THE MONTHLY REPOSITORY

AND

REVIEW.

NEW SERIES, No. X.

OCTOBER, 1827.

BAVARIAN CATHOLICISM AND CLERICAL EDUCATION.

We have lately noticed the restraints imposed by several Catholic governments upon ecclesiastical tendencies to interfere with the interests of the State, and we may perhaps usefully follow up the same subject with some particulars as to the regulations imposed by the Bavarian Government on the education and qualifications of the clergy of its establishment, for which we are indebted to an article in the Revue Encyclopédique for May, 1827.*

The education of the clergy has always been a subject of considerable solicitude among the German princes. The Austrian reforms under Maria Theresa, Joseph II., and the present Emperor, are generally known. The grand dutchy of Baden, Wurtemberg, and Bavaria, have followed the example. In Bavaria, in particular, a regularly organized system has been established in accordance with the fundamental principles in ecclesiastical matters recognized by the constitution, and with the concordat of 1817.

It should, in the first instance, be observed what are the general principles which in Bavaria regulate the relations between the Church and the State.

In the first place, the Catholic religion is declared to be the religion of the State, but all other modes of faith and worship are free. Every citizen, whatever be his creed, has the same rights, civil and political, and is equally admissible to all public employments and privileges.

In the second place, the articles of the concordat concluded with the See of Rome, are in their application declared to be subordinate to the regulations and principles of the fundamental law on which the constitution is founded, and especially to the edict concerning matters of religion which forms part of that law.

Thirdly, every thing which concerns public instruction and study is considered in Bavaria as forming part of the higher administrative police under the controul of the government. The ecclesiastical authorities cannot interfere except when the introduction of a new catechism or other manual of religion is under consideration; but they have not even the right of publishing a new catechism without the special approbation of the king.

[The following communication has in part been anticipated by a note in our last, p. 633, but as the subject is interesting, and our readers may wish further details, we have thought it best to give the additional statement. EDIT.]

Fourthly, the ecclesiastical authorities cannot of themselves proscribe any work as hostile or injurious to religion. It is the government which must decide on such matters, after having examined and declared the book which the clergy have denounced to be really dangerous.

Fifthly, the ecclesiastical authorities have no concern with, or jurisdiction over, any matters but what are purely religious; for instance, such as concern the modes and rites of public worship, the administration of the sacraments and of matrimonial affairs between Catholics. But even in these things they can execute none of their decisions, without obtaining the placet royal.

On all these points an excellent "Manual of Ecclesiastical Law" was, in 1823, compiled by M. Brendel, Professor of Law in the University of Wurtzburg. It is one of the most important works which Germany has produced of late, and is particularly directed (like the works of the Austrian writers on similar subjects) to combating ultra-montanism and the false pretensions by which the Papal Court has sought to make religion subservient to political or pecuniary views.

The theological studies by which pupils are gradually prepared for and admitted into the ranks of the pastoral clergy, are arranged as follows:

1. Those young men who intend to devote themselves to the clerical state, must begin by following the preparatory courses of study in the public schools of the kingdom, exactly as those who are destined for other professions. They must, therefore, have successively passed through all the classes of a royal gymnasium, and have obtained, after the usual examination, an authority to pass to a university. Those who have gone through their preparatory studies in a foreign country, must also be examined and have the proper certificate. At the university the candidates for theology must frequent the courses of philosophy and literature, the same as other students. These courses comprise logic, metaphysics, mathematics, physics, universal history, and Greek and Latin literature. After terminating each course, the pupil passes an examination and obtains a diploma which attests his diligence and points out the degree of his proficiency.

2. It is only after having acquired this general instruction that students can pass on to the peculiar study of theology. The faculty of theology then comprises the following courses: 1. What is called the Encyclopædia of Theological Studies. 2. The interpretation of the Holy Scriptures, or Exegetic Theology. 3. Ecclesiastical History. 4. Ecclesiastical and Canon Law. 5. Morals. 6. Dogmatical Theology. 7. Oriental Philology.

The students must also frequent the pædagogic and esthetic classes. There is no positive order of study laid down, but they must remain in the faculty of theology at least during six academic half-yearly courses. They must be examined by the professor of each science which they cultivate, and obtain a certificate. Those who aspire to the degree of Doctor in Theology have a much more rigorous course of preparation and qualification.

The faculty of theology in the universities ranks equally with others. The ecclesiastical authorities have nothing to do with the appointment of the professors, and the latter owe neither to them nor to the bishops nor vicarsgeneral any account of their teaching or doctrines. If the latter think the doctrines of any of the professors heterodox, they may complain to the government, furnishing the grounds and proofs of their denunciation.

3. Those theological students who have terminated their academic pursuits can alone be admitted into the episcopal seminaries. These last are not in general organized in Bavaria according to the direction of the Council

of Trent. They are establishments in which the young theologian prepares himself for the exercise of the functions and duties of the priesthood. He there learns what is called pastoral theology; he exercises himself in preaching, in catechizing; in short, he learns the practical duties of a pastor. In general the students pay for their maintenance in these establishments; but there is a fixed number of gratuitous admissions.

The number of students which can be received into these seminaries for the formation of the pastoral character being limited, their reception is subjected to strict regulations. Once a year a meeting takes place for the admission of candidates. An inquiry is there held before a Committee composed of the professors of theology, the ruler of the seminary, and a counsellor appointed by the government, who presides. The certificates received in passing from the gymnasia upwards, to the completion of the academic courses, are here produced. Certificates are also required of irreproachable moral conduct, and (if gratuitous admission be sought) of the insufficiency of the student's means. An examination takes place in all the branches of study, and the Committee reports to the bishop and chapter on the merits of the candidates. The bishop names those whom he sees fit to admit, but the admission is complete only on the assent of the minister of the interior. Immediately on their reception, the theologians assume the clerical habit.

4. The heads of the seminaries are named by the bishop, but must be approved by the king. The young ecclesiastics must remain there two years. Those who have not previously finished their course of theology, complete it by continuing to frequent the university.

The rector and sub-rector themselves teach pastoral theology, &c. The young men pursue the necessary branches of study, and have discussions in the different branches of theology and pulpit exercises, in which the bishop often takes part. The royal edict requires that they should during six months attend lectures on the arts of teaching and elementary instruction. They leave the seminary on taking holy orders.

5. The young priests must exercise the functions of vicar eight years (or at least six, when they get a dispensation from the longer service) before they can aspire to a cure. They are every three years examined by the vicariat. Cures are only bestowed on those who have shewn their merit in an open session or meeting, which lasts three or four days, and is held under the direction of the government. The judges at this session are the counsellor of the circle, and the professors of theology who are specially summoned. The government commissioner presides; and the bishop is invited to send a delegate. Each commissioner reports his own ideas of the merits of the candidates, and all the reports are thus collected and forwarded to the minister of the interior, who distributes the young priests into six classes of merit, the three first of which give a title to cures. As occupiers of cures they are charged with the school belonging to their cure, of which they are also inspectors, and are responsible to government as public func

tionaries.

Such are the principal details of the education which the Bavarian clergy receive, from which some idea may be formed of the general line of policy adopted by the government in matters of religion, resembling in fact, in all important particulars, that adopted by the Austrian administration.

E.

SIR,

MR. CAISSON'S APPEAL.

To the Editor.

I HAVE read with great interest the little address of Mr. Caisson to his brethren, which is briefly reviewed in your August Number. Allow me room for a few observations upon the same subject.

There have been, and in our day still are, enthusiastic interpreters of the Scripture prophecies respecting the Jews, who would really seem to intimate that the salvation of that one particular nation is the primary object of the Divine Mind; that, instead of its being the chosen instrument by which Providence began and will perhaps complete its grand designs towards the whole world, the whole world and all its complicated interests are to be subordinated to the single purpose of teaching, guiding, and restoring the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

While protesting against this narrow view of the Divine counsels, it is impossible not to allow that the conversion of the Jews to a belief in "him whom they have pierced," is held out in the sacred books as an event of no trivial importance to the world. A spirit of affectionate interest in the welfare of these our elder brethren must, if we are attentive readers of the Bible, be the result of our meditations upon those many beautiful passages in which the compassion and solicitude of God for his people are portrayed. There we find it hinted, and in no obscure terms, that to the Gentiles will one day be committed the grateful task of restoring her through whose "diminishing" they have obtained "riches," to the possession of more than her former blessings. It is said that the Gentile hand and heart shall not be slow in this work of righteous retribution. How careful should we be then to cherish in our hearts such feelings towards this interesting portion of the human race as may be in conformity with the prophetic declarations, in conformity with the spirit of affection which Christ himself displayed, when he beheld the devoted city and wept over it!

A Christian will even be disposed to look with some tenderness on every effort, however mistaken, which bears upon its general aspect an appearance and profession friendly to the peace of Jerusalem; but this will not blind his eyes, nor deaden his understanding. He will not throw the darts of ridicule among any men or sets of men who may be associated together for the purpose, as they think, of performing the duties enjoined on them towards this people, nor will their failures excite either triumph or merriment, but they will dispose him to inquire fairly what the nature of the case demands from him.

Nothing that I have read from the pen of any member of the Jewish nation seems to me more calculated to do good both to Christians and Jews than Mr. Caisson's little tract. It is the production of one who is both Jew and Christian, one who is most anxious to convert his brethren to a belief in Jesus as the Messiah, but stoutly maintains (why may he not?) the necessity of remaining steadfast in the observance of the law in which he was born. He contends for the superiority of a form of worship of confessedly divine origin over any of mere human institution so strongly, and puts the case as it applies to himself and his brethren so forcibly, that I cannot see how it is easy for some of those sects of Christians which lay a great stress upon mere ritual observances to withstand his arguments. The only tenable ground for Gentile believers, when disputing with a Jewish Christian, seems to be that which the language of our Saviour to the woman of Sa

maria would authorize us to take: "Woman, believe me the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain nor yet at Jerusalem worship the Father. But, the true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth." Against a system of rites and ceremonies it is of little use to oppose other rites and ceremonies as matters of necessity. These the Jew well knows can claim no authority or antiquity of origin comparable to his own; the only question is, whether Christ came to substitute a spiritual for a ceremonial religion, or whether, while insisting on the former, he meant also to require a continuance of the latter. That he at least meant to permit its continuance, I cannot but think very evident.

E.

SIR,

ON THE USE OF THE TERM UNITARIAN.

To the Editor.

IN your last Number (August) are some remarks by "A Unitarian" on a previous communication by T. F. B. respecting the use of that appellation, which appear to me more harsh than the occasion required. The objec tions of T. F. B. seem to have originated in an amiable desire of doing more good by removing a supposed obstacle to the attendance of many on worship which he thought calculated for their improvement, and should not therefore have been treated as " striking at the root of fair and honest dealing." Christian practice is of more consequence than Unitarian or any other profession, and it should be our object to bring as many as possible to righteousness. At the same time I agree with "A Unitarian" in much that he has said. It is now too late to inquire "whether it was good policy or consistent with just principle to adopt a name assuming for the basis of a religious denomination a decision of a great theological question." I for one should have been glad if some denomination had been fixed on which, without implying offence to others, and without expressing decision on any point of controversy, would have simply denoted freedom of inquiry as our distinguishing principle, and would have pointed us out as Christians who seek the truth in the Holy Scriptures without respect for persons, acknowledging no mere human teacher as a guide, but looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith. But whatever I might desire, I do not see the possibility of change; the term Unitarian is stamped upon us in characters which cannot be erased. If the use of it was objectionable, the evil has been done, and we have now only to use our efforts that, with the Divine blessing on our labours, this evil, like others, may be productive of good. If we must, indeed, be distinguished by an ism, I do not know any less objectionable than Unitarianism, if properly understood. The terms Arianism and Socinianism which were previously used, were not only less comprehensive, but were inaccurate, because they referred to sects or individuals who had many opinions in which those to whom the name was applied could not concur. We should object on the same grounds to be denominated from Clarke, or Priestley, or Belsham, or any other eminent writer, however much we might esteem the individual; and we conceive that we have just cause of complaint against many of our opponents, because they try to connect with Unitarianism the opinions of individuals who have exercised their