like that of the Jewish religion, is largely dependent on that idea; and the modern mind is diverging more and more from that attitude.
In fine, the very methods from which its strength ie now derived will one day prove grievous sources of offence; for the simple reason that they are inconsistent with its real function as a purely religious organism. Diplomatic intrigue and the exercise of a purely temporal power may serve to extend and strengthen its influence in less spiritual quarters; but it is an agency of very questionable character in the hands of a spiritual body, and has more than once been the basis of an effective protest against Rome. The sensuous character of its services—a result, not of Christ’s direction, but of later Roman policy—is another force of equivocal value. Any earnest thinker would scorn to be influenced by such a consideration, either as regards entering or remaining in the Church of Rome; there seems to be, even in the Church itself, a growing tendency to demand a greater purity of the religious duty. And, finally, it need hardly be said that its literary exclusiveness, its Index, its tyranny, its wilful calumniation of the character of great opponents and distortion of their criticisms, are a very vulnerable part of its system. As yet they are effective methods of preserving the integrity of the Church; but laymen are now taking the polemical work on their own shoulders, and interpreting the strictures of theologians at their own discretion—the result will be
