The Press.
London, England, 1858-05-22 00:00:00

THE PRE S S, MAY 22, 1858.

Jesuit school would " reason " against reverence
to the Bible:—

" All should shudder," said he, " at the fundamental
sophism of a system which has unfortunately divided
Europe. The partizans of that system say, 'We believe
nothing but the word of God.' What an abuse of words !
what a strange and perverse ignorance of the Divine
will!—we alone believe lie word, whilst our dear
enemies persist in believing nothing but what is written,
as if God could or would change the nature of things, of
which He is the author, and give a life and efficacy to
writing which it has not. Are not the Holy Scriptures
writings? Were they not traced with a pen and a little
black fluid Do they know what ought to be told to one
man, and hidden from another? Do not Liebnitz and
his maid read the same words there ? Can writing be any-
thing but the portrait of a word? and though very much
to be respected on that account, if people come to interro-
gate it, must it not keep a holy silence? If you attack it
or insult it, can it defend itself in the absence of its
father? Glory be to Truth, if the Word living to all
eternity doss not vivify the writing, never can it become
the word; that is to say, life. Let others, then, invoke
as much as they please the dumb word. We laugh in
peace at the false god; waiting with tender impatience
for the moment when its undeceived partizans shall throw
themselves into our arms, which have been extended to-
wards them for nearly three hundred years."

We say nothing of the tone of this palisage—but
let us mark M. Lutteroth's comment :
The originality of this passage arises, above all, from
the singular idea conceited by Joseph de Maistre, of
borrowing his principal arguments from Plato: all the
passages underlined, and they were so underlined by the
author himself, belong to Plio3don, to whi,:h he refers us.
That which Plato says of writing, or of books in general,
the Count de Maistre applies to the holy writings; by
which means he places them on an equality, and he refuses
to them all that Plato refuses to human books.

The comment is critical and judicious, and is an
effective antidote to the coarse poison of De
Maistre's perverted logic.

Elsewhere M. Lutteroth's quotes some pas-
sages from De Maistre :
Joseph de Maistre shows, in the first place, that a
violent death is the natural death of princes, and that in
their ease natural death is the exception. Then he in
quires, What is the influence of religion on the duration of
reigns? According to him, an average reign in Christian
countries may amount to twenty-five Years ; and according
to a calculation, which embraces three hundred years, that
is precisely the average reign in France.
The Reformation, if we believe him, has shortened
reigns in Protestant countries. Before that time the
average length of reigns in England was three-and-twenty
years : since the Reformation, it is only seventeen years ;
and in Sweden, the reigns have shortened in the same
proportion.
As to the length of the reigns in France and
Sweden, we shall not enter into calculation here,
but De Maistre's assertion about England is
erroneous. We suppose that a Romanist
reasoner would date the Reformation, quoad
length of reigning, from the time when Henry
VIII. married Anne Boleyn in 1532. From that
date to 1837, when William IV. died, was
a period of 305 years, including the eleven years
of Cromwell's rule. Thus there were Henry
VIII., Edward VI., Mary, Elizabeth, four
Stuarts, William 111., Anne, four Georges, and
William IV. Taking off eleven years for Crom-
well, there are fifteen reigns to 294 years, or an
average of nineteen and a half years. But that
is not the proper way to calculate the average,
for the Reformation could not be said to be per-
manently established until Queen Elizabeth's
reign, as her immediate predecessor was a
Romanist. Queen Mary died in 1558, and
omitting Cromwell's Protectorate, and counting
down to the end of William IV.'s reign, there
were twelve rulers from the accession of Eliza-
beth to 1837—a period of 268 years—making an
average of twenty-two years and a fraction.

That is very different from De hlaistre's asser-
tion of "seventeen years" being the average
length of our English reigns "since the Reforma-
tion." Or let us takeit in another way. From the
death of Queen Mary (1555) to the present year
is a riod of three hundred years, and counting
the Protectorate of Cromwell, and the reign of
our present Gracious Sovereign, there are four-
teen rulers, giving an average of twenty-one
years and a quarter to every reign. De hlaistre,
however, is rather more right in his calculations
upon the average length of reigns in England
prior to the Reformation. But "since the Refor-
mation in England " we have had only one
Sovereign put to death, and another banished ;
while before the Reformation, taking an equal
number of anterior years, we would remind the
Jesuits that two of the I'lantagenets (Edward
11. and Richard II.) were murdered—of the
House of Lancaster, Henry VI. was deposed, and
died in the Tower, it is supposed, by violence—of