lesson the wrong way, through dread of a brow-beating schoolmaster. Do not substitute contraries for contradictories.
One more example. Mr. Gladstone's seventeenth erroneous sentence (seventy-eighth in the Syllabus) says: "In some Catholic countries, it has been wisely provided by law, that persons coming to reside therein, shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship." The contradictory would be: "In the Catholic countries referred to by the condemned author, it has been un-wisely enacted that," etc. This is, and always has been, most true, in the case of countries where unity of Faith had never been shattered, and the introduction of new religions produced political convulsions. But if I were to say, "In no Catholic country may liberty of worship ever be allowed to Protestants," I have gone many a mile wide of the mark. Mr. Gladstone's version from the latin is so distorted and untrue, that we cannot form its contra dictory without making the Pope say what he never wanted to say. It runs thus: In "Countries called Catholic, the free exercise of other religions may laudably be allowed." Of course, the proposition contradictory to this would run thus: "In countries called Catholic, the free exercise of other religions may not laudably be allowed." The ex-Premier left the quibusdam untranslated,—it ought to have been, "In certain countries"—and has thereby coined a new condemnation for us, never dreamed of by the Pontiff.
One more item and I shall close this chapter. I know many honest Protestants think, that whatever the Church defines, she defines as of faith; that the
