolemies to play an im portant part in the history of the an cient world. It was the chief city of the Delta during the most interesting two or three thousand years of Egyp tian history ; it owed much of its splen dor to Rameses II., who restored and built here upon a scale of extraordinary magnificence—the king when “the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve with rigor.” At San are the remains of a city once hardly inferior in grandeur to Thebes itself, while about it, as the capital of the Ilyksos or Shepherd Kings, as the Zoan of the Bible and the Tanis of the Greeks, centers a sacred interest aud an historical value peculiarly its own. Here, to illustrate the gigantic masonry of the place, Mr. Petrie disclosed the broken portions of the greatest of all colossi known to man -the Monolith of Rameses II. Among the labors, discoveries, or re sults at Sin, have been the successive and exhaustive surveys of the great temple, with mappings and photog raphy of every object and mound in the enclosure; the critical scrutiny of every fallen block of the great pylon of Shes honk III. ; trenching and shafting in many parts of the mounds ; proof that the wall of Pisebkanu reaches entirely round the temple, and that the Ptole maic stratum averages fifteen feet above the places and villas of the Hebrew period; a granite sarcophagus larger than the great one at Sakkarah ; the unpublished half of the celebrated tab let of Tirhakah ; an inscribed obelisk, in part of the XHIth dynasty ; a curi ous Grreco-Egyptian chapel, with val uable relies; a large stela of Ptolemy Philadelphia and five smaller ones: royal statuettes and sphinxes; discov ery of the Great Necropolis and minor necropolises ; and ttie disclosure of private dwellings of the pro-Ptolemaic and Roman times, containing many ob jects of special archajological and his torical value to illustrate the domestic life and the worship of the periods repre sented.— K. 1'. Observer. —It is the nearly unanimous prac‘ice to judge our fellows by the rule of self consistency. We say, They profess this: they do that. The two positions are not consistent: there is hypocrisy. But it may be doubted whether this is a fair judgment of human motive. As a criti cism of conduct it is just. We do right to point out the discrepancy between word and deed. In this way the actor is enlightened aud perhaps disciplined. Men’s inconsistencies are less appar ent to themselves than to others. To exhibit the looped and wiudowed ragged ness of their character is to afford them the means of repairing it. —But it does not follow that those who are inconsu-teut are insincere. The trnth is, symmetry of character is a difficult and exceedingly rare attainment; and only those who have made great progress in the high school of moral proportion are aware of the disagreement between the parts they play at different times. Men respond to the solicitations of the life around them with perfeet sincerity at the momeut; but ou looking over even a day’s doings it is seen that much of their movement was out of proportion with the rest. We once knew a perfectly sincere mau who read daily journals rep resenting three different uud hostile par ties. It was noticeable that he changed his politics several times a week. Some times this editor had him: sometimes that. In a degree this is true of all but the strongest men—of all who are not tirmly and intelligently established in conviction. —The Afrieo-Amei ieano Presbyterian has a positive word to delinquent sub scribers: “If you don’t want the skin rubbed off you as you try to enter heaven, you are advised to pay your subscription to this paper within the next thirty days.” —Erasmus said that when he got any money he bought hooks. If he had any money left, he bought clothes. JZsicIitorinl Bricks. ->M BY REV. I. M. ATWOOD, D.D. Canton, N. Y The music teachers are no more in ac cord, it appears, on the question of church mnsic than the public. At the rrcent session of the National Music Teachers’ Association this subject proved to be the most agitating of the many discussed. On the one side it was argued that the tastes as well as spiritual needs of the congregation should be taken into the account in adapting music to worship. On the other it was contended that con gregations are not to be consulted but educated. The musical director is to de cide what, is in good taste aud bring the congregation up to it. Ur. Duryea, who has had much experience in conducting congregational singing, held that the music is part of the worship and that the congregation must participate. Mr. Caryl Flon’o, of New York, while dissenting from Dr. Duryea on many points, de nounced in strong terms the “ quartet ” choir, aud proposed the abolition of solos, duets, and all compositions calcu lated to convert the church into a concert room. —Such articles as that of Father Mur phy in the Nineteenth Century, in reply to St. George Mivart, on the Church’s ac tion in relation to Galileo, are among the things that tend to bring religion and its representatives into disrepute. Mr. Mur phy makes an elaborate argument to show that the Church never, by any competent authority, declared against Galileo’s book. He concedes, as he is compelled to do, that the conclave of cardinals con demned it; that the Pope authorized it to be placed on the Index Purgatorium; that in pursuance of this action Galileo was persecuted and driven to the pusil lanimous recantation. But he makes the purely technical plea, that the Pope, speaking in that character which makes his deliverances infallible, had not, him self, pronounced Galileo’s doctrine false. —By similar ingenuity it is clear that the Church could be exculpated from responsibility for all the acts done by her various representatives, except the very few actually executed by a Pope, under the narrow limitation in which he is, according to Mr. Murphy, infallible. But such subtleties are quite thrown away on the.common sense of mankind. IH# truth of the matter -is, that the Church, speaking by the ecclesiastics, great and small, the Pope included, con demned Galileo in every variety of phrase, and meant to condemn him, and reiterated the condemnation, and verily thought she was serving God by so do ing. Neither Paul the Fifth nor Urban Eighth, nor the cardinals of the period, would thank Father Murphy for attempt ing to make out that their acts were null and their intentions were the reverse of what they and all the world knew them to be. — The chief merit of Emerson, accord ing to Matthew Arnold, is, that he is the “ friend of those who would live in the spirit.” This also, according to President Gilman, of Johns Hopkins, should be the chief merit of a college. Not physics nor yet metaphysics are the chief con cern, says Dr. Gilman; but breadth, cult ure, repose, and a spiritual as against a materialistic philosophy. The bread and-butter notion of whnt a college is for he distinctly repudiates. President See lye has lately shown that education, as such, does not save either a nation or an individual. It is education with the end in view of making manly, self-deny ing, God-fearing men that is required. —The loud applause which greeted Hon. Leverett Saltonstall’s rebuke of the “ iuereuse of luxury and extravagance” at Harvard, in his remarks at the alumni dinner, attests the strong feeling whioh exists among the best friends of the col lege that it is acquiring an undesirable notoriety. President Eliot endeavors to \ break the force of the reproof somewhat by saying that not more than ten per j cent of the students are rich. But this would give over a hundred rich young * men to set the style in apartments, fur 1 niture, dress, suppers and spreads. What is worse, these rich young men determine the scale of expenses in all the “ in cidentals” and thus burden the poor student or else drive him out of college society altogether. —The responsibility can not be laid on the college, except to the extent in which she caters to extravagance and bids for the patronage of the rich. Some young men with more money than brains and more desires than discretion will be found in alt colleges. They are a corrupting ele ment which the authorities strive in vain to bring under discipline. The misfor tune of Harvard is, that this element is predominant. Year by } ear the num bers and sway of the rich increase. It deserves consideration whether the great care taken to keep the scandalous esca pades of some of these young men out of the papers lias anything to do with tho steady growth of their evil intlneuce. —Nor can it be deemed a trilling mat ter that a young man at his most sus ceptible and ambitious period should come into an atmosphere where the per sonal habits, belongings and exploits of other young men who spend §10,000 a year, Bre leading topics of conversation. “Luxury and extruvagauce” are insep arable from the expenditure by any young men of large sums of money; but these are, after all, mild words to express the truth in regard to the conduct and career of many rich young men at Har vard