, 1892-02-13

.ness,-which did not lmpreSS,-n dealing
with doubt or difficulty and this certainly
remindtd one more OF the Anglican
clergyman who had never been exposed
to challenge or contradiction, than OF the
Roman Catholic priest who had been care
fully educated to distinguish between what
the Church had defined and what the
Church had not defined and was open to
discussion, though to profitable discussion
only so far as the discussion rested OIL prln-
Giples of settled Significance and explicit
authority.
The great merit, however, of lie Cardinal
whom the Catholic Church in England has
lust lost, was his passionate sympathy with
the various ~nfiSeries of the poor, and his IN
dpfatigable lahours on their behalf. Often
he went, to our mind, far beyond what it
was prudent either tor a dignitary of his
Ohu. cl, or for an English patriot, or for y
wise mOralist to go. His crusade against
intoxication, for instance, gave the impress
sion of something like u fanatic dread OF
the substance alcoho'." His sympathy
with Irish Home-rplers Vften gave the I'M
preston of something like indifference to
British unity and constitutional traditions.
His treatment Of the various great social
questions w ich arose during the last seven
years of his episcopatp, often gave the Im-
preston of a pfelate who cared more to al
leyidte the sutferingS of the poor, than to
stimulate their Self-cOutIol, ana place thtlr
relations with their employers Oh q sound
and permanent basis. But IN spite OF all
these apparent shortcomings, no one could
ever doubt that the Cardinal threw healt
and soul into the work Of preaching The
Gospel las he understood i9 to the poor,
and that he would have given far more tore
.a.o:I. a. ,A,r to Tho CbUtnl tb0n tn Nh-
tain even for tue Church in which he felt 80
great a pride. any other kind Of influence
and honour. He was often thought to be an
ambitious ecclcsiaStic; but it is not he part
of an ambitious ecclesiastiC to push such a
movement as the Temperance movement TO
the almost fanatic@l extreme to which Car
dinal Manning pushed it. Nobody has any
right 10 doubt that he cared tar mote 10
exert the power Of the Church for the re-
4lemption of the poor, than he did merely TO
enhance the spleudour OF the Church lay
nOpularising il amongst the masses OF the
people. His sympathy with The people was
very deep and tender, nor 90 we believe
that his evident desire to reconcile the
Church with the demOCracleS which he saw
looming in the future, was nearly so eCctt-
%siastical in motive as it has often been sup
posed to be. Had it been SO, he could hardly
nave maze me mlSldhcj hS M0 tuluh ~, duib
as the greater number of the0Ider members
of his own Church thought it, Of giving his
cordial support to General Booth i'll the
generous but rather wild and dangerous
experiment on the dregS of our pauperism,
which the head Of the Salvation Army
launched a year or 80 ago. Cardinal Man
'ninS'e adhesion to that proposal fell al
most like Il bomb amongst bis co-religiOnists.
And though we ourselves ih0ught that he
then Il ade y moral and economical, not to
say theological, mistake, we cannot but re-
cognise that it demonstrated his enthusiasm
for such projects az having its oti9in in
|ferveut charity for the miserable, and not
ilranv kind of tcclcsiaStical anhi ion. For
amongst his own supporters ami a%ifeS, 1t
lost the Church much more support than It
gained for her,
The DISTINGUISHED enthusiasm Ct Cardinal
Manning, the singular dignity Of his bear
ing, and the authoritative So!cmniiy,-
though it WAS a vague and rather artificial
solemnity-o hiS,speech, made him - con.
s%picuous figure among the pcclesiastics OF
his Church. 1t used TO be said that 1t waS
worth u Ions walk merely to scr him ascend
the pulpit of the Pro-Cathedrll, without
regard even to the substance or ~elocution
of his sermon. We do not think that he
vas great AS a theolOgian. There was
always something OF the old Evangelical
unciion about him, and something