evidence contained in the writings of the fathers. There is no doubt, a candid and honest inquirer will find the evidence for the divine authority of Scripture which he requires. But, unfortunately for Protestantism, he will find much more than this. Side by side with the proofs for the authority of Scripture lies the evidence for the authority of the Church; side by side with the testimonies to the belief of the first Christians in the divinity of Christ, are the testimonies to their belief in the adorable mystery of the altar. Catholics have known this all along, and almost every great work which has been done for the illustration of Christian antiquity has been done by Catholic hands. We can only hope that this study may not flag, or be neglected among us now. Never was a time when it was needed more by those who would live for the one cause worth living and fighting for-the defence and propagation of the Catholic faith. APPENDIX. The passages on the Holy Eucharist which we have given are clear and plain, and they put the doctrine of Irenæus on this mystery beyond reasonable doubt. One passage, and only one of any importance, we have omitted in the text of our article, and we proceed to consider it here. It is extremely difficult, and that for two reasons: First, it is hard to say what are the exact words which Irenæus wrote; for the Latin text differs from the original Greek, as given by S. John of Damascus; and of the best editors, some suppose that the Latin translator omitted some words by an oversight, others that S. John Damascene quoted loosely and added something of his own. Next, whether we follow the Greek or the Latin text, the meaning is obscure. However, among the large number of interpretations advanced by Catholic and Protestant scholars, the choice, as it seems to us, lies between two, either of which is perfectly consistent with the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation. The passage in question occurs in the fourth book (xviii. 5). S. Irenæus is speaking of two Gnostic errors: (1) That Christ is not the Son of the God who made the world; (2) that the body will not rise again. Each error, he maintains, is refuted by the Catholic doctrine of the Eucharist. The former, because, if Christ were the Son of a God hostile to the material world, He would not take bread and wine in the Holy Eucharist and make them His body and blood. The second, because, if the body were not to rise again, it would not "be nourished with the body and blood of the Lord." Then he continues: "But our doctrine agrees with the Eucharist, and the Eucharist again confirms our opinion. For we offer to Him things which are His own, proclaiming participation and union, and professing a resurrection of flesh and spirit. For as bread from the earth, receiving the invocation of God, is no longer common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two things, a heavenly and an earthly, so also our bodies, partaking of the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having the hope of the eternal resurrection." The chief point to be determined is, What does Irenæus mean by saying that the Eucharist "is composed of two things, a heavenly and an earthly"? Many Catholic scholars* have answered, the glorified body of Christ is the "heavenly thing," the accidents or appearances of bread and wine which remain, even after consecration, are the "earthly thing." According to this interpretation, which is, perhaps, better suited than any other to the words of S. Irenæus, as we have them in Greek, the argument would run thus: On the one hand, we believe that Christ is the Son of the God who made the world, and, consistently with this belief, we confess that He changes the bread and wine of this material world into His body and blood, so that the bread is no longer common bread, but the Eucharist, i.e. the heavenly body of Christ under earthly accidents. On the other hand, proclaiming a union of our bodies with the body of Christ in the blessed Sacrament, we hold consistently that these bodies will rise again. Others have understood by the "heavenly and earthly" things, the divine and human natures of Christ, both of which are truly given and received in the sacrament of the altar. According to this interpretation, Irenæus argues: As in the Eucharist there are two things, the human nature of Christ, and the divinity which is united to it, and which deifies it; so in our bodies, after communion, there are two elements, viz., their own nature, which is of itself corruptible, and the new life they have received from the Holy Communion. We have hesitated for a long time between these two explanations, without being able to reach a definite conclusion. But the reader will see that, in any case, the passage contains nothing which is opposed to the account given above of the saint's teaching on the Holy Eucharist. * For a collection of the various interpretations, Catholic and Protestant, see Hopfenmüller, p. 52. An interpretation which the words in themselves will bear very easily. Thus Irenæus says: "Quid est ergo terrenum? Plasma" (v. 9, 3). Plasma is an ordinary word in Irenæus, and the writers of his day, for human nature. We ought to add that Pfaffius published from a MS. in the library of Turin, now missing, a few sentences on the Holy Eucharist, supposed to come from a lost work of S. Irenæus. We have abstained from quoting this fragment because we believe that the balance of evidence is against its authenticity. Those who are interested in the matter will find a series of tracts upon this fragment, reprinted in the second volume of Stieren's Irenæus. ART. VI.-MR. ALFRED AUSTIN'S HUMAN TRAGEDY. The Human Tragedy. By ALFRED AUSTIN. William Blackwood & Sons, Edinburgh and London. 1876. HE name of this poem is one of the author's happiest inspirations. It is simple, in pleasing contrast to many modern titles, yet it has in itself a subtle recommendation. Tragedy indicates the conflict of the great passions of the soul, ended by an inevitable fate inspiring horror, pity, or awe. Human touches the heart's centre. It is a word which, like an electric bond of brotherhood, brings home to us the sorrows, the affections, even the weakness of others, as worthy of our sympathy if we are not unworthy to be human too. We shall see, in examining the work, whether it merits so noble a name or disappoints our expectations. The "Human Tragedy" is enacted in our own time in the quiet home life of England; on the Italian shore in "a silent little city by the sea"; again, in Italy when Garibaldi was out with his Redshirts, and the cry was "Rome or Death!"; and in Paris, during the brief rule of the Commune, when the luxurious capital had become a city of fire and blood. There is here, without going further back than the last few years, a fruitful field, not only for the poet but for the historian and philosopher; and, to some extent, this triple character must be found combined in the man who essays to write a truly great poem based on the life of such a period. As an historian, the author before us is scarcely reliable. He is prejudiced by a certain amount of hero-worship, and a too fervid admiration of those who have held his own views; and we shall have, later on, the unpleasant task of pointing out some of his grave mistakes. As a philosopher his line of thought diverges from ours. a poet he has by this work established a fame which was already widely spread. As Mr. Austin has attained a complete success in his idea of placing the "Human Tragedy" in our own time. He does not avoid the incidents and surroundings of ordinary life, and for the most part his actors are men and women and not ideal beings. An opinion prevails that the nineteenth century is a prosaic, matter-of-fact century of business, when the one cry of the nation is "progress!" and of the individual money!" But were the medieval or even the heroic ages less prosaic to those who lived in them? Perhaps later generations will see lying far back this eventful time of ours, and be able to take in its fulness and to understand it. A fine prospect can only be seen from a distance; a nearer view distracts the eye with details, and hides the bold outlines from sight. So it is with these days. The grand features of modern life are as well fitted for poetry as those of any other time, but familiar sights lose their loveliness, and trivialities check our vision. If, then, there is a man who can look with the eyes of a poet not only on the classical and the early ages, or on men and women transformed into ideal beings; if there is one who has sufficient courage and feeling, as well as the gift of language, to show us the value and beauty of what lies near at hand, by all means let us have epics and idylls of modern life. The present poem has been termed a tragedy, and accordingly it is divided, not into books, but into acts; and as Protagonists, Love, Religion, Country, and Mankind are brought successively upon the stage. But these, instead of moving in concord for the happiness of men, are shown as conflicting elements, tearing human hearts asunder, raising the tempests of the world, when whole nations are roused for good or evil, making life a tumult of vain desires, short-lived Joy, misfortune, mischance and sorrow. Love is the sole Protagonist of the First Act, but the struggle is no less hard because it is one of love alone. In the Second another power is at work-Religion. Then follows a part full of the cry of "Rome or Death!" Country being represented in the strife by the mistaken patriots of united Italy. The scene of the Fourth Act is laid in the Paris of the Commune. Mankind, under a dark and lurid aspect, joins in the contest; and thus, having dropped in one by one during the course of the story, the four Protagonists are at its close united in the deathstruggle,-the fatal four, which by the dark decree Of Heaven evolve the Human Tragedy. The irresistible working of Fate, which gave such an awful power to the Greek tragedy, is here at the outset indicated by those words "the dark decree of Heaven," and may be traced throughout the poem. It is especially noticeable in the first act. The sonnet of dedication, which is lofty, and at the same time tender in feeling, claims a passing word of praise. The "Human Tragedy" opens with an address to Love, which might have been written in the days of the old Roman Republic; but, as the work progresses, we are given so many other glimpses of fate and "the gods," that their appearance in a tale of modern life must be ascribed by the lenient critic to the author's classical spirit, although it must be said that the poem does not bear obtrusively the mark of being written. by a lover of the classics. The opening invocation is addressed by the poet to the eternal star of undying Love that burns "on high, fixed where the immortals are," to the influence of whose light he owes all his thoughts, prayers, gifts, as well as the inspiration of his present labour, long brooded over since it was planned "in youth's warm days." But thee, O Love! . . . . I with bowed head and reverent heart invoke. No more too sanguine souls deaf doom implore To spare Humanity life's good, death's yoke; Thou, though the spell of shrine, shore, world, should fade, Godfrid, who is the central figure of the tragedy, is of high lineage, but without fortune. At his mother's knee he was taught the ancient Faith, but he has thrown it aside as something that the world has left behind in its advance. He "possessed his soul in peace"; that is, believing that nothing is certain and nothing can be known, he has plunged into the great void of infidelity. But of his aspect as regards religion more will be developed in the second act. At present he is in heart a worshipper of beauty, whether in his fellow-beings or in nature, keenly alive to its impressions, young, impulsive, with a contempt for the drones of the world, who rest idly on their riches, and a vague yearning to achieve something great with his own empty hands, or to support some noble cause for the common good of mankind. In the June of 1857 he spends two days at an English country house-memorable days for him and for the daughter of his host. A description of the late English spring leads up gracefully to the story. Our author shows a wonderful felicity in painting the details of nature in all their richness and colour, and it is evidently done by one who has been a long and close observer, and whose |