44 2
ESSAYS ON LIBERTY
sight of the grave consequences of the act, it has become necessary for us, in addition, to explain the CirCU11lstances by which he \vas led into a course we have so much reason to deplore, and to sho\v how an erroneous and unjust opinion could arise in the mind of one whom obvious motives would have disposed to make the best use of a publication, the conductors of which are labouring to serve the community he governs, and desired and endeavoured to obtain his sanction for their \vork. If we \vere unable to reconcile these two necessities,-if we were compelled to choose between a forbearance dishonour- able to ourselves, and a refutation injurious to the Cardinal, \ve should be placed in a painful and almost inextricable difficulty. For a Catholic \vho defends himself at the expense of an ecclesiastical superior sacrifices that which is generally of more public value than his o\vn fair fame; and an English Catholic \vho casts back on Cardinal Wiseman the blame unjustly thrown on himself, hurts a reputation which belongs to the whole body, and disgraces the entire community of Catholics. By such a course, a Review \vhich exists only for public objects would stultify its own position and injure its own cause, and The H011ze and Foreign Review has no object to attain, and no views to advance, except objects and views in which the Catholic Church is interested. The ends for which it labours, according to its light and ability, are ends by which the Church cannot but gain; the doctrine it receives, and the authority it obeys, are none other than those which command the acceptance and submission of the Cardinal himself. I t desires to enjoy his support; it has no end to gain by opposing him. But \ve are not in this painful dilemma. We can sho\v that the accusations of the Cardinal are unjust; and, at the same time, we can explain how naturally the suppositions on \vhich they are founded have arisen, by giving a distinct and ample statement of our own principles and position. The cOlnplaint \vhich the Cardinal makes against us contains, substantially, five charges: (I) that we made a misstatement, affirming something historically false to
