_________________________________________________________________ Title: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 13: Revelation-Stock Creator(s): Herbermann, Charles George (1840-1916) Print Basis: 1907-1913 Rights: From online edition Copyright 2003 by K. Knight, used by permission CCEL Subjects: All; Reference LC Call no: BX841.C286 LC Subjects: Christian Denominations Roman Catholic Church Dictionaries. Encyclopedias _________________________________________________________________ THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA AN INTERNATIONAL WORK OF REFERENCE ON THE CONSTITUTION, DOCTRINE, DISCIPLINE, AND HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH EDITED BY CHARLES G. HERBERMANN, Ph.D., LL.D. EDWARD A. PACE, Ph.D., D.D. CONDE B PALLEN, Ph.D., LL.D. THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D.D. JOHN J. WYNNE, S.J. ASSISTED BY NUMEROUS COLLABORATORS IN FIFTEEN VOLUMES VOLUME 13 Revelation to Stock New York: ROBERT APPLETON COMPANY Imprimatur JOHN M. FARLEY ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK _________________________________________________________________ Revelation Revelation I. MEANING OF REVELATION Revelation may be defined as the communication of some truth by God to a rational creature through means which are beyond the ordinary course of nature. The truths revealed may be such as are otherwise inaccessible to the human mind -- mysteries, which even when revealed, the intellect of man is incapable of fully penetrating. But Revelation is not restricted to these. God may see fit to employ supernatural means to affirm truths, the discovery of which is not per se beyond the powers of reason. The essence of Revelation lies in the fact that it is the direct speech of God to man. The mode of communication, however, may be mediate. Revelation does not cease to be such if God's message is delivered to us by a prophet, who alone is the recipient of the immediate communication. Such in brief is the account of Revelation given in the Constitution "De Fide Catholica" of the Vatican Council. The Decree "Lamentabili" (3 July, 1907), by its condemnation of a contrary proposition, declares that the dogmas which the Church proposes as revealed are "truths which have come down to us from heaven" (veritates e coelo delapsoe) and not "an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has acquired by its own strenuous efforts" (prop., 22). It will be seen that Revelation as thus explained differs clearly from: + inspiration such as is bestowed by God on the author of a sacred book; for this, while involving a special illumination of the mind in virtue of which the recipient conceives such thoughts as God desires him to commit to writing, does not necessarily suppose a supernatural communication of these truths; + from the illustrations which God may bestow from time to time upon any of the faithful to bring home to the mind the import of some truth of religion hitherto obscurely grasped; and, + from the Divine assistance by which the pope when acting as the supreme teacher of the Church, is preserved from all error as to faith or morals. The function of this assistance is purely negative: it need not carry with it any positive gift of light to the mind. Much of the confusion in which the discussion of Revelation in non-Catholic works is involved arises from the neglect to distinguish it from one or other of these. During the past century the Church has been called on to reject as erroneous several views of Revelation irreconcilable with Catholic belief. Three of these may here be noted. + The view of Anton Guenther (1783-1863). This writer denied that Revelation could include mysteries strictly so-called, inasmuch as the human intellect is capable of penetrating to the full all revealed truth. He taught, further, that the meaning to be attached to revealed doctrines is undergoing constant change as human knowledge grows and man's mind develops; so that the dogmatic formul which are now true will gradually cease to be so. His writings were put on the Index in 1857, and his erroneous propositions definitively condemned in the decrees of the Vatican Council. + the Modernist view (Loisy, Tyrrell). According to this school, there is no such thing as Revelation in the sense of a direct communication from God to man. The human soul reaching up towards the unknowable God is ever endeavouring to interpret its sentiments in intellectual formul . The formul it thus frames are our ecclesiastical dogmas. These can but symbolize the Unknowable; they can give us no real knowledge regarding it. Such an error is manifestly subversive of all belief, and was explicitly condemned by the Decree "Lamentabili" and the Encyclical "Pascendi" (8 Sept., 1907). + With the view just mentioned is closely connected the Pragmatist view of M. Leroy ("Dogme et Critique", Paris, 2nd ed. 1907). Like the Modernists, he sees in revealed dogmas simply the results of spiritual experience, but holds their value to lie not in the fact that they symbolize the Unknowable, but that they have practical value in pointing the way by which we may best enjoy experience of the Divine. This view was condemned in the same documents as the last mentioned. II. POSSIBILITY OF REVELATION The possibility of Revelation as above explained has been strenuously denied from various points of view during the last century. For this reason the Church held it necessary to issue special decrees on the subject in the Vatican Council. Its antagonists may be divided into two classes according to the different standpoints from which they direct their attack, viz: + Rationalists (under this class we include both Deist and Agnostic writers). Those who adopt this standpoint rely in the main on two fundamental objections: they either urge that the miraculous is impossible, and that Revelation involves miraculous interposition on the part of the Deity; or they appeal to the autonomy of reason, which it is maintained can only accept as truths the results of its own activities. + Immanentists. To this class may be assigned all those whose objections are based on Kantian and Hegelian doctrines as to the subjective character of all our knowledge. The views of these writers frequently involve a purely pantheistic doctrine. But even those who repudiate pantheism, in place of the personal God, Ruler, and Judge of the world, whom Christianity teaches, substitute the vague notion of the "Spirit" immanent in all men, and regard all religious creeds as the attempts of the human soul to find expression for its inward experience. Hence no religion, whether pagan or Christian, is wholly false; but none can claim to be a message from God free from any admixture of error. (Cf. Sabatier, "Esquisse", etc., Bk. I, cap. ii.) Here too the autonomy of reason is invoked as fatal to the doctrine of Revelation properly so called. In the face of these objections, it is evident that the question of the possibility of Revelation is at present one of the most vital portions of Christian apologetic. If the existence of a personal God be once established, the physical possibility at least of Revelation is undeniable. God, who has endowed man with means to communicate his thoughts to his fellows, cannot be destitute of the power to communicate His own thoughts to us. [Martineau, it is true, denies that we possess faculties either to receive or to authenticate a divine revelation concerning the past or the future (Seat of Authority in Religion, p. 311); but such an assertion is arbitrary and extravagant in the extreme.] However, numerous difficulties have been urged on grounds other than that of physical possibility. In estimating their value it seems desirable to distinguish three aspects of Revelation, viz: as it makes known to us; (1) truths of the natural law, (2) mysteries of the faith, (3) positive precepts, e.g. regarding Divine worship. (1) The revelation of truths of the natural law is certainly not inconsistent with God's wisdom. God so created man as to bestow on him endowments amply sufficient for him to attain his last end. Had it been otherwise, the creation would have been imperfect. If over and above this He decreed to make the attainment of beatitude yet easier for man by placing within his reach a far simpler and far more certain way of knowing the law on the observance of which his fate depended, this is an argument for the Divine generosity; it does not disprove the Divine wisdom. To assume, with certain Rationalists, that exceptional intervention can only be explained on the ground that God was unable to embrace His ultimate design in His original scheme is a mere petitio principii. Further, the doctrine of original sin supplies an additional reason for such a revelation of the natural law. That doctrine teaches us that man by the abuse of his free will has rendered his attainment of salvation difficult. Though his intellectual faculties are not radically vitiated, yet his grasp of truth is weakened; his recognition of the moral law is constantly clouded by doubts and questionings. Revelation gives to his mind the certainty he had lost, and so far repairs the evils consequent on the catastrophe which had befallen him. (2) Still more difficulty has been felt regarding mysteries. It is freely asserted that a mystery is something repugnant to reason, and therefore something intrinsically impossible. This objection rests on a mere misunderstanding of what is signified by a mystery. In theological terminology a conception involves a mystery when it is such that the natural faculties of the mind are unable to see how its elements can coalesce. This does not imply anything contrary to reason. A conception is only contrary to reason when the mind can recognize that its elements are mutually exclusive, and therefore involve a contradiction in terms. A more subtle objection is that urged by Dr. J. Caird, to the effect that every truth that can be partially communicated to the mind by analogies is ultimately capable of being fully grasped by the understanding. "Of all such representations, unless they are purely illusory, it must hold good that implicitly and in undeveloped form they contain rational thought and therefore thought which human intelligence may ultimately free from its sensuous veil. . . . Nothing that is absolutely inscrutable to reason can be made known to faith" (Philosophy of Religion, p. 71). The objection rests on a wholly exaggerated view regarding the powers of the human intellect. The cognitive faculty of any nature is proportionate to its grade in the scale of being. The intelligence of a finite intellect can only penetrate a finite object; it is incapable of comprehending the Infinite. The finite types through which the Infinite is made known to it can never under any circumstances lead to more than analogous knowledge. It is further frequently urged that the revelation of what the mind cannot understand would be an act of violence to the intellect; and that this faculty can only accept those truths whose intrinsic reasonableness it recognizes. This assertion, based on the alleged autonomy of reason, can only be met with denial. The function of the intellect is to recognize and admit any truth which is adequately presented to it, whether that truth be guaranteed by internal or by external criteria. The reason is not deprived of its legitimate activity because the criteria are external. It finds ample scope in weighing the arguments for the credibility of the fact asserted. The existence of mysteries in the Christian religion was expressly taught by the Vatican Council (De Fide Cath., cap. ii, can. ii). "If anyone shall say that no mysteries properly so called are contained in the Divine revelation, but that all the dogmas of the faith can be understood and proved from natural principles by human reason duly cultivated -- let him be anathema." (3) The older (Deist) School of Rationalists denied the possibility of a Divine revelation imposing any laws other than those which natural religion enjoins on man. These writers regarded natural religion as, so to speak, a political constitution determining the Divine government of the universe, and held that God could only act as its terms prescribed. This error likewise was proscribed at the same time (De Fide Cath., cap. ii, can. ii). "If any one shall say that it is impossible or that it is inexpedient that man should be instructed regarding God and the worship to be paid to Him by Divine revelation -- let him be anathema." It can hardly be questioned that the "autonomy of reasons" furnishes the main source of the difficulties at present felt against Revelation in the Christian sense. It seems desirable to indicate very briefly the various ways in which that principle is understood. It is explained by M. Blondel, an eminent member of the Immanentist School, as signifying that "nothing can enter into a man which does not proceed from him, and which does not correspond in some manner to an interior need of expansion; and that neither in the sphere of historic facts nor of traditional doctrine, nor of commands imposed by authority, can any truth rank as valid for a man or any precept as obligatory, unless it be in some way autonomous and autochthonous" (Lettre sur les exigences, etc., p. 601). Although M. Blondel has in his own case reconciled this principle with the acceptance of Catholic belief, yet it may readily be seen that it affords an easy ground for the denial not merely of the possibility of external Revelation, but of the whole historic basis of Christianity. The origin of this erroneous doctrine is to be found in the fact that within the sphere of the natural speculative reason, truths which are received purely on external authority, and which are in no way connected with principles already admitted, can scarcely be said to form part of our knowledge. Science asks for the inner reason of things and can make no use of truths save in so far as it can reach the principles from which they flow. The extension of this to religious truths is an error directly traceable to the assumption of the eighteenth-century philosophers that there are no religious truths save those which the human intellect can attain unaided. The principle is, however, sometimes applied with a less extensive signification. It may be understood to involve no more than that reason cannot be compelled to admit any religious doctrine or any moral obligation merely because they possess extrinsic guarantees of truth; they must in every case be able to justify their validity on intrinsic grounds. Thus Prof. J. Caird writes: "Neither moral nor religious ideas can be simply transferred to the human spirit in the form of fact, nor can they be verified by any evidence outside of or lower than themselves" (Fundamental Ideas of Christianity, p. 31). A somewhat different meaning again is implied in the canon of the Vatican Council in which the right of the intellect to claim absolute independence (autonomy) is denied. "If anyone shall say that human reason is independent in such wise that faith cannot be commanded it by God -- let him be anathema" (De Fide Cath., cap. iii, can. i). This canon is directed against the position maintained as already noted by the older Rationalists and the Deists, that human reason is amply sufficient without exterior assistance to attain to absolute truth in all matters of religion (cf. Vacant, "Etudes Théologiques", I, 572; II, 387). III. NECESSITY OF REVELATION Can it be said that Revelation is necessary to man? There can be no question as to its necessity, if it be admitted that God destines man to attain a supernatural beatitude which surpasses the exigencies of his natural endowments. In that case God must needs reveal alike the existence of that supernatural end and the means by which we are to attain it. But is Revelation necessary even in order that man should observe the precepts of the natural law? If our race be viewed in its present condition as history displays it, the answer can only be that it is, morally speaking, impossible for men unassisted by Revelation, to attain by their natural powers such a knowledge of that law as is sufficient to the right ordering of life. In other words, Revelation is morally necessary. Absolute necessity we do not assert. Man, Catholic theology teaches, possesses the requisite faculties to discover the natural law. Luther indeed asserted that man's intellect had become hopelessly obscured by original sin, so that even natural truth was beyond his reach. And the Traditionalists of the nineteenth century (Bautain, Bonnetty, etc.) also fell into error, teaching that man was incapable of arriving at moral and religious truth apart from Revelation. The Church, on the contrary, recognizes the capacity of human reason and grants that here and there pagans may have existed, who had freed themselves from prevalent errors, and who had attained to such a knowledge of the natural law as would suffice to guide them to the attainment of beatitude. But she teaches nevertheless that this can only be the case as regards a few, and that for the bulk of mankind Revelation is necessary. That this is so may be shown both from the facts of history and from the nature of the case. As regards the testimony of history, it is notorious that even the most civilized of pagan races have fallen into the grossest errors regarding the natural law; and from these it may safely be asserted they would never have emerged. Certainly the schools of philosophy would not have enabled them to do so; for many of these denied even such fundamental principles of the natural law as the personality of God and the freedom of the will. Again, by the very nature of the case, the difficulties involved in the attainment of the requisite knowledge are insuperable. For men to be able to attain such a knowledge of the natural law as will enable them to order their lives rightly, the truths of that law must be so plain that the mass of men can discover them without long delay, and possess a knowledge of them which will be alike free from uncertainty and secure from serious error. No reasonable man will maintain that in the case of the greater part of mankind this is possible. Even the most vital truths are called in question and are met by serious objections. The separation of truth from error is a work involving time and labour. For this the majority of men have neither inclination nor opportunity. Apart from the security which Revelation gives they would reject an obligation both irksome and uncertain. It results that a revelation even of the natural law is for man in his present state a moral necessity. IV. CRITERIA OF REVELATION The fact that Revelation is not merely possible but morally necessary is in itself a strong argument for the existence of a revelation, and imposes on all men the strict obligation of examining the credentials of a religion which presents itself with prima facie marks of truth. On the other hand if God has conferred a revelation on men, it stands to reason that He must have attached to it plain and evident criteria enabling even the unlettered to recognize His message for what it is, and to distinguish it from all false claimants. The criteria of Revelation are either external or internal: (1) External criteria consist in certain signs attached to the revelation as a divine testimony to its truth, e.g., miracles. (2) Internal criteria are those which are found in the nature of the doctrine itself in the manner in which it was presented to the world, and in the effects which it produces on the soul. These are distinguished into negative and positive criteria. (a) The immunity of the alleged revelation from any teaching, speculative or moral, which is manifestly erroneous or self-contradictory, the absence of all fraud on the part of those who deliver it to the world, provide negative internal criteria. (b) Positive internal criteria are of various kinds. One such is found in the beneficent effects of the doctrine and in its power to meet even the highest aspirations which man can frame. Another consists in the internal conviction felt by the soul as to the truth of the doctrine (Suarez, "De Fide", IV, sect. 5, n. 9.) In the last century there was in certain schools of thought a manifest tendency to deny the value of all external criteria. This was largely due to the Rationalist polemic against miracles. Not a few non-Catholic divines anxious to make terms with the enemy adopted this attitude. They allowed that miracles are useless as a foundation for faith, and that they form on the contrary one of the chief difficulties which lie in faith's path. Faith, they admitted, must be presupposed before the miracle can be accepted. Hence these writers held the sole criterion of faith to lie in inward experience -- in the testimony of the Spirit. Thus Schleiermacher says: "We renounce altogether any attempt to demonstrate the truth and the necessity of the Christian religion. On the contrary we assume that every Christian before he commences inquiries of this kind is already convinced that no other form of religion but the Christian can harmonize with his piety" (Glaubenslehre, n. 11). The Traditionalists by denying the power of human reason to test the grounds of faith were driven to fall back on the same criterion (cf. Lamennais, "Pensées Diverses", p. 488). This position is altogether untenable. The testimony afforded by inward experience is undoubtedly not to be neglected. Catholic doctors have always recognized its value. But its force is limited to the individual who is the subject of it. It cannot be employed as a criterion valid for all; for its absence is no proof that the doctrine is not true. Moreover, of all the criteria it is the one with regard to which there is most possibility of deception. When truth mingled with error is presented to the mind, it often happens that the whole teaching, false and true alike, is believed to have a Divine guarantee, because the soul has recognized and welcomed the truth of some one doctrine, e.g., the Atonement. Taken alone and apart from objective proof it conveys but a probability that the revelation is true. Hence the Vatican Council expressly condemns the error of those who teach it to be the only criterion (De Fide Cath., cap. iii, can. iii). The perfect agreement of a religious doctrine with the teachings of reason and natural law, its power to satisfy, and more than satisfy, the highest aspirations of man, its beneficent influence both as regards public and private life, provide us with a more trustworthy test. This is a criterion which has often been applied with great force on behalf of the claims of the Catholic Church to be the sole guardian of God's Revelation. These qualities indeed appertain in so transcendent a degree to the teaching of the Church, that the argument must needs carry conviction to an earnest and truth-seeking mind. Another criterion which at first sight bears some resemblance to this claims a mention here. It is based upon the theory of Immanence and has of recent years been strenuously advocated by certain of the less extreme members of the Modernist School. These writers urge that the vital needs of the soul imperatively demand, as their necessary complement, Divine co-operation, supernatural grace, and even the supreme magisterium of the Church. To these needs the Catholic religion alone corresponds. And this correspondence with our vital needs is, they hold, the one sure criterion of truth. The theory is altogether inconsistent with Catholic dogma. It supposes that the Christian Revelation and the gift of grace are not free gifts from God, but something of which the nature of man is absolutely exigent; and without which it would be incomplete. It is a return to the errors of Baius. (Denz. 1021, etc.) While the Church, as we have said, is far from undervaluing internal criteria, she has always regarded external criteria as the most easily recognizable and the most decisive. Hence the Vatican Council teaches: "In order that the obedience of our faith might be agreeable to reason, God has willed that to the internal aids of the Holy Spirit, there should be joined external proofs of His Revelation, viz: Divine works (facta divina), especially miracles and prophecy, which inasmuch as they manifestly display the omnipotence and the omniscience of God are most certain signs of a Divine revelation and are suited to the understanding of all" (De Fide Cath., cap. iii). As an instance of a work evidently Divine and yet other than miracle or prophecy, the council instances the Catholic Church, which, "by reason of the marvellous manner of its propagation, its surprising sanctity, its inexhaustible fruitfulness in all good works, its catholic unity and its invincible stability, is a mighty and perpetual motive of credibility and an irrefragable testimony to its own divine legation" (l. c.). The truth of the teaching of the council regarding external criteria is plain to any unprejudiced mind. Granted the presence of the negative criteria, external guarantees establish the Divine origin of a revelation as nothing else can do. They are, so to say, a seal affixed by the hand of God Himself, and authenticating the work as His. (For a fuller treatment of their apologetic value, and for a discussion of objections, see MIRACLES; APOLOGETICS.) V. THE CHRISTIAN REVELATION It remains here to distinguish the Christian Revelation or "deposit of faith" from what are termed private revelations. This distinction is of importance: for while the Church recognizes that God has spoken to His servants in every age, and still continues thus to favour chosen souls, she is careful to distinguish these revelations from the Revelation which has been committed to her charge, and which she proposes to all her members for their acceptance. That Revelation was given in its entirety to Our Lord and His Apostles. After the death of the last of the twelve it could receive no increment. It was, as the Church calls it, a deposit -- "the faith once delivered to the saints" (Jude, 2) -- for which the Church was to "contend" but to which she could add nothing. Thus, whenever there has been question of defining a doctrine, whether at Nicæa, at Trent, or at the Vatican, the sole point of debate has been as to whether the doctrine is found in Scripture or in Apostolic tradition. The gift of Divine assistance (see I), sometimes confounded with Revelation by the less instructed of anti-Catholic writers, merely preserves the supreme pontiff from error in defining the faith; it does not enable him to add jot or tittle to it. All subsequent revelations conferred by God are known as private revelations, for the reason that they are not directed to the whole Church but are for the good of individual members alone, They may indeed be a legitimate object for our faith; but that will depend on the evidence in each particular case. The Church does not propose them to us as part of her message. It is true that in certain cases she has given her approbation to certain private revelations. This, however, only signifies: + that there is nothing in them contrary to the Catholic Faith or to the moral law, and, + that there are sufficient indications of their truth to justify the faithful in attaching credence to them without being guilty of superstition or of imprudence. It may however be further asked, whether the Christian Revelation does not receive increment through the development of doctrine. During the last half of the nineteenth century the question of doctrinal development was widely debated. Owing to Guenther's erroneous teaching that the doctrines of the faith assume a new sense as human science progresses, the Vatican Council declared once for all that the meaning of the Church's dogmas is immutable (De Fide Cath., cap. iv, can. iii). On the other hand it explicitly recognizes that there is a legitimate mode of development, and cites to that effect (op. cit., cap. iv) the words of Vincent of Lirins: "Let understanding science and wisdom [regarding the Church's doctrine] progress and make large increase in each and in all, in the individual and in the whole Church, as ages and centuries advance: but let it be solely in its own order, retaining, that is, the same dogma, the same sense, the same import" (Commonit. 28). Two of the most eminent theological writers of the period, Cardinal Franzelin and Cardinal Newman, have on very different lines dealt with the progress and nature of this development. Cardinal Franzelin in his "De Divina Traditione et Scriptura" (pt. XXII VI) has principally in view the Hegelian theories of Guenther. He consequently lays the chief stress on the identity at all points of the intellectual datum, and explains development almost exclusively as a process of logical deduction. Cardinal Newman wrote his "Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine" in the course of the two years (1843 45) immediately preceding his reception into the Catholic Church. He was called on to deal with different adversaries, viz., the Protestants who justified their separation from the main body of Christians on the ground that Rome had corrupted primitive teaching by a series of additions. In that work he examines in detail the difference between a corruption and a development. He shows how a true and fertile idea is endowed with a vital and assimilative energy of its own, in virtue of which, without undergoing the least substantive change, it attains to an ever completer expression, as the course of time brings it into contact with new aspects of truth or forces it into collision with new errors: the life of the idea is shown to be analogous to an organic development. He provides a series of tests distinguishing a true development from a corruption, chief among them being the preservation of type, and the continuity of principles; and then, applying the tests to the case of the additions of Roman teaching, shows that these have the marks not of corruptions but of true and legitimate developments. The theory, though less scholastic in its form than that of Franzelin, is in perfect conformity with orthodox belief. Newman no less than his Jesuit contemporary teaches that the whole doctrine, alike in its later as in its earlier forms, was contained in the original revelation given to the Church by Our Lord and His Apostles, and that its identity is guaranteed to us by the infallible magisterium of the Church. The claim of certain Modernist writers that their views on the evolution of dogma were connected with Newman's theory of development is the merest figment. OTTIGER, Theologia fundamentalis (Freiburg, 1897); VACANT, Etudes Th ologiques sur la Concile du Vatican (Paris, 1895); LEBACHELET, De l apolog tique traditionelle et l apolog tique moderne. (Paris, 1897); DE BROGLIE, Religion et Critique (Paris, 1906); BLONDEL, Lettre sur les Exigences de la Pens e moderne en mati re apolog tique in Annales de la Philos: Chr tienne (Paris. 1896). On private revelations: SUAREZ, De Fide, disp. III, sect. 10; FRANZELIN, De Scriptura et Traditione, Th. xxii (Rome, 1870); POULAIN, Graces of Interior Prayer, pt. IV, tr. (London, 1910). On development of doctrine: BAINVEL, De magisterio vivo et traditione (Paris, 1905); VACANT, op. cit., II, p. 281 seq.; PINARD, art. Dogme in Dict. Apolog tique de la Foi Catholique, ed. D AL S (Paris, 1910); O DWYER, Cardinal Newman and the Encyclical Pascendi (London, 1908). Among those who from one point of view or another have controverted the Christian doctrine of Revelation the following may be mentioned: PAINE, Age of Reason (ed. 1910), 1 30; F. W. NEWMAN, Phases of Faith (4th ed., London, 1854); SABATIER, Esquisse d une philosophie de la religion, I, ii (Paris, 1902); PFLEIDERER, Religionsphilosophie auf geschichtlicher Grundlage (Berlin, 1896), 493 seq.; LOISY, Autour d un petit livre (Paris, 1903), 192 sqq.; WILSON, art. Revelation and Modern Thought in Cambridge Theol. Essays (London, 1905); TYRRELL, Through Scylla and Charybdis (London, 1907), ii; MARTINEAU, Seat of Authority in Religion, III, ii (London, 1890). G.H. JOYCE Private Revelations Private Revelations There are two kinds of revelations: (1) universal revelations, which are contained in the Bible or in the depositum of Apostolic tradition transmitted by the Church. These ended with the preaching of the Apostles and must be believed by all; (2) particular or private revelations which are constantly occurring among Christians (see CONTEMPLATION). When the Church approves private revelations, she declares only that there is nothing in them contrary faith or good morals, and that they may be read without danger or even with profit; no obligation is thereby imposed on the faithful to believe them. Speaking of such revelations as (e.g.) those of St. Hildegard (approved in part by Eugenius III), St. Bridget (by Boniface IX), and St. Catherine of Siena (by Gregory XI) Benedict XIV says: "It is not obligatory nor even possible to give them the assent of Catholic faith, but only of human faith, in conformity with the dictates of prudence, which presents them to us as probable and worthy of pius belief)" (De canon., III, liii, xxii, II). Illusions connected with private revelations have been explained in the article CONTEMPLATION. Some of them are at first thought surprising. Thus a vision of an historical scene (e.g., of the life or death of Christ) is often only approximately accurate, although the visionary may be unaware of this fact, and he may be misled, if he believes in its absolute historical fidelity. This error is quite natural, being based on the assumption that, if the vision comes from God, all its details (the landscape, dress, words, actions, etc.) should be a faithful reproduction of the historical past. This assumption is not justified, for accuracy in secondary details is not necessary; the main point is that the fact, event, or communication revealed be strictly true. It may be objected that the Bible contains historical books, and that thus God may sometimes wish to reveal certain facts in religious history to us exactly. That doubtless is true, when there is question of facts which are necessary or useful as a basis for religion, in which case the revelation is accompanied by proofs that guarantee its accuracy. A vision need not guarantee its accuracy in every detail. One should thus beware of concluding without examination that revelations are to be rejected; the prudent course is neither to believe nor to deny them unless there is sufficient reason for so doing. Much less should one suspect that the saints have been always, or very often deceived in their vision. On the contrary, such deception is rare, and as a rule in unimportant matters only. There are cases in which we can be certain that a revelation is Divine. (1) God can give this certainty to the person who receives the revelation (at least during it), by granting an insight and an evidence so compelling as to exclude all possibility of doubt. We can find an analogy in the natural order: our senses are subject to many illusions, and yet we frequently perceive clearly that we have not been deceived. (2) At times others can be equally certain of the revelation thus vouchsafed. For instance, the Prophets of the Old Testament gave indubitable signs of their mission; otherwise they would not have been believed. There were always false prophets, who deceived some of the people but, inasmuch as the faithful were counselled by Holy Writ to distinguish the false from the true, it was possible so to distinguish. One incontrovertible proof is the working of a miracle, if it be wrought for this purpose and circumstances show this to be so. A prophecy realized is equally convincing, when it is precise and cannot be the result of chance or of a conjecture of the evil spirit. Besides these rather rare means of forming an opinion, there is another, but longer and more intricate method: to discuss the reasons for and against. Practically, this examination will often give only a probability more or less great. It may be also that the revelation can be regarded as Divine in its broad outlines, but doubtful in minor details. Concerning the revelations of Marie de Agreda and Anne Catherine Emmerich, for example, contradictory opinions have been expressed: some believe unhesitatingly everything they contain, and are annoyed when anyone does not share their confidence; others give the revelations no credence whatsoever (generally on a priori grounds); finally there are many who are sympathetic, but do not know what to reply when asked what degree of credibility is to be attributed to the writings of these two ecstatics. The truth seems to be between the two extreme opinions indicated first. If there is question of a particular fact related in these books and not mentioned elsewhere, we cannot be certain that it is true, especially in minor details. In particular instances, these visionaries have been mistaken: thus Marie de Agreda teaches, like her contemporaries, the existence of crystal heavens, and declares that one must believe everything she says, although such an obligation exists only in the case of the Holy Scriptures. In 1771 Clement XIV forbade the continuation of her process of beatification "on account of the book". Catherine Emmerich has likewise given expression to false or unlikely opinions: she regards the writings of the pseudo-Dionysius as due to the Areopagite, and says strange things about the terrestrial Paradise, which, according to her, exists on an inaccessible Mountain towards Tibet. If there be question of the general statement of facts given in these works, we can admit with probability that many of them are true. For these two visionaries led lives that were regarded as very holy. Competent authorities have judged their ecstasies as divine. It is therefore prudent to admit that they received a special assistance from God, preserving them not absolutely, but in the main, from error. In judging of revelations or visions we may proceed in this manner: (1) get detailed information about the person who believes himself thus favored; (2) also about the fact of the revelation and the circumstances attending it. To prove that a revelation is Divine (at least in its general outlines), the method of exclusion is sometimes employed. It consists in proving that neither the demon nor the ecstatic's own ideas have interfered (at least on important points) with God's action, and that no one has retouched the revelation after its occurrence. This method differs from the preceding one only in the manner of arranging the information obtained, but it is not so convenient. To judge revelations or visions, we must be acquainted with the character of the person favoured with them from a triple point of view: natural, ascetical, and mystical. (For those who have been beatified or canonized, this inquiry has been already made by the Church.) Our inquiry into the visionary's character might be pursued as follows: 1. What are his natural qualities or defects, from a physical, intellectual, and especially moral standpoint? If the information is favourable (if the person is of sound judgment, calm imagination; if his acts are dictated by reason and not by enthusiasm, etc.), many causes of illusion are thereby excluded. However, a momentary aberration is still possible. 2. How has the person been educated? Can the knowledge of the visionary have been derived from books or from conversations with theologians? 3. What are the virtues exhibited before and after the revelation? Has he made progress in holiness and especially in humility? The tree can be judged by its fruits. 4. What extraordinary graces of union with God have been received? The greater they are the greater the probability in favour of the revelation, at least in the main. 5. Has the person had other revelations that have been judged Divine? Has he made any predictions that have been clearly realized? 6. Has he been subjected to heavy trials? It is almost impossible for extraordinary favours to be conferred without heavy crosses; for both are marks of God's friendship, and each is a preparation for the other. 7. Does he practice the following rules: fear deception; be open with your director; do not desire to have revelations? Our information concerning a revelation considered in itself or concerning the circumstances that accompanied it might be secured as follows: 1. Is there an authentic account, in which nothing has been added, suppressed, or corrected? 2. Does the revelation agree with the teaching of the Church or with the recognized facts of history or natural science? 3. Does it teach nothing contrary to good morals, and is it unaccompanied by any indecent action? The commandments of God are addressed to everyone without exception. More than once the demon has persuaded false visionaries that they were chosen souls, and that God loved them so much as to dispense them from the burdensome restrictions imposed on ordinary mortals. On the contrary, the effect of Divine visitations is to remove us more and more from the life of sense, and make us more rigorous towards ourselves. 4. Is the reaching helpful towards the obtaining of eternal salvation? In spiritism we find the spirits evoked treat only of trifles. They reply to idle questions, or descend to providing amusement for an assembly (e.g., by moving furniture about); deceased relatives or the great philosophers are interrogated and their replies are woefully commonplace. A revelation is also suspect if its aim is to decide a disputed question in theology, history, astronomy, etc. Eternal salvation is the only thing of importance in the eyes of God. "In all other matters", says St. John of the Cross, "He wishes men to have recourse to human means" (Montée, II, xxii). Finally, a revelation is suspect if it is commonplace, telling only what is to be found in every book. It is then probable that the visionary is unconsciously repeating what he has learnt by reading. 5. After examining all the circumstances accompanying the vision (the attitudes, acts, words, etc.), do we find that the dignity and seriousness which become the Divine Majesty? The spirits evoked by Spiritists often speak in a trivial manner. Spiritists try to explain this by pretending that the spirits are not demons, but the souls of the departed who have retained all their vices; absurd or unbecoming replies are given by deceased persons who are still liars, or libertines, frivolous or mystifiers, etc. But if that be so, communications with these degraded beings is evidently dangerous. In Protestant "revivals" assembled crowds bewail their sins, but in a strange, exaggerated way, as if frenzied or intoxicated. It must be admitted that they are inspired by a good principle: a very ardent sentiment of the love of God and of repentance. But to this is added another element that cannot be regarded as Divine: a neuropathic enthusiasm, which is contagious and sometimes develops so far as to produce convulsions or repugnant contortions. Sometimes a kind of unknown language is spoken, but it consists in reality of a succession of meaningless sounds. 6. What sentiments of peace, or, on the other hand, of disturbance, are experienced during or after the revelations? Here is the rule as formulated by St. Catherine of Siena and St. Ignatius: "With persons of good will [it is only of such that we are here treating] the action of the good spirit [God or His Angels] is characterized by the production of peace, joy, security, courage; except perhaps at the first moment." Note the restriction. The Bible often mentions this disturbance at the first moment of the revelation; the Blessed Virgin experienced it when the Angel Gabriel appeared to her. The action of the demon produces quite the contrary effect: "With persons of good will he produces, except perhaps at the first moment, disturbance, sorrow, discouragement, perturbation, gloom." In a word the action of Satan encounters a mysterious resistance of the soul. 7. It often happens that the revelation inspires an exterior work - for instance, the establishment of a new devotion, the foundation of a new religious congregation or association, the revision of the constitutions of a congregation, etc., the building of a church or the creation of a pilgrimage, the reformation of the lax spirit in a certain body, the preaching of a new spirituality, etc. In these cases the value of the proposed work must be carefully examined; is it good in itself, useful, filling a need, not injurious to other works, etc.? 8. Have the revelations been subjected to the tests of time and discussion? 9. If any work has been begun as a result of the revelation, has it produced great spiritual fruit? Have the sovereign pontiffs and the bishops believed this to be so, and have they assisted the progress of the work? This is very well illustrated in the cases of the Scapular of Mount Carmel, the devotion to the Sacred Heart, the miraculous medal. These are the signs that enable us to judge with probability if a revelation is Divine. In the case of certain persons very closely united to God, the slow study of these signs has been sometimes aided or replaced by a supernatural intuition; this is what is known as the infused gift of the discernment of spirits. As regards the rules of conduct, the two principal have been explained in the article on CONTEMPLATION, namely 1. if the revelation leads solely to the love of God and the saints, the director may provisionally regard it as Divine; 2. at the beginning the visionary should do his best to repulse the revelation quietly. He should not desire to receive it, otherwise he will be exposing himself to the risk of being deceived. Here are some further rules: + the director must be content to proceed slowly, not to express astonishment, to treat the person gently. If he were to be harsh or distrustful, he would intimidate the soul he is directing, and incline it to conceal important details from him; + he must be very careful to urge the soul to make progress in the way of sanctity. He will point out that the only value of the visions is in the spiritual fruit that they produce; + he will pray fervently, and have the subject he is directing pray, that the necessary light may be granted. God cannot fail to make known the true path to those who ask Him humbly. If on the contrary a person confided solely in his natural prudence, he would expose himself to punishment for his self-sufficiency; + the visionary should be perfectly calm and patient if his superiors do not allow him to carry out the enterprises that he deems inspired by Heaven or revealed. One who, when confronted with this opposition, becomes impatient or discouraged, shows that he has very little confidence in the power of God and is but little conformed to His will. If God wishes the project to succeed, He can make the obstacles suddenly disappear at the time appointed by Him. A very striking example of this divine delay is to be found in the life of St. Juliana, the Cistercian prioress of Mont-Cornillon, near Liège (1192-1258). It is to her that the institution of the feast of the Blessed Sacrament is due. All of her life was passed in awaiting the hour of God, which she was never to see, for it came only more than a century after the beginning of the revelations. As regards inspirations ordinarily, those who have not passed the period of tranquility or a complete union, must beware of the idea that they hear supernatural words; unless the evidence is irresistible, they should attribute them to the activity of their own imaginations. But they may at least experience inspirations or impulses more or less strong, which seem to point out to them how to act in difficult circumstances. This is a minor form of revelation. The same line of conduct should be followed as in the latter case. We must not accept them blindly and against the dictates of reason, but weigh the reasons for and against, consult a prudent director, and decide only after applying the rules for the discernment of spirits. The attitude of reserve that has just been laid down does not apply to the simple, sudden and illuminating views of faith, which enables one to understand in a higher manner not novelties, but the truths admitted by the Church. Such enlightenment cannot have any evil result. It is on the contrary a very precious grace, which should be very carefully welcomed and utilized. Consult the writings of ST. TERESA AND ST. JOHN OF THE CROSS, passim; PHILIP OF THE BLESSED TRINITY, Summa theologica mysticae (Lyons, 1656), pt. II, tr. iii; DE VALLGORNERA, Mystica Theologia (Barcelona, 1662), Q. ii, disp. 5; LOPEZ DE EZQUERRA, Lucerna Mystica (Venice, 1692), tr. v; AMORT, De revelationibus (Augsburg, 1744); BENEDICT XIV, De servorum Dei canonizatione (Rome, 1767), l.III, c. liii; SCARAMELLI, Direttorio mistico (Venice, 1754), tr.iv; SCHRAM, Institutiones theologicae mysticae (Augsburg, 1777), pt. II, c. iv; ST. LIGUORI, Homo apostolicus (Venice, 1782), append.i, n. 19; RIBET, La mystique divine, II (Paris, 1879); POULAIN, Des graces d'oraison (5th ed., Paris, 1909), tr. The Graces of Interior Prayer (London, 1910). AUG. POULAIN Revocation Revocation The act of recalling or annulling, the reversal of an act, the recalling of a grant, or the making void of some deed previously existing. This term is of wide application in canon law. Grants, laws, contracts, sentences, jurisdiction, appointments are at times revoked by the grantor, his successor or superior according to the prescriptions of law. Revocation without just cause is illicit, though often valid. Laws and customs are revoked when, owing to change of circumstances, they cease to be just and reasonable. Concordats (q.v.) are revocable when they redound to the serious injury of the Church. Minors and ecclesiastical institutions may have sentences in certain civil trials set aside (Restitutio in integrum). Contracts by which ecclesiastical property is alienated are sometimes rescindable. A judge may revoke his own interlocutory sentence but not a definitive judicial sentence. Many appointments are revocable at will; others require a judicial trial or other formalities. (See BENEFICE; FACULTIES, CANONICAL; INDULTS, PONTIFICAL; JURISDICTION, ECCLESIASTICAL.) ANDREW B. MEEHAN English Revolution of 1688 English Revolution of 1688 James II, having reached the climax of his power after the successful suppression of Monmouth's rebellion in 1685, then had the Tory reaction in his favour, complete control over Parliament and the town corporations, a regular army in England, a thoroughly Catholic army in process of formation in Ireland, and a large revenue granted by Parliament for life. His policy was to govern England as absolute monarch and to restore Catholics to their full civil and religious rights. Unfortunately, both prudence and statesmanship were lacking, with the result that in three years the king lost his throne. The history of the Revolution resolves itself into a catalogue of various ill-judged measures which alienated the support of the Established Church, the Tory party, and the nation as a whole. The execution of Monmouth (July, 1685) made the Revolution possible, for it led to the Whig party accepting William of Orange as the natural champion of Protestantism against the attempts of James. Thus the opposition gained a centre round which it consolidated with ever-increasing force. What the Catholics as a body desired was freedom of worship and the repeal of the penal laws; but a small section of them, desirous of political power, aimed chiefly at the repeal of the Test Act of 1673 and the Act of 1678 which excluded Catholics from both houses of Parliament. Unfortunately James fell under the influence of this section, which was directed by the unprincipled Earl of Sunderland, and he decided on a policy of repeal of the Test Act. Circumstances had caused this question to be closely bound up with that of the army. For James, who placed his chief reliance on his soldiers, had increased the standing army to 30,000, 13,000 of whom, partly officered by Catholics, were encamped on Hounslow Heath to the great indignation of London which regarded the camp as a menace to its liberties and a centre of disorder. Parliament demanded that the army should be reduced to normal dimensions and the Catholic officers dismissed; but James, realizing that the test would not be repealed, prorogued Parliament and proceeded to exercise the "dispensing and suspending power". By this he claimed that it was the prerogative of the crown to dispense with the execution of the penal laws in individual cases and to suspend the operation of any law altogether. To obtain the sanction of the Law Courts for this doctrine a test case, known as Hales's case, was brought to decide whether the king could allow a Catholic to hold office in the army without complying with the Test Act. After James had replaced some of the judges by more complaisant lawyers, he obtained a decision that "it was of the king's prerogative to dispense. with penal laws in particular instances". He acted on the decision by appointing Catholics to various positions, Lord Tyrconnel becoming Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Lord Arundel Lord Privy Seal, and Lord Bellasyse Lord Treasurer in place of the Tory minister Lord Rochester, who was regarded as the chief mainstay of the Established Church. The Church of England, which was rendered uneasy by the dismissal of Rochester, was further alienated by the king's action in appointing a Court of High Commission, which suspended the Bishop of London for refusing to inhibit one of his clergy from preaching anti-Catholic sermons. The feeling was intensified by the liberty which Catholics enjoyed in London during 1686. Public chapels were opened, including one in the Royal Palace, the Jesuits founded a large school in the Savoy, and Catholic ecclesiastics appeared openly at Court. At this juncture James, desiring to counterbalance the loss of Anglican support, offered toleration to the dissenters, who at the beginning of his reign had been severely persecuted. The influence of William Penn induced the king to issue on 4 April, 1687, the Declaration of Indulgence, by which liberty of worship was granted to all, Catholic and Protestant alike. He also replaced Tory churchmen by Whig dissenters on the municipal corporations and the commission of the peace, and, having dissolved Parliament, hoped to secure a new House of Commons which would repeal both the penal laws and the Test. But he underestimated two difficulties, the hatred of the dissenters for "popery" and their distrust of royal absolutism. His action in promoting Catholics to the Privy Council, the judicial bench, and the offices of Lord lieutenant, sheriff, and magistrate, wounded these susceptibilities, while he further offended the Anglicans by attempting to restore to Catholics some of their ancient foundations in the universities. Catholics obtained some footing both at Christ Church and University College, Oxford, and in March 1688, James gave the presidency of Magdalen College to Bonaventure Giffard, the Catholic Vicar Apostolic of the Midland District. This restoration of Magdalen as a Catholic college created the greatest alarm, not only among the holders of benefices throughout the country, but also among the owners of ancient abbey lands. The presence of the papal nuncio, Mgr d'Adda, at Court and the public position granted to the four Catholic bishops, who had recently been appointed as vicars Apostolic, served to increase both the dislike of the dissenters to support a king whose acts, while of doubtful legality, were also subversive of Protestant interests, and likewise the difficulty of the Anglicans in practicing passive obedience in face of such provocation. Surrounded by these complications, James issued his second Declaration of Indulgence in April, 1688, and ordered that it should be read in all the churches. This strained Anglican obedience to the breaking point. The Archbishop of Canterbury and six of his suffragans presented a petition questioning the dispensing power. The seven bishops were sent to the Tower prosecuted, tried, and acquitted. This trial proved to be the immediate occasion of the Revolution, for, as Halifax said, "it hath brought all Protestants together and bound them up into a knot that cannot easily be untied". While the bishops were in the Tower, another epoch-marking event occurred -- the birth of an heir to the crown (10 June, 1688). Hitherto the hopes of the king's opponents had been fixed on the succession of his Protestant daughter Mary, wife of William of Orange, the Protestant leader. The birth of Prince James now opened up the prospect of a Catholic dynasty just at a moment when the ancient anti-Catholic bigotry had been aroused by events both in England and France. For besides the ill-advised acts of James, the persecution of the Huguenots by Louis XIV, consequent on the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, revived old religious animosities. England was flooded with French Protestant refugees bearing everywhere the tale of a Catholic king's cruelty. Unfortunately for James his whole foreign policy had been one of subservience to France, and at this moment of crisis the power of France was a menace to all Europe. Even Catholic Austria and Spain supported the threatened Protestant states, and the pope himself, outraged by Louis XIV in a succession of wrongs, joined the universal resistance to France and was allied with William of Orange and other Protestant sovereigns against Louis and his single supporter, James. William had long watched the situation in England, and during 1687 had received communications from the opposition in which it was agreed that, whenever revolutionary action should become advisable, it should be carried out under William's guidance. As early as the autumn of 1687 the papal secretary of state was aware of the plot to dethrone James and make Mary queen, and a French agent dispatched the news to England through France. The Duke of Norfolk then in Rome also learned it, and sent intelligence to the king before 18 Dec., 1687 (letter of d'Estrées to Louvois, cited by Ranke, II, 424). But James, though early informed, was reluctant to believe that his son-in-law would head an insurrection against him. On the day the seven bishops were acquitted seven English statesmen sent a letter to William inviting him to rescue the religion and liberties of England. But William was threatened by a French army on the Belgian frontier, and could not take action. Louis XIV made a last effort to save James, and warned the Dutch States General that he would regard any attack on England as a declaration of war against France. This was keenly resented by James who regarded it as a slight upon English independence, and he repudiated the charge that he had made a secret treaty with France. Thereupon Louis left him to his fate, removed the French troops from Flanders to begin a campaign against the empire, and thus William was free to move. When it was too late James realized his danger. By hasty concessions granted one after another he tried to undo his work and win back the Tory churchmen to his cause. But he did not remove the Catholic officers or suggest the restriction of the dispensing power. In October Sunderland was dismissed from office, but William was already on the seas, and, though driven back by a storm, he re-embarked and landed at Torbay on 5 Nov., 1688. James at first prepared to resist. The army was sent to intercept William, but by the characteristic treachery of Churchill, disaffection was spread, and the king, not knowing in whom he could place confidence, attempted to escape. At Sheerness he was stopped and sent back to London, where he might have proved an embarrassing prisoner had not his escape been connived at. On 23 Dec., 1688, he left England to take refuge with Louis XIV; the latter received him generously and granted him both palace and pension. On his first departure the mob had risen in London against the Catholics, and attacked chapels and houses, plundering and carrying off the contents. Even the ambassadors' houses were not spared, and the Spanish and Sardinian embassy chapels were destroyed. Bishops Giffard and Leyburn were arrested and committed to the Tower. Father Petre had escaped, and the Nuncio disguised himself as a servant at the house of the envoy from Savoy, till he was enabled to obtain from William a passport. So far as the English Catholics were concerned, the result of the Revolution was that their restoration to freedom of worship and liberation from the penal laws was delayed for a century and more. So completely had James lost the confidence of the nation that William experienced no opposition and the Revolution ran its course in an almost regular way. A Convention Parliament met on 22 January, 1689, declared that James "having withdrawn himself out of the kingdom, had abdicated the government, and that the throne was thereby vacant", and "that experience had shown it to be inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this Protestant kingdom to be governed by a Popish Prince". The crown was offered to William and Mary, who accepted the Declaration of Right, which laid down the principles of the constitution with regard to the dispensing power, the liberties of Parliament, and other matters. After their proclamation as king and queen, the Declaration was ratified by the Bill of Rights, and the work of the Revolution was complete. English Catholics have indeed had good cause to lament the failure of the king's well-meant, if unwise, attempts to restore their liberty, and to regret that he did not act on the wise advice of Pope Innocent XI and Cardinal Howard to proceed by slow degrees and obtain first the repeal of the penal laws before going on to restore their full civil rights. But on the other hand we can now realize that the Revolution had the advantage of finally closing the long struggle between king and Parliament that had lasted for nearly a century, and of establishing general principles of religious toleration in which Catholics were bound sooner or later to be included. LINGARD, Hist. of England, X (London, 1849), the standard Catholic account; LODGE in HUNT and POOLE, Political Hist. of England, Vlll (London, 1910); TEMPERLEY in Cambridge Modern Hist., V (London, 1908); TREVELYAN, England under the Stuarts (London, 1904); WYATT-DAVIES, Hist. of England for Catholic Schools (London, 1903); GREEN, Hist. of the English People (London, 1877-80); MACAULAY, Hist. of England (London, 1849); TASWELL-LANGMEAD, English Constitutional Hist. (London, 1875); BRIGHT, Hist. of England, 2nd period (London, 1880); GUIZOT Pourquoi la Révolution a-t-elle réussi? (1640~1688) (Paris, 1850); MAZURE, Hist. de la révol. de 1688 (3 vols., Paris, 1825). For earlier accounts consult DEFOE, Revol. of 1688 reprinted in ARBER, English Garner, XII (London, 1903); EACHARD, Hist. of the Revol. in 1688 (London, 1725); BURNET, Hist. of my Own Times (last edition, Oxford 1897-1900); DODD, Church Hist. (Wolverhampton vere Brussels, 1737 -42); SPEKE, Secret Hist. of the happy Revol., 1688 (London, 1715). EDWIN BURTON French Revolution French Revolution The last thirty years have given us a new version of the history of the French Revolution, the most diverse and hostile schools having contributed to it. The philosopher, Taine, drew attention to the affinity between the revolutionary and what he calls the classic spirit, that is, the spirit of abstraction which gave rise to Cartesianism and produced certain masterpieces of French literature. Moreover he admirably demonstrated the mechanism of the local revolutionary committees and showed how a daring Jacobin minority was able to enforce its will as that of "the people". Following up this line of research M. Augustin Cochin has quite recently studied the mechanism of the sociétés de pensée in which the revolutionary doctrine was developed and in which were formed men quite prepared to put this doctrine into execution. The influence of freemasonry in the French Revolution proclaimed by Louis Blanc and by freemasonry itself is proved by the researches of M. Cochin. Sorel has brought out the connection between the diplomacy of the Revolution and that of the old regime. His works prove that the Revolution did not mark a break in the continuity of the foreign policy of France. The radically inclined historical school, founded and led by M. Aulard, has published numerous useful documents as well as the review, "La Révolution Française". Two years since, a schism occured in this school, M. Mathiez undertaking opposition to M. Aulard the defence of Robespierre, in consequence of which he founded a new review "Les Annales Révolutionaires". The "Société d'histoire contemporaine", founded under Catholic auspices, has published a series of texts bearing on revolutionary history. Lastly the works of Abbé Sicard have revealed in the clergy who remained faithful to Rome various tendencies, some legitimist, others more favourable to the new political forms, a new side of the history of the French clergy being thus developed. Such are the most recent additions to the history of the French Revolution. This article, however, will emphasize more especially the relations between the Revolution and the Church (see France). MEETING OF THE ESTATES The starting point of the French Revolution was the convocation of the States General by Louis XVI. They comprised three orders, nobility, clergy, and the third estate, the last named being permitted to have as many members as the two other orders together. The electoral regulation of 24 January, 1789, assured the parochial clergy a large majority in the meetings of the bailliages which were to elect clerical representatives to the States General. While chapters were to send to these meetings only a single delegate for ten canons, and each convent only one of its members, all the curés were permitted to vote. The number of the "order" of clergy at the States General exceeded 300, among whom were 44 prelates, 208 curés, 50 canons and commendatory abbots, and some monks. The clergy advocated almost as forcibly as did the Third Estate the establishment of a constitutional government based on the separation of the powers, the periodical convocation of the States General, their supremacy in financial matters, the responsibility of ministers, and the regular guarantee of individual liberty. Thus the true and great reforms tending to the establishment of liberty were advocated by the clergy on the eve of the Revolution. When the Estates assembled 5 May, 1789, the Third Estate demanded that the verification of powers should be made in common by the three orders, the object being that the Estates should form but one assembly in which the distinction between the "orders" should disappear and where every member was to have a vote. Scarcely a fourth of the clergy advocated this reform, but from the opening of the Estates it was evident that the desired individual voting which would give the members of the Third Estate, the advocates of reform, an effectual preponderance. As early as 23 May, 1789, the curés at the house of the Archbishop of Bordeaux were of the opinion that the power of the deputies should be verified in the general assembly of the Estates, and when on 17 June the members of the Third Estate proclaimed themselves the "National Assembly", the majority of the clergy decided (19 June) to join them. As the higher clergy and the nobility still held out, the king caused the hall where the meetings of the Third Estate were held to be closed (20 June), whereupon the deputies, with their president, Bailly, repaired to the Jeu de Paume and an oath was taken not to disband till they had provided France with a constitution. After Mirabeau's thundering speech (23 June) addressed to the Marquis de Dreux-Brézé, master-of-ceremonies to Louis XVI, the king himself (27 June) invited the nobility to join the Third Estate. Louis XVI's dismissal of the reforming minister, Necker, and the concentration of the royal army about Paris, brought about the insurrection of 14 July, and the capture of the Bastille. M. Funck-Brentano has destroyed the legends which rapidly arose in connection with the celebrated fortress. There was no rising en masse of the people of Paris, and the number of the besiegers was but a thousand at most; only seven prisoners were found at the Bastille, four of whom were forgers, one a young man guilty of monstrous crimes and who for the sake of his family was kept at the Bastille that he might escape the death penalty, and two insane prisoners. But in the public opinion the Bastille symbolized royal absolutism and the capture of this fortress was regarded as the overthrow of the whole regime, and foreign nations attached great importance to the event. Louis XVI yielded before this agitation; Necker was recalled; Bailly became Mayor of Paris; Lafayette, commander of the national militia; the tri-colour was adopted, and Louis XVI consented to recognize the title of "National Constituent Assembly". Te Deums and processions celebrated the taking of the Bastille; in the pulpits the Abbé Fauchet preached the harinony of religion and liberty. As a result of the establishment of the "vote by order" the political privileges of the clergy may be considered to have ceased to exist. During the night of 4 August, 1789, at the instance of the Vicomte de Noailles, the Assembly voted with extraordinary enthusiasm the abolition of all privileges and feudal rights and the equality of all Frenchmen. A blow was thereby struck at the wealth of the clergy, but the churchmen were the first to give an example of sacrifice. Plurality of benefices and annates was abolished and the redemption of tithes was agreed upon, but two days later, the higher clergy becoming uneasy, demanded another discussion of the vote which had carried the redemption. The result was the abolition, pure and simple, of tithes without redemption. In the course of the discussion Buzot declared that the property of the clergy belonged to the nation. Louis XVI's conscience began to be alarmed. He temporized for five weeks, then merely published the decrees as general principles, reserving the right to approve or reject the measures which the Assembly would take to enforce them. DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN. CATHOLICISM CEASES TO BE THE RELIGION OF THE STATE Before giving France a constitution the Assembly judged it necessary to draw up a "Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen", which should form a preamble to the Constitution. Camus's suggestion that to the declaration of the rights of man should be added a declaration of his duties, was rejected. The Declaration of Rights mentions in its preamble that it is made in the presence and under the auspices of the Supreme Being, but out of three of the articles proposed by the clergy, guaranteeing the respect due to religion and public worship, two were rejected after speeches by the Protestant, Rabaut Saint-Etienne, and Mirabeau, and the only article relating to religion was worded as follows: "No one shall be disturbed for his opinions, even religious, provided their manifestation does not disturb the public order established by law." In fact it was the wish of the Assembly that Catholicism should cease to be the religion of the State and that liberty of worship should be established. It subsequently declared Protestants eligible to all offices (24 Dec., 1789), restored to their possessions and status as Frenchmen the heirs of Protestant refugees (10 July and 9 Dec., 1790), and took measures in favour of the Jews (28 January, 26 July, 16 Aug., 1790). But it soon became evident in the discussions relating to the Civil Constitution of the clergy that the Assembly desired that the Catholic Church, to which the majority of the French people belonged, should be subject to the State and really organized by the State. The rumours that Louis XVI sought to fly to Metz and place himself under the protection of the army of Bouillé in order to organize a counter-revolutionary movement and his refusal to promulgate the Declaration of the Rights of Man, brought about an uprising in Paris. The mob set out to Versailles, and amid insults brought back the king and queen to Paris (6 Oct., 1789). Thenceforth the Assembly sat at Paris, first at the archiepiscopal residence, then at the Tuileries. At this moment the idea of taking possession of the goods of the clergy in order to meet financial exigencies began to appear in a number of journals and pamphlets. The plan of confiscating this property, which had been suggested as early as 8 August by the Marquis de Lacoste, was resumed (24 Sept.) by the economist, Dupont de Nemours, and on 10 October was supported in the name of the Committee of Finances in a report which caused scandal by Talleyrand, Bishop of Autun, who under the old regime had been one of the two "general agents" charged with defending the financial interests of the French clergy. On 12 October Mirabeau requested the Assembly to decree (1) that the ownership of the church property belonged to the nation that it might provide for the support of the priests; (2) that the salary of each curé should not be less than 1200 livres. The plan was discussed from 13 October to 2 November. It was opposed the Abbé de Montesquieu, and the Abbé Maury, who contended that the clergy being a moral person could be an owner, disputed the estimates placed upon placed upon the wealth of the clergy, and suggested that their possessions should simply serve as a guarantee for a loan of 400,000,000 livres to the nation. The advocates of confiscation maintained that the clergy no longer existed as an order, that the property was like an escheated succession, and that the State had a right to claim it, that moreover the Royal Government had never expressly recognized the clergy as a proprietor, that in 1749 Louis XV had forbidden the clergy to receive anything without the authority of the State, and that he had confiscated the property of the Society of Jesus. Malouet took an intermediate stand and demanded that the State should confiscate only superfluous ecclesiastical possessions, but that the parochial clergy should be endowed with land. Finally, on 2 November, 1789, the Assembly decided that the possessions of the clergy be "placed at the disposal" of the nation. The results of this vote were not long in following. The first was Treilhard's motion (17 December), demanding in the name of the ecclesiastical committee of the Assembly, the closing of useless convents, and decreeing that the State should permit the religious to release themselves from their monastic vows. The discussion of this project began in February, 1790, after the Assembly by the creation of assemblies of departments, districts, and commons, had proceeded to the administrative reorganization of France. The discussion was again very violent. On 13 February, 1790, the Assembly, swayed by the more radical suggestions of Barnave and Thouret, decreed as a "constitutional article" that not only should the law no longer recognize monastic vows, but that religious orders and congregations were and should remain suppressed in France, and that no others should be established in the future. After having planned a partial suppression of monastic orders the Assembly voted for their total suppression. The proposal of Cazalès (17 February) calling for the dissolution of the Constituent Assembly, and the rightful efforts, made by the higher clergy to prevent Catholics from purchasing the confiscated goods of the Church provoked reprisals. On 17 March, 1790, the Assembly decided that the 400,000,000 livres worth of alienated ecclesiastical properties should be sold to municipalities which in turn should sell them to private buyers. On 14 April it decided that the maintenance of Catholic worship should be provided for without recourse to the revenues of former ecclesiastical property and that a sufficient sum, fixed at more than 133,000,000 livres for the first year, should be entered in the budget for the allowances to be made to the clergy; on 17 April the decree was passed dealing with the assignats, the papers issued by the Government paying interest at 5 per cent, and which were to be accepted as money in payment for the ecclesial property, thenceforth called national property; finally, on 9 July, it was decreed that all this property should be put up for sale. CIVIL CONSTITUTION OF THE CLERGY On 6 February, 1790, the Assembly charged its ecclesiastical committee, appointed 20 Aug., 1789, and composed of fifteen members to prepare the reorganization of the clergy. Fifteen new members were added to the committee on 7 February. The "constituents" were disciples of the eighteenth century philosophes who subordinated religion to the State; moreover, to understand their standpoint it is well to bear in mind that many of them were jurists imbued with Gallican and Josephist ideas. Finally Taine has proved that in many respects their religious policy merely followed in the footsteps of the old regime, but while the old regime protected the Catholic Church and made it the church exclusive, recognized, the constituents planned to enslave it after having stripped it of its privileges. Furthermore they did not take into account that there are mixed matters that can only be regulated after an agreement with ecclesiastical authority. They were especially incensed against the clergy after the consistorial address in which Pius VI (22 March, 1790) reproved some of the measures already taken by the Constituent Assembly, and by the news received from the West and South where the just dissatisfaction of Catholic consciences had provoked disturbances; in particular the election of the Protestant Rabaut Saint-Etienne to the presidency of the National Assembly brought about commotions at Toulouse and Nimes. Under the influence of these disturbances the Civil Constitution of the Clergy was developed. On 29 May, 1790, it was laid before the Assembly. Bonal, Bishop of Clermont, and some members of the Right requested that the project should be submitted to a national council or to the pope. But the Assembly proceeded; it discussed the Civil Constitution of the Clergy from 1 June to 12 July, 1790, on which date it was passed. This Constitution comprised four titles. Title I, Ecclesiastical Offices: Diocesan boundaries were to agree with those of departments, 57 episcopal sees being thus suppressed. The title of archbishop was abolished; out of 83 remaining bishoprics 10 were called metropolitan bishoprics and given jurisdiction over the neighbouring dioceses. No section of French territory should recognize the authority of a bishop living abroad, or of his delegates, and this, adds the Constitution, "without prejudice to the unity of faith and the communion which shall be maintained with the head of the Universal Church". Canonries, prebends, and priories were abolished. There should no longer be any sacerdotal posts especially devoted to fulfilling the conditions of Mass foundations. All appeals to Rome were forbidden. Title II, Appointment to Benefice: Bishops should be appointed by the Electoral Assembly of the department; they should be invested and consecrated by the metropolitan and take an oath of fidelity to the nation, the King, the Law, and the Constitution; they should not seek any confirmation from the pope. Parish priests should be elected by the electoral assemblies of the districts. Thus all citizens, even Protestants, Jews, and nominal Catholics, might name titulars to ecclesiastical offices, and the first obligation of priests and bishops was to take an oath of fidelity to the Constitution which denied to the Holy See any effective power over the Church. Title III, Salary of ministers of Religion: The Constitution fixed the salary of the Bishop of Paris at 51,000 livres (about $10,200), that of bishops of towns whose population exceeded 50,000 souls at 20,000 livres (about $4000), that of other bishops at 12,000 livres (about $2400), that of curés at a sum ranging from 6000 (about $1200) to 1200 livres (about $240). For the lower clergy this was a betterment of their material condition, especially as the real value of these sums was two and one-half times the present amount. Title IV, dealing with residence, made very severe conditions regarding the absences of bishops and priests. At the festival of the Federation (14 July, 1790) Talleyrand and three hundred priests officiating at the altar of the nation erected on the Champs-de-Mars wore the tri-colored girdle above their priestly vestments and besought the blessing of God on the Revolution. Deputations were present from the towns of France, and there was inaugurated a sort of cult, of the Fatherland, the remote origin of all the "Revolutionary cults". On 10 July, 1790, in a confidential Brief to Louis XVI, Pius VI expressed the alarm with which the project under discussion filled him. He commissioned two ecclesiastics who were ministers of Louis XVI, Champion de Cicé and Lefranc de Pompignan, to urge the king not to sign the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. On 28 July, in a letter to the pope, Louis XVI replied that he would be compelled, "with death in his soul", to promulgate the Constitution, that he would reserve the right to broach as soon as possible the matter of some concession, but that if he refused, his life and the lives of his family would be endangered. The pope replied (17 August) that he still held the same opinion of the Constitution, but that he would make no public declaration on the subject until he consulted with the Sacred College. On 24 August the king promulgated the Constitution, for which he was blamed by the pope in a confidential Brief on 22 September. M. Mathiez claims to have proved that the hesitancy of Pius VI was due to temporal rather than to spiritual considerations, to his serious fears about the affairs of Avignon and the Comtat Venaissin, where certain popular parties were clamoring for French troops, but the truth is that Pius VI, who had made known his opinion of the Constitution to two French prelates, was awaiting some manifestation on the part of the French episcopate. Indeed the bishops spoke before the pope had spoken publicly. At the end of October, 1790, they published an "Exposition des principes sur la constitution civile du clergé", compiled by Boisgelin, Archbishop of Aix in which they rejected the Constitution and called upon the faithful to do the same. This publication marks the beginning of a violent conflict between the episcopate an the Constitution. On 27 November, 1790, after a speech by Mirabeau, a decree stipulated that all bishops and priests should within a week, under penalty of losing their offices, take the oath to the Constitution, that all who refused and who nevertheless continued to discharge their priestly functions should be prosecuted as disturbers of the public peace. The king, who was much disturbed by this decree, eventually sanctioned it (26 December, 1790) in order to avoid a rising. Hitherto a large section of the lesser clergy had shown a certain amount of sympathy for the Revolution, but when it was seen that the episcopal members of the Assembly refused to take the oath, thus sacrificing their sees, a number of the priests followed this disinterested example. It may be said that from the end of 1790 the higher clergy and the truly orthodox elements of the lower clergy were united against the revolutionary measures. Thenceforth there were two classes, the non-juring or refractory priests, who were faithful to Rome and refused the oath, and the jurors, sworn, or Constitutional priests, who had consented to take the oath. M. de la Gorce has recently sought to estimate the exact proportion of the priests who took the oath. Out of 125 bishops there were only four, Talleyrand of Autun, Brienne of Sens, Jarente of Orleans, and Lafond de Savine, of Viviers; three coadjutors or bishops in partibus, Gobel, Coadjutor Bishop of Bâle; Martial de Brienne, Coadjutor of Sens; and Dubourg-Miraudet, Bishop of Babylon. In the important towns most of the priests refused to take the oath. Statistics for the small boroughs and the country are more difficult to obtain. The national archives preserve the complete dockets of 42 departments which were sent to the Constituent Assembly by the civil authorities. This shows that in these 42 departments, of 23,093 priests called upon to swear, 13,118 took the oath. There would be therefore out of 100 priests, 56 to 57 jurors against 43 to 44 non-jurors. M. de la Gorce gives serious reasons for contesting these statistics, which were compiled by zealous bureaucrats anxious to please the central administrators. He asserts on the other hand that the schism had little hold in fifteen departments and concludes that in 1791 the number of priests faithful to Rome was 52 to 55 out of 100; this is a small enough majority, but one which M. de la Gorce considers authentic. On 5 February, 1791, the Constituent Assembly forbade every non-juring priest to preach in public. In March the elections to provide for the vacant episcopal sees and parishes took place. Disorder grew in the Church of France; young and ambitious priests, better known for their political than for their religious zeal, were candidates, and in many places owing to the opposition of good Catholics those elected had much difficulty in taking possession of their churches. At this juncture, seeing the Constitutional Church thus setup in France against the legitimate Church, Pius VI wrote two letters, one to the bishops and one to Louis XVI, to inquire if there remained any means to prevent schism; and finally, on 13 April, 1791, he issued a solemn condemnation of the Civil Constitution in a solemn Brief to the clergy and the people. On 2 May, 1791, the annexation of the Comtat Venaissin and the city of Avignon by the French troops marked the rupture of diplomatic relations between France and the Holy See. From May, 1791, there was no longer an ambassador from France at Rome or a nuncio at Paris. The Brief of Pius VI encouraged the resistance of the Catholics. The Masses celebrated by non-juring priests attracted crowds of the faithful. Then mobs gathered and beat and outraged nuns and other pious women. On 7 May, 1791, the Assembly decided that the non-juring priests as prêtres habitués might continue to say Mass in parochial churches or conduct their services in other churches on condition that they would respect the laws and not stir up revolt against the Civil Constitution. The Constitutional priests became more and more unpopular with good Catholics; Sciout's works go to show that the "departmental directories" had to spend their time in organizing regular police expeditions to protect the Constitutional priests against the opposition of good Catholics, or to prosecute the non-juring priests who heroically persisted in remaining at their posts. Finally on 9 June, 1791, the Assembly forbade the publication of all Bulls or Decrees of the Court of Rome, at least until they had been submitted to the legislative body and their publication authorized. Thus Revolutionary France not only broke with Rome, but wished to place a barrier between Rome and the Catholics of France The king's tormenting conscience was the chief reason for his attempted flight (20-21 June, 1791). Before fleeing he had addressed to the Assembly a declaration of his dissatisfaction with the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, and once more protested against the moral violence which had compelled him to accept such a document. Halted at Varennes, Louis XVI was brought back on 25 June, and was suspended from his functions till the completion of the Constitution, to which he took the oath 13 Sept., 1791. On 30 Sept., 1791, the Constituent Assembly dissolved, to make way for the Legislative Assembly, in which none of the members of the Constituent Assembly could sit. The Constituent Assembly had passed 2500 laws and reorganized the whole French administration. Its chief error from a social standpoint, which Anatole Leroy-Beaulieu calls a capital one, was to pass the Chapelier Decree (15 June, 1791), which forbade working people to band together and form associations "for their so-called common interest". Led astray by their spirit of individualism and their hatred for certain abuses of the old corporations, the Constituents did not understand that the world of labour should be organized. They were responsible for the economic anarchy which reigned during the nineteenth century, and the present syndicate movement as well as the efforts of the social Catholics in conformity with the Encyclical "Rerum novarum" marks a deep and decisive reaction against the work of the Constituent Assembly. THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY When the Constituent Assembly disbanded (30 Sept., 1791), France all was aflame concerning the religious question. More than half the French people did not want the new Church, the factitious creation of the law; the old the Church was ruined, demolished, hunted down, and the general amnesty decreed by the Constituent Assembly before disbanding could do nothing towards restoring peace in the country where that Assembly's bungling work had unsettled the consciences of individuals. The parties in the Legislative Assembly were soon irreconcilable. The Feuillants, on the Right, saw no salvation save in the Constitution; the Girondins on the Left, and the Montagnards on the Extreme Left, made ready for the Republic. There were men who, like the poet André Chénier, dreamed of a complete Separation of Church and State. "The priests", he wrote in a letter to the "Moniteur" (22 October, 1791), "will not trouble the Estates when no one is concerned about them, and they will always trouble them while anyone is concerned about them as at present." But the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly had sat in the departmental or district assemblies; they had fought against the non-juring priests and brought violent passions and a hostile spirit to the Legislative Assembly. A report from Gensonné and Gallois to the Legislative Assembly (9 October, 1791) on the condition of the provinces of the West denounced the non-juring priests as exciting the populace to rebellion and called for measures against them. It accused them of complicity with the émigrés bishops. At Avignon the Revolutionary Lécuyer, having been slain in a church, some citizens reputed to be partisans of the pope were thrown into the ancient papal castle and strangled (16-17 Oct., 1791). Calvados was also the scene of serious disturbances. The Legislative Assembly, instead of repairing the tremendous errors of the Constituent Assembly, took up the question of the non-juring priests. On 29 November, on the proposal of François de Neufchâteau, it decided that if within eight days they did not take the civil oath they should be deprived of all salary, that they should be place under the surveillance of the authorities, that if troubles arose where they resided they should be sent away, that they should be imprisoned for a year if they persisted in remaining and for two years if they were convicted of having provoked disobedience to the king. Finally it forbade non-juring priests the legal exercise of worship. It also requested from the departmental directories lists of the jurors and non-jurors, that it might, as it said, "stamp out the rebellion which disguises itself under the pretended dissidence in the exercise of the Catholic religion". Thus its decree ended in a threat. But this decree was the object of a sharp conflict between Louis XVI and the Assembly. On 9 Dec., 1791, the king made his veto known officially. Parties began to form. On one side were the king and the Catholics faithful to Rome, on the other the Assembly and the priests who had taken the oath. The legislative power was on one side, the executive on the other. In March, 1792, the Assembly accused the ministers of Louis XVI; the king replaced them by a Girondin ministry headed by Dumouriez, with Roland, Servan, and Clavière among its members. They had a double policy: abroad, war with Austria, and at home, measures against the non-juring priests. Louis XVI, surrounded by dangers, was also accused of duplicity; his secret negotiations with foreign courts made it possible for his enemies to say that he had already conspired against France. A papal Brief of 19 March, 1792, renewed the condemnation of the Civil Constitution and visited with major excommunication all juring priests who after sixty days should not have retracted, and all Catholics who remained faithful to these priests. The Assembly replied by the Decree of 27 May, 1792, declaring that all non-juring priests might be deported by the directory of their department at the request of twenty citizens, and if they should return after expulsion they would be liable to ten years of imprisonment. Louis vetoed this decree. Thus arose a struggle not only between Louis XVI and the Assembly, but between the king and his ministry. On 3 June 1792, the Assembly decreed the formation of a camp near Paris of 20,600 volunteers to guard the king. At the ministerial council Roland read an insulting letter to Louis, in which he called upon him to sanction the decrees of November and May against the non-juring priests. He was dismissed, whereupon the populace of Paris arose and invaded the Tuileries (20 June, 1792). and for several hours the king and his family were the objects of all manner of outrages. After the public manifesto of the Duke of Brunswick in the name of the powers in coalition against France (25 July, 1792) and the Assembly's declaration of "Fatherland in danger" there came petitions for the deposition of the king, who was accused of being in communication with foreign rulers. On 10 August, Santerre, Westermann, and Fournier l'Américain at the head of the national guard attacked the Tuileries defended by 800 Swiss. Louis refused to defend himself, and with his family sought refuge in the Legislative Assembly. The Assembly passed a decree which suspended the king's powers, drew up a plan of education for the dauphin, and convoked a national convention. Louis XVI was imprisoned in the Temple by order of the insurrectionary Commune of Paris. Madness spread through France caused by the threatened danger from without; arrests of non-juring priests multiplied. In an effort to make them give way. The Assembly decided (15 August) that the oath should consist only of the promise to uphold with all one's might liberty, equality, and the execution of the law, or to die at one's post". But the non-juring priests remained firm and refused even this second oath. On 26 August the Assembly decreed that within fifteen days they should be expelled from the kingdom, that those who remained or returned to France should be deported to Guiana, or should be liable to ten years imprisonment. It then extended this threat to the priests, who, having no publicly recognized priestly duties, had hitherto been dispensed from the oath, declaring that they also might be expelled if they were convicted of having provoked disturbances. This was the signal for a real civil war. The peasants armed in La Vendée, Deux Sèvres, Loire Inférieure, Maine and Loire, Ile and Vilaine. This news and that of the invasion of Champagne by the Prussian army caused hidden influences to arouse the Parisian populaces hence the September massacres. In the prisons of La Force, the Conciergerie, and the Abbaye Saint Germain, at least 1500 Women, priests and soldiers fell under the axe or the club. The celebrated tribune, Danton, cannot be entirely acquitted of complicity in these massacres. The Legislative Assembly terminated its career by two measures against the Church: it deprived priests of the right to register births etc., and authorize divorce. Laicizing the civil state was not in the minds of the Constituents, but was the result of the blocking of the Civil Constitution of the Clergy. The Legislative Assembly was induced to enact it because the Catholics faithful to Rome would not have recourse to Constitutional priests for registering of births, baptisms, and deaths. THE CONVENTION; THE REPUBLIC; THE REIGN OF TERROR The opening of the National Convention (21 Sept., 1792) took place the day following Dumouriez's victory at Valmy over the Prussian troops. The constitutional bishop, Grégoire, proclaimed the republic at the first session; he was surrounded in the assembly by fifteen constitutional bishops and twenty-eight constitutional priests. But the time was at hand when the constitutional clergy in turn was to be under suspicion, the majority of the Convention being hostile to Christianity itself. As early as 16 November, 1792, Cambon demanded that the salaries of the priests be suppressed and that thenceforth no religion be subsidized by the State, but the motion was rejected for the time being. Henceforth the Convention enacted all manner of arbitrary political measures: it undertook the trial of Louis XVI, and on 2 January, 1799, "hurled a kings head at Europe". But from a religious standpoint it was more timid; it feared to disturb the people of Savoy and Belgium, which its armies were annexing to France. From 10 to 15 March, 1793, formidable insurrections broke out in La Vendée, Anjou, and a part of Brittany. At the same time Dumouriez, having been defeated at Neerwinden, sought to turn his army against the Convention, and he himself went over to the Austrians. The Convention took fright; it instituted a Revolutionary Tribunal on 9 March and on 6 April the Committee of Public Safety, formidable powers, was established. Increasingly severe measures were taken chiefly against the non-juring clergy. On 18 Feb., 1793, the Convention voted a prize one hundred livres to whomsoever should denounce a priest liable to deportation and who remained in France despite the law. On 1 March the émigrés were sentenced to perpetual banishment and their property confiscated. On 18 March it was decreed that any émigré or deported priest arrested on French soil should be executed within twenty-four hours. On 23 April it was enacted that all ecclesiastics, priests or monks, who had not taken the oath prescribed by the Decree of 15 August, 1792, should be transported to Guiana; even the priests who had taken the oath should be treated likewise if six citizens should denounce them for lack of citizenship. But despite all these measures the non-juring priests remained faithful to Rome. The pope had maintained in France an official internuncio, the Abbé de Salamon, who kept himself in hiding and performed his duties at the risk of his life, gave information concerning current events, and transmitted orders. The proconsuls of the Convention, Fréron and Barras at Marseilles and Toulon, Tallien at Bordeaux, Carrier at Nantes, perpetuated abominable massacres. In Paris the Revolutionary Tribunal, carrying out the proposals of the public accuser, Foquier-Tinville, inaugurated the Reign of Terror. The proscription of the Girondins by the Montagnards (2 June, 1793), marked a progress in demagogy. The assassination of the bloodthirsty in demagogue Marat, by Charlotte Corday 913 July 1793) gave rise to extravagant manifestations in honour of Marat. But the provinces did not follow this policy. News came of insurrections in Caen, Marseilles, Lyons, and Toulon; and at the same time the Spaniards were in Roussillon, the Piedmontese in Savoy, the Austrians in Valenciennes, and the Vendeans defeated Kleber at Torfou (Sept., 1793). The crazed Convention decreed a rising en masse; the heroic resistance of Valenciennes and Mainz gave Carnot time to organize new armies. At the same time the Convention passed the Law of Suspects. (17 Sept., 1793), which authorized the imprisonment of almost anyone and as a consequence of which 30,000 were imprisoned. Informing became a trade in France. Queen Marie Antoinette was beheaded 16 October, 1793. Fourteen Carmelites who were executed 17 July, 1794, were declared Venerable by Leo XIII in 1902. From a religious point of view a new feature arose at this period — the constitutional clergy, accused of sympathy with the Girondins, came to be suspected almost as much as the non-juring priests. Numerous conflicts arose between the constitutional priests and the civil authorities with regard to the decree of the Convention which did not permit the priests to ask those intending to marry if they were baptized, had been to confession, or were divorced. The constitutional bishops would not submit to the Convention when it required them to give apostate priests the nuptial blessing. Despite the example of the constitutional bishop, Thomas Lindet, a member of the Convention, who won the applause of the Assembly by ann his marriage, despite the scandal given by Gobel, Bishop of Paris, in appointing a married priest to a post in Paris the majority of constitutional bishops remained hostile to the marriage of priests. The conflict between them and the Convention became notorious when, on 19 July, 1793, a decree of the Convention decided that the bishops who directly or indirectly offered any obstacle to the marriage of priests should be deported and replaced. In October the Convention declared that the constitutional priests themselves should be deported if they were found wanting in citizenship. The measures taken by the Convention to substitute the Revolutionary calendar for the old Christian calendar, and the decrees ordering the municipalities to seize and melt down the bells and treasures of the churches, proved that certain currents prevailed tending to the dechristianization of France. On the one hand the rest of décadi, every tenth day, replaced the Sunday rest; on the other the Convention commissioned Leonard Bourdon (19 Sept., 1793) to compile a collection of the heroic actions of Republicans to replace the lives of the saints in the schools. The "missionary representatives", sent to the provinces, closed churches, hunted down citizens suspected of religious practices, endeavoured to constrain priests to marry, and threatened with deportation for lack of citizenship priests who refused to abandon their posts. Persecution of all religious ideas began. At the request of the Paris Commune, Gobel, Bishop of Paris, and thirteen of his vicars resigned at the bar of the Convention (7 November) and their example was followed by several constitutional bishops. The Montagnards who considered worship necessary replaced the Catholic Sunday Mass by the civil mass of décadi. Having failed to reform and nationalize Catholicism they endeavoured to form a sort of civil cult, a development of the worship of the fatherland which had been inaugurated at the feast of the Federation. The Church of Notre-Dame-de-Paris became a temple of Reason, and the feast of Reason was celebrated on 10 November. The Goddesses of Reason and Liberty were not always the daughters of low people; they frequently came of the middle classes. Recent research has thrown new light on the history of these cults. M. Aulard was the first to recognize that the idea of honouring the fatherland, which had its origin in the festival of the Federation in 1790 gave rise to successive cults. Going deeper M. Mathiez developed the theory that confronted by the blocking of the Civil Constitution, the Conventionals, who had witnessed in the successive feasts of the Federation the power of formulas on the minds of the masses, wanted to create a real culte de la patrie, a sanction of faith in the fatherland. On 23 November, 1793, Chaumette passed a law alienating all churches in the capital. This example was followed in the provinces, where all city churches and a number of those in the country were closed to Catholic worship. The Convention offered a prize for the abjuration of priests by passing a decree which assured a pension to Priests who abjured, and the most painful day of that sad period was 20 November, 1793, when men, women, and children dressed in Priestly garments taken from the Church of St. Germain des Prés marched through the hall of the Convention. Laloi, who presided, congratulated them, saying they had "wiped out eighteen centuries of error". Despite the part played by Chaumette and the Commune of Paris in the work of violent dechristianization, M. Mathiez has proved that it is not correct to lay on the Commune and the Exagérés, they were called, the entire responsibility, and that a Moderate, an Indulgent, namely Thuriot, the friend of Danton, was one of the most violent instigators. It is thus clear why Robespierre who desired a reaction against these excesses, should attack both Exagérés and Indulgents. Indeed a reactionary movement was soon evident. As early as 21 November, 1793, Robespierre complained of the "madmen who could only revive fanaticism". On 5 December he caused the Convention to adopt the text of a manifesto to the nations of Europe in which the members declared that they sought to protect the liberty of all creeds; on 7 December, he supported the motion of the committee of public safety which reported the bad effect in the provinces of the intolerant violence of the missionary representatives, and which forbade in the future all threats or violence contrary to liberty of worship. These decrees were the cause of warfare between Robespierre an enthusiasts such as Hébert and Clootz. At first Robespierre sent his enemies to the scaffold; Hébert and Clootz were beheaded in March, 1704, Chaumette and Bishop Gobel in April. But in this same month of April Robespierre sent to the scaffold the Moderates, Desmoulins and Danton, who wanted to stop the Terror, and became the master of France with his lieutenants Couthon and Saint-Just. M. Aulard regards Robespierre as having been hostile to the dechristianization for religious and political motives; he explains that Robespierre shared the admiration for Christ felt by Rousseau's Vicar Savoyard and that he feared the evil effect on the powers of Europe of the Convention's anti-religious policy. M. Mathiez on the other hand considers that Robespierre did not condemn the dechristianization in principle; that he knew the common hostility to the Committee of Public Safety of Moderates such as Thuriot and enthusiasts like Hébert; and that on the information of Basire and Chabot he suspected both parties of having furthered the fanatical measures of dechristianization only to discredit the Convention abroad and thus more easily to plot with the powers hostile to France. Robespierre's true intentions are still an historical problem. On 6 April, 1794, he commissioned Couthon to propose in the name of the Committee of Public Safety that a feast be instituted in honour of the Supreme Being, and on 7 May Robespierre himself outlined in a long speech the plan of the new religion. He explained that from the religious and Republican standpoint the idea of a Supreme Being was advantageous to the State, that religion should dispense with a priesthood, and that priests were to religion what charlatans were to medicine, and that the true priest of the Supreme Being was Nature. The Convention desired to have this speech translated into all languages and adopted a decree of which the first article was: "The French people recognize the existence of a Supreme Being and the immortality of the soul". The same decree states that freedom of worship is maintained but adds that in the case of disturbances caused by the exercise of a religion those who "excite them by fanatical preaching or by counter Revolutionary innovations", shall be punished according to the rigour of the law. Thus the condition of the Catholic Church remained equally precarious and the first festival of the Supreme Being was celebrated throughout France on 8 June, 1794, with aggressive splendour. Whereas the Exagérés wished simply to destroy Catholicism, and in the temples of Reason political rather than moral doctrines were taught. Robespierre desired that the civic religion should have a moral code which he based on the two dogmas of God and the immortality of the soul. He was of the opinion that the idea of God had a social value, that public morality depended on it and that Catholics would more readily support the republic under the auspices of a Supreme Being. The victories of the Republican armies, especially that of Fleurus (July, 1794), reassured the patriots of the Convention; those of Cholet, Mans, and Savenay, marked the checking of the Vendean insurrection. Lyons and Toulon were recaptured, Alsace was delivered, and the victory of Fleurus (26 June, 1794) gave Belgium to France. While danger from abroad was decreasing, Robespierre made the mistake of putting to vote in June the terrible law of 22 Prairial, which still further shortened the summary procedure of the Revolutionary tribunal and allowed sentence to be passed almost without trial even on the members of the Convention. The Convention took fright and the next day struck out this last clause. Montagnards like Tallien, Billaud-Varenne, and Collot d'Herbois, threatened by Robespierre, joined with such Moderates as Boissy d'Anglas and Durand Maillane to bring about the coup d'état of 9 Thermidor (27 July, 1794). Robespierre and his partisans were executed, and the Thermidorian reaction began. The Commune of paris was suppressed, the Jacobin Club closed, the Revolutionary tribunal disappeared after having sent to the scaffold the public accuser Fouquier-tinville and the Terrorist, Carrier, the author of the noyades (drownings) of Nantes. The death of Robespierre was the signal for a change of policy which proved of advantage to the Church; many imprisoned priests were released and many émigré priests returned. Not a single law hostile to Catholicism was repealed, but the application of them was greatly relaxed. The religious policy of the Convention became indecisive and changeable. On 21 December 1794, a speech of the constitutional bishop, Grégoire, claiming effective liberty of worship, aroused violent murmurings in the Convention, but was applauded by the people; and when in Feb., 1795, the generals and commissaries of the Convention in their negotiations with the Vendeans promised them the restoration of their religious liberties, the Convention returned to the idea supported by Grégoire, and at the suggestion of the Protestant, Boissy d'Anglas, it passed the Law of 3 Ventôse (21 Feb., 1795), which marked the enfranchisement of the Catholic Church. This law enacted that the republic should pay salaries to the ministers of no religion, and that no churches should be reopened, but it declared that the exercise of religion should not be disturbed, and prescribed penalties for disturbers. Immediately the constitutional bishops issued an Encyclical for the Establishment of Catholic worship, but their credit was shaken. The confidence of the faithful was given instead to the non-juring priests who were returning by degrees. These priests were soon so numerous that in April, 1795, the Convention ordered them to depart within the month under pain of death. This was a fresh outbreak of anti-Catholicism. With the fluctuation which thenceforth characterized it the Convention soon made a counter-movement. On 20 May, 1795, the assembly hall was invaded by the mob and the deputy Féraud assassinated. These violences of the Extremists gave some influence to the Moderates, and 30 May, at the suggestion of the Catholic, Lanjuinais, the Convention decreed that (Law of 11 Prairial) the churches not confiscated should be place at the disposal of citizens for the exercise of their religion, but that every priest who wished to officiate in these churches should previously take an oath of submission to the laws; those who refused might legally hold services in private houses. This oath of submission to the laws was much less serious than the oaths formerly prescribed by the Revolutionary authorities, and the Abbé Sicard has shown how Emery, Superior General of St. Sulpice, Bausset, Bishop of Alais and other ecclesiastics were inclined to a policy of pacification and to think that such an oath might be taken. While it seemed to be favouring a more tolerant policy the Convention met with diplomatic successes, the reward of the military victories: the treaties of Paris with Tuscany, of the Hague with the Batavian Republic, of Basle with Spain, gave to France as boundaries the Alps, the Rhine, and the Meuse. But the policy of religious pacification was not lasting. Certain periods of the history of the Convention justify M. Champion's theory that certain religious measures taken by the Revolutionists were forced upon them by circumstances. The descent of the émigrés on the Breton coasts, to be checked by Hoche at Quiberon, aroused fresh attacks on the priests. On 6 Sept., 1795 (Law of 20 Fructidor), the Convention exacted the oath of submission to the laws even of priests who officiated in private houses. The Royalist insurrection of 13 Vendémiaire, put down by Bonaparte, provoked a very severe decree against deported priests who should be found on French territory; they were to be sentenced to perpetual banishment. Thus at the time when the Convention was disbanding, churches were separated from the State. In theory worship was free; the Law of 29 Sept., 1795 (7 Vendémiaire), on the religious policy, though still far from satisfactory to the clergy, was nevertheless an improvement on the laws of the Terror, but anarchy and the spirit of persecution still disturbed the whole country. Nevertheless France owes to the Convention a number of lasting creations: the Ledger of the Public Debt, the Ecole Polytechnique, the Conservatory of Arts and Crafts, the Bureau of Longitudes, the Institute of France, and the adoption of the decimal system of weights and measures. The vast projects drawn up with regard to primary, secondary and higher education had almost no results. THE DIRECTORY In virtue of the so-called "Constitution of the year III", promulgated by the Convention 23 Sept., 1795, a Directory of five members (27 Oct., 1795) became the executive, and the Councils of Five Hundred and of the Ancients, the legislative power. At this time the public treasuries were empty, which was one reason why the people came by degrees to feel the necessity of a strong restorative power. The Directors Carnot, Barras, Letourneur, Rewbell, La Reveillière-Lépeaux were averse to Christianity, and in the separation of Church and State saw only a means of annihilating the Church. They wished that even the Constitutional episcopate, though they could not deny its attachment to the new regime, should become extinct by degrees, and when the constitutional bishops died they sought to prevent the election of successors, and multiplied measures against the non-juring priests. The Decree of 16 April, 1796, which made death the penalty for, provoking any attempt to overthrow the Republican government was a threat held perpetually over the heads of the non-juring priests. That the Directors really wished to throw difficulties in the way of all kinds of religion, despite theoretical declarations affirming liberty of worship is proved by the Law of 11 April, 1796, which forbade the use of bells and all sorts of public convocation for the exercise of religion, under penalty of a year in prison, and, in case of a second offense of deportation. The Directory having ascertained that despite police interference some non-juring bishops were officiating publicly in Paris, and that before the end of 1796 more than thirty churches or oratories had been opened to non-juring priests in Paris, laid before the Five Hundred a plan which, after twenty days, allowed the expulsion from French soil, without admission to the oath prescribed by the Law of Vendémiaire, all priests who had not taken the Constitutional Oath prescribed in 1790, or the Oath of Liberty and Equality prescribed in 1792; those who after such time should be found in France would be put to death. But amid the discussions to which this project gave rise, the revolutionary Socialist conspiracy of Babeuf was discovered, which showed that danger lay on the Left; and on @5 Aug., 1796, the dreadful project which had only been passed with much difficulty by the Five Hundred was rejected by the Ancients. The Directory began to feel that its policy of religious persecution was no longer followed by the Councils. It learned also that Bonaparte, who in Italy led the armies of the Directory from victory to victory, displayed consideration for the pope. Furthermore, the electors themselves showed that they desired a change of policy. The elections of 20 may, 1797, caused the majority of Councils to pass from the Left to the Right. Pichegru became president of the Five Hundred, a Royalist, Barthélemy, became one of the Five Directors. Violent discussions which took place from 26 June to 18 July, in which Royer-Collard distinguished himself, brought to the vote the proposal of the deputy Dubruel for the abolition of all laws against non-juring priests passed since 1791. The Directors, alarmed by what they considered a reactionary movement, commissioned General Augereau to effect the coup d'état of 18 Fructidor (4 Sept., 1797); the elections of 49 departments were quashed, two Directors, Carnot and Barthélemy, proscribed, 53 deputies deported, and laws against the émigré and non-juring priests restored to their vigour. Organized hunting for these priests took place throughout France; the Directory cast hundreds of them on the unhealthy shore of Sinnamary, Guiana, where they died. At the same time the Directory commissioned Berthier to make the attack on the Papal States and the pope, from which Bonaparte had refrained. The Roman Republic was proclaimed in 1798 and Pius VI was taken prisoner to Valence. An especially odious persecution was renewed in France against the ancient Christian customs; it was known as the décadaire persecution. Officials and municipalities were called upon to overwhelm with vexations the partisans of Sunday and to restore the observance of décadi. The rest of that day became compulsory not only for administrations and schools, but also for business and industry. Marriages could only be celebrated on décadi at the chief town of each canton. Another religious venture of this period was that of Theophilanthropists, who wished to create a spiritualist church without dogmas, miracles, priesthood or sacraments, a sort of vague religiosity, similar to the "ethical societies of the United States." Contrary to what has been asserted for one hundred years, M. Mathiez has proved that Theophilanthropism was not founded by the director La Réveillière-Lépeaux. It was the private initiative of a former Girondin, the librarian Chemin Dupontés, which gave rise to this cult; Valentine Hauy, instructor of the blind and former Terrorist, and the physiocrat, Dupont de Nemours, collaborated with him. During its early existence, the new Church was persecuted by agents of Cochon, Minister of Police, who was the tool of Camot, and it was only for a short time, after the coup d'état of 18 Fructidor, that the the Theophanthropists benefited by the protection of La Réveillière. In proportion to the efforts of the Directory for the culte décadaire, the Theophilanthropists suffered and were persecuted; in Paris, they were sometimes treated even worse than the Catholics, Catholic priests being at times permitted to occupy the buildings connected with certain churches while the Theophilanthropists were driven out. On a curious memoir written after 18 Fructidor entitled "Des circonstances actuelles qui peuvent terminer la Revolution et des principes qui doivent fonder la Républic en France", the famous Madame de Stael, who was a Protestant, declared herself against Theophilanthropy; like many Protestants, she hoped that Protestantism would become the State religion of the Republic. Through its clumsy and odious religious policy the Directory exposed itself to serious difficulties. Disturbed by the anti-religious innovations, the Belgian provinces revolted; 6000 Belgian priests were proscribed. Brttany, Anjou. and Maine again revolted, winning over Normandy. Abroad the prestige of the French armies was upheld by were upheld by Bonaparte in Egypt, but they were hated on the Continent, and in 1799 were compelled to evacuate most of Italy. Bonaparte's return and the coup d'état of 18 Brumaire (10 November 1799) were necessary to strengthen the glory of the French armies and to restore peace to the country and to consciences. TOURNEUX, Bibl. de l'hist. de Paris pendant la Révolution (Paris, 1896-1906); TUETEY, Répertoire des sources manuscrites de l'hist de Paris sous la Révolution, 7 vols. already published (Paris, 1896-1906); FORTESCUE, List of the three collections of books, pamphlets, and journals in the British Museum relating to the French Revolution (London, 1899). Reprint of the Moniteur Universel (1789-99); the two collections in course of publication of Documents inédits sur l'hist. économique de la Révolution française; and Documents sur l'hist. de Paris pendant la Révolution française; the works of BARRUEL (q.v.); BOURGIN, La france et Rome de 1788 à 1797, regeste des dépêches du cardinal secrétaire d'état, tirée du fond des "Vescovi" des archives secrètes du Vatican (Paris, 1909), fasc. 102 of the Library of French Schools of Athens and Rome; among numerous memoirs on france on the eve of the Revolution may be mentioned: YOUNG, Travels in France, ed. BETHAM-EDWARDS (London, 1889); and on the Revolution itself: Mémoires de l'internounce Salamon, ed. BRIDIER (Paris, 1890); GOUVERNEUR MORRIS, Diary and Letters (New York, 1882); Un séjour en France 1792 à 1795, lettres d'un témoin de la Révolution française, tr. TAINE (Paris, 1883); the work of the famous BURKE, Reflections on the Revolution in France, ed, SELBY (London, 1890), remains an important criticism of Revolutionary ideas. General Works — THIERS, Hist. de la Révolution française (tr. Paris, 1823-27); MIGNET, Hist. de la Révolution française (Paris, 1824); MICHELET, Hist. de la Révolution française (Paris, 1847-1853); LOUIS BLANK, Hist. de la Révolution française (Paris, 1847-1863; TOCQUEVILLE, L'ancien régime et la Révolution (Paris, 1856); TAINE, Les Origines de la France contemporaine: la Révolution (tr. Paris, 1878-84); SOREL, L'Europe et la Révolution française (Paris, 1885-1904); SYBEL, Gesch. der Revolutionszeit (Dusseldorf, 1853-57); CHUQUET, Les guerres de la Révolution (Paris, 1889-1902); AULARD, Hist. Politique de la Révolution française (Paris, 1901); IDEM, Etudes et leçons sur la Révolution française (Paris, 1893-1910); GAUTHEROT, Cours professés à l'Institut Catholique de Paris sur la Révolution française, a periodical begun at the end of 1910 and promising to be very important; MADELIN, La Révolution (Paris, 1911), a summary commendable for the exactness of its information and its effort at justice in the most delicate questions; The Cambridge Modern History, planned by the late LORD ACTON, II the French Revolution (Cambridge, 1904); MacCARTHY, The French Revolution (London, 1890-97); Ross, The Revolutionary and Napoleonic Era (Cambridge, 1907); LEGG, Select Documents Illustrative of the History of the French Revolution (Oxford, 1905); GIBBS, Men and Women of the French Revolution (London, 1905). Monographs and Special Works — AULARD, Taine, historien de la Révolution française (Paris, 1907); COCHIN, La crise de l'hist révolutionaire: Taine et M. Aulard (Paris, 1909); BORD, La francmaçonnerie en France des origiines à 1815, bk. I, Les ouvriers de l'idée révolutionaire (Paris, 1909); IDEM, La conspiration révolutionnaire de 1789, les complices, les victimes (Paris, 1909); FUNCK-BRENTANO, Légendes et archives de la Bastille (Paris, 1898); MALLET, Mallet du Pan and the French Revolution (London, 1902); FLING, Mirabeau and the French Revolution (London, 1906); LENOTRE, Mémoires et souvenirs sur la Révolution et l'Empire (Paris, 1907-9); IDEM, Paris révolutionaire, vieilles maisons, vieux papiers (Paris, 1900-10); WARWICK, Robespierre and the French Revolution (Philadelphia, 1909); FUNCK-BRENTANO, Légendes et archives de la Bastille (Paris, 1898); BLIARD, Fraternité révolutionnaire, études et récits d'après des documents inédits (Paris, 1909); MORTIMER TERNAUX, Hist. de la Terreur (Paris, 1862-1881); WALLON, Hist. du tribunal révolutionnaire (Paris, 1880-2); IDEM, La journéedu 31 Mai et le fédéralisme en 1793 (Paris, 1886); IDEM, Les représentants en mission (Paris, 1888-90); DAUDET, Hist. de l'émigration pendant la Révolution (Paris, 1904-7); LALLEMAND, La Révolution et les pauvres (Paris, 1898); ALGER, Englishment in the French Revolution (London, 1889); DOWDEN, The French Revolution and English Literture (London, 1897); CESTRE, La Révolution française et les poètes anglais (Paris, 1906). Religious History. — SICARD, L'ancien clergé de France II,III (Paris, 1902-3) IDEM, L'éducation morale et civique avant et pendant la Révolution (Paris, 1884); PIERRE DE LA GORCE, Hist. religieuse de la Révolution française I (Paris, 1909); MATHIEZ, rome et le clergé française sous la Constituante (Paris, 1911); IDEM, La théophilanthropie et le culte décadaire (Paris, 1904); IDEM, Contribution à l'histoire religieuse de la Révolution Française (Paris, 1907); IDEM, La Révolution et l'Eglise (Paris, 1910); AULARD, La Révolution française et les congrégations (Paris, 1911); IDEM, Le culte de la raison et le culte de l'Etre suprème (Paris, 1907); IDEM, Le culte de la séparation de 'Eglise et de l'Etat en 1794 (Paris, 1903); PIERRE, La Déportation ecclésiastique sous le Directoire (Paris, 1906). GEORGES GOYAU Rex Gloriose Martyrum Rex Gloriose Martyrum Rex Gloriose Martyrum, the hymn at Lauds in the Common of Martyrs (Commune plurimorum Martyrum) in the Roman Breviary. lit comprises three strophes of four verses in Classical iambic dimeter, the verses rhyming in couplets, together with a fourth concluding strophe (or doxology) in unrhymed verses varying for the season. The first stanza will serve to illustrate the metric and rhymic scheme: Rex gloriose martyrum, Corona confitentium, Qui respuentes terrea Perducis ad coelestia. The hymn is of uncertain date and unknown authorship, Mone (Lateinische Hymnen des Mittelalters, III, 143, no. 732) ascribing it to the sixth century and Daniel (Thesaurus Hymnologicus, IV, 139) to the ninth or tenth century. The Roman Breviary text is a revision, in the interest of Classical prosody, of an older form (given by Daniel, I, 248). The corrections are: terrea instead of terrena in the line "Qui respuentes terrena"; parcisque for parcendo in the line "Parcendo confessoribus"; inter Martyres for in Martyribus in the line "Tu vincis in Martyribus"; "Largitor indulgentiæ" for the line "Donando indulgentiam". A non-prosodic correction is intende for appone in the line "Appone nostris vocibus". Daniel (IV, 139) gives the Roman Breviary text, but mistakenly includes the uncorrected line "Parcendo confessoribus". lie places after the hymn an elaboration of it in thirty-two lines, found written on leaves added to a Nuremberg book and intended to accommodate the hymn to Protestant doctrine. This elaborated form uses only lines 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 of the original. Two of the added strophes may be quoted here to illustrate the possible reason (but also a curious misconception of Catholic doctrine in the apparent assumption of the lines) for the modification of the original hymn: Velut infirma vascula Ictus inter lapideos Videntur sancti martyres, Sed fide durant fortiter. Non fidunt suis meritis, Sed sola tua gratia Agnoscunt se persistere In tantis cruciatibus. Of the thirteen translations of the original hymn into English. nine are by Catholics. To the list given in JULIAN, Dictionary of Hymnology, 958, should be added the versions of BAGSHAWE, Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences (London, 1900), 166, and DONAHOE, Early Christian Hymns (New York, 1908), 50. For many Manuscript references and readings, see BLUME, Analecta Hymnica, LI (Leipzig, 1909), 128-29; IDEM, Der Cursus s. Benedicti Nursini (Leipzig, 1909), 67. H.T. HENRY Rex Sempiterne Caelitum Rex Sempiterne Cælitum The Roman Breviary hymn for Matins of Sundays and weekdays during the Paschal Time (from Low Sunday to Ascension Thursday). Cardinal Thomasius ("Opera omnia", II, Rome, 1747, 370) gives its primitive form in eight strophes, and Vezzosi conjectures, with perfect justice, that this is the hymn mentioned both by Cæsarius (died 542) and Aurelianus (died circa 550) of Arles, in their "Rules for Virgins", under the title "Rex æterne domine". Pimont (op. cit. infra, III, 95) agrees with the conjecture, and present-day hymnologists confirm it without hesitation. The hymn is especially interesting for several reasons. In his "De arte metrica" (xxiv) the Ven. Bede selects it from amongst "Alii Ambrosiani non pauci" to illustrate the difference between the metre of Classical iambics and the accentual rhythms imitating them. Ordinarily brief in his comment, he nevertheless refers to it (P. L., XC, 174) as "that admirable hymn . . . fashioned exquisitely after the model of iambic metre" and quotes the first strophe: Rex æterne Domine, Rerum Creator omnium, Qui eras ante sæcula Semper cum patre filius. Pimont (op. cit., III, 97) points out that, in its original text, it is amongst all the hymns, the one assuredly which best evidences the substitution of accent for prosodical quantity, and that the (unknown) author gives no greater heed to the laws of elision than to quantity "qui eras", "mundi in primordio", "plasmasti hominem", "tuæ imagini", etc. The second strophe illustrates this well: Qui mundi in primordio Adam plasmasti hominem, Qui tuæ imagini Vultum dedisti similem. Following the law of binary movement (the alternation of arsis and thesis), the accent is made to shorten long syllables and to lengthen short ones, in such wise that the verses, while using the external form of iambic dimeters, are purely rhythmic. Under Urban VIII, the correctors of the hymns omitted the fourth stanza and, in their zeal to turn the rhythm into Classical iambic dimeter, altered every line except one. Hymnologists, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, are usually severe in their judgment of the work of the correctors; but in this instance, Pimont, who thinks the hymn needed no alteration at their hands, nevertheless hastens to add that "never, perhaps, were they better inspired". And it is only just to say that, as found now in the Roman Breviary, the hymn is no less vigorous than elegant. PIMONT, Les hymnes du bréviaire romain, III (Paris, 1884), 93-100, gives the old and the revised text, supplementary stanzas, and much comment. Complete old text with various Manuscript readings in Hymnarium Sarisburiense (London, 1851), 95, and in DANIEL, Thesaurus hymnol., I (Halle, 1841), 85 (together with Rom. Brev. text and notes). Text (8 strophes) With English version, notes, plainsong and other settings in Hymns, Ancient and Modern, Historical Edition (London, 1909), 205-7. Old text, with many Manuscript references and readings, and notes, in BLUME, Der Cursus s. Benedicti Nursini (Leipzig, 1909), 111-13 (cf, also the alphabetical index). For first lines of translations etc., JULIAN, Dict. of Hymnology (London, 1907), s. vv. Rex aeterne Domine and Rex sempiterne coelitum. To his list should be added BAGSHAWE, Breviary Hymns and Missal Sequences (London, 1900), 78, and DONAHOE, Early Christian Hymns (New York, 1908), 22. The translation in BUTE, The Roman Breviary (Edinburgh, 1879), is by Moultrie, an Anglican clergyman. H. T. HENRY. Anthony Rey Anthony Rey An educator and Mexican War chaplain, born at Lyons, 19 March, 1807; died near Ceralvo, Mexico, 19 Jan., 1847. He studied at the Jesuit college of Fribourg, entered the novitiate of that Society, 12 Nov., 1827, and subsequently taught at Fribourg and Sion in Valais, In 1840 he was sent to the United States, appointed professor of philosophy in Georgetown College, and in 1843 transferred to St. Joseph's Church in Philadelphia. He became assistant to the Jesuit provincial of Maryland, pastor of Trinity Church, Georgetown, and vice-president of the college (1845). Appointed chaplain in the U. S. Army in 1846, he ministered to the wounded and dying at the siege of Monterey amid the greatest dangers; after the capture of the city, he remained with the army at Monterey and preached to the rancheros of the neighbourhood. Against the advice of the U. S. officers, he set out for Matamoras, preaching to a congregation of Americans and Mexicans at Ceralvo. It is conjectured that he was killed by a band under the leader Canales, as his body was discovered, pierced with lances, a few days later. He left letters dating from November, 1846, which were printed in the "Woodstock Letters" (XVII, 149-50, 152-55, 157-59). DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliothèque, VI, 1689; APPLETONS' Cyclopedia of American Biography (New York, 1888), s. v. N. A. WEBER William Reynolds William Reynolds (RAINOLDS, RAYNOLDS, REGINALDUS) Reynolds, William, born. at Pinhorn near Exeter, about 1544; died at Antwerp, 24 August, 1594, the second son of Richard Rainolds, and elder brother of John Rainolds, one of the chief Anglican scholars engaged on the "Authorized Version" of the Bible. Educated at Winchester School, he became fellow of New College, Oxford (1560-1572). He was converted partly by the controversy between Jewel and Harding, and partly by the personal influence of Dr. Allen. In 1575 he made a public recantation in Rome, and two years later went to Douai to study for the priesthood. He removed with the other collegians from Douai to Reims in 1578 and was ordained priest at Chalons in April, 1580. He then remained at the college, lecturing on Scripture and Hebrew, and helping Gregory Martin in translating the Reims Testament. Some years before his death he had left the college to become chaplain to the Beguines at Antwerp. He translated several of the writings of Allen and Harding into Latin and wrote a "Refutation" of Whitaker's attack on the Reims version (Paris, 1583); "De justa reipublicæ christianæ in reges impios et hæreticos authoritate" (Paris, 1590), under the name of Rossæus; a treatise on the Blessed Sacrament (Antwerp, 1593); "Calvino-Turcismus" (Antwerp, 1597). KIRBY, Annals of Winchester College (London, 1892); FOSTER, Alumni Ozonienses (Oxford. 1891); Douay Diaries (London, 1878); WOOD, Athenae Ozonienses (London, 1813); PITTS, De illustribus Angliae scriptoribus (Paris, 1619); DODD. Church History, II (Brussels vere Wolverhampton, 1737-42); GILLOW in Biog. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v.; RIGG in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v. Rainolds. EDWIN BURTON. Rhaetia Rhætia (RHÆTORUM). Prefecture Apostolic in Switzerland; includes in general the district occupied by the Catholics belonging to the Rhæto-Romanic race in the canton of the Grisons (Graubünden). The prefecture is bounded on the north by the Prättigau, on the south by Lombardy, on the east by the Tyrol, on the west by the cantons of Tessin (Ticino), Uri, and Glarus. During the sixteenth century the greater part of the inhabitants of the Grisons became Calvinists. In 1621 Paul V, at the entreaty of Bishop John Flugi of Coire (Chur) and Archduke Leopold of Austria, sent thither Capuchin missionaries from Brixen in the Tyrol; the first superior was P. Ignatius of Cosnigo, who resided in the mission (1621-45) and conducted it under the title of prefect Apostolic. The best known of the missionaries is St. Fidelis of Sigmaringen, who was martyred. After the death of P. Ignatius the mission was cared for by the Capuchin province of Brixen, represented in the mission by a sub-prefect. For a long time after the suppression of the religious orders by Napoleon, the mission was without an administrator; upon the restoration of the order, Capuchins from various provinces were sent into the mission. At present it is under the care of Capuchins of the Roman province. It has 22 parishes, in three of which the majority of inhabitants speak Italian; 52 churches and chapels; 40 schools for boys and girls; 7200 Catholics; 25 Capuchins. The prefect Apostolic lives at Sagens. BÜCHI, Die kath. Kirche in der Schweiz (Munich, 1902), 89; Missiones Catholicae (Rome, 1907), 103; MAYER, Gesch. des Bistums Chur (Stans, 1907), not yet completed. JOSEPH LINS. Rhaphanaea Rhaphanæa A titular see in Syria Secunda, suffragan of Apamea. Rhaphanæa is mentioned in ancient times only by Josephus (Bel. Jud., VII, 5, 1), who says that in that vicinity there was a river which flowed six days and ceased on the seventh, probably an intermittent spring now called Fououar ed-Deir, near Rafanieh, a village of the vilayet of Alep in the valley of the Oronte. The ancient name was preserved. At the time of Ptolemy (V, 14, 12), the Third Legion (Gallica) was stationed there. Hierocles (Synecdemus, 712, 8) and Georgius Cyprius, 870 (Gelzer, "Georgii Cyprii descriptio orbis romani", 44) mention it among the towns of Syria Secunda. The crusaders passed through it at the end of 1099; it was taken by Baldwin and was given to the Count of Tripoli ("Historiens des croisades", passim; Rey in "Bulletin de la Société des antiquaires de France", Paris, 1885, 266). The only bishops of Rhaphanæa known are (Le Quien, "Oriens christianus", II, 921): Bassianus, present at the Council of Nicæa, 325; Gerontius at Philippopolis, 344; Basil at Constantinople, 381; Lampadius at Chalcedon, 451; Zoilus about 518; Nonnus, 536. The see is mentioned as late as the tenth century in the "Notitia episcopatuum" of Antioch (Vailhé "Echos d'Orient", X, 94). SMITH, Dict. of Gr. and Rom. geogr., s. v.; MÜLLER, notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 973. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Joseph Gabriel Rheinberger Joseph Gabriel Rheinberger A composer and organist, born at Vaduz, in the Principality of Lichtenstein, Bavaria, 17 March, 1839; died at Munich, 25 Nov., 1901. When seven years old, he already served as organist in his parish church, and at the age of eight composed a mass for three voices. After enjoying for a short time the instruction of Choir-master Schmutzer in Feldkirch, he attended the conservatory at Munich from 1851 to 1854, and finished his musical education with a course under Franz Lachner. In 1859 he was appointed professor of the theory of music and organ at the conservatory, a position which he held until a few months before his death. Besides his duties as teacher he acted successively as organist at the court Church of St. Michael, conductor of the Munich Oratorio Society, and instructor of the solo artists at the royal opera. In 1867 he received the title of royal professor, and became inspector of the newly established royal school for music, now called the Royal Academy of Music. In 1877 he was promoted to the rank of royal court conductor, which position carried with it the direction of the music in the royal chapel. Honoured by his prince with the title of nobility and accorded the honorary degree of Doctor of Philosophy by the Munich University, Rheinberger for more than forty years wielded as teacher of many of the most gifted young musicians of Europe and America, perhaps more influence than any of his contemporaries. As a composer he was remarkable for his power of invention, masterful technique, and a noble, solid style. Among his two hundred compositions are oratorios (notably "Christoforus" and "Monfort"); two operas; cantatas for soli, chorus, and orchestra ("The Star of Bethlehem", "Toggenburg", "Klãrchen auf Eberstein" etc.); smaller works for chorus and orchestra; symphonies ("Wallenstein"), overtures, and chamber music for various combinations of instruments, Most important of all his instrumental works are his twenty sonatas for organ, the most notable productions in this form since Mendelssohn. Rheinberger wrote many works to liturgical texts, namely, twelve masses (one for double chorus, three for four voices a cappella, three for women's voices and organ, two for men's voices and one with orchestra), a requiem, Stabat Mater, and a large number of motets, and smaller pieces. Rheinbergen's masses rank high as works of art, but some of them are defective in the treatment of the text. Joseph Renner, Jr., has recently remedied most of these defects, and made the masses available for liturgical purposes. KRAYER, Joseph Rheinberger (Ratisbon, 1911); RENNER, Rheinberger's Messen in Kirchen-musikalisches Jahrbuch (Ratisbon, 1909). JOSEPH OTTEN Rhesaena Rhesæna A titular see in Osrhoene, suffragan of Edessa. Rhesæna (numerous variations of the name appear in ancient authors) was an important town at the northern extremity of Mesopotamia near the sources of the Chaboras (now Khabour), on the way from Carrhæ to Nicephorium about eighty miles from Nisibis and forty from Dara; Near by Gordian III fought the Persians in 243. Its coins show that it was a Roman colony from the time of Septimus Severus. The "Notitia dignitatum" (ed. Boecking, I, 400) represents it as under the jurisdiction of the governor or Dux of Osrhoene. Hierocles (Synecdemus, 714, 3) also locates it in this province but under the name of Theodosiopolis; it had in fact obtained the favour of Theodosius the Great and taken his name. It was fortified by Justinian. In 1393 it was nearly destroyed by Tamerlane's troops. To-day under the name of Râs-el-'Ain, it is the capital of a caza in the vilayet of Diarbekir and has only 1500 inhabitants. Le Quien (Oriens christianus, II, 979) mentions nine bishops of Rhesæna: Antiochus, present at the Council of Nicæa (325); Eunomius, who (about 420) forced the Persians to raise the siege of the town; John, at the Council of Antioch (444); Olympius at Chalcedon (451); Andrew (about 490); Peter, exiled with Sevenian (518); Ascholius, his successor, a Monophysite; Daniel (550); Sebastianus (about 600), a correspondent of St. Gregory the Great. The see is again mentioned in the tenth century in a Greek "Notitiæ episcopatuum" of the Patriarchate of Antioch (Vailhé, in "Echos d'Orient", X, 94). Le Quien (ibid., 1329 and 1513) mentions two Jacobite bishops: Scalita, author of a hymn and of homilies, and Theodosius (1035). About a dozen others are known. Revue de l'Orient chrét. VI (1901), 203; D'HERBELOT, Bibl. orientale, I, 140; III, 112; RITTER. Erdkunde, XI, 375; SMITH, Dict. Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v., with bibliography of ancient authors; MÜLLER, notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 1008; CHAPOT, La frontière de l'Euphrate de Pompée à la conquête arabe (Paris, 1907). 302. S. PÉTRIDÈS Rhinocolura Rhinocolura A titular see in Augustamnica Prima, suffragan of Pelusium. Rhinocolura or Rhinocorura was a maritime town so situated on the boundary of Egypt and Palestine that ancient geographers attributed it sometimes to one country and sometimes to the other. Its history is unknown. Diodorus Siculus (I, 60, 5) relates that it must have been founded by Actisanes, King of Ethiopia, who established there convicts whose noses had been cut off; this novel legend was invented to give a Greek meaning to the name of the town. Strabo (XVI, 781) says that it was formerly the great emporium of the merchandise of India and Arabia, which was unloaded at Leuce Come, on the eastern shore of the Red Sea, whence it was transported via Petra to Rhinocolura, It is identified usually with the present fortified village El Anish, which has 400 inhabitants, excluding the garrison, situated half a mile from the sea, and has some ruins of the Roman period. It was taken by the French in 1799, who signed there in 1800 the treaty by which they evacuated Egypt. To-day it and its vicinity are occupied by Egypt, after having been for a long period claimed by Turkey. The village is near a stream which bears its name (Wadi el-Arish), and receives its waters from central Sinai; it does not flow in winter, but is torrential after heavy rain. It is the "nahal Misraim", or stream of Egypt, frequently mentioned in the Bible (Gen., xv, 18, etc.), as marking on the south-west the frontier of the Promised Land. Instead of the ordinary translation of the Hebrew name, the Septuagint in Is., xxvii, 12, render it by Hrinokoroura; see St. Jerome (In Isaiam, XXVII, 12 in P. L., XXIV, 313). Le Quien (Oriens Christianus, II, 541) gives a list of thirteen bishops of Rhinocolura: the first does not belong to it. A Coptic manuscript also wrongly names a bishop said to have assisted in 325 at the Council of Nice. The first authentic titular known is St. Melas, who suffered exile under Valens and is mentioned on 16 January in the Roman Martyrology. He was succeeded by his brother Solon. Polybius was the disciple of St. Epiphanius of Cyprus, whose life he wrote. Hermogenes assisted at the Council of Ephesus (431), was sent to Rome by St. Cyril, and received many letters from his suffragan St. Isidore. His successor Zeno defended Eutyches at the Second Council of Ephesus (451). Other bishops were: Alphius, the Massalian heretic; Ptolemy, about 460, Gregory, 610. Of the other bishops on the list one did not belong to Rhinocolura; the other three are Coptic heretics. RELAND, Palæstina, 285, 969 sq.; SMITH, Dict. Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v.; MÜLLER, notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, 1, 683; VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible, s. v. Egypte (torrent ou ruisseau d'); AMÉLINEAU, Géoqraphie de l'Egypte à l'époque copte, 404; RITTER, Erdkunde, XVI, 143; XVI, 39, 41. S. PÉTRIDÈS Rhithymna Rhithymna (RHETHYMNA) A titular see of Crete, suffragan of Gortyna, mentioned by Ptolemy, III, 15, Pliny, IV, 59, and Stephen of Byzantium. Nothing is known of its ancient history but some of its coins are extant. It still exists under the Greek name of Rhethymnon (Turkish, Resmo, It. and Fr. Retimo). It is a small port on the north side of the island thirty-seven miles south-west of Candia; it has about 10,000 inhabitants (half Greeks, half Mussulmans), and some Catholics who have a church and school. Rhithymna exports oil and soap. During the occupation of Crete by the Venetians it became a Latin see. According to Corner (Creta sacra, II, 138 sq.), this see is identical with Calamona. For a list of twenty-four bishops (1287 to 1592) see Eubel (Hier. cath. med. ævi, I, 161; II, 128; III, 161). Three other names are mentioned by Corner from 1611 to 1641. The Turks who had already ravaged the city in 1572, captured it again in 1646. At present the Greeks have a bishop there who bears the combined titles of Rhethymnon and Aulopotamos. The date of the foundation of the see is unknown. It is not mentioned in the Middle Ages in any of the Greek "Notitiæ episcopatuum". SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Rhizus Rhizus ( Rizous.) A titular see of Pontus Polemoniacus suffragan of Neocaesarea, mentioned by Ptolemy (V, 6) as a port on the Black Sea (Euxine); it is referred to also in other ancient geographical documents, but its history is unknown, Procopius ("De bello gothico", IV, 2), tells us that the town was of some importance and that it was fortified by Justinian. He calls it Rhizaion, and it is so styled in the "Notitiæ Episcopatuum". It was originally a suffragan of Neocaesarea, then an "autocephalous" archdiocese, finally a metropolitan see; the dates of these changes are uncertain. With the decrease of the Christian element the suffragan has become a simple exarchate. To-day there are no more than 400 Greeks among the 2000 inhabitants of Rizeh, as the Turks call the town. It is the capital of the Sanjak of Lazistan in the Vilayet of Trebizond, and exports oranges and lemons. Le Quien (Oriens christianus, I, 517), mentions three bishops; Nectarius, present at the Council of Nice, 787; John, at the Council of Constantinople, 879, and Joachim (metropolitan) in 1565. SMITH, Dict. Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v.; MÜLLER, Notes on Ptolemy, ed. DIDOT, I, 868. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Giacomo Rho Giacomo Rho Missionary, born at Milan, 1593; died at Peking 27 April, 1638. He was the son of a noble and learned jurist, and at the age of twenty entered the Society of Jesus. While poor success attended his early studies, he was later very proficient in mathematics. After his ordination at Rome by Cardinal Bellarmine, he sailed in 1617 for the Far East with forty-four companions. After a brief stay at Goa he proceeded to Macao where, during the siege of that city by the Dutch, he taught the inhabitants the use of artillery and thus brought about its deliverance. This service opened China to him. He rapidly acquired the knowledge of the native language and was summoned in 1631 by the emperor to Peking for the reform of the Chinese calendar. With Father Schall he worked to the end of his life at this difficult task. When he died, amidst circumstances exceptionally favourable to the Catholic mission, numerous Chinese officials attended his funeral. He left works relative to the correction of the Chinese calendar, to astronomical and theological questions. DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, Biblioth. de la Comp. de Jésus, VI (9 vols., Brussels and Paris, 1890-1900), 1709-11; HUC, Christianity in China, Tartary and Thibet, II (tr. New York, 1884), 265-66. N. A. WEBER. Rhode Island Rhode Island The State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, one of the thirteen original colonies, is in extent of territory (land area, 1054 square miles), the smallest state in the American union. It includes the Island of Rhode Island, Block Island, and the lands adjacent to Narragansett Bay, bounded on the north and east by Massachusetts, on the south by the Atlantic Ocean, and on the west by Connecticut. The population, according to the United States Census of 1910, numbers 542,674. Providence, the capital, situated at head of Narragansett Bay, and having a population of 224,326, is the industrial centre of an extremely wealthy and densely populated district. Rhode Island has long since ranked as chiefly a manufacturing state, although the agricultural interest in certain sections are still considerable. The agriculture in Rhode Island has not kept pace with manufacturers is illustrated by instances of rural population. Two country towns have fewer inhabitants than in 1748; two others, but a few more than at that date; one town, less than in 1782; two, less than in 1790, and another, less than in 1830. Coal exists and has been mined, but it is of graphitic nature. Granite of high grade is extensively quarried. The value of stone quarried in 1902 was $734,623; the value of all other minerals produced, $39,998. The power supplied by the rivers gave early impetus to manufacturing are general, including cotton, woolen, and rubber goods, jewelry, silverware, machinery and tools. In 1905 there were 1617 manufacturing establishments with a total capitalization of $215,901,375; employing 97,318 workers with a payroll of $43,112,637, and an output of the value of $202,109,583. The total assets of banks and trust companies in June, 1909, were $252,612,122. The bonded State debt,1 Jan., 1910, was $4,800,000 with a sinking fund of $654,999. The direct foreign commerce is small, imports in 1908 being $1,499,116 and exports $21,281. The population of Rhode Island in 1708 was 7181. In 1774 it had increased to 59,707, subsequently decreasing until in 1782 it was 52,391. Thereafter until 1840 the average annual increase was 973; and from 1840 to 1860, 3289. During the latter period and for several years afterward came a heavy immigration from Ireland, followed by a large influx from Canada. For the last twenty-five years, the increase from European countries, especially Italy, has been great. According to the State census of 1095, the number of foreign-born in Rhode Island is as follows; born in Canada, 38,500; in Ireland, 32,629; In England, 24,431; In Italy, 18,014; In Sweden, 7201; In Scotland, 5649; in Portugal, 5293; In Russia, 4505; in Germany, 4463; in Poland, 4104. This classification does not distinguish the Jews, who are rapidly increasing, and who in 1905 numbered 14,570. HISTORY A. Political It is probable that Verrazano, sailing under the French flag, visited rhode Island waters in 1524. A dutch navigator, Adrian Block, in 1614 explored Narragansett Bay and gave to Block Island the name it bears. The sentence of banishment of Roger Williams from Plymouth Colony was passed in 1635, and in the following year he settled on the site of Providence, acquiring land by purchase from the Indians. One cause of Williams's banishment was his protest against the interference of civil authorities in religious matters. In November, 1637, William Coddington was notified to eave Massachusetts. With the help f of Williams, he settled on the site of Portsmouth, in the northerly part of the island of Rhode Island, which was then call Aquidneck. Disagreements arising at Portsmouth, Coddington, with a minority of his townsmen, in 1639 moved southward on the island and began the settlement of New port. Samuel Gorton, another refugee from Massachusetts, in 1638 came first to Portsmouth, and later to Providence, creating discord at both places by denying all power in the magistrates. Gorton finally, in 1643, purchased from the Indians a tract of land in what is now the town of Warwick, and settled there. The four towns, Providence, Warwick, Portsmouth, and Newport, lying in a broken line about thirty miles in length, for many years constituted the municipal divisions of the colony. In 1644 Roger Williams secured from the English Parliament the first charter, which was accepted by an assembly of delegates from the four towns; and a bill of rights, and a brief code of laws, declaring the government to be "held by the common consent of all the free inhabitants", were enacted thereunder. In 1663 was granted the charter of Charles II, the most liberal of all the colonial charters. It ordained that no person should be in any way molested on account of religion; and created the General Assembly, with power to enact all laws necessary for the government of the colony, such laws being not repugnant to but agreeable as near as might be to the laws of England, "considering the nature and constitution of the place and people there" The separate existence of the little colony was long precarious. Coddington in 1651 secured for himself a commission as governor of the islands of Rhode Island and Conanicut, but his authority was vigorously assailed, and his commission finally revoked. The Puritans in Massachusetts were no friends of the people of Rhode Island, and portions of the meagre territory were claimed by Massachusetts and Connecticut. Rhode Island, like the other colonies was threatened both in England and in America by those who favoured direct control by the English Government. Under the regime of Andros, Colonial Governor at Boston, the charter government was suspended for two years; and had the recommendations of the English commissioner, Lord Bellemont, been adopted, the charter government would have been abolished. In 1710 the colony first issued "bills of credit", paper money, which continued increasing in volume and with great depreciation in value, until after the close of the Revolution, causing and inciting bitter partisan and sectional strife, and at times leading to the verge of civil war. The advocates of this currency defended it on the ground of necessity, lack of specie, and the demand for some medium to pay the expenses os successive wars. In 1787 the State owed £150,047, English money, on interest-bearing notes, which in 1789 the Assembly voted to retire by paying them in paper money then passing at the ratio of twelve to one. By the early part of the eighteenth century the people were extensively engaged in ship-building, and it is said that in the wars in America between Great Britain and France, Rhode Island fitted out more ships for service than any other colony. The extraordinary measure of self-government granted to the colonists by the charter fostered in them a spirit of loyalty toward the mother country, substantially and energetically manifested on every occasion; but which, nevertheless, when the danger from the foreign foe was no longer imminent, was supplanted by a feeling of jealous apprehension of the encroachments on that the colonist s had now learned to regard as their natural rights. Rhode Island heartily joined the other colonies in making the Revolution her cause. In 1768 the Assembly ratified the Massachusetts remonstrance against the British principle of taxation, in spite of Lord Hillsborough's advice to treat it with "the contempt it deserves". The first overt act of the Revolution, the scuttling of the revenue sloop "Liberty", took place in Newport harbour, 19 July, 1769; followed three years later by the burning of the British ship of war "Gaspee" at Providence. A strong loyalist party in the colony for social and commercial reasons was anxious to avoid an open breach with the mother country, but the enthusiasm with which the news of Lexington was received showed that the majority of the people welcomed the impending struggle. on 4 May, 1776, the Rhode Island Assembly by formal act renounced its allegiance to Great Britain, and in the following July voted its approval of the Declaration of Independence. The colony bore its burden, too, of the actual conflict. From 1776 until 1779, the British occupied Newport as their headquarters, ruining the commerce of the town and wasting the neighbouring country. The evident strategic importance of the possession of Newport by the British, and the possibility of the place's becoming the centre of a protracted and disastrous war, created great alarm not only in the colony but throughout New England. Two attempts were made to dislodge the enemy, the second with the co-operation of the French fleet, but both failed. The levies of men and money were promptly met by the people of the colony in spite of the widespread privation and actual suffering. At last the British headquarters were shifted to the south, and the French allies Newport until the end of the war. The same consideration, the instinct for local self-government, which prompted Rhode Island to resist the mother country, made her slow to join with the other colonies in establishing a strong centralized government. "We have not seen our way clear to do it consistent with our idea of the principles upon which we are all embarked together", wrote the Assemble to the President of Congress. The proposed federal organization seemed scarcely less objectionable than the former British rule. Rhode Island took no part in the Convention of 1787, and long refused even to submit the question of the adoption of the Constitution to a state convention. Eight times the motion to submit was lost in the Assemble, and it was only when it became evident that the other states did not regard Rhode Island's condition single independence as an "eligible" one, and where quite ready to act in support of their opinion even to the extent of parcelling her territory among themselves, that the Constitution was submitted to a convention and adopted by a majority of two votes, 29 May, 1790. Admitted to the Union, Rhode Island did not follow the example of most of the other states in framing a constitution adapted to the new national life, but continued under the old charter. This fact underlies here political history for the next fifty years. The charter of Charles II, though suitable to its time, was bound to become oppressive. First, it fixed the representation of the several towns without providing for a readjustment to accord with the relative changes therein. Hence, the natural and social forces, necessarily operating in the course of two hundred years to enlarge some communities and to reduce others, failed to find a corresponding political expression. Again, the charter had conferred the franchise upon the "freemen" of the towns, leaving to the Assemble the task of defining the term. From early colonial days the qualification had fluctuated until in 1798 it was fixed at the ownership of real estate to the value of $134, or of $7 annual rental (the eldest sons of freeholders being also eligible). Agitation for a constitution began as soon as Rhode Island had entered the Union, and continued for many years with little result. It came to a head ultimately in 1841 in the Dorr Rebellion, the name given to that movement whereby a large part in the state, under the leadership of Thomas W. Dorr of Providence, proceeded to frame a constitution, independently of the existing government and to elect officers thereunder. The movement was readily put down by the authorities after some display of force, and Dorr was obliged to flee the state. Returning later, he was indicted for treason, convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was pardoned and set at liberty within a year. His work was not a failure, however, for in 1842 a constitution was adopted incorporating his proposed reforms. A personal property qualification was instituted, practically equivalent to the real estate qualification; and neither was required, except in voting upon an proposition to impose a tax or to expend money, or for the election of the City Council of Providence. The personal property qualification was not available, to foreign-born citizens, and this discrimination persisted until 1888, when it was abolished by constitutional amendment. Each town and city was entitled to one member in the Senate; and the membership of the Lower House, limited to seventy-two, was apportioned among the towns and cities on the basis of population, with the proviso that now town or city should have more than one-sixth of the total membership. In 1909, an amendment was adopted increasing the membership of the Lower House to one hundred, apportioned as before among the towns and cities on the basis of population, with the proviso that no town or city should have more than one-fourth of the total membership. It is significant that under this amendment the City of Providence has twenty-five representatives whereas its population warrants forty-one. In the same year, the veto power was for the first time bestowed upon the governor. Notwithstanding these approaches toward a republican form of government, there is a strong demand for a thorough revision of the Constitution. According to an opinion of the Supreme Court a constitutional convention is out of the question, inasmuch as the Constitution itself contains no provision therefor (In re The Constitutional Convention, IIV R. I., 469), and the only hope of reform seems to be in the slow and difficult process of amendment. B. Religious The earliest settlers in this state were criticized by their enemies for lack of religion. Cotton Mather described them as a "colluvies" of everything but Roman Catholics and real Christians. In Providence Roger Williams was made pastor of the first church, the beginning of the present First Baptist Church. In 1739 there were thirty-three churches in the colony; twelve Baptist, ten Quaker, six Congregational or Presbyterian, and five Episcopalian. It is said that in 1680 there was not one Catholic in the colony, and for a long period their number must have been small. In 1828 there were probably less than 1000 Catholics in the state. In that year Bishop Fenwick of Boston assigned Rev. Robert Woodley to a "parish" which included all of Rhode Island and territory to the east in Massachusetts. A church was built in Pawtucket in 1829. Father Woodley in 1828 acquired in Newport a lot and building which was used for a church and school. In 1830 Rev. John Corry was assigned to Taunton and Providence, and built a church in Taunton in that year. The first Catholic church in Providence was built in 1837 on the site of the present cathedral. At that time Father Corry was placed in charge of Providence alone. From 1844 to 1846 the mission of Rev. James Fitton included Woonsocket, Pawtucket, Crompton and Newport, a series of districts extending the length of the state. In 1846, Newport was made a parish by itself. Woonsocket received a pastor at about the same time; Pawtucket in 1847; Warren in 1851; Pascoag in 1851; East Greenwich in 1853; Georgiaville in 1855. These parishes were not confined to the limits of the towns or villages named, but included the surrounding territory. In 1844 the Diocese of Hartford was created, including Rhode Island and Connecticut, with the episcopal residence at Providence. At this time there were only six priests in the two states. In 1872 the diocese of Hartford was divided and the Diocese of Providence created, including all Rhode Island, and in Massachusetts, the counties of Bristol, Barnstable, Dukes and Nantucket, also the towns of Mattapoisset, Marion, and Wareham in the County of Plymouth. In 1904 the Diocese of Fall River was created, leaving the Diocese of Providence coextensive with the state. After 1840, and especially following the famine in Ireland, the Irish increased with great rapidity and long formed the bulk of the Catholic population. The growth of cotton manufactures after the Civil War drew great numbers of Canadian Catholics. In more recent years Italians have settled in Rhode Island in great numbers, and many Polish Catholics. Included in the Catholic population are approximately 65,000 Canadians and French, 40,000 Italians, 10,000 Portuguese,8000 Poles, and 1000 Armenians and Syrians. According to a special government report on the census of religious bodies of the United States, 76.5 per cent, of the population of the City of Providence are Catholics. There are 199 priests in the diocese, including about 47 Canadian and French priests, 8 Italian, and 5 Polish priests. Thirty parishes support parochial schools. Under Catholic auspices are two orphan asylums, one infant asylum, two hospitals, one home for the aged poor, one industrial school, one house for working boys, and two houses for working girls. The first Catholic governor of the State was James H. Higgins, a Democrat, who was elected for two terms, 1907, 1908. He was succeeded by Aram J. Pothier, A Catholic, and a Republican. The State census of 1905 gives the following statistics of religious denominations: + Catholic: 200,00 members (76 churches) + Protestant Episcopal: 15,441 members (68 churches) + Baptist: 14,761 members (75 churches) + Methodist Episcopal: 5,725 members (45 churches) + Congregationalist: 9,738 members (42 churches) + Lutheran: 2,217 members (12 churches) + Free Baptist: 3,306 members (30 churches) + Presbyterian: 993 members (4 churches) + Universalist: 1,166 members (9 churches) + Unitarian: 1,000 members (4 churches) + Seventh Day Baptist: 1,040 members (5 churches) + Friends: 915 members (7 churches) Value of property owned by certain denominations is stated as follows: Protestant Episcopal, $1,957,518; Congregational, $1,417,089; Baptist, $1,124,348; Methodist Episcopal, $624,900; Unitarian $280,000; Universalist, $259,000; Free Baptist, $242,000. Education Provision was made for a public school in New port in 1640. State supervision of public schools was not inaugurated until 1828. The number of pupils enrolled in public schools in 1907 was 74,065, and the number of teachers employed, 2198. The State maintains an agricultural college, a normal school, a school for the deaf, a home and school for dependent children not criminal or vicious, and makes provision for teaching the blind. Schools are supported mainly by the towns wherein they are located. The state appropriates annually $120,000 to be used only for teachers salaries, and to be divided among the towns and cities in proportion to school population, but no town may receive its allotment without appropriating at least an equal amount for the same purpose. Another appropriation is paid to towns maintaining graded high schools. This appropriation in 1910 was $26,500. The total amount expended on public schools in 1907, exclusive of permanent improvements, was $1,800,325, the number of school buildings was 528; and the valuation of school property, $6,550,172. The number of parochial school pupils in 1907 was 16,254; the total attendance of Catholic parochial schools and academies in 1910 was 17,440. These schools cost about $1,500,000, and their annual maintenance about $150,000. The average monthly expense per pupil in the public schools in 1907 was stated as $3.14. Allowing ten months for the school year, on the basis of that cost, the 16,254 parochial school pupils, if attending the public school, would have cost the State and towns $510,375. Providence is the seat of Brown University, a Baptist institution founded in 1764. The corporation consists of a Board of Trustees and a Board of Fellow. A majority of the trustees must be Baptists and the rest of the trustees must be chosen from three other prescribed Protestant denominations. A majority of the fellows including the president, must be Baptists; "the rest indifferently of any or all denominations". It is provided that the places of professors, tutors and all officers, the president alone excepted, shall be free and open to all denominations of Protestants. The total enrollment of the university for the academic year 1909-10 was 967, including the graduate department and the Women's College. Legislation Affecting Religion In 1657 the Assembly denied the demand of the commissioners of the United Colonies that Quakers should be banished from Rhode Island, and later passed a law that military service should not be exacted from those whose religious belief forbade the bearing of arms. The Charter of 1663 guaranteed freedom of conscience, and the colonial laws prohibited compulsory support of any form of worship. In 1663, Charles II wrote to the Assembly declaring that all men of civil conversation, obedient to magistrates though of differing judgments, might be admitted as freemen, with liberty to choose and be chosen to office, civil and military. In this communication it was voted that all those who should take an oath of allegiance to Charles II and were of competent estate, should be admitted as freemen; but none should vote or hold office until admitted by vote of the assembly. In the volume of laws printed in 1719, appeared a provision that all men professing Christianity, obedient to magistrates, and of civil conversation, though of differing judgments in religious matters, Roman Catholics alone excepted should have liberty to choose and be chosen to offices both civil and military. The date of the original enactment of this exception is not known. It was repealed in 1783. The State Constitution of 1842 guarantees freedom of conscience, and provides that no man's civil capacity shall be increased or diminished on account of his religious belief. The Sunday law of Rhode Island, following the original English statute (Charles II, e. VII, sect. 1) differs from the law of most other states in that it forbids simply the exercise of one's ordinary calling upon the Lord's day; excepting of course works of charity and necessity. Hence a release given on Sunday has been held good (Allen v. Gardiner, VII, R.I. 22); and probably any contracts not in pursuance of one's ordinary calling would be sustained though made on Sunday. A characteristic exception exists in favour of Jews and Sabbatarians, who are permitted with certain restrictions, to pursue their ordinary calling on the first day of the week. Fishing and fowling, except on one's own property, and all games, sports, plays, and recreations on Sunday are forbidden. The penalty for the first violation of the statute is $5, and $10 for subsequent violations. Service of civil process on Sunday is void. Witnesses are sworn with the simple formality of raising the right hand; or they make affirmation upon peril of the penalty for perjury. Judges assemblymen, and all State officers, civil and military, must take an oath of office. The substance of the oath is to support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution and laws of this State, and faithfully and impartially to discharge the duties of the office. The judges of the Supreme and Superior Courts also swear to administer justice without respect of persons, and to do equal right to the poor and to the rich. Lawyers, auditors and almost every city and town official take an oath office. Blasphemy is punished by imprisonment not exceeding two months or fine not exceeding $200; profane cursing swearing by fine not exceeding $5. New State and municipal governments are generally inaugurated with prayer. Legal holidays include New Year's Day, Columbus Day, and Christmas. Good Friday is a Court holiday by rule of Court and a school holiday in Providence by vote of the school committee. There is no statute or reported decision regarding evidence of statements made under the seal of confession. Should a question arise concerning this, it would have to be decided on precedent and on grounds of public policy. The sole statutory privilege is that accorded to communications between husband and wife; although the common law privilege of offers of compromise and settlement and of communications between attorney and client are recognized. Physicians may be compelled to disclose statements made to them by patients regarding physical condition. Incorporation and Taxation In 1869 an act was passed enabling the bishop of the Diocese of Hartford, with the vicar-general, the pastor and two lay members of any Catholic congregation in this State, to incorporate, and to hold the Church property of such congregation, by filing with the secretary of State an agreement to incorporate. This act was amended upon the creation of the Diocese of Providence. The property of all the organized and self-sustaining Catholic parishes is held by corporations so formed. The system furnishes a convenient means of continuing the ownership of the property of the respective parishes. In 1900 the bishop of the Diocese of Providence and his successors were created a corporation sole with power to hold property for the religious and charitable purposes of the Roman Catholic Church. Since 1883 there has existed an act enabling Episcopalian parishes to incorporate. Special chatters are freely granted when desired. There is a general law allowing libraries, lyceums and societies for religious charitable, literary, scientific, artistic, musical or social purposes to incorporate by filing an agreement stating the names of the promoters and the object of the corporation, and by paying a nominal charge. Such corporations may hold property up to $100,000 in value. By general law, buildings for religious worship, and the land on which they stand, not exceeding one acre, so far as such land and buildings are occupied and used exclusively for religious or educational purposes, are exempt from taxation. The exemption does not apply to pastors' houses. The buildings and personal property of any corporation used for schools, academies, or seminaries of learning, and of any incorporated public charity, and the land, not exceeding one acre, on which such buildings stand, are exempt. School property is exempt only so far as it is used exclusively for educational purposes. Property used exclusively for burial purposes, hospitals, public libraries, and property used for the aid of the poor, are exempt. Any church property other than that specified is taxed, unless it is in a form exempted by national law. Clergymen are exempt from jury and military duty. Marriage and Divorce Marriage between grandparent and grandchild, or uncle and niece, and between persons more closely related by blood, is void; as is marriage with a step-parent, with the child or grandchild or one's husband or wife, with the husband or wife of one's child or grandchild, and with the parent or grandparent of one's wife or husband. The statute contains no express requirement regarding the age of the parties contracting marriage, but it is a defence to an indictment for bigamy that the prior marriage was contracted when the man was under fourteen years of age, and the woman under twelve. Marriages among Jews are valid in law if they are valid under the Jewish religion. Marriages may be performed by licensed clergymen and by the judges of the Supreme and Superior Courts. Before marriage, parties must obtain a licence by personal application from the town clerk, or city clerk, or registrar; and a non-resident woman must obtain such licence at least five days previous to the marriage. The licence must be presented to the clergyman or judge officiating, who must make return of the marriage. Two witnesses are required to the marriage ceremony. Failure to observe the licence regulations will not invalidate the marriage provided either of the contracting parties supposes they have been complied with; but the noncompliance is punished by fine or imprisonment. Causes for divorce include adultery, extreme cruelty, wilful desertion for five years, or for a shorter time in the discretion of the Court, continued drunkenness, excessive use of opium, morphine, or chloral, neglect of husband to provide necessaries for this wife, and an other gross misbehaviour and wickedness repugnant to the marriage covenant. If the parties have been separated for ten years, the Court may in its discretion decree a divorce. Under the law of Rhode Island marriage is regarded as a status, pertaining to the citizen, which the State may regulate or alter. Hence a Court having jurisdiction over one of the parties to a marriage as a bona fide domiciled citizen of the State, may dissolve the marriage although the other party is beyond the jurisdiction; and such dissolution will be recognized by other states b virtue of the comity provision of the Federal Constitution (Ditson vs. Ditson, IV R.I. 87). Liquor Laws, Corrections, etc. A Constitutional amendment prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquor was adopted in 1886, and repealed in 1889. At present Rhode Island is a local option state, the question of licence or no-licence being submitted annually to the voters of the several cities and towns. The licensing boards may in their discretion refuse any application. The number of licences in any town may not exceed the proportion of one licence to each 500 inhabitants. The owners of the greater part of the land within two hundred feet of any location may bar its licence. No licence can be granted for a location within two hundred feet, measured on the street, of any public or parochial school. Maximum and minimum licence fees are fixed by statute, and the exact sum is determined by the licensing boards. For retail licences the minimum fee is $300, and the maximum, $1000. In the City of Cranston are located the "State institutions", so-called, including the State prison, the county jail, the State workhouse, a reform school for girls, and another for boys. The probation system is extensively employed, and in the case of juvenile offenders especially, the State makes every effort to prevent their becoming hardened criminals. Probation officers have the power of bail over persons committed to them. In proper cases, probation officers may provide for the maintenance of girls and women apart from their families. Capital punishment does not exist in the State except in cases where a life convict commits murder. Wills disposing of personal property may be made by persons eighteen years of age or over; wills disposing of real estate, by persons twenty-one years of age or over. Probate clerks are required to notify corporations and voluntary associations of all gifts made to them by will. If a gift for charity is made by will to a corporation and the acceptance thereof would be ultra vires, the corporation may at once receive the gift, and may retain it on condition of securing the consent of the legislature within one year. It has been held that a legacy for Masses should be paid in full even if the estate were insufficient to pay general pecuniary legacies in full, on the ground that the gift for Masses is for services to be rendered and is not gratuitous, furthermore that a gift for Masses is legal and is not void as being a superstitious use (Sherman v. Baker, XX R.I., 446, 613). Cemeteries are regulated to the extent that town councils may prevent their location in thickly populated districts, and for the protection of health may pass ordinances regarding burials and the use of the grounds. Desecration of graves is punished. Towns may receive land for burial purposes, and town councils may hold funds for the perpetual care of burial lots. Cemeteries are generally owned by corporations specially chartered, by churches and families. Field, State of R.I. and Providence Plantations (Boston, 1902); Arnold, Hist. of R.I. (New York, 1860); Staples, Annals of Providence (Providence, 1843); Dowling, Hist. of the Catholic Church in New England (Boston, 1899); R.I. Colonial Records. ALBERT B. WEST Alexandre de Rhodes Alexandre De Rhodes A missionary and author, born at Avignon, 15 March, 1591; died at Ispahan, Persia, 5 Nov., 1660. He entered the novitiate of the Society of Jesus at Rome, 24 April, 1612, with the intention of devoting his life to the conversion of the infidels. He was assigned to the missions of the East Indies, and inaugurated his missionary labours in 1624 with great success in Cochin China. In 1627 he proceeded to Tongking where, within the space of three years, he converted 6000 persons, including several bonzes. When in 1630 persecution forced him to leave the country, the newly-made converts continued the work of evangelization. Rhodes was later recalled to Rome where he obtained permission from his superiors to undertake missionary work in Persia. Amidst the numerous activities of a missionary career, he found time for literary productions: "Tunchinensis historiæ libri duo" (Lyons, 1652); "La glorieuse mort d'André, Catéchiste . . ." (Paris, 1653); "Catechismus", published in Latin and in Tongkingese at Rome in 1658. DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, Biblioth. de la Comp. de Jésus, VI (9 vols., Brussels and Paris, 1890-1900), 1718-21; CARAYON, Voyages et Missions du P. Rhodes (Paris and Le Mans, 1854). N. A. WEBER. Rhodes Rhodes (RHODUS) A titular metropolitan of the Cyclades (q. v.). It is an island opposite to Lycia and Caria, from which it is separated by a narrow arm of the sea. It has an area of about 564 sq. miles, is well watered by many streams and the river Candura, and is very rich in fruits of all kinds. The climate is so genial that the sun shines ever there, as recorded in a proverb already known to Pliny (Hist. natur., II, 62). The island, inhabited first by the Carians and then by the Phoenicians (about 1300 b.c.) who settled several colonies there, was occupied about 800 b.c. by the Dorian Greeks. In 408 b.c. the inhabitants of the three chief towns, Lindus, Ialysus, and Camirus founded the city of Rhodes, from which the island took its name. This town, built on the side of a hill, had a very fine port. On the breakwater, which separated the interior from the exterior port, was the famous bronze statue, the Colossus of Rhodes, 105 feet high, which cost 300 talents. Constructed (280) from the machines of war which Demetrius Poliorcetes had to abandon after his defeat before the town, it was thrown down by an earthquake in 203 B.C.; its ruins were sold in the seventh century by Caliph Moaviah to a Jew from Emesus, who loaded them on 900 camels. After the death of Alexander the Great and the expulsion of the Macedonian garrison (323 b.c.) the island, owing to its navy manned by the best mariners in the world, became the rival of Carthage and Alexandria. Allied with the Romans, and more or less under their protectorate, Rhodes became a centre of art and science; its school of rhetoric was frequented by many Romans, including Cato, Cicero, Cæsar, and Pompey. Ravaged by Cassius in 43 b.c. it remained nominally independent till a.d. 44, when it was incorporated with the Roman Empire by Claudius, becoming under Diocletian the capital of the Isles or of the Cyclades, which it long remained. The First Book of Machabees (xv, 23) records that Rome sent the Rhodians a decree in favour of the Jews. St. Paul stopped there on his way from Miletus to Jerusalem (Acts, xxi, 1); he may even have made converts there. In three other passages of Holy Writ (Gen., x, 4; I Par., i, 7; Ezech., xxvii, 15) the Septuagint renders by Rhodians what the Hebrew and the Vulgate rightly call Dodanim and Dedan. If we except some ancient inscriptions supposed to be Christian, there is no trace of Christianity until the third century, when Bishop Euphranon is said to have opposed the Encratites. Euphrosynus assisted at the Council of Nicæa (325). As the religious metropolitan of the Cyclades, Rhodes had eleven suffragan sees towards the middle of the seventh century (Gelzer, "Ungedruckte. . . . Texte der Notitiæ episcopatuum", 542); at the beginning of the tenth century, it had only ten (op. cit., 558); at the close of the fifteenth, only one, Lerne (op. cit., 635), which has since disappeared. Rhodes is still a Greek metropolitan depending on the Patriarchate of Constantinople. On 15 August, 1310, under the leadership of Grand Master Foulques de Villaret, the Knights of St. John captured the island in spite of the Greek emperor, Andronicus II, and for more than two centuries, thanks to their fleet, were a solid bulwark between Christendom and Islam. In 1480 Rhodes, under the orders of Pierre d'Aubusson, underwent a memorable siege by the lieutenants of Mahomet II; on 24 October, 1522, Villiers de l'Isle Adam had to make an honorable capitulation to Solyman II and deliver the island definitively to the Turks. From 1328 to 1546 Rhodes was a Latin metropolitan, having for suffragans the sees of Melos, Nicaria, Carpathos, Chios, Tinos, and Mycone; the list of its bishops is to be found in Le Quien (Oriens christ., III, 1049) and Eubel (Hierarchia catholica medii ævi, I, 205; II, 148; III, 188). The most distinguished bishop is Andreas Colossensis (the archdiocese was called Rhodes or Colossi) who, in 1416 at Constance and 1439 at Florence, defended the rights of the Roman Church against the Greeks, and especially against Marcus Eugenicus. After the death of Marco Cattaneo, the last residential archbishop, Rhodes became a mere titular bishopric, while Naxos inherited its metropolitan rights. On 3 March, 1797 it became again a titular archbishopric but the title was thenceforth attached to the See of Malta. Its suffragans are Carpathos, Leros, Melos, Samos, and Tenedos. By a decree of the Congregation of the Propaganda, 14 August, 1897, a prefecture Apostolic, entrusted to the Franciscans, was established in the Island of Rhodes; it has in addition jurisdiction over a score of neighbouring islands, of which the principal are Carpathos, Leros, and Calymnos. There are in all 320 Catholics, while the island, the capital of the vilayet of the archipelago, contains 30,000 inhabitants. The Franciscans have three priests; the Brothers of the Christian Schools have established there a scholasticate for the Orient as well as a school; the Franciscan Sisters of Gemona have a girls' school. The most striking feature of the city, in addition to a series of medieval towers and fortifications, is the Street of the Knights, which still preserves their blason (Order of St. John) and the date of the erection of each house or palace; several of the mosques are former churches. MEURSIUS, Creta, Cyprus, Rhodus (Amsterdam, 1675): CORONELLI, Isola di Rodi geographica, storica (Venice, 1702); LE QUIEN, Oriens christ., I, 923 30; PAULSEN, Commentatio exhibens Rhodi descriptionem macedonica oetate (Göttingsn, 1818); MENGE, Ueber die Vorgesch. der Insel Rhodus (Cologne, 1827): ROTTIERS, Description des monuments de Rhodes (Brussels, 1828); ROSS, Reisen auf den griech. Inseln, III, 70-113; IDEM, Reisen nach Kos, Halikarnassos, Rhodos (Stuttgart, 1840); BERG, Die Insel Rhodos (Brunswick, 1860); SCHNEIDERWIRTH, Gesch. der Insel Rhodos (Heiligenstadt. 1868); GUÉRIN, L'île de Rhodes (Paris, 1880); BILLIOTI AND COTTERET, L'île de Rhodes (Paris, 1891); BECKER, De Rhodiorum primordiis (Leipzig, 1882); TORR, Rhodes in Ancient Times (Cambridge, 1885); IDEM, Rhodes in Modern Times (Cambridge, 1887); SCHUMACHER, De Republica Rhodiorum commentatio (Heidelberg, 1886); VON GELDER, Gesch. der alten Rhodier (La Haye, 1900); SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr., s. v.; FILLION in VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible, s. v.; Missiones catholicae (Rome, 1907). S. VAILHÉ Rhodesia Rhodesia A British possession in South Africa, bounded on the north and north-west by the Congo Free State and German East Africa; on the east by German East Africa, Nyassaland, and Portuguese East Africa; on the south by the Transvaal and Bechuanaland; on the west by Bechuanaland and Portuguese West Africa. Cecil John Rhodes, to whom the colony owes its name, desired to promote the expansion of the British Empire in South Africa. The Dutch South African Republic and Germany were contemplating annexations in the neighbourhood of the Zambesi River. To thwart these enemies of unity without delay and without the aid of the British Parliament was the task to which Mr. Rhodes and his colleagues set themselves. Early in 1888 Lobengula, King of Matabeleland, entered into a treaty with Great Britain and on 30 October of the same year he granted to Rhodes's agents "the complete and exclusive charge over all metals and minerals" in his dominions. On 28 October, 1889, the British South Africa Company was formed under a royal charter. The company, on Lobengula's advice, first decided to open up Mashonaland, which lies north and west of Matabeleland and south of the Zambesi. In September, 1890, an expeditionary column occupied that country and, in the next four years, much was done to develop its resources. In 1893 the company, who questioned the right of the Matabele to make annual raids among their neighbours the Mashonas, came to blows with King Lobengula. Five weeks of active operations and the death of the king, probably by self-administered poison, brought the whole of Southern Rhodesia under the absolute control of the company. After the war, the settlement and opening up of the country was carried on under the direction of Mr. Rhodes who, on the ruins of Lobengula's royal kraal at Bulawayo, built Government House, and in the vicinity, laid out the streets and avenues of what was intended soon to become a great city. At one time Bulawayo had a population of some 7000 white inhabitants and seemed to be fulfilling the dreams of its founder when its progress and that of the whole country was cut short by the cattle pest, the native rebellion of 1896, and by years of stagnation and inactivity consequent upon the Boer War. Its white population (1911) is 5200. Besides Southern Rhodesia the chartered company own the extensive teritories of North-western and North-eastern Rhodesia which lie north of the Zambesi and which, with the more populous southern province, cover an area of some 450,000 square miles and form a country larger than France, Germany, and the Low Countries combined. The black population is less than 1,500,000, while the whites hardly exceed 16,000. All the native tribes of Rhodesia belong to the great Bantu family of the negro race. Before the arrival of the pioneer columns the dominant race south of the Zambesi were the Matabele, an off-shoot of the Zulus, who conquered the country north of the Limpopo River in the middle of the last century. They formed a military caste which lived by war and periodical raids upon their weaker neighbours. The destruction of this military despotism was a necessary step to the evangelizing of the country. Before the arrival of the Matabele warriors the principal inhabitants of Southern Rhodesia were the Makaranga whose ancestors had formed the once powerful empire of Monomotapa. North-western Rhodesia or Barotseland is ruled partly by an administrator residing at Livingstone, near the Victoria Falls of the Zambesi and partly by its native King Lewanika, the chief of the Barotse, who has been heavily subsidised by the company. The predominant people in North-eastern Rhodesia are the Awemba and the Angoni whose raiding propensities and coöperation with the Arab slave drivers caused much trouble and expense until their definitive annexation by the company in 1894. The earliest attempt to evangelize Matabeleland was made in 1879 when three Jesuit Fathers, travelling by ox-wagon, accomplished the journey of some twelve hundred miles between Grahamstown and Bulawayo. They were hospitably received by King Lobengula who had been assured by some resident traders that the missionaries had come for his people's good. He granted them a free passage through his dominions and allowed them to train his subjects in habits of industry but not to preach the Gospel of Christ which, as he well knew, would lead to drastic changes, not only in the domestic life of his people, but in his whole system of government. For some fourteen years the missionaries held their ground awaiting events and it was only through the conquest of the country by the company that free missionary work was rendered possible. It was during this period that Baron von Hubner, who was not without personal experience of South Africa, declared that he would never contribute a penny to the Zambesi Mission, since he thought it contrary to his duty to foster an enterprise doomed to failure and disaster. Events seemed to justify his prognostications, for the mission, owing to fever and the hardships of travel, seemed to be losing more workers than it made converts. In 1893, however, the power of Lobengula was broken and mission stations began to grow up in the neighbourhood of Salisbury, the capital, and of Bulawayo. In Matabeleland there are two mission stations, one at Bulawayo and the second at Empandeni, some sixty miles away. This last station owns a property of about one hundred square miles most of which formed the original grant of Lobengula and the title to which was confirmed by the company. The principal station among the Mashonas or Makaranga is Chishawasha, fourteen miles from Salisbury (founded in 1892). There are other stations of more recent date at Salisbury, Driefontein, Hama's Kraal, and Mzondo, near Victoria, all under the charge of the Jesuit Fathers. The Missionaries of Marianhill, recently separated from the Trappists, have two missions in Mashonaland at Macheke and St. Trias Hill. The Makaranga who are thus being evangelized from seven mission stations are the descendants of the predominant tribe who received the faith from the Ven. Father Gonçalo de Silveira in 1561. Among the Batongas, who owe a somewhat doubtful allegiance to King Lewanika in North-western Rhodesia, there are two Jesuit mission stations on the Chikuni and Nguerere Rivers. These missions are under the jurisdiction of the Jesuit Prefect Apostolic of the Zambesi, resident in Bulawayo. There are 35 priests, 30 lay brothers, and 83 nuns in charge of the missions. The Catholic native population is about 3000. For the missions of North-eastern Rhodesia see NYASSA, VICARIATE, APOSTOLIC OF. The land of the mission stations in Rhodesia is usually a grant from the Government made on condition of doing missionary work and is therefore inalienable without a special order in Council. Native schools, in some cases, are in receipt of a small grant from the Government. The Jesuit Fathers have one school for white boys (120) at Bulawayo, while the Sisters of the Third Order of St. Dominic have three: at Bulawayo (210), Salisbury (130) and Gwelo (40). These schools are undenominational and receive grants from the Government. Hence Catholics who were first in the field, have a very considerable share in the education of the country. New Government schools have been built recently in Salisbury, Bulawayo, and Gwelo and other places in order to meet the growing demand for education and they have, so far, succeeded in filling their school-rooms without taking many pupils from the schools managed by Catholics. The chief source of information about the Zambesi Mission is the Zambesi Mission Record, issued quarterly (Roehampton, England); HENSMAN, A History of Rhodesia (London, 1900); HONE, Southern Rhodesia (London, 1909); HALL, Prehistoric Rhodesia (London, 1909); MICHELL, Life of C. J. Rhodes (2 vols., London, 1910). JAMES KENDAL. Rhodiopolis Rhodiopolis A titular see of Lycia, suffragan of Myra, called Rhodia by Ptolemy (V, 3) and Stephanus Byzantius; Rhodiapolis on its coins and inscriptions; Rhodiopolis by Pliny (V, 28), who locates it in the mountains to the north of Corydalla. Its history is unknown. Its ruins may be seen on a hill in the heart of a forest at Eski Hissar, vilayet of Koniah. They consist of the remains of an aqueduct, a small theatre, a temple of Escalapius, sarcophagi, and churches. Only one bishop is known, Nicholas, present in 518 at a Council of Constantinople. The "Notitiæ episcopatuum" continue to mention the see as late as the twelfth or thirteenth century. LE QUIEN, Oriens christianus, I, 991; SPRATT AND FORBES, Travels in Lycia, I, 166, 181; SMITH, Dict. of Greek and Roman geogr., s. v. S. PÉTRIDÈS Rhodo Rhodo A Christian writer who flourished in the time of Commodus (180-92); he was a native of Asia who came to Rome where he was a pupil of Tatian's. He wrote several books, two of which are mentioned by Eusebius (Hist. eccl., V, xiii), viz., a treatise on "The Six Days of Creation" and a work against the Marcionites in which he dwelled upon the various opinions which divided them. Eusebius, upon whom we depend exclusively for our knowledge of Rhodo, quotes some passages from the latter work, in one of which an account is given of the Marcionite Apelles. St. Jerome (De vir. ill.) amplifies Eusebius's account somewhat by making Rhodo the author of a work against the Cataphrygians -- probably he had in mind an anonymous work quoted by Eusebius a little later (op. cit., V, xvi). HARNACK, Altchrist Lit., p . 599; BARDENHEWER, Patrology (tr. SHAHAN, St. Louis, 1908), 117. F.J. BACCHUS Rhosus Rhosus A titular see in Cilicia Secunda, suffragan to Anazarba. Rhosus or Rhossus was a seaport situated on the Gulf of Issus, now Alexandretta, southwest of Alexandria (Iskenderoun or Alexandretta). It is mentioned by Strabo (XIV, 5; XVI, 2), Ptolemy (V, 14), Pliny (V, xviii, 2), who place it in Syria, and by Stephanus Byzantius; later by Hierocles (Synecd. 705, 7), and George of Cyprus (Descriptio orbis romani, 827), who locate it in Cilicia Secunda. Towards 200, Serapion of Antioch composed a treatise on the Gospel of Peter for the faithful of Rhosus who had become heterodox on account of that book (Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", VI, xii, 2). Theodoret (Philoth. Hist., X, XI), who places it in Cilicia, relates the history of the hermit Theodosius of Antioch, founder of a monastery in the mountain near Rhosus, who was forced by the inroads of barbarians to retire to Antioch, where he died and was succeeded by his disciple Romanus, a native of Rhosus; these two religious are honoured by the Greek Church on 5 and 9 February. Six bishops of Rhosus are known (Le Quien, "Or. Christ.", II, 905): Antipatros, at the Council of Antioch, 363; Porphyrius, a correspondent of St. John Chrysostom; Julian, at the Council of Chalcedon, 451; a little later a bishop (name unknown), who separated from his metropolitan to approve of the reconciliation effected between John of Antioch and St. Cyril; Antoninus, at the Council of Mopsuestra, 550; Theodore, about 600. The see is mentioned among the suffragans of Anazarba in "Notitiæ episcopatuum" of the Patriarchate of Antioch, of the sixth century (Vailhé in "Echos d'Orient", X, 145) and one dating from about 840 (Parthey, "Hieroclis synecd. et notit. gr. episcopat.", not. Ia, 827). In another of the tenth century Rhosus is included among the exempt sees (Vailhé, ibid 93 seq.). In the twelfth century the town and neighbouring fortress fell into the hands of the Armenians; in 1268 this castle was captured from the Templars by Sultan Bibars (Alishan, "Sissouan", Venice, 1899, 515). Rhosus is near the village of Arsous in the vilayet of Adana. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Rhymed Bibles Rhymed Bibles The rhymed versions of the Bible are almost entirely collections of the psalms. The oldest English rhymed psalter is a pre-Reformation translation of the Vulgate psalms, generally assigned to the reign of Henry II and still preserved in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. The Bodleian Library, Oxford, has another Catholic rhyming psalter of much the same style, assigned epigraphically to the time of Edward II. Thomas Brampton did the Seven Penitential Psalms, from the Vulgate into rhyming verse in 1414; the Manuscript is in the Cottonian collection, British Museum. These and other pre-Reformation rhyming psalters tell a story of popular use of the vernacular Scripture in England which they ignore who say that the singing of psalms in English began with the Reformation. Sir Thomas Wyat (died 1521) is said to have done the whole psalter. We have only "Certayne Psalmes chosen out of the Psalter of David, commonly called the VII Penitential Psalmes, Drawen into English metre". Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey (died 1547), translated Pss. lv, lxxiii, lxxxviii into English verse. Miles Coverdale (died 1567) translated several psalms in "Goastly psalmes and spirituall songs drawen out of the Holy Scripture". The old Version of the Anglican Church, printed at the end of the Prayer Book (1562) contains thirty-seven rhyming psalms translated by Thomas Sternhold, fifty-eight by John Hopkins, twenty-eight by Thomas Norton, and the remainder by Robert Wisdom (Ps. cxxv), William Whittingham (Ps. cxix of 700 lines) and others. Sternhold's psalms had been previously published (1549). Robert Crowley (1549) did the entire psalter into verse. The Seven Penitential Psalms were translated by very many; William Hunnis (1583) entitles his translation, with quaint Elizabethan conceit, "Seven Sobs of a Sorrowful Soul for Sinne". During the reign of Edward VI, Sir Thomas Smith translated ninety-two of the psalms into English verse, while imprisoned in the Tower. A chaplain to Queen Mary, calling himself the "symple and unlearned Syr William Forrest, preeiste", did a poetical version of fifty psalms (1551). Matthew Parker (1557), later Archbishop of Canterbury, completed a metrical psalter. The Scotch had their Psalmes buickes from 1564. One of the most renowned of Scotch versifiers of the Psalms was Robert Pont (1575). Zachary Boyd, another Scotchman, published the Psalms in verse early in the seventeenth century. Of English rhyming versifications of the Psalms, the most charming are those of Sir Philip Sidney (d. 1586) together with his sister, Countess of Pembroke. This complete psalter was not published till 1823. The rich variety of the versification is worthy of note; almost all the usual varieties of lyric metres of that lyric age are called into requisition and handled with elegance. The stately and elegant style of Lord Bacon is distinctive of his poetical paraphrases of several psalms. Richard Verstegan, a Catholic, published a rhyming version of the Seven Penitential Psalms (1601). George Sandys (1636) published a volume containing a metrical version of other parts of the Bible together with "a Paraphrase upon the Psalmes of David, set to new Tunes for Private Devotion, and a Thorow Base for Voice and Instruments"; his work is touching in its simplicity and unction. The Psalm Books of the various Protestant churches are mostly rhyming versions and are numerous: New England Psalm Book (Boston, 1773); Psalm Book of the Reformed Dutch Church in North America (New York, 1792); The Bay Psalm Book (Cambridge, 1640). Noteworthy also, among the popular and more recent rhymed psalters are: Brady and Tate (poet laureate), "A new Version of the Psalms of David" (Boston, 1762); James Merrick, "The Psalms in English Verse" (Reading, England, 1765); I. Watts, "The Psalms of David" (27th ed., Boston, 1771); J. T. Barrett, "A Course of Psalms" (Lambeth, 1825); Abraham Coles, "A New Rendering of the Hebrew Psalms into English Verse" (New York, 1885); David S. Wrangham, "Lyra Regis" (Leeds, 1885); Arthur Trevor Jebb "A Book of Psalms" (London, 1898). Such are the chief rhyming English psalters. Other parts of Holy Writ done into rhyming English verse are: Christopher Tye's "The Acts of the Apostles translated into English Metre" (1553); Zachary Boyd's "St. Matthew" (early seventeenth cent.); Thomas Prince's "Canticles, parts of Isaias and Revelations" in New England Psalm Book (1758); Henry Ainswort, "Solomon's Song of Songs" (1642); John Mason Good's "Song of Songs" (London, 1803); C. C. Price's "Acts of the Apostles" (New York, 1845). The French have had rhyming psalters since the "Sainctes Chansonettes en Rime Française" of Clement Marot (1540). Some Italian rhymed versions of the Bible are: Abbate Francesco Rezzano, "II Libro di Giobbe" (Nice, 1781); Stefano Egidio Petroni, "Proverbi di Salomone" (London, 1815); Abbate Pietro Rossi, "Lamentazioni di Geremia, i Sette Salmi Penitenziali e il Cantico di Mose" (Nizza, 1781); Evasio Leone, "II Cantico de' Cantici" (Venice, 1793); Francesco Campana, "Libro di Giuditta" (Nizza, 1782). Bibliotheca Sussexiana, II (London. 1839); WARTON, History of English Poetry (1774-81); HOLLAND, The Psalmists of Britain (London, 1843). WALTER DRUM. Rhythmical Office Rhythmical Office I. DESCRIPTION, DEVELOPMENT, AND DIVISION By rhythmical office is meant a liturgical horary prayer, the canonical hours of the priest, or an office of the Breviary, in which not only the hymns are regulated by a certain rhythm, but where, with the exception of the psalms and lessons, practically all the other parts show metre, rhythm, or rhyme; such parts for instance as the antiphons to each psalm, to the Magnificat, Invitatorium, and Benedictus, likewise the responses and versicles to the prayers, and after each of the nine lessons; quite often also the benedictions before the lessons, and the antiphons to the minor Horœ (Prime, Terce, Sext, and None). The old technical term for such an office was Historia, with or without an additional " rhytmata" or rimata, an expression that frequently caused misunderstanding on the part of later writers. The reason for the name lay in the fact that originally the antiphons or the responses, and sometimes the two together, served to amplify or comment upon the history of a saint, of which there was a brief sketch in the readings of the second nocturn. Gradually this name was transferred to offices in which no word was said about a "history", and thus we find the expression "Historia ss. Trinitatis". The structure of the ordinary office of the Breviary in which antiphons, psalms, hymns, lessons, and responses followed one another in fixed order, was the natural form for the rhythmical office. It was not a question of inventing something new, as with the hymns, sequences, or other kinds of poetry, but of creating a text in poetic form in the place of a text in prose form, where the scheme existed, definitely arranged in all its parts. A development therefore which could eventually serve as a basis for the division of the rhythmical offices into distinct classes is of itself limited to a narrow field, namely the external form of the parts of the office as they appear in poetic garb. Here we find in historical order the following characters: + (1) a metrical, of hexameters intermixed with prose or rhymed prose; + (2) a rhythmical, in the broadest sense, which will be explained below; + (3) a form embellished by strict rhythm and rhyme. Consequently one may distinguish three classes of rhythmical offices: + (1) metrical offices, in hexameters or distichs; + (2) offices in rhymed prose, i. e., offices with very free and irregular rhythm, or with dissimilar assonant long lines; + (3) rhymed offices with regular rhythm and harmonious artistic structure. The second class represents a state of transition, wherefore the groups may be called those of the first epoch, the groups of the transition period, and those of the third epoch, in the same way as with the sequences, although with the latter the characteristic difference is much more pronounced. If one desires a general name for all three groups, the expression "Rhymed Office", as suggested by " Historia rimata"" would be quite appropriate for the pars major et potior, which includes the best and most artistic offices; this designation: " gereimtes Officium" (Reimofficium) has been adopted in Germany through the "Analecta Hymnica". The term does not give absolute satisfaction, because the first and oldest offices are without rhyme, and cannot very well be called rhymed offices. In the Middle Ages the word "rhythmical" was used as the general term for any kind of poetry to be distinguished from prose, no matter whether there was regular rhythm in those poems or not. And for that reason it is practical to comprise in the name "rhythmical offices" all those which are other than pure prose, a designation corresponding to the "Historia rhytmata". Apart from the predilection of the Middle Ages for the poetic form, the Vitœ metricœ of the saints were the point of departure and motive for the rhythmical offices. Those Vitœ were frequently composed in hexameters or distichs. From them various couples of hexameters or a distich were taken to be used as antiphon or response respectively. In case the hexameters of the Vitœ metricœ did not prove suitable enough, the lacking parts of the office were supplemented by simple prose or by means of verses in rhymed prose, i. e., by text lines of different length in which there was very little of rhythm, but simply assonance. Such offices are often a motley mixture of hexameters, rhythmical stanzas, stanzas in pure prose, and again in rhymed prose. An example of an old metrical office, intermixed with Prose Responses, is that of St. Lambert (Anal. Hymn., XXVII, no. 79), where all the antiphons are borrowed from that saint's Vitœ metricœ, presumably the work of Hucbald of St. Amand; the office itself was composed by Bishop Stephen of Liège about the end of the ninth century: Antiphona I: Orbita solaris præsentia gaudia confert Præsulis eximii Lantberti gesta revolvens. Antiphona II: Hic fuit ad tempus Hildrici regis in aula, Dilectus cunctis et vocis famine dulcis. A mixing of hexameters, of rhythmical stanzas, and of stanzas formed by unequal lines in rhymed prose is shown in the old Office of Rictrudis, composed by Hucbald about 907 (Anal. Hymn., XIII, no. 87). By the side of regular hexameters, as in the Invitatorium: Rictrudis sponso sit laus et gloria, Christo, Pro cuius merito iubilemus ei vigilando. we find rhythmical stanzas, like the first antiphon to Lauds: Beata Dei famula Rictrudis, adhuc posita In terris, mente devota Christo hærebat in æhra; or stanzas in very free rhythm, as e. g., the second response to the first nocturn: Hæc femina laudabilis Meritisque honorabilis Rictrudis egregia Divina providentia Pervenit in Galliam, Præclaris orta natalibus, Honestis alta et instituta moribus. From the metrical offices, from the pure as well as from those mixed with rhymed prose, the transition was soon made to such as consisted of rhymed prose merely. An example of this kind is in the Offices of Ulrich, composed by Abbot Berno of Reichenau (d. 1048); the antiphon to the Magnificat of the first Vespers begins thus: Venerandi patris Wodalrici sollemnia Magnæ jucunditatis repræsentant gaudia, Quæ merito cleri suscipiuntur voto Ac populi celebrantur tripudio. Lætetur tellus tali compta præsule, Exsultet polus tanto ditatus compare; Solus dæmon ingemat, qui ad eius sepulcrum Suum assidue perdit dominium . . . etc. Much more perfectly developed on the other hand, is the rhythm in the Office which Leo IX composed in honour of Gregory the Great (Anal. Hymn., V, no. 64). This office, the work of a pope, appeared in the eleventh century in the Roman breviaries, and soon enjoyed widespread circulation; all its verses are iambic dimeters, but the rhythm does not as yet coincide with the natural accent of the word, and many a verse has a syllable in excess or a syllable wanting. For example, the first antiphon of the first nocturn: Gregorius ortus Romæ E senatorum sanguine Fulsit mundo velut gemma Auro superaddita, Dum præclarior præclaris Hic accessit atavis. This author does not yet make use of pure rhyme, but only of assonance, the precursor of rhyme. Hence we have before us an example of transition from offices of the first epoch to those of the second. With these latter the highest development of the rhythmical office is reached. It is marvellous how in many offices of this artistic period, in spite of all symmetry in rhythm and rhyme, the greatest variety exists in the structure of the stanzas, how a smooth and refined language matches the rich contents full of deep ideas, and how the individual parts are joined together in a complete and most striking picture of the saint or of the mystery to be celebrated. A prominent example is the Office of the Trinity by Archbishop Pecham of Canterbury. The first Vespers begins with the antiphons: 1. Sedenti super solium Congratulans trishagium Seraphici clamoris Cum patre laudat filium Indifferens principium Reciproci amoris. 2. Sequamur per suspirium, Quod geritur et gaudium In sanctis cæli choris; Levemus cordis studium In trinum lucis radium Splendoris et amoris. It is interesting to compare with the preceding the antiphons to the first nocturn, which have quite a different structure; the third of them exhibits the profound thought: Leventur cordis ostia: Memoria Giguenti Nato intelligentia, Voluntas Procedenti. again the first response to the third nocturn: Candor lucis, perpurum speculum Patris splendor, perlustrans sæculum, Nubis levis intrans umbraculum In Ægypti venit ergastulum. Virgo circumdedit virum Mel mandentem et butyrum. upon which follows as second response the beautiful picture of the Trinity in the following form: A Veterani facie manavit ardens fiuvius: Antiquus est ingenitus, et facies est Filius, Ardoris fluxus Spiritus, duorum amor medius. Sic olim multifarie Prophetis luxit Trinitas, Quam post pandit ecclesiæ In carne fulgens veritas. II. HISTORY AND SIGNIFICANCE It cannot be definitely stated which of the three old abbeys: Prüm, Landévennec, or Saint-Amand can claim priority in composing a rhythmical office. There is no doubt however that Saint-Amand and the monasteries in Hainault, Flanders, and Brabant, was the real starting-point of this style of poetry, as long ago as the ninth century. The pioneer in music, the Monk Hucbald of Saint-Amand, composed at least two, probably four, rhythmical offices; and the larger number of the older offices were used liturgically in those monasteries and cities which had some connexion with Saint-Amand. From there this new branch of hymnody very soon found its way to France, and in the tenth and eleventh, and particularly in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, showed fine, if not the finest results, both in quality and quantity. Worthy of especial mention as poets of this order are: the Abbots Odo (927-42) and Odilo (994-1049) of Cluny, Bishop Fulbert of Chartres (1017-28), the Benedictine Monk Odorannus of Sens (died 1045), Pope Leo IX (died 1054); Bishop Stephen of Tournay (1192-1203); Archdeacon Rainald of St. Maurice in Angers (died about 1074); Bishop Richard de Gerberoy of Amiens (1204-10); Prior Arnaud du Prè of Toulouse (died 1306), and the General of the Dominican Order, Martialis Auribelli, who in 1456 wrote a rhymed office for the purpose of glorifying St. Vincent Ferrer. The most eminent poet and composer of offices belongs to Germany by birth, but more so to France by reason of his activity; he is Julian von Speyer, director of the orchestra at the Frankish royal court, afterwards Franciscan friar and choir master in the Paris convent, where about 1240 he composed words and music for the two well-known offices in honour of St. Francis of Assisi and of St. Anthony of Padua (Anal. Hymn., V, nos. 61 and 42). These two productions, the musical value of which has in many ways been overestimated, served as a prototype for a goodly number of successive offices in honour of saints of the Franciscan Order as well as of others. In Germany the rhymed offices were just as popular as in France. As early as in the ninth century an office, in honour of St. Chrysantus and Daria, had its origin probably in Prüm, perhaps through Friar Wandalbert (Anal. Hymn,, XXV, no. 73); perhaps not much later through Abbot Gurdestin of Landévennec a similar poem in honour of St. Winwalœus (Anal. Hymn., XVIII, no. 100). As hailing from Germany two other composers of rhythmical offices in the earlier period have become known: Abbot Berno of Reichenau (died 1048) and Abbot Udalschalc of Maischach at Augsburg (died 1150). The other German poets whose names can be given belong to a period as late as the fifteenth century, as e. g. Provost Lippold of Steinberg and Bishop Johann Hofmann of Meissen. England took an early part in this style of poetry, but unfortunately most of the offices which originated there have been lost. Brilliant among the English poets is Archbishop Pecham whose office of the Trinity has been discussed above. Next to him are worthy of especial mention Cardinal Adam Easton (died 1397) and the Carmelite John Horneby of Lincoln, who about 1370 composed a rhymed office in honour of the Holy Name of Jesus, and of the Visitation of Our Lady. Italy seems to have a relatively small representation; Rome itself, i. e. the Roman Breviary, as we know, did not favour innovations, and consequently was reluctant to adopt rhythmical offices. The famous Archbishop Alfons of Salerno (1058-85) is presumably the oldest Italian poet of this kind. Besides him we can name only Abbot Reinaldus de Colle di Mezzo (twelfth century), and the General of the Dominicans, Raymundus de Vineis from Capua (fourteenth century). In Sicily and in Spain the rhymed offices were popular and quite numerous, but with the exception of the Franciscan Fra Gil de Zamora, who about the middle of the fifteenth century composed an office in honour of the Blessed Virgin (Anal. Hymn., XVII, no. 8) it has been impossible to cite by name from those two countries any other poet who took part in composing rhythmical offices. Towards the close of the thirteenth century, Scandinavia also comes to the fore with rhymed offices, in a most dignified manner. Special attention should be called to Bishop Brynolphus of Skara (1278-1317), Archbishop Birgerus Gregorii of Upsala (died 1383), Bishop Nicolaus of Linköping (1374-91), and Johannes Benechini of Oeland (about 1440). The number of offices where the composer's name is known is insignificantly small. No less than seven hundred anonymous rhythmical offices have been brought to light during the last twenty years through the "Analecta Hymnica". It is true not all of them are works of art; particularly during the fifteenth century many offices with tasteless rhyming and shallow contents reflect the general decadence of hymnody. Many, however, belong to the best products of religious lyric poetry. For six centuries in all countries of the West, men of different ranks and stations in life, among them the highest dignitaries of the Church, took part in this style of poetry, which enjoyed absolute popularity in all dioceses. Hence one may surmise the significance of the rhythmical offices with reference to the history of civilization, their importance in history and development of liturgy, and above all their influence on other poetry and literature. BLUME AND DREVES, Analecta Hymnica medii œvi, V, XIII, XVII, XVIII-XXVI, XXVIII, XL Va, LII, appendix (Leipzig, 1889-1909); BÄUMER, Reimofficien, 356-64, in Gesch. des Breviers (Freiburg, 1895); BLUME, Zur Poesie des kirchlichen Stundengebetes, 132-45, in Stimmen aus Maria-Laach (1898); FELDER, Liturgische Reimofficien auf die hll. Franziskus und Antonius (Fribourg, 1901). CLEMENS BLUME. Pedro de Ribadeneira Pedro de Ribadeneira (or RIBADENEYRA and among Spaniards often RIVADENEIRA) Pedro De Ribadeneira was born at Toledo, of a noble Castilian family, 1 Nov., 1526 (Astrain, I, 206); died 22 Sept., 1611. His father Alvaro Ortiz de Cisneros, was the son of Pedro Gonzales Cedillo and grandson of Hernando Ortiz de Cisneros whom Ferdinand IV had honoured with the governorship of Toledo and important missions. His mother, of the illustrious house of Villalobos, was still more distinguished for her virtue than for her birth. Already the mother of three daughters, she promised to consecrate her fourth child to the Blessed Virgin if it should be a son. Thus vowed to Mary before his birth, Ribadeneira received in baptism the name of Pedro which had been borne by his paternal grandfather and that of Ribadeneira in memory of his maternal grandmother, of one of the first families of Galicia. In the capacity of page he followed Cardinal Alexander Farnese to Italy, and at Rome entered the Society of Jesus at the age of fourteen, on 18 Sept., 1540, eight days before the approval of the order by Paul III. After having attended the Universities of Paris, Louvain, and Padua, where, besides the moral crises which assailed him, he often had to encounter great hardships and habitually confined himself to very meagre fare [he wrote to St. Ignatius (Epp. mixtæ, V, 649): "Quanto al nostro magnare ordinariamente é, a disnare un poco de menestra et un poco de carne, et con questo è finito"]. He was ordered in November, 1549, to go to Palermo, to profess rhetoric at the new college which the Society had just opened in that city. He filled this chair for two years and a half, devoting his leisure time to visiting and consoling the sick in the hospitals. Meanwhile St. Ignatius was negotiating the creation of the German College which was to give Germany a chosen clergy as remarkable for virtue and orthodoxy as for learning: his efforts were soon successful, and during the autumn of 1552 he called on the talent and eloquence of the young professor of rhetoric at Palermo. Ribadeneira amply fulfilled the expectations of his master and delivered the inaugural address amid the applause of an august assembly of prelates and Roman nobles. He was ordained priest 8 December, 1553 (Epp. mixtæ, III, 179); during the twenty-one years which followed he constantly filled the most important posts in the government of his order. From 1556 to 1560 he devoted his activity to securing the official recognition of the Society of Jesus in the Low Countries. At the same time he was charged by his general with the duty of promulgating and causing to be accepted in the Belgian houses the Constitutions, which St. Ignatius had just completed at the cost of much labour. But these diplomatic and administrative missions did not exhaust Ribadeneira's zeal. He still applied himself ardently to preaching. In December, 1555 he preached at Louvain with wonderful success, and likewise in January, 1556, at Brussels. On 25 November of the same year he left Belgium and reached Rome 3 February, 1557, setting out again, 17 October for Flanders. His sojourn in the Low Countries was interrupted for five months (November, 1558 to March, 1559); this period he spent in London, having been summoned thither on account of the sickness of Mary Tudor, Queen of England, which ended in her death. In the summer of 1559 he was once more with his general, Lainez, whose right hand he truly was. On 3 November, 1560, he made his solemn profession, and from then until the death of St. Francis Borgia (1572) he continued to reside in Italy, filling in turn the posts of provincial of Tuscany, of commissary-general of the Society in Sicily, visitor of Lombardy, and assistant for Spain and Portugal. The accession of Father Everard Mercurian as general of the order brought a great change to Ribadeneira. His health being much impaired, he was ordered to Spain, preferably to Toledo, his native town, to recuperate. This was a dreadful blow to the poor invalid, a remedy worse than the disease. He obeyed, but had been scarcely a year in his native land when he began to importune his general by letter to permit him to return to Italy. These solicitations continued for several years. At the same time his superiors saw that he was as sick in mind as in body, and that his religious spirit was somewhat shaken. Not only was he lax in his religious observances, but he did not hesitate to criticize the persons and affairs of the Society, so much so that he was strongly suspected of being the author of the memoirs then circulated through Spain against the Jesuits (Astrain, III, 106-10). This, however, was a mistake, and his innocence was recognized in 1578. He it was who took upon himself the task of refuting the calumnies which mischief-makers, apparently Jesuits, went about disseminating against the Constitutions of the Society, nor did he show less ardour and filial piety in making known the life of St. Ignatius Loyola and promoting his canonization. Outside of the Society of Jesus, Ribadeneira is chiefly known for his literary works. From the day of his arrival in Spain to repair his failing health until the day of his death his career was that of a brilliant writer. His compatriots regard him as a master of Castilian and rank him among the classic authors of their tongue. All lines were familiar to him, but he preferred history and ascetical literature. His chief claim to glory is his Life of St. Ignatius Loyola, in which he speaks as an eye-witness, admirably supported by documents. Perhaps the work abounds too much in anecdotal details which tend to obscure the grand aspect of the saint's character and genius (Analecta Bolland., XXIII, 513). It appeared for the first time in Latin at Naples in 1572 (ibid., XXI, 230). The first Spanish edition, revised and considerably augmented by the author, dates from 1583. Other editions followed, all of them revised by the author; that of 1594 seems to contain the final text. It was soon translated into most of the European languages. Among his other works must be mentioned his "Historia eclesiástica del Cisma del reino de Inglaterra" and the "Flos sanctorum", which has been very popular in many countries. Some unpublished works of his deserve publication, notably his History of the persecution of the Society of Jesus and his History of the Spanish Assistancy. ASTRAIN, Historia de la Compañía de Jesús en le Asistencia de España (Madrid, 1902-09); PEAT, Histoire du Père Ribadeneyra, disciple de S. Ignace (Paris, 1862); SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliothèque de la C. de J., VI, 1724-58; DE LA FUENTE, Obras escojidas del Padre Pedro de Rivadeneira, con una noticia de su vida y juicio crítico de sus escritos in Biblioteca de autores Españoles, LX (1868); Monumenta historica S.J.; Ignatiana, ser. I, Epistolœ, II; ser. IV, I; POLANCO, Chronicon Soc. Jesu, VI; Epistolœ mixtœ, V. FRANCIS VAN ORTROY. Andres Perez de Ribas Andrés Pérez De Ribas A pioneer missionary, historian of north-western Mexico; born at Cordova, Spain, 1576; died in Mexico, 26 March, 1655. He joined the Society of Jesus in 1602, coming at once to America, and finishing his novitiate in Mexico in 1604. In the same year he was sent to undertake the Christianization of the Ahome and Suaqui of northern Sinaloa, of whom the former were friendly and anxious for teachers, while the latter had just been brought to submission after a hard campaign. He succeeded so well that within a year he had both tribes gathered into regular towns, each with a well-built church, while all of the Ahome and a large part of the Suaqui had been baptized. The two tribes together numbered about 10,000 souls. In 1613, being then superior of the Sinaloa district, he was instrumental in procuring the submission of a hostile mountain tribe. In 1617, in company with other Jesuit missionaries whom he had brought from Mexico City, he began the conversion of the powerful and largely hostile Yaqui tribe (q.v.) of Sonora, estimated at 30,000 souls, with such success that within a few years most of them had been gathered into orderly town communities. In 1620 he was recalled to Mexico to assist in the college, being ultimately appointed provincial, which post he held for several years. After a visit to Rome in 1643 to take part in the election of a general of the order, he devoted himself chiefly to study and writing until his death. He left numerous works, religious and historical, most of which are still in manuscript, but his reputation as an historian rests secure upon his history of the Jesuit missions of Mexico published at Madrid in 1645, one year after its completion, under the title: "Historia de los Triunfos de Nuestra Santa Fe entre gentes las más bárbaras . . . conseguidos por los soldados de la milicia de Ia Compañía de Jesús en las misiones de la Provincia de Nueva-España". Of this work Bancroft says: "It is a complete history of Jesuit work in Nueva Vizcaya, practically the only history the country had from 1590 to 1644, written not only by a contemporary author but by a prominent actor in the events narrated, who had access to all the voluminous correspondence of his order, comparatively few of which documents have been preserved. In short, Ribas wrote under the most favourable circumstances and made good use of his opportunities." ALEGRE, Historia de la Compañía de Jesús (Mexico, 1841); BANCROFT, Hist. North Mexican States and Texas, I (San Francisco, 1886); BERÍSTAIN Y SOUZA, Biblioteca Hispano-Americana Setentrional, III (Amecemeca, 1883). JAMES MOONEY Diocese of Preto Ribeirao Ribeirao Preto (DE RIBERAO PRETO) A suffragan see of the Archdiocese of São Paulo, Brazil, established 7 June, 1908, with a Catholic population of 500,000 souls. The first and present bishop, Rt. Rev. Alberto José Gonçalves, was born 20 July, 1859, elevated 5 December, 1908, and consecrated 29 April, 1909. The district of Ribeirão Preto is at present the most important one of the State of São Paulo, both on account of the richness of its soil and the great number of agricultural, industrial, and commercial establishments therein. Its principal product is coffee, the shipments of which are so considerable as to necessitate the constant running of an extraordinary number of trains. The seat of the diocese is the city of Ribeirão Preto, situated on the shores of Ribeirão Preto and Ribeirão Retiro, 264 miles from the capital of the state. The municipality, created by law of 1 April, 1889, is divided into four wards, viz.: Villa Tibeiro, Barracão, Morro do Cipó, and Republica. It is, like most of the interior towns of São Paulo, of modern construction. The city is lighted by electric light and has excellent sewer and water-supply systems. The streets are well laid, straight, and intersecting at right angles, with many parks and squares. The cathedral now nearing completion will be one of the finest buildings of its kind in Brazil. It is well provided with schools and colleges, prominent among which are those maintained by the Church. JULIAN MORENO-LACALLE. Jusepe de Ribera Jusepe de Ribera Jusepe De Ribera, called also SPAGNOLETTO, L'ESPAGNOLET (the little Spaniard), painter born at Jativa, 12 Jan., 1588; died at Naples, 1656. Fantastic accounts have been given of his early history; his father was said to be a noble, captain of the fortress of Naples, etc. All this is pure romance. A pupil of Ribalta, the author of many beautiful pictures in the churches of Valencia, the young man desired to know Italy. He was a very determined character. At eighteen, alone and without resources, he begged in the streets of Rome in order to live, and performed the services of a lackey. A picture by Caravaggio aroused his admiration, and he set out for Naples in search of the artist, but the latter had just died (1609). Ribera was then only twenty. For fifteen years the artist is entirely lost sight of; it is thought that he travelled in upper Italy. He is again found at Naples in 1626, at which time he was married, living like a nobleman, keeping his carriage and a train of followers, received by viceroys, the accomplished host of all travelling artists, and very proud of his title of Roman Academician. Velasquez paid him a visit on each of his journeys (1630, 1649). A sorrow clouded the end of his life; his daughter was seduced by Don Juan of Austria. Her father seems to have died of grief, but the story of his suicide is a fiction. Ribera's name is synonymous with a terrifying art of wild-beast fighters and executioners. Not that he did not paint charming figures. No artist of his time, not excepting Rubens or Guido Reni, was more sensitive to a certain ideal of Correggio-like grace. But Ribera did not love either ugliness or beauty for themselves, seeking them in turn only to arouse emotion. His fixed idea, which recurs in every form in his art, is the pursuit and cultivation of sensation. In fact the whole of Ribera's work must be understood as that of a man who made the pathetic the condition of art and the reason of the beautiful. It is the negation of the art of the Renaissance, the reaction of asceticism and the Catholic Reformation on the voluptuous paganism of the sixteenth century. Hence the preference for the popular types, the weather-beaten and wrinkled beggar, and especially the old man. This "aging" of art about 1600 is a sign of the century. Heroic youth and pure beauty were dead for a long time. The anchorites and wasted cenobites, the parchment-like St. Jeromes, these singular methods of depicting the mystical life seem Ribera's personal creation; to show the ruins of the human body, the drama of a long existence written in furrows and wrinkles, all engraved by a pencil which digs and scrutinizes, using the sunlight as a kind of acid which bites and makes dark shadows, was one of the artist's most cherished formulas. No one demonstrates so well the profound change which took place in men's minds after the Reformation and the Council of Trent. Thenceforth concern for character and accent forestalled every other consideration. Leanness, weariness, and abasement became the pictorial signs of the spiritual life. A sombre energy breathes in these figures of Apostles, prophets, saints, and philosophers. Search for character became that of ugliness and monstrosity. Nothing is so personal to Ribera as this love of deformity. Paintings like the portrait of "Cambazo", the blind sculptor, the "Bearded Woman" (Prado, 1630), and the "Club Foot" of the Louvre (1651) inaugurate curiosities which had happily been foreign to the spirit of the Renaissance. They show a gloomy pleasure in humiliating human nature. Art, which formerly used to glorify life, now violently emphasized its vices and defects. The artist seized upon the most ghastly aspects even of antiquity. Cato of Utica howling and distending his wound, Ixion on his wheel, Sisyphus beneath his rock. This artistic terrorism won for Ribera his sinister reputation, and it must be admitted that it had depraved and perverted qualities. The sight of blood and torture as the source of pleasure is more pagan than the joy of life and the laughing sensuality of the Renaissance. At times Ribera's art seems a dangerous return to the delights of the amphitheatre. His "Apollo and Marsyas" (Naples) his "Duel" or "Match of Women" (Prado) recall the programme of some spectacle manager of the decadence. In nothing is Ribera more "Latin" than in this sanguinary tradition of the games of the circus. However, it would be unjust wholly to condemn this singular taste in accordance with our modern ideas. At least we cannot deny extraordinary merit to the scenes of martyrdom painted by Ribera. This great master has never been surpassed as a practical artist. For plastic realism, clearness of drawing and evidence of composition the "Martyrdom of St. Bartholomew" (there are in Europe a dozen copies, of which the most beautiful is at the Prado) is one of the masterpieces of Spanish genius. It is impossible to imagine a more novel and striking idea. No one has spoken a language more simple and direct. In this class of subjects Rubens usually avoids atrocity by an oratorical turn, by the splendour of his discourse, the lyric brilliancy of the colouring. Ribera's point of view is scarcely less powerful with much less artifice. It is less transformed and developed. The action is collected in fewer persons. The gestures are less redundant, with a more spontaneous quality. The tone is more sober and at the same time stronger. Everything seems more severe and of a more concentrated violence. The art also, while perhaps not the most elevated of all, is at least one of the most original and convincing. Few artiste have given us, if not serene enjoyment, more serious thoughts. The "St. Lawrence" of the Vatican is scarcely less beautiful than the "St. Bartholomew". Moreover it must not be thought that these ideas of violence exhaust Ribera's art. They are supplemented by sweet ideas, and in his work horrible pictures alternate with tender ones. There is a type of young woman or rather young girl, still almost a child, of delicate beauty with candid oval features and rather thin arms, with streaming hair and an air of ignorance, a type of paradoxical grace which is found in his "Rapture of St. Magdalen" (Madrid, Academy of S. Fernando), or the "St. Agnes" of the Dresden Museum. This virginal figure is truly the "eternal feminine" of a country which more than any other dreamed of love and sought to deify its object summarizing in it the most irreconcilable desires and virtues. No painter has endowed the subject of the Immaculate Conception with such grandeur as Ribera in his picture for the Ursulines of Salamanca (1636). Even a certain familiar turn of imagination, a certain intimate and domestic piety, a sweetness, an amicable and popular cordiality which would seem unknown to this savage spirit were not foreign to him. In more than one instance he reminds us of Murillo. He painted several "Holy Families", "Housekeeping in the Carpenter Shop" (Gallery of the Duke of Norfolk). All that is inspired by tender reverie about cradles and chaste alcoves, all the distracting delights in which modern religion rejoices and which sometimes result in affectation, are found in more than germ in the art of this painter, who is regarded by many as cruel and uniformly inhuman. Thus throughout his work scenes of carnage are succeeded by scenes of love, atrocious visions by visions of beauty. They complete each other or rather the impression they convey is heightened by contrast. And under both forms the artist incessantly sought one object, namely to obtain the maximum of emotion; his art expresses the most intense nervous life. This is the genius of antithesis. It forms the very basis of Ribera's art, the condition of his ideas, and even dictates the customary processes of his chiaroscuro. For Ribera's chiaroscuro, scarcely less personal than that of Rembrandt, is, no less than the latter's, inseparable from a certain manner of feeling. Less supple than the latter less enveloping, less penetrating, less permeable by the light, twilight, and penumbra, it proceeds more roughly by clearer oppositions and sharp intersections of light and darkness. Contrary to Rembrandt, Ribera does not decompose or discolour, his palette does not dissolve under the influence of shadows, and nothing is so peculiar to him as certain superexcited notes of furious red. Nevertheless, compared to Caravaggio, his chiaroscuro is much more than a mere means of relief. The canvas assumes a vulcanized, carbonized appearance. Large wan shapes stand out from the asphalt of the background, and the shadows about them deepen and accumulate a kind of obscure tragic capacity. There is always the same twofold rhythm, the same pathetic formula of a dramatized universe regarded as a duel between sorrow and joy, day and night. This striking formula, infinitely less subtile than that of Rembrandt, nevertheless had an immense success. For all the schools of the south Caravaggio's chiaroscuro perfected by Ribera had the force of law, such as it is found throughout the Neapolitan school, in Stanzioni, Salvator Rosa, Luca Giordano. In modern times Bonnat and Ribot painted as though they knew no master but Ribera. Rest came to this violent nature towards the end of his life; from the idea of contrast he rose to that of harmony. His last works, the "Club Foot" and the "Adoration of the Shepherds" (1650), both in the Louvre, are painted in a silvery tone which seems to foreshadow the light of Velasquez. His hand had not lost its vigour, its care for truth; he always displayed the same implacable and, as it were, inflexible realism. The objects of still life in the "Adoration of the Shepherds" have not been equalled by any specialist, but these works are marked by a new serenity. This impassioned genius leaves us under a tranquil impression; we catch a ray— should it rather be called a reflection?— the Olympian genius of the author of "The Maids of Honour". Ribera was long the only Spanish painter who enjoyed a European fame; this he owed to the fact that he had lived at Naples and has often been classed with the European school. Because of this he is now denied the glory which was formerly his. He is regarded more or less as a deserter, at any rate as the least national of Spanish painters. But in the seventeenth century Naples was still Spanish, and by living there a man did not cease to be a Spanish subject. By removing the centre of the school to Naples, Ribera did Spain a great service. Spanish art, hitherto little known, almost lost at Valencia and Seville, thanks to Ribera was put into wider circulation. Through the authority of a master recognized even at Rome the school felt emboldened and encouraged. It is true that his art, although more Spanish than any other, is also somewhat less specialized; it is cosmopolitan. Like Seneca and Lucian, who came from Cordova, and St. Augustine, who came from Carthage, Ribera has expressed in a universal language the ideal of the country where life has most savour. DOMINICI, Vite de' pittori . . . napoletani (Naples, 1742-1743; 2nd ed., Naples, 1844); PALOMINO, El Museo Pictórico, I (Madrid, 1715); II (Madrid, 1724); Noticias, Elogios y Vidas de Los Pintores, at the end of vol. II, Separate edition (London, 1742), in German (Dresden, 1781); BERMÚDEZ, Diccionario historíco de los más ilustres profesores de las bellas artes en España (Madrid, 1800); STIRLING. Annals of the artists of Spain (London, 1848); VIARDOT, Notices sur les principaux peintres de l'Espagne (Paris, 1839); BLANC, Ecole Espagnole (1869); MEYER, Ribera (Strasburg, 1908); LAFOND, Ribera et Zurbaran (Paris, 1910). LOUIS GILLET. Ricardus Anglicus Ricardus Anglicus Ricardus Anglicus, Archdeacon of Bologna, was an English priest who was rector of the law school at the University of Bologna in 1226, and who, by new methods of explaining legal proceedings, became recognized as the pioneer of scientific judicial procedure in the twelfth century. His long-lost work "Ordo Judiciarius" was discovered in Manuscript by Wunderlich in Douai and published by Witt in 1851. A more correct Manuscript was subsequently discovered at Brussels by Sir Travers Twiss, who, on evidence which seems insufficient, followed Panciroli in identifying him with the celebrated Bishop Richard Poor (died 1237). Probably he graduated in Paris, as a Papal Bull of 1218 refers to "Ricardus Anglicus doctor Parisiensis", but there is no evidence to connect him with Oxford. He also wrote glosses on the papal decretals, and distinctions on the Decree of Gratian. He must be distinguished from his contemporary, Ricardus Anglicanus, a physician. RASHDALL, Mediæval Universities, II, 750 (London, 1895); TWISS, Law Magazine and Review, May, 1894; SARTI AND FATTORINI, De claris Archigymnasii Bononiensis Professoribus; BLAKISTON in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v. Poor, Richard. EDWIN BURTON. Nicholas Riccardi Nicholas Riccardi A theologian, writer and preacher; born at Genoa, 1585; died at Rome, 30 May, 1639. Physically he was unprepossessing, even slightly deformed. His physical deficiencies, however, were abundantly compensated for by mentality of the highest order. His natural taste for study was encouraged by his parents who sent him to Spain to pursue his studies in the Pincian Academy. While a student at this institution he entered the Dominican order and was invested with its habit in the Convent of St. Paul, where he studied philosophy and theology. So brilliant was his record that after completing his studies he was made a professor of Thomistic theology at Pincia. While discharging his academic duties, he acquired a reputation as a preacher second only to his fame as a theologian. As a preacher Philip III of Spain named him "The Marvel", a sobriquet by which he was known in Spain and at Rome till the end of his life. On his removal to Rome in 1621, he acquired the confidence of Urban VIII. He was made regent of studies and professor of theology at the College of the Minerva. In 1629 Urban VIII appointed him Master of the Sacred Palace to succeed Niccolò Ridolphi, recently elected Master General of the Dominicans. Shortly after this the same pontiff appointed him pontifical preacher. These two offices he discharged with distinction. His extant works number twenty. Besides several volumes of sermons for Advent, Lent, and special occasions, his writings treat of Scripture, theology, and history. One of his best known works is the "History of the Council of Trent" (Rome, 1627). His commentaries treat of all the books of Scripture, and are notable for their originality, clearness, and profound learning. Two other commentaries treat of the Lord's Prayer and the Canticle of Canticles. QUÉTIF-ECHARD, SS. Ord. Praed., II, 503, 504. JOHN B. O'CONNOR. Lorenzo Ricci Lorenzo Ricci General of the Society of Jesus b. at Florence, 2 Aug., 1703; d. at the Castle of Sant' Angelo, Rome, 24 Nov., 1775. He belonged to one of the most ancient, and illustrious families of Tuscany. He had two brothers, one of whom subsequently became canon of the. cathedral and the other was raised by Francis I, Grand Duke of Tuscany, to the dignity of first syndic of the Grand duchy. Sent when very young to Prato to pursue, his studies under the direction of the Society of Jesus in the celebrated Cicognini college, he entered the society when he was scarcely fifteen, 16 Dec., 1718, at the novitiate of S. Andrea at Rome. Having made the usual course of philosophical and theological studies and twice defended with rare success public theses in these subjects, he was successively charged with teaching belles lettres and philosophy it Siena, and philosophy and theology at the Roman College, from which he was promoted to the foremost office of his order. Meanwhile he was admitted to the profession of the four vows, 15 Aug., 1736. About 1751 his edifying and regular life, his discretion, gentleness, and simplicity caused him to be appointed to the important office of spiritual father, the duties of which he discharged to the satisfaction of all. In 1755 Father Luigi Centurione, who appreciated his eminent qualities, chose him as secretary of the society. Finally in the Nineteenth Congregation he was elected general by unanimous vote, (21 May, 1758). It was at the most stormy and distressed period of its existence that the senate of the society placed its government and its destinies in the, hand of a man deeply virtuous and endowed with rare merit, but, who was inexperienced in the art of governing and who had always lived apart from the world and diplomatic intrigues. The historiographer Julius Cordara, who lived near Ricci and seems to have known him intimately, deplored this choice: "Eundem tot, inter iactationes ac fluctus cum aliquid praeter morem audendum et malis inusitatis inusitata remedia adhibenda videbantur, propter ipsam nature placiditatem et nulla unquam causa incalescentem animum, minus aptum arbitrabar" (On account of his placid nature and too even temper, I regarded him as little suited for a time when disturbance and storm seem to require extraordinary application of unusual remedies to unusual evils). (Denkwurdigkeiten der Jesuiten, p.19.) On the other hand it must be admitted that the new general did not have much leeway. In his first interview with Clement XIII, who had assumed the tiara 6 July, 1758, and always showed himself deeply attached to the Jesuits, the pope counselled him: "Silentium, patientiam et preces; cetera sibi curae fore" (Cordara, op. cit., 22), The saintly superior followed this line of conduct to the letter and incessantly inculcated it in his subordinates. The seven encyclical letters which he addressed to them in the fifteen years of his generalship all breathe the sweetest and tenderest piety and zeal for their religious perfection. "Preces vestras", he says in the last, that of 21 Feb., 1773, "animate omni pietatis exercitio accurate fervideque obeundo, mutua inter vosmetipsos caritate, obedientia et observantia erga eos qui vobis Dei loco sunt, tolerantia laborurn, aerumnarum, paupertatis, contumeliarum, secessu et solitudine, prudentia et evangelica in agendo simplicitate, boni exempli operibus, piisque colloquiis" (Let your prayers be inspired by every practice of piety, with mutual charity among yourselves, obedience and respect for those who hold the place of God in your regard, en durance of labour, of hardships, of poverty, of insult in retreat and solitude, with prudence and evangelical simplicity of conduct, the example of good works, and pious conversation). (Epistolae praepositorum generalium S.J., 11, Ghent 1847, 306). This pious and profoundly upright man was nevertheless not wanting on occasion in courage and firmness. When it was suggested to save the French provinces of his order by giving them a superior entirely independent of the general of Rome he refused thus to transgress the. constitutions committed to his care and uttered to the pope the ever famous saying: "Sint ut sunt aut non sint" (Leave them as they are or not at all). (Cordara, op. cit., 35) Unfortunately he placed all his confidence in hi,, assistant for Italy, Father Timoni, of Greek origin, "vir quippe praefidens sibi, iudiciique sui plus nimio tenax" (Idem, op. cit., 20), who, like many other expected the society to be saved by a miracle of Providence. When, to the mass of pamphlets aimed against the Jesuits, the Portuguese episcopate brought the reinforcement of pastoral letters, a number of bishops wrote to the pope letters which were very eulogistic of the Society of Jesus and its Institute, and Clement XIII hastened to send a copy to Father Ricci. It was a brilliant apologia for the order Cordara and many of his brethren considered it, expedient to publish this correspondence in full with the sole title: "ludicium Ecclesiae, universae, de statu praesenti Societatis Iesu" (op. cit., 26). Timoni, who fancied that no one would dare any thing against the Jesuits of Portugal, was of a contrary opinion, and the general was won over to his way of thinking. Disaster followed disaster, and Ricci experienced the most serious material difficulties in assisting the members who were expelled from every country. At his instance, and perhaps even with his collaboration, Clement XIII, solicitous for the fate of the Society, published 7 January, 1765, the Bull "Apostolicam pascendi", which was a cogent defence of the Institute and its members (Masson, "Le cardinal de, Bernis depuis son ministere" 80). But even the pontiff's intervention could not stay the devastating torrent. After the suppression of the Jesuits in Naples and the Duchy of Parma, the ambassadors of France, Spain, and Portugal went (Jan., 1769) to request officially of the pope the total suppression of the society. This was the death-blow of Clement XIII, who died some days later (2 Feb., 1769) of an apoplectic attack. His successor, the conventual Ganganelli, little resembled him. Whatever may have been his sympathies for the order prior to his elevation to the sovereign pontificate, and his indebtedness to Ricci, who had used his powerful influence to secure for him the cardinal's hat, it is indisputable that once he became pope he assumed at least in appearance a hostile attitude. "Se palam Jesuitis infensum praebere atque ita quidem, ut ne generalem quidem praepositum in conspectum admitteret" (Cordara, 43). There is no necessity of repeating even briefly the history of the pontificate of Clement XIV (18 May, 1769-22 Sept., 1774), which was absorbed by his measures to bring about the suppression of the Society of Jesus. Despite the exactions and outrageous injustices which the Jesuit houses had to undergo even at Rome, the general did not give up hope of a speedy deliverance, as is testified by the letter he wrote to Cordara the day after the feast of St. Ignatius, 1773 (Cordara, loc. cit., 53). Although the Brief of abolition had been signed by the pope ten days previously, Father Ricci was suddenly notified on the evening of 16 August. The next day he was assigned the English College as residence, until 23 Sept., 1773, when he was removed to the Castle of Sant' Angelo, where he was held in strict captivity for the remaining two years of his life. The surveillance was so severe that he did not learn of the death of his secretary Cornolli, imprisoned with him and in his vicinity, until six months after the event=2E To satisfy the hatred of his enemies his trial and that of his companions was hastened, but the judge ended by recognizing "nunquam objectos sibi reos his innocentiores; Riccium etiam ut hominem vere sanctum dilaudabat" (Cordara, op. cit., 62); and Cardinal de Bernis dared to write (5 July): "There are not, perhaps, sufficient proofs for judges, but there are enough for upright and reasonable men" (Masson, op. cit., 324). Justice required that the ex-general be at once set at liberty, but nothing was done, apparently through fear lest the scattered Jesuits should gather about their old head, to reconstruct their society at the centre of Catholicism. At the end of August, 1775, Ricci sent an appeal to the new pope, Pius VI, to obtain his release. But while his claims were being considered by the circle of the Sovereign Pontiff, death came to summon the venerable old man to the tribunal of the supreme Judge. Five days previously, when about to receive Holy Viaticum, he made this double protest: (1) "I declare and protest that the suppressed Society of Jesus has not given any cause for its suppression; this I declare and protest with all that moral certainty that a superior well informed of his order can have. (2) I declare and protest that I have not given any cause, even the slightest, for my imprisonment; this I declare and protest with that supreme certainty and evidence that each one has of his own actions. I make this second protest only because it is necessary for the reputation of the suppressed Society of Jesus, of which I was the general." (Murr, "Journal zur Kunstgeschichte", IX, 281.) To do honour to his memory the pope caused the celebration of elaborate funeral services in the church of St. John of the Florentines near the Castle of Sant' Angelo. As is customary with prelates, the body was placed on a bed of state. It was carried in the evening to the Church of the Gesu where it was buried in the vault reserved for the burial of his predecessors in the government of the order. CORDARA, Denkwürdigkeiten in DÖLLINGER, Beiträge zur politischen, kirchlichen und Culturgesch., III (1882), 1-74. These memoirs carry much weight, inasmuch as Cordara speaks with severity of his former brothers in arms, and of the Society of Jesus. CARAYON, Documents inedits concernant la Compagnie de Jesus, XVII, Le Pere Ricci et la suppression de la Compagnie de Jesus en 1773, CLXXIV (Poitiers, 1869); Epistoloe proepositorum generalium Societatis Jesu, If (Ghent, 1847); SMITH, The Suppression of the Society of Jesus in The Month (1902-03); MURR, Journal zur Kunstgesch. u. zur allgemeinen Litteratur, IX (Nuremberg, 1780), 254-309; MASSON, Le Cardinal de Bernis depuis son ministere 1758-1794 (Paris, 1903), a good collection of documents, but the author does not know the history of the Jesuits; RAVIGNAN, Clement XIII et Clement XI V, supplementary volume, historical and critical documents (Paris, 1854); BOERO, Osservazioni sopra l'istoria del pontificato di Clemente XIV scritta dal P. A. Theiner (2nd ed., Monza, 1854), useful for documents. FRANCIS VAN ORTROY Matteo Ricci Matteo Ricci Founder of the Catholic missions of China, b. at Macerata in the Papal States, 6 Oct. 1552; d. at Peking, 11 May, 1610. Ricci made his classical studies in his native town, studied law at Rome for two years, and on 15 Aug., 1571, entered the Society of Jesus at the Roman College, where he made his novitiate, and philosophical and theological studies. While there he also devoted his attention to mathematics, cosmology, and astronomy under the direction of the celebrated Father Christopher Clavius. In 1577 he asked to be sent on the missions in Farthest Asia, and his request being granted he embarked at Lisbon, 24 March, 1578. Arriving at Goa, the capital of the Portuguese Indies, on 13 Sept. of this year, he was employed there and at Cochin in teaching and the ministry until the end of Lent, 1582, when Father Alessandro Valignani (who had been his novice-master at Rome but who since August, 1573, was in charge of all the Jesuit missions in the East Indies) summoned him to Macao to prepare to enter China. Father Ricci arrived at Macao on 7 August, 1582. Beginning of the Mission In the sixteenth century nothing remained of the Christian communities founded in China by the Nestorian missionaries in the seventh century and by the Catholic monks in the thirteenth and fourteenth (see CHINA). Moreover it is doubtful whether the native Chinese population was ever seriously affected by this ancient evangelisation. For those desiring to resume the work everything therefore remained to be done, and the obstacles were greater than formerly. After the death of St. Francis Xavier (27 November, 1552) many fruitless attempts had been made. The first missionary to whom Chinese barriers were temporarily lowered was the Jesuit, Melchior Nuñez Barreto, who twice went as far as Canton, where he spent a month each time (1555). A Dominican, Father Gaspar da Cruz, was also admitted to Canton for a month, but he also had to refrain from "forming a Christian Christianity". Still others, Jesuits, Augustinians, and Fransciscans in 1568, 1575, 1579, and 1582 touched on Chinese soil, only to be forced, sometimes with ill treatment, to withdraw. To Father Valignani is due the credit of having seen what prevented all these undertakings from having lasting results. The attempts had hitherto been made haphazard, with men insufficiently prepared and incapable of profiting by favourable circumstances had they encountered them. Father Valignani substituted the methodical attack with previous careful selection of missionaries who, the field once open, would implant Christianity there. To this end he first summoned to Macao Father Michele de Ruggieri, who had also come to India from Italy in 1578. Only twenty years had elapsed since the Portuguese had succeeded in establishing their colony at the portals of China, and the Chinese, attracted by opportunities for gain, were flocking thither. Ruggieri reached Macao in July, 1579, and, following the given orders applied himself wholly to the study of the Mandarin language, that is, Chinese, as it is spoken throughout the empire by the officials and the educated. His progress, though very slow, permitted him to labour with more fruit than his predecessors in two sojourns at Canton (1580-81) allowed him by an unwonted complacency of the mandarins. Finally, after many untoward events, he was authorized (10 Sept., 1583) to take up his residence with Father Ricci at Chao-k'ing, the administrative capital of Canton. Method of the Missionaries The exercise of great prudence alone enabled the missionaries to remain in the region which they had had such difficulty in entering. Omitting all mention at first of their intention to preach the Gospel, they declared to the mandarins who questioned them concerning their object "that they were religious who had left their country in the distant West because of the renown of the good government of China, where they desired to remain till their death, serving god, the Lord of Heaven". Had they immediately declared their intention to preach a new religion, they would never have been received; this would have clashed with Chinese pride, which would not admit that China had anything to learn from foreigners, and it would have especially alarmed their politics, which beheld a national danger in every innovation. However, the missionaries never hid their Faith nor the fact that they were Christian priests. As soon as they were established at Chao-k'ing they placed in a conspicuous part of their house a picture of the Blessed Virgin with the Infant Jesus in her arms. Visitors seldom failed to inquire the meaning of this, to them, novel representation, and the missionaries profited thereby to give them a first idea of Christianity. The missionaries assumed the initiative in speaking of their religion as soon as they had sufficiently overcome Chinese antipathy and distrust to see their instructions desired, or at least to be certain of making them understood without shocking their listeners. They achieved this result by appealing to the curiosity of the Chinese, by making them feel, without saying so, that the foreigners had something new and interesting to teach; to this end they made use of the European things they had brought with them. Such were large and small clocks, mathematical and astronomical instruments, prisms revealing the various colours, musical instruments, oil paintings and prints, cosmographical, geographical, and architectural works with diagrams, maps, and views of towns and buildings, large volumes, magnificently printed and splendidly bound, etc. The Chinese, who had hitherto fancied that outside of their country only barbarism existed, were astounded. Rumours of the wonders displayed by the religious from the West soon spread on all sides, and thenceforth their house was always filled, especially with mandarins and the educated. It followed, says Father Ricci, that "all came by degrees to have with regard to our countries, our people, and especially of our educated men, an idea vastly different from that which they had hitherto entertained". This impression was intensified by the explanations of the missionaries concerning their little museum in reply to the numerous questions of their visitors. One of the articles which most aroused their curiosity was a map of the world. The Chinese had already had maps, called by their geographers "descriptions of the world", but almost the entire space was filled by the fifteen provinces of China, around which were painted a bit of sea and a few islands on which were inscribed the names of countries of which they had heard -- all together was not as large as a small Chinese province. Naturally the learned men of Chao-k'ing immediately protested when Father Ricci pointed out the various parts of the world on the European map and when they saw how small a part China played. But after the missionaries had explained its construction and the care taken by the geographers of the West to assign to each country its actual position and boundaries, the wisest of them surrendered to the evidence, and beginning with the Governor of Chao-k'ing, all urged the missionary to make a copy of his map with the names and inscriptions in Chinese. Ricci drew a larger map of the world on which he wrote more detailed inscriptions, suited to the needs of the Chinese; when the work was completed the governor had it printed, giving all the copies as presents to his friends in the province and at a distance. Father Ricci does not hesitate to say: "This was the most useful work that could be done at that time to dispose China to give credence to the things of our holy Faith. . . . Their conception of the greatness of their country and of the insignificance of all other lands made them so proud that the w hole world seemed to them savage and barbarous compared with themselves; it was scarcely to be expected that they, while entertaining this idea, would heed foreign masters." But now numbers were eager to learn of European affairs from the missionaries, who profited by these dispositions to introduce religion more frequently with their explanations. For example, their beautiful Bibles and the paintings and prints depicting religious subjects, monuments, churches, etc., gave them an opportunity of speaking of "the good customs in the countries of the Christians, of the falseness of idolatry, of the conformity of the law of God with natural reason and similar teachings found in the writings of the ancient sages of China". This last instance shows that Father Ricci already knew how to draw from his Chinese studies testimony favourable to the religion which he was to preach. It was soon evident to the missionaries that their remarks regarding religion were no less interesting to many of their visitors than their Western curiosities and learning, and, to satisfy those who wished to learn more, they distributed leaflets containing a Chinese translation of the Ten Commandments, an abbreviation of the moral code much appreciated by the Chinese, composed a small catechism in which the chief points of Christian doctrine were explained in a dialogue between a pagan and a European priest. This work, printed about 1584, was also well received, the highest mandarins of the province considering themselves honoured to receive it as a present. The missionaries distributed hundreds and thousands of copies and thus "the good odour of our Faith began to be spread throughout China". Having begun their direct apostolate in this manner, they furthered it not a little by their edifying regular life, their disinterestedness, their charity, and their patience under persecutions which often destroyed the fruits of their labours. Development of the Missions Father Ricci played the chief part in these early attempts to make Christianity known to the Chinese. In 1607 Father Ruggieri died in Europe, where he had been sent in 1588 by Father Valignani to interest the Holy See more particularly in the missions. Left alone with a young priest, a pupil rather than an assistant, Ricci was expelled from Chao-k'ing in 1589 by a viceroy of Canton who had found the house of the missionaries suited to his own needs; but the mission had taken root too deeply to be exterminated by the ruin of its first home. Thenceforth in whatever town Ricci sought a new field of apostolate he was preceded by his reputation and he found powerful friends to protect him. He first went to Shao-chow, also in the province of Canton, where he dispensed with the services of interpreters and adopted the costume of the educated Chinese. In 1595 he made an attempt on Nan-king, the famous capital in the south of China, and, though unsuccessful, it furnished him with an opportunity of forming a Christian Church at Nan-ch'ang, capital of Kiang-si, which was so famous for the number and learning of its educated men. In 1598 he made a bold but equally fruitless attempt to establish himself at Peking. Forced to return to Nan-king on 6 Feb., 1599, he found Providential compensation there; the situation had changed completely since the preceding year, and the highest mandarins were desirous of seeing the holy doctor from the West take up his abode in their city. Although his zeal was rewarded with much success in this wider field, he constantly longed to repair his repulse at Peking. He felt that the mission was not secure in the provinces until it was established and authorized in the capital. On 18 May, 1600, Ricci again set out for Peking and, when all human hope of success was lost, he entered on 24 January, 1601, summoned by Emperor Wan-li. Last Labours Ricci's last nine years were spent at Peking, strengthening his work with the same wisdom and tenacity of purpose which had conducted it so far. The imperial goodwill was gained by gifts of European curiosities, especially the map of the world, from which the Asiatic ruler learned for the first time the true situation of his empire and the existence of so many other different kingdoms and peoples; he required Father Ricci to make a copy of it for him in his palace. At Peking, as at Nan-king and elsewhere, the interest of the most intelligent Chinese was aroused chiefly by the revelations which the European teacher made to them in the domain of the sciences, even those in which they considered themselves most proficient. Mathematics and astronomy, for example, had from time immemorial formed a part of the institutions of the Chinese Government, but, when they listened to Father Ricci, even the men who knew most had to acknowledge how small and how mingled with errors was their knowledge. But this recognition of their ignorance and their esteem for European learning, of which they had just got a glimpse, impelled very few Chinese to make serious efforts to acquire this knowledge, their attachment to tradition or the routine of national teaching being too deep-rooted. However, the Chinese governors, who even at the present day have made no attempt at reform in this matter, did not wish to deprive the country of all the advantages of European discoveries. To procure them recourse had to be had to the missionaries, and thus the Chinese mission from Ricci's time until the end of the eighteenth century found its chief protection in the services performed with the assistance of European learning. Father Ricci made use of profane science only to prepare the ground and open the way to the apostolate properly so called. With this object in view he employed other means, which made a deep impression on the majority of the educated class, and especially on those who held public offices. He composed under various forms adapted to the Chinese taste little moral treatises, e.g., that called by the Chinese "The Twenty-five Words", because in twenty-five short chapters it treated "of the mortification of the passions and the nobility of virtue". Still greater admiration was aroused by the "Paradoxes", a collection of practical sentences, useful to a moral life, familiar to Christians but new to the Chinese, which Ricci developed with accounts of examples, comparisons, and extracts from the Scriptures and from Christian philosophers and doctors. Not unreasonably proud of their rich moral literature, the Chinese were greatly surprised to see a stranger succeed so well; they could not refrain from praising his exalted doctrine, and the respect which they soon acquired for the Christian writings did much to dissipate their distrust of strangers and to render them kindly disposed towards the Christian religion. But the book through which Ricci exercised the widest and most fortunate influence was his "T'ien-chu-she-i" (The True Doctrine of God). This was the little catechism of Chao-k'ing which had been delivered from day to day, corrected and improved as occasion offered, until it finally contained all the matter suggested by long years of experience in the apostolate. The truths which must be admitted as the necessary preliminary to faith -- the existence and unity of God, the creation, the immortality of the soul, reward or punishment in a future life -- are here demonstrated by the best arguments from reason, while the errors most widespread in China, especially the worship of idols and the belief in the transmigration of souls, are successfully refuted. To the testimony furnished by Christian philosophy and theology Ricci added numerous proofs from the ancient Chinese books which did much to win credit for his work. A masterpiece of apologetics and controversy, the "T'ien-chu-she-i", rightfully became the manual of the missionaries and did most effacacious missionary work. Before its author's death it had been reprinted at least four times, and twice by the pagans. It led countless numbers to Christianity, and aroused esteem for our religion in those readers whom it did not convert. The perusal of it induced Emperor K'ang-hi to issue his edict of 1692 granting liberty to preach the Gospel. The Emperor Kien-long, although he persecuted the Christians, ordered the "T'ien-chu-she-i" to be placed in his library with his collection of the most notable productions of the Chinese language. Even to the present time missionaries have experienced its beneficent influence, which was not confined to China, being felt also in Japan, Tong-king, and other countries tributary to Chinese literature. Besides the works intended especially for the infidels and the catechumens whose initiation was in progress, Father Ricci wrote others for the new Christians. As founder of the mission he had to invent formulae capable of expressing clearly and unequivocally our dogmas and rites in a language which had hitherto never been put to such use (except for the Nestorian use, with which Ricci was not acquainted). It was a delicate and difficult task, but it formed only a part of the heavy burden which the direction of the mission was for Father Ricci, particularly during his last years. While advancing gradually on the capital Ricci did not abandon the territory already conquered; he trained in his methods the fellow-workers who joined him and commissioned them to continue his work in the cities he left. Thus in 1601, the mission included, besides Peking, the three residences of Nan-king, Nan-ch'ang, Shao-chow, to which was added in 1608 that of Shang-hai. In each of these there were two or three missionaries with "brothers", Chinese Christians from Macao who had been received into the Society of Jesus, and who served the mission as catechists. Although as yet the number of Christians was not very great (2000 baptized in 1608), Father Ricci in his "Memoirs" has said well that considering the obstacles to the entrance of Christianity into China the result was "a very great miracle of Divine Omnipotence". To preserve and increase the success already obtained, it was necessary that the means which had already proved efficacious should continue to be employed; everywhere and always the missionaries, without neglecting the essential duties of the Christian apostolate, had to adapt their methods to the special conditions of the country, and avoid unnecessary attacks on traditional customs and habits. The application of this undeniably sound policy was often difficult. In answer to the doubts of his fellow-workers Father Ricci outlined rules, which received the approval of Father Valignano; these insured the unity and fruitful efficacy of the apostolic work throughout the mission. Question of the Divine Names and the Chinese Rites The most difficult problem in the evangelization of China had to do with the rites or ceremonies, in use from time immemorial, to do honour to ancestors or deceased relatives and the particular tokens of respect which the educated felt bound to pay to their master, Confucius. Ricci's solution of this problem caused a long and heated controversy in which the Holy See finally decided against him. The discussion also dealt with the use of the Chinese terms T'ien (heaven) and Shang-ti (Sovereign Lord) to designate God; here also the custom established by Father Ricci had to be corrected. The following is a short history of this famous controversy which was singularly complicated and embittered by passion. With regard to the designations for God, Ricci always preferred, and employed from the first, the term T'ien chu (Lord of Heaven) for the God of Christians; as had been seen, he used it in the title of his catechism. But in studying the most ancient Chinese books he considered it established that they said of T'ien (Heaven) and Shang-ti (Sovereign Lord) what we say of the true God, that is, they described under these two names a sovereign lord of spirits and men who knows all that takes place in the world, the source of all power and all lawful authority, the supreme regulator and defender of the moral law, rewarding those who observe and punishing those who violate it. Hence he concluded that, in the most revered monuments of China, T'ien and Shang'ti designate nothing else than the true God whom he himself preached. Ricci maintained this opinion in several passages of his T'ien-chu-she-i; it will be readily understood of what assistance it was to destroy Chinese prejudices against the Christian religion. It is true that, in drawing this conclusion, Ricci had to contradict the common interpretation of modern scholars who follow Chu-Hi in referring T'ien and Shang-ti to apply to the material heaven; but he showed that this material interpretation does not do justice to the texts and it is at least reasonable to see in them something better. In fact he informs us that the educated Confucianists, who did not adore idols, were grateful to him for interpreting the words of their master with such goodwill. Indeed, Ricci's opinion has been adopted and confirmed by illustrious modern Sinologists, amongst whom it suffices to mention James Legge ("The Notions of the Chinese concerning God and Spirits", 1852; "A Letter to Prof. Max Muller chiefly on the Translation of the Chinese terms Ti and Chang-ti", 1880). Therefore it was not without serious grounds that the founder of the Chinese mission and his successors believed themselves justified in employing the terms T'ien and Shang-ti as well as T'ien-chu to designate the true God. However, there were objections to this practice even among the Jesuits, the earliest rising shortly after the death of Father Ricci and being formulated by the Japanese Jesuits. In the ensuing discussion carried on in various writings for and against, which did not circulate beyond the circle of the missionaries only one of those working in China declared himself against the use of the name Shang-ti. This was Father Nicholas Longobardi, Ricci's successor as superior general of the mission, who, however, did not depart in anything from the lines laid down by its founder. After allowing the question to be discussed for some years, the superior ordered the missionaries to abide simply by the custom of Father Ricci; later this custom together with the rites was submitted to the judgment of the Holy See. In 1704 and 1715 Clement XI, without pronouncing as to the meaning of T'ien and Shang-ti in the ancient Chinese books, forbade, as being open to misconstruction, the use of these names to indicate the true God, and permitted only the T'ien-chu. Regarding the rites and ceremonies in honour of ancestors and Confucius, Father Ricci was also of the opinion that a broad toleration was permissible without injury to the purity of the Christian religion. Moreover, the question was of the utmost importance for the progress of the apostolate. To honour their ancestors and deceased parents by traditional prostrations and sacrifices was in the eyes of the Chinese the gravest duty of filial piety, and one who neglected it was treated by all his relatives as an unworthy member of his family and nation. Similar ceremonies in honour of Confucius were an indispensable obligation for scholars, so that they could not receive any literary degree nor claim any public office without having fulfilled it. This law still remains inviolable; Kiang-hi, the emperor who showed most goodwill towards the Christians, always refused to set it aside in their favour. In modern times the Chinese Government showed no more favour to the ministers of France, who, in the name of the treaties guaranteeing the liberty of Catholicism in China, claimed for the Christians who had passed the examinations, the titles and advantages of the corresponding degrees without the necessity of going through the ceremonies; the Court of Peking invariably replied that this was a question of national tradition on which it was impossible to compromise. After having carefully studied what the Chinese classical books said regarding these rites, and after having observed for a long time the practice of them and questioned numerous scholars of every rank with whom he was associated during this eighteen years of apostolate, Ricci was convinced that these rites had no religious significance, either in their institution or in their practice by the enlightened classes. The Chinese, he said, recognized no divinity in Confucius any more than in their deceased ancestors; they prayed to neither; the made no requests nor expected any extraordinary intervention from them. In fact they only did for them what they did for the living to whom they wished to show great respect. "The honour they pay to their parents consists in serving them dead as they did living. They do not for this reason think that the dead come to eat their offerings [the flesh, fruit, etc.] or need them. They declare that they act in this manner because they know no other way of showing their love and gratitude to their ancestors. . . . Likewise what they do [especially the educated], they do to thank Confucius for the excellent doctrine which he left them in his books, and through which they obtained their degrees and mandarinships. Thus in all this there is nothing suggestive of idolatry, and perhaps it may even be said that there is no superstition." The "perhaps" added to the last part of this conclusion shows the conscientiousness with which the founder acted in this matter. That the vulgar and indeed even most of the Chinese pagans mingled superstition with their national rites Ricci never denied; neither did he overlook the fact that the Chinese, like infidels in general, mixed superstition with their most legitimate actions. In such cases superstition is only an accident which does not corrupt the substance of the just action itself, and Ricci thought this applied also to the rites. Consequently he allowed the new Christians to continue the practice of them avoiding everything suggestive of superstition, and he gave them rules to assist them to discriminate. He believed, however, that this tolerance, though licit, should be limited by the necessity of the case; whenever the Chinese Christian community should enjoy sufficient liberty, its customs, notably its manner of honouring the dead, must be brought into conformity with the customs of the rest of the Christian world. These principles of Father Ricci, controlled by his fellow-workers during his lifetime, and after his death, served for fifty years as the guide of all the missionaries. In 1631 the first mission of the Dominicans was founded at Fu-kien by two Spanish religious; in 1633 two Franciscans, also Spanish, came to establish a mission of their order. The new missionaries were soon alarmed by the attacks on the purity of religion which they thought they discerned in the communities founded by their predecessors. Without taking sufficient time perhaps to become acquainted with Chinese matters and to learn exactly what was done in the Jesuit missions they sent a denunciation to the bishops of the Philippines. The bishops referred it to Pope Urban VIII (1635), and soon the public was informed. As early as 1638 a controversy began in the Philippines between the Jesuits in defence of their brethren on the one side and the Dominicans and Franciscans on the other. In 1643 one of the chief accusers, the Dominican, Jean-Baptiste Moralez, went to Rome to submit to the Holy See a series of "questions" or "doubts" which he said were controverted between the Jesuit missionaries and their rivals. Ten of these questions concerned the participation of Christians in the rites in honour of Confucius and the dead. Moralez's petition tended to show that the cases on which he requested the decision of the Holy See represented the practice authorized by the Society of Jesus; as soon as the Jesuits learned of this they declared that these cases were imaginary and that they had never allowed the Christians to take part in the rites as set forth by Moralez. In declaring the ceremonies illicit in its Decree of 12 Sept., 1645 (approved by Innocent X), the congregation of the Propaganda gave the only possible reply to the questions referred to it. In 1651 Father Martin Martini (author of the "Novus Atlas Sienensis") was sent from China to Rome by his brethren to give a true account of the Jesuits practices and permissions with regard to the Chinese rites. This delegate reached the Eternal City in 1654, and in 1655 submitted four questions to the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office. This supreme tribunal, in its Decree of 23 March, 1656, approved by Pope Alexander VII, sanctioned the practice of Ricci and his associates as set forth by Father Martini, declaring that the ceremonies in honour of Confucius and ancestors appeared to constitute "a purely civil and political cult". Did this decree annul that of 1645? Concerning this question, laid before the Holy Office by the Dominican, Father John de Polanco, the reply was (20 Nov., 1669) that both decrees should remain "in their full force" and should be observed "according to the questions, circumstances, and everything contained in the proposed doubts". Meanwhile an understanding was reached by the hitherto divided missionaries. This reconciliation was hastened by the persecution of 1665 which assembled for nearly five years in the same house at Canton nineteen Jesuits, three Dominicans, and one Franciscan (then the sole member of his order in China). Profiting by their enforced leisure to agree on a uniform Apostolic method, the missionaries discussed all the points on which the discipline of the Church should be adapted to the exigencies of the Chinese situation. After forty days of conferences, which terminated on 26 Jan., 1668, all (with the possible exception of the Franciscan Antonio de Santa Maria, who was very zealous but extremely uncompromising) subscribed to forty-two articles, the result of the deliberations, of which the forty-first was as follows: "As to the ceremonies by which the Chinese honour their master Confucius and the dead, the replies of the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition approved by our Holy Father Alexander VII, in 1656, must be followed absolutely because they are based on a very probable opinion, to which it is impossible to offset any evidence to the contrary, and, this probability assumed, the door of salvation must not be closed to the innumerable Chinese who would stray from the Christian religion if they were forbidden to what they may do licitly and in good faith and which they cannot forego without serious injury." After the subscription, however, a new courteous discussion of this article in writing took place between Father Domingo Fernandez Navarrete, superior of the Dominicans, and the most learned of the Jesuits at Canton. Navarrette finally appeared satisfied and on 29 Sept., 1669, submitted his written acceptance of the article to the superior of the Jesuits. However, on 19 Dec. of this year he secretly left Canton for Macao whence he went to Europe. There, and especially at Rome where he was in 1673, he sought from now on only to overthrow what had been attempted in the conferences of Canton. He published the "Tratados historicos, politicos, ethicos, y religiosos de la monarchia de China" (I, Madrid, 1673; of vol. II, printed in 1679 and incomplete, only two copies are known). This work is filled with impassioned accusations against the Jesuit missionaries regarding their methods of apostolate and especially their toleration of the rites. Nevertheless, Naverrette did not succeed in inducing the Holy See to resume the question, this being reserved for Charles Maigrot, a member of the new Société des Missions Étrangères. Maigrot went to China in 1683. He was Vicar Apostolic of Fu-kien, before being as yet a bishop, when, on 26 March, 1693, he addressed to the missionaries of his vicariate a mandate proscribing the names T'ien and Shang-ti; forbidding that Christians be allowed to participate in or assist at "sacrifices or solemn oblations" in honour of Confucius or the dead; prescribing modifications of the inscriptions on the ancestral tablets; censuring and forbidding certain, according to him, too favourable references to the ancient Chinese philosophers; and, last but not least, declaring that the exposition made by Father Martini was not true and that consequently the approval which the latter had received from Rome was not to be relied on. By order of Innocent XII, the Holy Office resumed in 1697 the study of the question on the documents furnished by the procurators of Mgr Maigrot and on those showing the opposite side brought by the representatives of the Jesuit missionaries. It is worthy of note that at this period a number of the missionaries outside the Society of Jesus, especially all the Augustinians, nearly all the Franciscans, and some Dominicans, were converted to the practice of Ricci and the Jesuit missionaries. The difficulty of grasping the truth amid such different representations of facts and contradictory interpretations of texts prevented the Congregation from reaching a decision until towards the end of 1704 under the pontificate of Clement XI. Long before then the pope had chosen and sent to the Far East a legate to secure the execution of the Apostolic decrees and to regulate all other questions on the welfare of the missions. The prelate chosen was Charles-Thomas-Maillard de Tournon (b. at Turin) whom Clement XI had consecrated with his own hands on 27 Dec., 1701, and on whom he conferred the title of Patriarch of Antioch. Leaving Europe on 9 Feb., 1703, Mgr de Tournon stayed for a time in India (see MALABAR RITES) reaching Macao on 2 April, 1705, and Peking on 4 December of the same year. Emperor K'ang-hi accorded him a warm welcome and treated him with much honour until he learned, perhaps through the imprudence of the legate himself, that one of the objects of his embassy, if not the chief, was to abolish the rites amongst the Christians. Mgr de Tournon was already aware that the decision against the rites had been given since 20 Nov., 1704, but not yet published in Europe, as the pope wished that it should be published first in China. Forced to leave Peking, the legate had returned to Nan-king when he learned that the emperor had ordered all missionaries, under penalty of expulsion, to come to him for a piao or diploma granting permission to preach the Gospel. This diploma was to be granted only to those who promised not to oppose the national rites. On the receipt of this news the legate felt that he could no longer postpone the announcement of the Roman decisions. By a mandate of 15 January, 1707, he required all missionaries under pain of excommunication to reply to Chinese authority, if it questioned them, that "several things" in Chinese doctrine and customs did not agree with Divine law and that these were chiefly "the sacrifices to Confucius and ancestors" and "the use of ancestral tablets", moreover that Shang-ti and "T'ien" were not "the true God of the Christians". When the emperor learned of this Decree he ordered Mgr de Tournon to be brought to Macao and forbade him to leave there before the return of the envoys whom he himself sent to the pope to explain his objections to the interdiction of the rites. While still subject to this restraint, the legate died in 1710. Meanwhile Mgr Maigrot and several other missionaries having refused to ask for the piao had been expelled from China. But the majority (i.e. all the Jesuits, most of the Franciscans, and other missionary religious, having at their head the Bishop of Peking, a Franciscan, and the Bishop of Ascalon, Vicar Apostolic of Kiang-si, an Augustinian) considered that, to prevent the total ruin of the mission, they might postpone obedience to the legate until the pope should have signified his will. Clement XI replied by publishing (March, 1709) the answers of the Holy Office, which he had already approved on 20 November, 1704, and then by causing the same Congregation to issue (25 Sept., 1710) a new Decree which approved the acts of the legate and ordered the observance of the mandate of Nan-king, but interpreted in the sense of the Roman replies of 1704, omitting all the questions and most of the preambles, and concluded with a form of oath which the pope enjoined on all the missionaries and which obliged them under the severest penalties to observe and have observed fully and without reserve the decisions inserted in the pontifical act. This Constitution, which reached China in 1716, found no rebels among the missionaries, but even those who sought most zealously failed to induce the majority of their flock to observe its provisions. At the same time the hate of the pagans was reawakened, enkindled by the old charge that Christianity was the enemy of the national rites, and the neophytes began to be the objects of persecutions to which K'ang-hi, hitherto so well-disposed, now gave almost entire liberty. Clement XI sought to remedy this critical situation by sending to China a second legate, John-Ambrose Mezzabarba, whom he named Patriarch of Alexandria. This prelate sailed from Lisbon on 25 March, 1720, reaching Macao on 26 September, and Canton on 12 October. Admitted, not without difficulty, to Peking and to an audience with the emperor, the legate could only prevent his immediate dismissal and the expulsion of all the missionaries by making known some alleviations of the Constitution "Ex illâ die", which he was authorized to offer, and allowing K'ang-hi to hope that the pope would grant still others. Then he hastened to return to Macao, whence he addressed (4 November, 1721) a pastoral letter to the missionaries of China, communicating to them the authentic text of his eight "permissions" relating to the rites. He declared that he would permit nothing forbidden by the Constitution; in practice, however, his concessions relaxed the rigour of the pontifical interdictions, although they did not produce harmony or unity of action among the apostolic workers. To bring about this highly desirable result the pope ordered a new investigation, the chief object of which was the legitimacy and opportuneness of Mezzabarba's "permissions"; begun by the Holy Office under Clement XII a conclusion was reached only under Benedict XIV. On 11 July, 1742, this pope, by the Bull "Ex quo singulari", confirmed and reimposed in a most emphatic manner the Constitution "Ex illâ die", and condemned and annulled the "permissions" of Mezzabarba as authorizing the superstitions which that Constitution sought to destroy. This action terminated the controversy among Catholics. The Holy See did not touch on the purely theoretical questions, as for instance what the Chinese rites were and signified according to their institution and in ancient times. In this Father Ricci may have been right; but he was mistaken in thinking that as practised in modern times they are not superstitious or can be made free from all superstition. The popes declared, after scrupulous investigations, that the ceremonies in honour of Confucius or ancestors and deceased relatives are tainted with superstition to such a degree that they cannot be purified. But the error of Ricci, as of his fellow-workers and successors, was but an error in judgment. The Holy See expressly forbade it to be said that they approved of idolatry; it would indeed be an odious calumny to accuse such a man as Ricci, and so many other holy and zealous missionaries, of having approved and permitted their neophytes practices which they knew to be superstitions and contrary to the purity of religion. Despite this error, Matto Ricci remains a splendid type of missionary and founder, unsurpassed for his zealous intrepidity, the intelligence of the methods applied to each situation, and the unwearying tenacity with which he pursued the projects he undertook. To him belongs the glory not only of opening up a vast empire to the Gospel, but of simultaneously making the first breach in that distrust of strangers which excluded China from the general progress of the world. The establishment of the Catholic mission in the heart of this country also had its economic consequences: it laid the foundation of a better understanding between the Far East and the West, which grew with the progress of the mission. It is superfluous to detail the results from the standpoint of the material interests of the whole world. Lastly, science owes to Father Ricci the first exact scientific knowledge received in Europe concerning China, its true geographical situation, its ancient civilization, its vast and curious literature, its social organization so different from what existed elsewhere. The method instituted by Ricci necessitated a fundamental study of this new world, and if the missionaries who have since followed him have rendered scarcely less service to science than to religion, a great part of the credit is due to Ricci. [MATTEO RICCI], "Dell' entrata della Campagnia di Giesu e christianita nella Cina" (MS. Of Father Ricci, extant in the archives of the Society of Jesus; cited in the foregoing article as the "Memmoirs of Father Ricci", a somewhat free tr. Of his work is given in TRIGAULT, "De christiana expeditione apud Sinas suscepta ab Societate Jesu". "Ex P. Matthaei Ricci commentariis libri", V (Augsbrg, 1615); DE URSIS, "P. Matheus Ricci, S.J. Relacao escripta pelo seu companhiero" (Rome, 1910); BARTOLI, "Dell' Historia della Compagnia di Gesu. La Cina", I-II (Rome, 1663). Bartoli is the most accurate biographer of Ricci; d'ORLEANS, "La vie du Pere Matthieu Ricci" (Paris, 1693); NATALI, "Il secondo Confucio" (Rome, 1900); VENTURI, "L'apostolato del P. M. Ricci d. C. d. G. in Cina secondo I suoi scritti inediti" (Rome, 1910); BRUCKER, "Le Pere Matthieu Ricci" in "Etudes", CXXIV (Paris, 1910), 5-27; 185-208; 751-79; DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, "Bibl. Des ecrivains de la C. de J", VI, 1792-95). Chinese Rites.-BRUCKER in VACANT, "Dict. De Theol. cath., s.v. "Chinois (Rites"" and works indicated; CORDIER, "Bibl. Sinica", II, 2nd. Ed., 869-925; IDEM, "Hist. Des relations de la Chine avec les puissances occidentales", III (Paris, 1902) xxv. JOSEPH BRUCKER Giovanni Battista Riccioli Giovanni Battista Riccioli Italian astronomer, b. at Ferrara 17 April, 1598; d. at Bologna 25 June, 1671. He entered the Society of Jesus 6 Oct., 1614. After teaching philosophy and theology for a number of years, chiefly at Parma and Bologna, he devoted himself, at the request of his superiors, entirely to the study of astronomy, which at that time, owing to the discoveries of Kepler and the new theories of Copernicus, was a subject of much discussion. Realizing the many defects of the traditional astronomy inherited from the ancients, he conceived the bold idea of undertaking a reconstruction of the science with a view to bringing it into harmony with contemporary progress. This led to his "Almagestum novum, astronomiam veterem novamque complectens" (2 vols., Bologna, 1651), considered by many the most important literary work of the Jesuits during the seventeenth century. The author in common with many scholars of the time, notably in Italy, rejected the Copernican theory, and in this work, admittedly of great erudition, gives an elaborate refutation in justification of the Roman Decrees of 1616 and 1633. He praises, however, the genius of Copernicus and readily admits the value of his system as a simple hypothesis. His sincerity in this connexion has been called into question by some, e.g. Wolf, but a study of the work shows beyond doubt that he wrote from conviction and with the desire of making known the truth. Riccioli's project also included a comparison of the unit of length of various nations and a more exact determination of the dimensions of the earth. His topographical measurements occupied him at intervals between 1644 and 1656, but defects of method have rendered his results of but little value. His most important contribution to astronomy was perhaps his detailed telescopic study of the moon, made in collaboration with P. Grimaldi. The latter's excellent lunar map was inserted in the "Almagestum novum", and the lunar nomenclature they adopted is still in use. He also made observations on Saturn's rings, though it was reserved for Huyghens to determine the true ring-structure. He was an ardent defender of the new Gregorian calendar. Though of delicate health, Riccioli was an indefatigable worker and, in spite of his opposition to the Copernican theory, rendered valuable services to astronomy and also to geography and chronology. His chief works are: "Geographiæ et hydrographiæ reformatæ libri XII" (Bologna, 1661); "Astronomia reformata" (2 vols., Bologna, 1665); "Chronologia reformata" (1669); "Tabula latitudinum et longitudinum" (Vienna, 1689). SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. de la C. de J., VI (Paris, 1895), 1795; DELAMBRE, Hist. de l'Astronomie Moderne, II (Paris, 1821), 274; WOLF, Gesch. d. Astronomie (Munich, 1877), 434; WALSH, Catholic Churchmen in Science (2nd series, Philadelphia, 1909); LINSMEIER, Natur. u. Offenbarung, XLVII, 65 sqq. H. M. BROCK Edmund Ignatius Rice Edmund Ignatius Rice Founder of the Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools (better known as "Irish Christian Brothers"), b. at Callan, Co. Kilkenny, 1762; d. at Waterford, 1844. He was educated in a Catholic school which, despite the provision of the iniquitous penal laws, the authorities suffered to exist in the City of Kilkenny. In 1779 he entered the business house of his uncle, a large export and import trader in the City of Waterford, and, after the latter's death, became sole proprietor. As a citizen he was distinguished for his probity, charity, and piety; he was an active member of a society established in the city for the relief of the poor. About 1794 he meditated entering a continental convent, but his brother, an Augustinian who had but just returned from Rome, discountenanced the idea. Rice, thereupon, devoted himself to the extension of his business. Some years later, however, he again desired to become a religious. As he was discussing the matter with a friend of his, a sister of Bishop Power of Waterford, a band of ragged boys passed by. Pointing to them Miss Power exclaimed: "What! would you bury yourself in a cell on the continent rather than devote your wealth and your life to the spiritual and material interest of these poor youths?" The words were an inspiration. Rice related the incident to Dr. Lanigan, bishop of his native Diocese of Ossory, and to others, all of whom advised him to undertake the mission to which God was evidently calling him. Rice settled his worldly affairs, his last year's business (1800) being the most lucrative one he had known, and commenced the work of the Christian schools. Assisted by two young men, whom he paid for their services, he opened his fist school in Waterford in 1802. In June of this year Bishop Hussey of Waterford laid the foundation stone of a schoolhouse on a site which he named Mount Sion. The building was soon ready for occupation, but Rice's assistants had fled and could not be induced to return even when offered higher salaries. In this extremity two young men from Callan offered themselves as fellow-labourers. Other workers soon gathered round him, and by 1806 Christian schools were established in Waterford, Carrick-on-Suir, and Dungarvan. The communities adopted a modified form of the Rule of the Presentation order of nuns, and, in 1808, pronounced their vows before Bishop Power. Houses were established in Cork, Dublin, Limerick, and elsewhere. Though the brothers, as a rule, made their novitiate in Mount Sion and regarded Rice as their father and model, he was not their superior; they were subject to the bishops of their respective dioceses. In 1817, on the advice of Bishop Murray, coadjutor to the Archbishop of Dublin, and of Father Kenny, S.J., a special friend, Rice applied to the Holy See for approbation and a constitution for his society. In 1820 Pius VII formally confirmed the new congregation of "Fratres Monachi" by the Brief "Ad pastoralis dignitatis fastigium". This was the first confirmation by the Church of a congregation of religious men in Ireland. Brother Rice was unanimously elected superior general by the members. All the houses were united except the house in Cork, where Bishop Murphy refused his consent. Later, however, in 1826, the Brothers in Cork attained the object of their desire, but one of their number, preferring the old condition of things, offered his services to the bishop, who placed him in charge of a school on the south side of the city. This secession of Br. Austin Reardon was the origin of the teaching congregation of the Presentation Brothers. The confirmation of the new Institute attracted considerable attention, even outside of Ireland, and many presented themselves for the novitiate. The founder removed the seat of government to Dublin. At this time the agitation for Catholic Emancipation was at its height and the people were roused to indignation by the reports of the proselytizing practices carried on in the Government schools. Brother Rice conceived the idea of establishing a "Catholic Model School". The "Liberator" entered warmly into his scheme, and procured a grant of £1500 from the Catholic Association in aid of the proposed building. On St. Columba's day, 1828, Daniel O'Connell laid the foundation stone, in North Richmond Street, Dublin, of the famous school, since known as the "O'Connell Schools". In his speech on the occasion he referred to Brother Rice as "My old friend, Mr. Rice, the Patriarch of the Monks of the west". The founder resigned his office in 1838 and spent his remaining years in Mount Sion. Before his death he saw eleven communities of his institute in Ireland, eleven in England, and one in Sydney, Australia, while applications for foundations had been received from the Archbishop of Baltimore and from bishops in Canada, Newfoundland, and other places. PATRICK J. HENNESSY Richard (Franciscan Preacher) Richard A Friar minor and preacher, appearing in history between 1428 and 1431, whose origin and nationality are unknown. He is sometimes called the disciple of St. Bernardine of Sienna and of St. Vincent Ferrer, but probably only because, like the former, he promoted the veneration of the Holy Name of Jesus and, like the latter, announced the end of the world as near. In 1428 Richard came from the Holy Land to France, preached at Troyes, next year in Paris during ten days (16-26 April) every morning from about five o'clock to ten or eleven. He had such a sway over his numerous auditors that after his sermons the men burned their dice, and the women their vanities. Having been threatened by the Faculty of Theology on account of his doctrine — perhaps, also, because he was believed to favour Charles VII, King of France, whilst Paris was then in the hands of the English — he left Paris suddenly and betook himself to Orléans and Troyes. In the latter town he first met Bl. Joan of Arc. Having contributed much to the submission of Troyes to Charles VII, Richard now followed the French army and became confessor and chaplain to Bl. Joan. Some differences, however, arose between the two on account of Catherine de la Rochelle, who was protected by the friar, but scorned by Joan. Richard's name figures also in the proceedings against Bl. Joan of Arc in 1431; in the same year he preached the Lent in Orléans and shortly after was interdicted from preaching by the inquisitor of Poitiers. No trace of him is found after this. DE KERVAL, Jeanne d'Arc et les Franciscains (Vanves, 1893); DEBOUT, Jeanne d'Arc (Paris, 1905-07), I, 694-97 and passim; WALLON, Jeanne d'Arc (Paris, 1883), 125, 200, 261. LIVARIUS OLIGER Richard I, King of England Richard I, King Of England Richard I, born at Oxford, 6 Sept, 1157; died at Chaluz, France, 6 April, 1199; was known to the minstrels of a later age, rather than to his contemporaries, as "Coeur-de-Lion". He was only the second son of Henry II, but it was part of his father's policy, holding, as he did, continental dominions of great extent and little mutual cohesion, to assign them to his children during his own lifetime and even to have his sons brought up among the people they were destined to govern. To Richard were allotted the territories in the South of France belonging to his mother Eleanor of Aquitaine, and before he was sixteen he was inducted as Duke of that province. It was a weak point in the old King's management of his sons, that, while dazzling them with brilliant prospects, he invested them with very little of the substance of power. In 1173 the young Henry, who, following a German usage, had already been crowned king in the lifetime of his father, broke out into open revolt, being instigated thereto by his father-in-law, Louis VII, King of France. Under the influence of their mother Eleanor, who bitterly resented her husband's infidelities, Geoffrey and Richard in 1173 also threw in their lot with the rebel and took up arms against their father. Allies gathered round them and the situation grew so threatening, that Henry II thought it well to propitiate heaven by doing penance at the tomb of the martyred Archbishop St. Thomas (11 July, 1174). By a remarkable coincidence, on the very next day, a victory in Northumberland over William, King of Scotland, disposed of Henry's most formidable opponent. Returning with a large force to France, the King swept all before him, and though Richard for a while held out alone he was compelled by 21 Sept. to sue for forgiveness at his father's feet. The King dealt leniently with his rebellious children, but this first outbreak was only the harbinger of an almost uninterrupted series of disloyal intrigues, fomented by Louis VII and by his son and successor, Philip Augustus, in which Richard, who lived almost entirely in Guienne and Poitou, was engaged down to the time of his father's death. He acquired for himself a great and deserved reputation for knightly prowess, and he was often concerned in chivalrous exploits, showing much energy in particular in protecting the pilgrims who passed through his own and adjacent territories on their way to the shrine of St. James of Compostella. His elder brother Henry grew jealous of him and insisted that Richard should do him homage. On the latter's resistance war broke out between the brothers. Bertrand de Born, Count of Hautefort, who was Richard's rival in minstrelsy as well as in feats of arms, lent such powerful support to the younger Henry, that the old King had to intervene on Richard's side. The death of the younger Henry, 11 June, 1183, once more restored peace and made Richard heir to the throne. But other quarrels followed between Richard and his father, and it was in the heat of the most desperate of these, in which the astuteness of Philip Augustus had contrived to implicate Henry's favourite son John, that the old King died broken-hearted, 6 July, 1189. Despite the constant hostilities of the last few years, Richard secured the succession without difficulty. He came quickly to England and was crowned at Westminster on 3 Sept. But his object in visiting his native land was less to provide for the government of the kingdom than to collect resources for the projected Crusade which now appealed to the strongest, if not the best, instincts of his adventurous nature, and by the success of which he hoped to startle the world. Already, towards the end of 1187, when the news had reached him of Saladin's conquest of Jerusalem, Richard had taken the cross. Philip Augustus and Henry II had subsequently followed his example, but the quarrels which had supervened had so far prevented the realization of this pious design. Now that he was more free the young King seems to have been conscientiously in earnest in putting the recovery of the Holy Land before everything else. Though the expedients by which he set to work to gather every penny of ready money upon which he could lay hands were alike unscrupulous and impolitic, there is something which commands respect in the energy which he threw into the task. He sold sheriffdoms, justiceships, church lands, and appointments of all kinds, both lay and secular, practically to the highest bidder. He was not ungenerous in providing for his brothers John and Geoffrey, and he showed a certain prudence in exacting a promise from them to remain out of England for three years, in order to leave a free hand to the new Chancellor William of Longehamp, who was to govern England in his absence. Unfortunately he took with him many of the men, e. g. Archbishop Baldwin, Hubert Walter, and Ranulf Glanvill, whose statesmanship and experience would have been most useful in governing England and left behind many restless spirits like John himself and Longehamp, whose energy might have been serviceable against the infidel. Already on 11 Dec., 1189, Richard was ready to cross to Calais. He met Philip Augustus, who was also to start on the Crusade, and the two Kings swore to defend each other's dominions as they would their own. The story of the Third Crusade has already been told in some detail (see CRUSADES). It was September, 1190, before Richard reached Marseilles; he pushed on to Messina and waited for the spring. There miserable quarrels occurred with Philip, whose sister he now refused to marry, and this trouble was complicated by an interference in the affairs of Sicily, which the Emperor Henry VI watched with a jealous eye, and which later on was to cost Richard dear. Setting sail in March, he was driven to Cyprus, where he quarrelled with Isaac Comnenus, seized the island, and married Berengaria of Navarre. He at last reached Acre in June and after prodigies of valour captured it. Philip then returned to France but Richard made two desperate efforts to reach Jerusalem, the first of which might have succeeded had he known the panic and weakness of the foe. Saladin was a worthy opponent, but terrible acts of cruelty as well as of chivalry took place, notably when Richard slew his Saracen prisoners in a fit of passion. In July, 1192, further effort seemed hopeless, and the King of England's presence was badly needed at home to secure his own dominions from the treacherous intrigues of John. Hastening back Richard was wrecked in the Adriatic, and falling eventually into the hands of Leopold of Austria, he was sold to the Emperor Henry VI, who kept him prisoner for over a year and extorted a portentous ransom which England was racked to pay. Recent investigation has shown that the motives of Henry's conduct were less vindictive than political. Richard was induced to surrender England to the Emperor (as John a few years later was to make over England to the Holy See), and then Henry conferred the kingdom upon his captive as a fief at the Diet of Mainz, in Feb., 1194 (see Bloch, "Forschungen", Appendix IV). Despite the intrigues of King Philip and John, Richard had loyal friends in England. Hubert Walter had now reached home and worked energetically with the Justices to raise the ransom, while Eleanor the Queen Mother obtained from the Holy See an excommunication against his captors. England responded nobly to the appeal for money and Richard reached home in March, 1194. He showed little gratitude to his native land, and after spending less than two months there quitted it for his foreign dominions never to return. Still, in Hubert Walter, who was now both Archbishop of Canterbury and Justiciar, he left it a capable governor. Hubert tried to wring unconstitutional supplies and service from the impoverished barons and clergy, but failed in at least one such demand before the resolute opposition of St. Hugh of Lincoln. Richard's diplomatic struggles and his campaigns against the wily King of France were very costly but fairly successful. He would probably have triumphed in the end, but a bolt from a cross-bow while he was besieging the castle of Chaluz inflicted a mortal injury. He died, after receiving the last sacraments with signs of sincere repentance. In spite of his greed, his lack of principle, and, on occasions, his ferocious savagery, Richard had many good instincts. He thoroughly respected a man of fearless integrity like St. Hugh of Lincoln, and Bishop Stubbs says of him with justice that he was perhaps the most sincerely religious prince of his family. "He heard Mass daily, and on three occasions did penance in a very remarkable way, simply on the impulse of his own distressed conscience. He never showed the brutal profanity of John." Lingard and all other standard Histories of England deal fully with the reign and personal character of Richard. DAVIS, A History of England in Six Volumes, II (2nd ed., London, 1909), and ADAMS, The Political History of England. II (London, 1905), may be specially recommended. The Prefaces contributed by Bishop Stubbs to his editions of various Chronicles in the R. S. are also very valuable, notably those to Roger of Hoveden (London, 1868-71); Ralph de Diceto (1875); and Benedict of Peterborough (1867). Besides these should be mentioned in the same series the two extremely important volumes of Chronicles and Memorials of the Reign of Richard I (London, 1864-65), also edited by Stubbs; the Magna Vita S. Hugonis, edited by Dimock, 1864; and Randulphi de Coggeshall Chronicon Anglicanum, ed. Stevenson, 1875. See also NORGATE, England under the Angevin Kings (London, 1889); LUCRAIRE AND LAVISSE, Histoire de France (Paris, 1902); KNELLER, Des Richard Löwenherz deutsche Gefangenshaft (Freiburg, 1893); BLOCH, Forschungen zur Politik Kaisers Heinrich VI in den Jahren 1191-1194 (Berlin, 1892); KINDT, Gründe der Gefangenschaft Richard I von England (Halle, 1892); and especially RÖHRICHT, Gesch. d. Konigreich Jerusalem (Innsbruck, 1890). HERBERT THURSTON. Charles-Louis Richard Charles-Louis Richard Theologian and publicist; b. at Blainville-sur-l'Eau, in Lorraine, April, 1711; d. at Mons, Belgium, 16 Aug., 1794. His family, though of noble descent, was poor, and he received his education in the schools of his native town. At the age of sixteen he entered the Order of St. Dominic and, after his religious profession, was sent to study theology in Paris, where he received the Doctorate at the Sorbonne. He next applied himself to preaching and the defense of religion against d'Alembert, Voltaire, and their confederates. The outbreak of the Revolution forced him to seek refuge at Mons, in Belgium. During the second invasion of that country by the French, in 1794, old age prevented him from fleeing, and, though he eluded his pursuers for some time, he was at last detected, tried by court martial, and shot, as the author of "Parallèle des Juifs qui ont crucifié Jésus-Christ, avec les Français qui ont exécuté leur roi" (Mons, 1794). Among his works may be mentioned "Bibliothèque sacrée, ou dictionnaire universelle des sciences ecclésiastiques" (5 vols., Paris, 1760) and "Supplément" (Paris, 1765), the last and enlarged edition being that of Paris, 1821-27, 29 vols., and "Analyses des conciles généraux et particuliers" (5 vols., Paris, 1772-77). MOULAERT, Ch. L. Richard aus dem Predigerorden (Ratisbon, 1870); Nomenclator, III (3rd ed.), 433-35. H.J. SCHROEDER Richard de Bury Richard de Bury Bishop and bibliophile, b. near Bury St. Edmund's, Suffolk, England, 24 Jan., 1286; d. at Auckland, Durham, England, 24 April, 1345. He was the son of Sir Richard Aungerville, but was named after his birthplace. He studied at Oxford and became a Benedictine. Having been appointed tutor to Prince Edward, son of Edward II and Isabella of France, he was exposed to some danger during the stormy scenes that led to the deposition of the king. On the accession of his pupil to the throne (1327), de Bury eventually rose to be Bishop of Durham (1333), High Chancellor (1334), and Treasurer of England (1336). He was sent on two embassies to John XXII of Avignon, and on one of his visits, probably in 1330, he made the acquaintance of the poet Petrarch. He continued to enjoy the favor of the king, and in his later years took a prominent part in the diplomatic negotiations with Scotland and France. He died at his manor of Auckland, and was buried in the cathedral of Durham. He founded Durham College at Oxford, and according to tradition bequeathed to its library most of the books which he had spent his life in collecting. There they remained until the dissolution of the College by Henry VIII. They were then scattered, some going to Balliol College, others to the university (Duke Humphrey's) library, and still others passing into the possession of Dr. George Owen, the purchaser of the site whereon the dissolved college had stood. These books were of course all in manuscript, for the art of printing had not yet been discovered. Bale mentions three of de Bury's works, namely: "Philobiblon"; "Epistolae Familiarium"; and "Orationes ad Principes". It is by the "Philobiblon" that he is principally remembered. It was first printed at Cologne in 1473, then at Spires in 1483, in Paris in 1500, and at Oxford in 1598-99. Subsequent editions were made in Germany in 1610, 1614, 1674, and 1703, and in Paris in 1856. It was translated into English in 1832 by J. B. Inglis, and of this translation a reprint was made at Albany, New York, in 1861. The standard Latin text—the result of a collation of 28 manuscripts and of the printed editions—was established by Ernest C. Thomas and edited by him, with English translation, in 1888. A reprint of Thomas's translation appeared in the "Past and Present" Library in 1905. Bishop Richard had a threefold object in writing the "Philobiblon": he wished to inculcate on the clergy the pursuit of learning and the cherishing of books as its receptacles; to vindicate to his contemporaries and to posterity his own action in devoting so much time, attention, and money to the acquisition of books; and to give directions for the management of the library which he proposed to establish at Durham College, Oxford. The work is important for its side-lights on the state of learning and manners and on the habits of the clergy in fourteenth-century England. He is the true type of the book-lover. He had a library in each of his residences. Conspicuous in his legacy are Greek and Hebrew grammars. He did not despise the novelties of the moderns, but he preferred the well-tested labors of the ancients, and, while he did not neglect the poets, he had but little use for law-books. He kept copyists, scribes, binders, correctors, and illuminators, and he was particularly careful to restore defaced or battered texts. His directions for the lending and care of the books intended for his college at Oxford are minute, and evince considerable practical forethought. His humility and simple faith are shown in the concluding chapter, in which he acknowledges his sins and asks the future students of his college to pray for the repose of his soul. BALE, Scriptorum Illustrium majoris Britanniae, quam nunc Angliam et Scotiam vocant, Catalogus (Basle, 1557); WARTON, History of English Poetry, I, 146; HALLAM, Introduction to the Literature of Europe in the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Serenteenth Centuries; THOMAS, The Philobiblon newly translated, published under the title of The Love of Books in the Past and Present Library (1905); SURTEES SOCIETY, edition of Scriptores Tres; WHARTON, Anglia Sacra; Cambridge Modern History, I, xvii; The Cambridge History of English Literature, II, 410; BLADES, The Enemies of Books; CLARK, The Care of Books. P.J. LENNOX Francois-Marie-Benjamin Richard de la Vergne François-Marie-Benjamin Richard de la Vergne Archbishop of Paris, born at Nantes, 1 March, 1819; died in Paris, 28 January, 1908. Educated at the Seminary of Saint-Sulpice he became in 1849 secretary to Bishop Jacquemet at Nantes, then, from 1850 to 1869, vicar-general. In 1871 he became Bishop of Belley where he began the process for the beatification of the Curé d'Ars. On 7 May, 1875, he became coadjutor of Cardinal Guibert, Archbishop of Paris, whom he succeeded 8 July, 1886, becoming cardinal with the title of Santa Maria in Via, 24 May, 1889. He devoted much energy to the completion of the Basilica of the Sacred Heart at Montmartre, which he consecrated. Politically, Cardinal Richard was attached by ties of esteem and sympathy to the Monarchist Catholics. In 1892, when Leo XIII recommended the rallying of Catholics to the Republic (see FRANCE, The Third Republic and the Church in France), the cardinal created the "Union of Christian France" (Union de la France Chrétienne), to unite all Catholics on the sole basis of the defence of religion. The Monarchists opposed this "rallying" (Ralliement) with the policy which this union represented, and at last, at the pope's desire, the union was dissolved. On many occasions Cardinal Richard spoke in defence of the religious congregations, and Leo XIII addressed to him a letter (27 December, 1900) on the religious who were menaced by the then projected Law of Associations. In the domain of hagiography he earned distinction by his "Vie de la bienheureuse Françoise d'Amboise" (1865) and "Saints de l'église de Bretagne" (1872). L'episcopat français, 1802-1905, s. v. Belley, Paris; LECANUET, L'Eglise de France sous la troisieme republique, II (Paris, 1910). GEORGES GOYAU St. Richard de Wyche St. Richard de Wyche Bishop and confessor, b. about 1197 at Droitwich, Worcestershire, from which his surname is derived; d. 3 April, 1253, at Dover. He was the second son of Richard and Alice de Wyche. His father died while he was still young and the family property fell into a state of great delapidation. His elder brother offered to resign the inheritance to him, but Richard refused the offer, although he undertook the management of the estate and soon restored it to a good condition. He went to Oxford, where he and two companions lived in such poverty that they had only one tunic and hooded gown between them, in which they attended lectures by turns. He then went to Paris and on his return proceeded Master of Arts. At Bologna he studied canon law, in which he acquired a great reputation and was elected Chancellor of the University of Oxford. His learning and sanctity were so famed that Edmund Rich, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln, both offered him the post of chancellor of their respective dioceses. Richard accepted the archbishop's offer and thenceforward became St. Edmund's intimate friend and follower. He approved the archbishop's action in opposing the king on the question of the vacant sees, accompanied him in his exile to Pontigny, was present at Soissy when he died, and made him a model in life. Richard supplied Matthew Paris with material for his biography, and, after attending the translation of his relics to Pontigny in 1249, wrote an account of the incident in a letter published by Matthew Paris (Historia major, V, VI). Retiring to the house of the Dominicans at Orleans, Richard studied theology, was ordained priest, and, after founding a chapel in honour of St. Edmund, returned to England where he became Vicar of Deal and Rector of Charring. Soon afterwards he was induced by Boniface of Savoy, the new Archbishop of Canterbury, to resume his former office of chancellor. In 1244 Ralph Neville, Bishop of Chichester, died; the election of Robert Passelewe, Archdeacon of Chichester, to the vacant see, was quashed by Boniface at a synod of his suffragans, held 3 June, 1244, and on his recommendation the chapter elected Richard, their choice being immediately confirmed by the archbishop. Henry III was indignant, as Robert Passelewe was a favourite, and he refused to surrender to Richard the temporalities of his see. The Saint took his case to Innocent IV, who consecrated him in person at Lyons, 5 March, 1245, and sent him back to England. But Henry was immovable. Thus homeless in his own diocese, Richard was dependent on the charity of his clergy, one of whom, Simon of Tarring, shared with him the little he possessed. At length, in 1246, Henry was induced by the threats of the pope to deliver up the temporalities. As bishop, Richard lived in great austerity, giving away most of his revenues as alms. He compiled a number of statutes which regulate in great detail the lives of the clergy, the celebration of Divine service, the administration of the sacraments, church privileges, and other matters. Every priest in the diocese was bound to obtain a copy of these statutes and bring it to the diocesan synod (Wilkins, "Concilia", I, 688-93); in this way the standard of life among the clergy was raised considerably. For the better maintenance of his cathedral Richard instituted a yearly collection to be made in every parish of the diocese on Easter or Whit Sunday. The mendicant orders, particularly the Dominicans, received special encouragement from him. In 1250 Richard was named as one of the collectors of the subsidy for the crusades (Bliss, "Calendar of Papal Letters", I, 263) and two years later the king appointed him to preach the crusade in London. He made strenuous efforts to rouse enthusiasm for the cause in the Dioceses of Chichester and Canterbury, and while journeying to Dover, where he was to consecrate a new church dedicated to St. Edmund, he was taken ill. Upon reaching Dover, he went to a hospital called "Maison Dieu", performed the consecration ceremony on 2 April, but died the next morning. His body was taken back to Chichester and buried in the cathedral. He was solemnly canonized by Urban IV in the Franciscan church at Viterbo, 1262, and on 20 Feb. a papal licence for the translation of his relics to a new shrine was given; but the unsettled state of the country prevented this until 16 June, 1276, when the translation was performed by Archbishop Kilwardby in the presence of Edward I. This shrine, which stood in the feretory behind the high altar, was rifled and destroyed at the Reformation. The much-restored altar tomb in the south transept now commonly assigned to St. Richard has no evidence to support its claim, and no relics are known to exist. The feast is celebrated on 3 April. The most accurate version of St. Richard's will, which has been frequently printed, is that given by Blaauw in "Sussex Archaeological Collections", I, 164-92, with a translation and valuable notes. His life was written by his confessor Ralph Bocking shortly after his canonization and another short life, compiled in the fifteenth century, was printed by Capgrave. Both these are included in the notice of St. Richard in the Bollandist "Acta Sanctorum". HARDY, Descriptive catalogue of MSS. relating to the history of Great Britain and Ireland, III (London, 1871), 136-9; Acta SS., April, I (Venice, 1768), 277-318; CAPGRAVE, Nova legenda Angliae (London, 1516), 269; PARIS, Historia major, ed. MADDEN in R. S., II, III (London, 1866); Annales monastici, ed. LUARD in R. S. (London, 1864); Flores historiarum, ed. IDEM in R. S., II (London, 1890); Rishanger's Chronicle, ed. RILEY in R. S. (London, 1865); TRIVET, ed. HOG, Annales sex regum Angliae (London, 1845); Calendar of Papal Letters, ed. BLISS, I (London, 1893); Vita di S. Ricardo vescovo di Cicestria (Milan, 1706); STEPHENS, Memorials of the See of Chichester (London, 1876), 83-98, contains the best modern life; WALLACE, St. Edmund of Canterbury (London, 1893), 196-205; GASQUET, Henry III and the Church (London, 1905), 222, 343; CHALLONER, Britannia sancta (London, 1745), 206-13; STANTON, Menology of England and Wales (London, 1887), 141-3. G. ROGER HUDLESTON Bl. Richard Fetherston Bl. Richard Fetherston Priest and martyr; died at Smithfield, 30 July, 1540. He was chaplain to Catharine of Aragon and schoolmaster to her daughter, Princess Mary, afterwards queen. He is called sacrae theologiae Doctor by Pits (De illustribus Angliae scriptoribus, 729). He was one of the theologians appointed to defend Queen Catharine's cause in the divorce proceedings before the legates Wolsey and Campeggio, and is said to have written a treatise "Contra divortium Henrici et Catharinae, Liber unus". No copy of this work is known to exist. He took part in the session of Convocation which began in April, 1529, and was one of the few members who refused to sign the Act declaring Henry's marriage with Catharine to be illegal ab initio, through the pope's inability to grant a dispensation in such a case. In 1534 he was called upon to take the Oath of Supremacy and, on refusing to do so, was committed to the Tower, 13 December, 1534. He seems to have remained in prison till 30 July, 1540, when he was hanged, drawn, and quartered at Smithfield, together with the Catholic theologians, Thomas Abel and Edward Powell, who like himself had been councillors to Queen Catharine in the divorce proceedings, and three heretics, Barnes, Garret, and Jerome, condemned for teaching Zwinglianism. All six were drawn through the streets upon three hurdles, a Catholic and a heretic on each hurdle. The Protestants were burned, and the three Catholics executed in the usual manner, their limbs being fixed over the gates of the city and their heads being placed upon poles on London Bridge. Richard was beatified by Leo XIII, 29 December, 1886. PITS, De illustribus Angliae scriptoribus (Paris, 1619), 729; SANDER, tr. LEWIS, Rise and Growth of the Anglican Schism (London, 1877), 65, 67, 150; BURNET, History of the Reformation, ed. POCOCK (Oxford, 1865), I, 260, 472, 566-67; IV, 555, 563; TANNER, Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica (London, 1748), 278; Original Letters Relative to the English Reformation (Parker Society, Cambridge, 1846), I, 209; Calendar of State Papers, Henry VIII, ed. GAIRDNER (London, 1882, 1883, 1885, VI, 311, 1199; VII, 530; VIII, 666, 1001. G. ROGER HUDLESTON Richard of Cirencester Richard of Cirencester Chronicler, d. about 1400. He was the compiler of a chronicle from 447 to 1066, entitled "Speculum Historiale de Gestis Regum Angliae". The work, which is in four books, is of little historical value, but contains several charters granted to Westminster Abbey. Nothing is known of Richard's life except that he was a monk of Westminster, who made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem in 1391, was still at Westminster in 1397, and that he lay sick in the infirmary in 1400. Two other works are attributed to him: "De Officiis", and "Super Symbolum Majus et Minus", but neither is now extant. In the eighteenth century his name was used by Charles Bertram as the pretended author of his forgery "Richardus Copenensis de situ Britanniae", which deceived Stukeley and many subsequent antiquarians and historians, including Lingard, and which was only finally exposed by Woodward in 1866-67. This spurious chronicle, however, still appears under Richard's name in Giles, "Six English Chronicles" (London, 1872). Ricardi Cicestrensis Speculum Historiale, ed. MAYOR, Rolls Series (London, 1863-69); STUKELEY An Account of Richard of Cirencester and his works (London, 1757); HARDY Descriptive Catalogue (London, 1871); HUNT in Dict. Nat. Biog, s. v.; BOLLANDISTS. Catalogus cod. hagiog. Lat. B. N. (Paris, 1893). EDWIN BURTON Richard of Cornwall Richard of Cornwall (RICHARD RUFUS, RUYS, ROSSO, ROWSE). The dates of his birth and death are unknown, but he was still living in 1259. He was an Oxford Franciscan, possibly a Master of Arts of that university, who had studied for a time in Paris (1238), and then returned to Oxford. He was chosen with Haymo of Faversham to go to Rome to oppose the minister-general Elias. In 1250 he was lecturing at Oxford on the "Sentences", till he was driven away by the riots, when he returned to Paris and continued lecturing there, gaining the title Philosophus Admirabilis; but according to Roger Bacon his teaching was very mischievous, and produced evil results for the next forty years. He was again at Oxford in 1255 as regent-master of the friars. Several works, all still in MS., are attributed to him. These are: "Commentaries on the Master of the Sentences", a work formerly at Assisi; "Commentary on Bonaventure's third book of Sentences" (Assisi); and a similar commentary on the fourth book (Assisi); Pits ("De illustribus Angliae scriptoribus") denies his identity with Richard Rufus on the ground that Rufus was born at Cirencester in Gloucestershire, and not in Cornwall. Monumenta Franciscana, ed. BREWER AND HOWLETT in R. S. (London, 1858-82); WADDING, Annales Minorum, IV (Lyons and Rome, 1650); 2nd ed. (Rome, 1731-45); and supplement by SBARALEA (1806); PARKINSON, Collectanea Anglo-Minoritica (London, 1726); LITTLE, The Grey Friars in Oxford (Oxford, 1892); DENIFLE, Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis (Paris 1889); see also tr. of THOMAS OF ECCLESTON by FR. CUTHBERT, The Friars and how they came to England (London, 1903), and The Chronicle of Thomas of Eccleston (London, 1909). EDWIN BURTON Richard of Middletown Richard of Middletown (A MEDIA VILLA). Flourished at the end of the thirteenth century, but the dates of his birth and death and most incidents of his life are unknown. Middleton Stoney in Oxfordshire and Middleton Cheyney in Northamptonshire have both been suggested as his native place, and he has also been claimed as a Scotsman. He probably studied first at Oxford, but in 1283 he was at the University of Paris and graduated Bachelor of Divinity in that year. He entered the Franciscan order. In 1278 he had been appointed by the general of his order to examine the doctrines of Peter Olivus, and the same work was again engaging his attention in 1283. In 1286 he was sent with two other Franciscans to Naples to undertake the education of two of the sons of Charles II, Ludwig, afterwards a Franciscan, and Robert. After the defeat of Charles by Peter of Arragon the two princes were carried as hostages to Barcelona and Richard accompanied them, sharing their captivity till their release in 1295. The rest of his life lies in obscurity. A new point of interest at the present day lies in the fact that, medieval scholastic though he was, he knew and studied the phenomena of hypnotism, and left the results of his investigations in his "Quodlibeta" (Paris, 1519, fol. 90 8) where he treats of what would now be termed auto-suggestion and adduces some instances of tele pathy. His works include "Super sententias Petri Lombardi", written between 1281 and 1285, and first printed at Venice, 1489; "Quaestiones Quodlibetales" in MS. at Oxford and elsewhere; "Quodlibeta tria" printed with the Sentences at Venice, 1509; "De gradibus formarum" in MS. at Munich; and "Quae stiones disputatae" in MS. at Assisi. Other works which have been attributed. to him are: "Super epistolas Pauli"; "Super evangelia"; "Super distinctiones decreti"; "De ordine judiciorum"; "De clavium sacerdotalium potestate"; "Contra Patrem Joannem Olivum"; a poem, "De conceptione immaculata Virginis Mariae"; three MS. sermons now in the Bibliotheque Nationale (MS. 14947, nos. 47, 69, 98), and a sermon on the Ascension, the MS. of which is at Erlangen. Works erroneously ascribed to him are a treatise on the rule of St. Francis; the "Quadragesimale" which was written by Francis of Asti; the completion of the "Summa" of Alexander of Hales, and an "Expositio super Ave Maria", probably by Richard of Saxony. His death is assigned by some to 1307 or 1308, by Pits to 1300, by Parkinson to some earlier date on the ground that he was one of the "Four Masters", the expositors of the Rule of St. Francis. WADDING, Annales Minorum (2nd ed., Rome, 1731-45), and supplement by SBARALEA (1806); PARKINSON, Collectanea Anglo Minoritica (London, 1726); DE MARTIGNE, La Scolastique et les traditions Franciscaines: Richard de Middletown in Revue. scien., eccles., II (1885); PORTALIE, L'hypnotisme au moyen age: Aricenne Avicenne et Richard Middletown in etudes relig. hist. Litt., LV (1892); CHEVALIER, Repertoire des sources historiques du Moyen Age (Paris, 1905); KINGSFORD in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v. Middleton. EDWIN BURTON Richard of St. Victor Richard of St. Victor Theologian, native of Scotland, but the date and place of his birth are unknown; d. 1173 and was commemorated on 10 March in the necrology of the abbey. He was professed at the monastery of St. Victor under the first Abbot Gilduin (d. 1155) and was a disciple of the great mystic Hugo whose principles and methods he adopted and elaborated. His career was strictly monastic, and his relations with the outer world were few and slight. He was sub-prior of the monastery in 1159, and subsequently became prior. During his tenure of the latter office, serious trouble arose in the community of St. Victor from the misconduct of the English Abbot Ervisius, whose irregular life brought upon him a personal admonition from Alexander III, and was subsequently referred by the pope to a commission of inquiry under the royal authority; after some delay and resistance on the part of the abbot his resignation was obtained and he retired from the monastery. A letter of exhortation was addressed by the pope to "Richard, the prior" and the community in 1170. Richard does not appear to have taken any active part in these proceedings, but the disturbed condition of his surroundings may well have accentuated his desire for the interior solace of mystical contemplation. Ervisius's resignation took place in 1172. In 1165, St. Victor had been visited by St. Thomas of Canterbury, after his flight from Northampton; and Richard was doubtless one of the auditors of the discourse delivered by the archbishop on that occasion. A letter to Alexander III, dealing with the affairs of the archbishop, and signed by Richard is extant and published by Migne. Like his master, Hugo, Richard may probably have had some acquaintance and intercourse with St. Bernard, who is thought to have been the Bernard to whom the treatise "De tribus appropriatis personis in Trinitate" is addressed. His reputation as a theologian extended far beyond the precincts of his monastery, and copies of his writings were eagerly sought by other religious houses. Exclusively a theologian, unlike Hugo, he appears to have had no interest in philosophy, and took no part in the acute philosophieal controversies of his time; but, like all the School of St. Victor, he was willing to avail himself of the didactic and constructive methods in theology which had been introduced by Abelard. Nevertheless, he regarded merely secular learning with much suspicion, holding it to be worthless as an end in itself, and only an occasion of worldly pride and self-seeking when divorced from the knowledge of Divine things. Such learning he calls, in the antithetical style which characterizes all his writing, "Sapientia insipida et doctrina indocta"; and the professor of such learning is "Captator famae, neglector conscientiae". Such worldly-minded persons should stimulate the student of sacred things to greater efforts in his own higher sphere—"When we consider how much the philosophers of this world have laboured, we should be ashamed to be inferior to them"; "We should seek always to comprehend by reason what we hold by faith." His works fall into the three classes of dogmatic, mystical, and exegetical. In the first, the most important is the treatise in six books on the Trinity, with the supplement on the attributes of the Three Persons, and the treatise on the Incarnate Word. But greater interest now belongs to his mystical theology, which is mainly contained in the two books on mystical contemplation, entitled respectively "Benjamin Minor" and "Benjamin Major", and the allegorical treatise on the Tabernacle. He carries on the mystical doctrine of Hugo, in a somewhat more detailed scheme, in which the successive stages of contemplation are described. These are six im number, divided equally among the three powers of the soul—the imagination, the reason, and the intelligence, and ascending from the contemplation of the visible things of creation to the rapture in which the soul is carried "beyond itself" into the Divine Presence, by the three final stages of "Dilatio, sublevatio, alienatio". This schematic arrangement of contemplative soul-states is substantially adopted by Gerson in his more systematic treatise on mystical theology, who, however, makes the important reservation that the distinction between reason and intelligence is to be understood as functional and not real. Much use is made in the mystical treatises of the allegorical interpretation of Scripture for which the Victorine school had a special affection. Thus the titles "Benjamin Major" and "Minor" refer to Ps. lxvii, "Benjamin in mentis excessu". Rachel represents the reason, Lia represents charity; the tabernacle is the type of the state of perfection, in which the soul is the dwelling-place of God. In like manner, the mystical or devotional point of view predominates in the exegetical treatises; though the critical and doctrinal exposition of the text also receives attention. The four books entitled "Tractatus exceptionum", and attributed to Richard, deal with matters of secular learning. Eight titles of works attributed to him by Trithemius (De Script. Eccl.) refer probably to MS. fragments of his known works. A "Liber Penitentialis" is mentioned by Montfauçon as attributed to a "Ricardus Secundus a Sancto Victore", and may probably be identical with the treatise "De potestate solvendi et ligandi" above mentioned. Nothing is otherwise known of a second Richard of St. Victor. Fifteen other MSS. are said to exist of works attributed to Richard which have appeared in none of the published editions, and are probably spurious. Eight editions of his works have been published: Venice, 1506 (incomplete) and 1592; Paris, 1518 and 1550; Lyons, 1534; Cologne, 1621; Rouen, 1650, by the Canons of St. Victor; and by Migne. HUGONIN, Notice sur R. de St. Victor in P.L., CXCVI; ENGELHARDT, R. von St. Victor u. J. Ruysbroek (Erlangen, 1838); VAUGHAN, Hours uith the Mystics V (London, 1893); INGE, Christian Mysticism (London, 1898); DE WULF, Histoire de la philosophie medievale (Louvain, 1905); BUONAMICI, R. di San Vittore saggi di studio sulla filosofia mistica del secolo XII (Alatri, 1898); VON HUGEL, The Mystical Element in Religion (London, 1909); UNDERHILL, Mysticism (London, 1911). A.B. SHARPE Ven. William Richardson Ven. William Richardson ( Alias Anderson.) Last martyr under Queen Elizabeth; b. according to Challoner at Vales in Yorkshire (i.e. presumably Wales, near Sheffield), but, according to the Valladolid diary, a Lancashire man; executed at Tyburn, 17 Feb., 1603. He arrived at Reims 16 July, 1592 and on 21 Aug. following was sent to Valladolid, where he arrived 23 Dec. Thence, 1 Oct., 1594, he was sent to Seville where he was ordained. According to one account he was arrested at Clement's Inn on 12 Feb., but another says he had been kept a close prisoner in Newgate for a week before he was condemned at the Old Bailey on the 15 Feb., under stat. 27 Eliz., c. 2, for being a priest and coming into the realm. He was betrayed by one of his trusted friends to the Lord Chief Justice, who expedited his trial and execution with unseemly haste, and seems to have acted more as a public prosecutor than as a judge. At his execution he showed great courage and constancy, dying most cheerfully, to the edification of all beholders. One of his last utterances was a prayer for the queen. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Blessed Richard Thirkeld Bl. Richard Thirkeld Martyr; b. at Coniscliffe, Durham, England; d. at York, 29 May, 1583. From Queen's College, Oxford, where he was in 1564-5, he went to Reims, where he was ordained priest, 18 April, 1579, and left 23 May for the mission, where he ministered in or about York, and acted as confessor to Ven. Margaret Clitheroe. On the eve of the Annunciation, 1583, he was arrested while visiting one of the Catholic prisoners in the Ousebridge Kidcote, York, and at once confessed his priesthood, both to the pursuivants, who arrested him, and to the mayor before whom he was brought, and for the night was lodged in the house of the high sheriff. The next day his trial took place, at which he managed to appear in cassock and biretta. The charge was one of having reconciled the queen's subjects to the Church of Rome. He was found guilty on 27 May and condemned 28 May. He spent the night in instructing his fellow-prisoners, and the morning of his condemnation in upholding the faith and constancy of those who were brought to the bar. No details of his execution are extant: six of his letters still remain, and are summarized by Dom Bede Camm. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Blessed Richard Whiting Blessed Richard Whiting Last Abbot of Glastonbury and martyr, parentage and date of birth unknown, executed 15 Nov., 1539; was probably educated in the claustral school at Glastonbury, whence he proceeded to Cambridge, graduating as M.A. in 1483 and D.D. in 1505. If, as is probable, he was already a monk when he went to Cambridge he must have received the habit from John Selwood, Abbot of Glastonbury from 1456 to 1493. He was ordained deacon in 1500 and priest in 1501, and held for some years the office of chamberlain of his monastery. In February, 1525, Richard Bere, Abbot of Glastonbury, died, and the community, after deciding to elect his successor per formam compromissi, which places the selection in the hands of some one person of note, agreed to request Cardinal Wolsey to make the choice of an abbot for them. After obtaining the king's permission to act and giving a fortnight's inquiry to the circumstances of the case Wolsey on 3 March, 1525, nominated Richard Whiting to the vacant post. The first ten years of Whiting's rule were prosperous and peaceful, and he appears in the State papers as a careful overseer of his abbey alike in spirituals and temporals. Then, in August, 1535, came the first "visitation" of Glastonbury by Dr. Layton, who, however, found all in good order. In spite of this, however, the abbot's jurisdiction over the town of Glastonbury was suspended and minute "injunctions" were given to him about the management of the abbey property; but then and more than once during the next few years he was assured that there was no intention of suppressing the abbey. By January, 1539, Glastonbury was the only monastery left in Somerset, and on 19 September in that year the royal commissioners, Lavton, Pollard and Moyle, arrived there without warning. Whiting happened to be at his manor of Sharpham. Thither the commissioners followed and examined him according to certain articles received from Cromwell, which apparently dealt with the question of the succession to the throne. The abbot, was then taken back to Glastonbury and thence sent up to London to the Tower that Cromwell might examine him for himself, but the precise charge on which he was arrested, and subsequently executed, remains uncertain though his case is usually referred to as one of treason. On 2 October, the commissioners wrote to Cromwell that they had now come to the knowledge of "divers and sundry treasons committed by the Abbot of Glastonbury", and enclosed a "book" of evidences thereof with the accusers' names, which however is no longer forthcoming. In Cromwell's MS., "Remembrances", for the same month, are the entries: "Item, Certayn persons to be sent to the Towre for the further examenacyon of the Abbot, of Glaston . . . . Item. The Abbot, of Glaston to (be) tryed at Glaston and also executvd there with his complvcys. . . Item. Councillors to give evidence against the Abbot of Glaston, Rich. Pollard, Lewis Forstew (Forstell), Thos. Moyle." Marillac, the French Ambassador, on 25 October wrote: "The Abbot of Glastonbury. . . has lately, been put in the Tower, because, in taking the Abbey treasures, valued at 200,000 crowns, they found a written book of arguments in behalf of queen Katherine." If the charge was high treason, which appears most probable, then, as a member of the House of Peers, Whiting should have been attainted by an Act of Parliament passed for the purpose, but his execution was an accomplished fact, before Parliament even met. In fact it seems clear that his doom was deliberately wrapped in obscurity by Cromwell and Henry, for Marillac, writing to Francis I on 30 November, after mentioning the execution of the Abbots of Reading and Glastonbury, adds: "could learn no particulars of what they were charged with, except that it was the relics of the late lord marquis"; which makes things more perplexing than ever. Whatever the charge, however, Whiting was sent back to Somerset in the care of Pollard and reached Wells on 14 November. Here some sort of trial apparently took place, and next day, Saturday, 15 November, he was taken to Glastonbury with two of his monks, Dom John Thorne and Dom Roger James, where all three were fastened upon hurdles and dragged by horses to the top of Toe Hill which overlooks the town. Here they were hanged, drawn and quartered, Abbot Whiting's head being fastened over the gate of the now deserted abbey and his limbs exposed at Wells, Bath, Ilchester and Bridgewater. Richard Whiting was beatified by Pope Leo XIII in his decree of 13 May, 1895. His watch and seal are still preserved in the museum at Glastonbury. G. ROGER HUDDLESTON Cardinal Richelieu Armand-Jean du Plessis, Duke de Richelieu Cardinal; French statesman, b. in Paris, 5 September, 1585; d. there 4 December 1642. At first he intended to follow a military career, but when, in 1605, his brother Alfred resigned the Bishopric of Luçon and retired to the Grande Chartreuse, Richelieu obtained the see from Henry IV and withdrew to the country to take up his theological studies under the direction of Bishop Cospéan of Aire. He was consecrated bishop on 17 April, 1607; he was not yet twenty-two years old, although the Brief of Paul V dated 19 December, 1606, announcing his appointment contains the statement: "in vigesimo tertio aetatis anno tantum constitutus". Mgr. Lacroix, the historian of Richelieu's youth, believes that in a journey made to Rome at the end of 1606, Richelieu deceived the pope as to his age, but the incident is still obscure. In his diocese, Richelieu showed great zeal for the conversion of Protestants and appointed the Oratorians and the Capuchins to give missions in all the parishes. Richelieu represented the clergy of Poitou in the States General of 1614, where his political career began. There he was the mouth-piece of the Church, and in a celebrated discourse demanded that bishops and prelates be summoned to the royal councils, that the distribution of ecclesiastical benefices to the laity be forbidden, that the Church be exempt from taxation, that Protestants who usurped churches or had their coreligionists interred in them be punished, and that the Decrees of the Council of Trent be promulgated throughout France. He ended by assuring the young king Louis XIII that the desire of the clergy was to have the royal power so assured that it might be "comme un ferme rocher qui brise tout ce qui le heurte" (as a firm rock which crushes all that opposes it). Richelieu was named secretary of state on 30 November, 1616, but after the assassination of Concini, favourite of Maria de' Medici, he was forced to leave the ministry and follow the queen mother to Blois. To escape the political intrigues which pursued him he retired in June, 1617, to the priory of Coussay and, during this time of leisure caused by his disgrace, published in October, 1617 (date confirmed by Mgr. Lacroix), his "Les principaux points de la foi de l'église catholique, défendus contre l'éecrit adressé au Roi par les quartre ministres de Charenton"; it was upon reading this book half a century later that Jacques de Coras, a Protestant pastor of Tonneins, was converted to Catholicism. Richelieu continued to be represented to the king as an enemy to his power; the Capuchin, Leclerc du Tremblay, never succeeded in completely clearing him in Louis XIII's opinion. To disarm suspicion Richelieu asked the king to name a place of exile, and at his order went in 1618 to Avignon, where he passed nearly a year and where he composed a catechism which became famous under the name of "Instruction du chrétien". This book, destined to be read in every parish each Sunday at the sermon, was a real blessing at a time when ignorance of religion was the principal evil. When Maria de' Medici escaped from Blois in 1619, Richelieu was chosen by the minister Luynes to negotiate for peace between Louis XIII and his mother. By Brief of 3 November, 1622, he was created cardinal by Gregory XV. On 19 April, 1624, he re-entered the Council of Ministers, and on 12 August, 1624, was made its president. Richelieu's policy can be reduced to two principal ideas: the domestic unification of France and opposition to the House of Austria. At home he had to contend with constant conspiracies in which Maria de' Medici, Queen Anne of Austria, Gaston d'Orléans (the king's brother), and the highest nobles of the court were involved. The executions of Marillac (1632), Montmorency (1632), Cinq-Mars and of de Thou (1642) intimidated the enemies of the cardinal. He had also to contend with the Protestants who were forming a state within the state (see HUGUENOTS). The capitulation of La Rochelle and the peace of Alais (28 June, 1629) annihilated Protestantism as a political party. Richelieu's foreign policy (for which see LECLERC DU TREMBLAY) was characterized by his fearlessness in making alliances with the foreign Protestants. At various times the Protestants of the Grisons, Sweden, the Protestant Princes of Germany, and Bernard of Saxe-Weimar were his allies. The favourable treaties signed by Mazarin were the result of Richelieu's policy of Protestant alliances, a policy which was severely censured by a number of Catholics. At the end of 1625, when Richelieu was preparing to give back Valteline to the Protestant Grisons, the partisans of Spain called him "Cardinal of the Huguenots", and two pamphlets, attributed to the Jesuits Eudemon Joannes and Jean Keller, appeared against him; these he had burned. Hostilities, however, increased until finally the king's confessor opposed the foreign policy of the cardinal. This was a very important episode, and on it the recent researches of Father de Rochemonteix in the archives of the Society of Jesus have cast new light. Father Caussin, author of "La Cour Sainte", the Jesuit whom Richelieu, on 25 March, 1636, had made the king's confessor, tried to use against the cardinal the influence of Mlle. de La Fayette, a lady for whom the king had entertained a certain regard and who had become a nun. On 8 December, 1637, in a solemn interview Caussin recalled to the king his duties towards his wife, Anne of Austria, to whom he was too indifferent; asked him to allow his mother, Maria de' Medici, to return to France; and pointed out the dangers to Catholicism which might arise through Richelieu's alliance with the Turks and the Protestant princes of Germany. After this interview Caussin gave Communion to the king and addressed him a very beautiful sermon, entreating him to obey his directions. Richelieu was anxious that the king's confessor should occupy himself solely with "giving absolutions", consequently, on 10 December, 1637, Caussin was dismissed and exiled to Rennes, and his successor, Father Jacques Sirmond, celebrated for his historical knowledge, was forced to promise that, if he saw "anything censurable in the conduct of the State", he would report it to the cardinal and not attempt to influence the king's conscience. However, Father Caussin's fears concerning Richelieu's foreign policy were not shared by all of his confrères. Father Lallemand, for instance, affirmed that it was rash to blame the king's political alliance with the Protestant princes -- an alliance which had been made only after an unsuccessful attempt to form one with Bavaria and the Catholic princes of Germany. That Richelieu was possessed of religious sentiments cannot be contested. It was he who in February, 1638, prompted the declaration by which Louis XIII consecrated the Kingdom of France to the Virgin Mary; in the ministry he surrounded himself with priests and religious; as general he employed Cardinal de la Valette; as admiral, Sourdis, Archbishop of Bordeaux; as diplomat, Bérulle; as chief auxiliary he had Leclerc du Tremblay. He himself designated Mazarin his successor. He had a high idea of the sacerdotal dignity, was continually protesting against he encroachments of the parlements on the jurisdiction of the Church, and advised the king to choose as bishops only those who should "have passed after their studies a considerable time in the seminaries, the places established for the study of the ecclesiastical functions". He wished to compel the bishops to reside in their dioceses, to establish seminaries there, and to visit their parishes. He aided the efforts of St. Vincent de Paul to induce the bishops to institute the "exercises des ordinants", retreats, during which the young clerics were to prepare themselves for the priesthood. Richelieu foresaw the perils to which nascent Jansenism would expose the Church. Saint-Cyran's doctrines on the constitution of the Church, his views on the organization of the "great Christian Republic", his liaison with Jansenius (who in 1635 had composed a violent pamphlet against France under the names of Mars gallicus), and the manner in which he opposed the annulment of the marriage of Gaston d'Orléans, drew upon him the cardinal's suspicion. In having him arrested 14 May, 1638, Richelieu declared that "had Luther and Calvin been confined before they had begun to dogmatize, the states would have been spared many troubles". Two months later Richelieu forced the solitaries of Port Royal-des- Champs to disperse; some were sent to Paris, others to Ferte-Milon. Saint-Cyran remained in the dungeon of Vincennes until the cardinal's death. With the co-operation of the Benedictine Gregoire Tarisse, Richelieu devoted himself seriously to the reform of the Benedictines. Named coadjutor to the Abbot of Cluny in 1627, and Abbot of Cluny in 1629, he called to this monastery the Reformed Benedictines of Saint-Vannes. He proposed forming the congregations of Saint-Vannes and Saint-Maur into one body, of which he was to have been superior. Only half of this project was accomplished, however, when in 1636 he succeeded in uniting the Order of Cluny with the Congregation of Saint-Maur. From 1622 Richelieu was proviseur of the Sorbonne, and was in virtue of this office head of the Association of Doctors of the Sorbonne. He had the Sorbonne entirely rebuilt between 1626 and 1629, and between 1635 and 1642 built the church of the Sorbonne, in which he is now buried. On the question of the relations between the temporal and the spiritual powers, Richelieu really professed the doctrine called Duvalism after the theologian Duval, who admitted at the same time the supreme power of the pope and the supreme power of the king and the divine right of both. In the dissensions between Rome and the Gallicans he most frequently acted as mediator. When in 1626 a book by the Jesuit Sanctarel appeared in Paris, affirming the right of the popes to depose kings for wrong-doing, heresy, or incapacity, it was burned in the Place de Greve; Father Coton and the three superiors of the Jesuits houses summoned before the Parlement were forced to repudiate the work. The enemies ofthe Jesuits wished immediately to create a new disturbance on the occasion of the publication of the "Somme theologique des vérités apostoliques capitales de la religion chrétienne", by Father Garasse, but Richelieu opposed the continued agitation. It was, however, renewed at the end of 1626, owing to a thesis of the Dominican Têtefort, which maintained that the Decretals formed part of the Scripture. Richelieu again strove to allay feeling, and in a discourse (while still affirming that the king held his kingdom from God alone) declared that "the king cannot make an article of faith unless this article has been so declared by the Church in her oecumenical councils". Subsequently, Richelieu gave satisfaction to the pope when on 7 December,1 629, he obtained a retraction from the Gallican Edmond Richer, syndic of the theological faculty, who submitted his book "La puissance ecclesiastique et politique" to the judgment of the pope. Nine years alter, however, Richelieu's struggles against the resistance offered by the French clergy to taxes led him to assume an attitude more deliberately Gallican. Contrary to the theories which he had maintained in his discourse of 1614 he considered, now that he was a minister, that the needs of the State constituted a case of force majeure, which should oblige the clergy to submit to all the fiscal exigencies of the civil power. As early as 1625 the assembly of the clergy, tired of the incessant demands of the Government for money, had decreed that no deputy could vote supplies without having first received full powers on the subject; Richelieu, contesting this principle, declared that the needs of the State were actual, while those of the Church were chimerical and arbitrary. In 1638 the struggle between the State and the clergy on the subject of taxes became critical, and Richelieu, to uphold his claims, enlisted the aid of the brothers Pierre and Jacques Dupuy, who about the middle of 1638 published "Les libertés de l'église gallicane". This book established the independence of the Gallican Church in opposition to Rome only to reduce it into servile submission to the temporal power. The clergy and the nuncio complained; eighteen bishops assembled at the house of Cardinal de la Rouchefoucald, and denounced to their colleagues this "work of the devil". Richelieu then exaggerated his fiscal exigencies in regard to the clergy; an edict of 16 April, 1639, stipulated that ecclesiastics and communities were incapable of possessing landed property in France, that the king could compel them to surrender their possessions and unite them to his domains, but that he would allow them to retain what they had in consideration of certain indemnities which should be calculated in going back to the year 1520. In Oct., 1639, after the murder of an equerry of Marshal d'Estrees, the French Ambassador, Estrees declared the rights of the people violated. Richelieu refused to receive the nuncio (October, 1639); a decree of the royal council, 22 December, restrained the powers of the pontifical Briefs, and even the canonist Marca proposed to break the Concordat and to hold a national council at which Richelieu was to have been made patriarch. Precisely at this date Richelieu had a whole series of grievances against Rome: Urban VIII had refused successively to name him Legate of the Holy See in France, Legate of Avignon, and coadjutor to the Bishop of Trier; he had refused the purple to Father Joseph, and had been opposed the annulment of the marriage of Gaston d'Orléans. But Richelieu, however furious he was, did not wish to carry things to extremes. After a certain number of polemics on the subject of the taxes to be levied on the clergy, the ecclesiastical assembly of Mantes in 1641 accorded to the Government (which was satisfied therewith) five and a half millions, and Richelieu, to restore quiet, accepted the dedication of Marca's book "La concorde du sacerdoce et de l'empire", in which certain exceptions were taken to Dupuy's book. At the same time the sending of Mazarin as envoy to France by Urban VIII, and the presentation to him of the cardinal's hat put an end to the differences between Richelieu and the Holy See. Upon the whole, Richelieu's policy was to preserve a just mean between the parliamentary Gallicans and the Ultramontanes. "In such matters", he wrote in his political testament, "one must believe neither the people of the palace, who ordinarily measure the power of the king by the shape of his crown, which, being round, has no end, nor those who, in the excesses of an indiscreet zeal, proclaim themselves openly as partisans of Rome". One may believe that Pierre de Marca's book was inspired by him and reproduces his ideas. According to this book the liberties of the Gallican Church have two foundations: (1) the recognition of the primacy and the sovereign authority ofthe Church of Rome, a primacy consisting in the right to make general laws, to judge without appeal, and to be judged neither by bishops nor by councils; (2) the sovereign right of the kings which knows no superior in temporal affairs. It is to be noted that Marca does not give the superiority of a council over the pope as a foundation of the Gallican liberties. (For Richelieu's work in Canada see article CANADA.) In 1636 Richelieu founded the Academie Française. He had great literary pretensions, and had several mediocre plays of his own composition produced in a theatre belonging to him. With a stubbornness inexplicable to-day Voltaire foolishly denied that Richelieu's "Testament politique" was authentic; the researches of M. Hanotaux have proved its authenticity, and given the proper value to admirable chapters such as the chapter entitled, "Le conseil du Prince", into which Richelieu, says M. Hanotaux, "has put all his soul and his genius". [For Richelieu's "Mémoires" see HARLAY, FAMILY OF: (2) Achille de Harlay.] Besides the works indicated in the articles LECLERC DU TREMBLAY and MARIA DE' MEDICI the following may be consulted: Maximes d'etat et fragments politiques du cardinal de Richelieu, ed. HANTAUX (Paris, 1880); Lettres, instructions diplomatiques et papiers d'etat du cardinal de Richelieu, ed. AVERNEL (8 vols., Paris, 1853-77); Memoires du cardinal de Richelieu, ed. HORRIC DE BEAUCAIRE, I (Paris, 1908); LAIR, LAVOLLEE, BRUEL, GABRIEL DE MUN, and LECESTRE, Rapports et notices sur l'edition des Memoires du cardinal de Richelieu preparee pour la societe de l'histoire de France (3 fasc., Paris, 1905-07); HANOTAUX, Hist. du cardinal de Richelieu (2 tomes in 3 vols., Paris, 1893-1903), extends to 1624; CAILLET, L'Administration en France sous le ministere du cardinal de Richelieu (2 vols., Paris, 1863); D'AVENEL, Richelieu et la monarchie absolue (4 vols., Paris, 1880-7); IDEM, La noblesse francaise sous Richelieu (Paris, 1901); IDEM, Pretres, soldats et juges sous Richelieu (Paris, 1907); LACROIX, Richelieu a Lucon, sa jeunese, son episcopat (Paris, 1890); GELEY, Fancan et la politique de Richelieu de 1617 a 1627 (Paris, 1884); DE ROCHEMONTEIX, Nicholaus Caussin, confesseur de Louis XIII, et le cardinal de Richelieu (Paris, 1911); PERRAUD, Le cardinal de Richelieu eveque, theologien et protecteur des lettres (Autun, 1882); VALENTIN, Cardinalis Richelieu scriptor ecclesiasticus (Toulouse, 1900); LODGE, Richelieu (London, 1896); PERKINS, Richelieu and the Growth of French Power (New York, 1900). GEORGES GOYAU Diocese of Richmond Diocese of Richmond (RICHMONDENSIS.) Suffragan of Baltimore, established 11 July, 1820, comprises the State of Virginia, except the Counties of Accomac and Northampton (Diocese of Wilmington); and Bland, Buchanan, Carroll, Craig (partly), Dickinson, Floyd, Giles, Grayson, Lee, Montgomery, Pulaski, Russell, Scott, Smyth, Tazewell, Washington, Wise, and Wythe (Diocese of Wheeling); and in the State of West Virginia, the Counties of Berkeley, Grant, Hampshire, Hardy, Jefferson, Mineral, Morgan, and Pendleton. It embraces 31,518 square miles in Virginia and 3290 square miles in West Virginia. Originally it included also the territory of the present Diocese of Wheeling, created 23 July, 1850. Colonial Period In the summer of 1526 a Spanish Catholic settlement was made in Virginia on the very spot (according to Ecija, the pilot-in-chief of Florida) where, in 1607, eighty-one years later, the English founded the settlement of Jamestown. Lucas Vasques de Ayllón, one of the judges of the island of San Domingo, received from the King of Spain, 12 June, 1523,a patent empowering him to explore the coast for 800 leagues, establish a settlement within three years and Christianize the natives. In June, 1526, Ayllón sailed from Puerto de la Plata, San Domingo, with three vessels, 600 persons of both sexes, horses and supplies. The Dominicans Antonio de Montesinos and Antonio de Cervantes, with Brother Peter de Estrada, accompanied the expedition. Entering the Capes at the Chesapeake, and ascending a river (the James), he landed at Guandape, which he named St. Michael. Buildings were constructed and the Holy Sacrifice offered in a chapel, the second place of Catholic worship on American soil. Ayllón died of fever, 18 Oct., 1526. The rebellion of the settlers and hostility of the Indians caused Francisco Gomez, the next in command, to abandon the settlement in the spring of 1527, when he set sail for San Domingo in two vessels, one of which foundered. Of the party only 150 reached their destination. A second expedition sent by Menendez, the Governor of Florida and nominal Governor of Virginia, settled on the Rappahannock River at a point called Axacan, 10 Sept., 1570. It consisted of Fathers Segura, Vice-Provincial of the Jesuits, and Luis de Quiros, six Jesuit brothers, and a few friendly Indians. A log building served as chapel and home. Through the treachery of Don Luis de Velasco, an Indian pilot of Spanish name, Father Quiros and Brothers Solis and Mendez were slain by the Indians, 14 Feb., 1571. Four days later were martyred Father Segura, Brothers Linares, Redondo, Gabriel, Gomez, and Sancho Zevalles. Menendez, several months later, sailed for Axacan, where he had eight of the murderers hanged; they being converted before death by Father John Rogel, a Jesuit missionary. Attempts to found Catholic settlements in Virginia were made by Lord Baltimore in 1629, and Captain George Brent in 1687. In the spring of 1634 Father John Altham, a Jesuit companion of Father Andrew White, the Maryland missionary, laboured amongst some of the Virginia tribes on the south side of the Potomac. Stringent laws were soon enacted in Virginia against Catholics. In 1687 Fathers Edmonds and Raymond were arrested at Norfolk for exercising their priestly functions. During the last quarter of the eighteenth century the few Catholic settlers at Aquia Creek, near the Potomac, were attended by Father John Carroll and other Jesuit missionaries from Maryland. American Period Rev. Jean Dubois, afterwards third Bishop of New York, accompanied by a few French priests and with letters of introduction from Lafayette to several prominent Virginia families, came to Norfolk in August, 1791, where he laboured a few months, and probably left the priests who came with him. Proceeding to Richmond towards the end of the year, he offered in the House of Delegates, by invitation of the General Assembly, the first Mass ever said in the Capital City. His successors at Richmond, with interruptions, were the Revs. T.C. Mongrand, Xavier Michel, John McElroy, John Baxter, John Mahoney, James Walsh, Thomas Hore, and Fathers Horner and Schreiber. Tradition tells us that at an early date, probably at the time of the Declaration of Independence, Alexandria had a log chapel with an unknown resident priest. Rev. John Thayer of Boston was stationed there in 1794. Rev. Francis Neale, who in 1796 constructed at Alexandria a brick church, erected fourteen years later a more suitable church where Fathers Kohlmann, Enoch, and Benedict Joseph Fenwick, afterwards second Bishop of Boston, frequently officiated. About 1796 Rev. James Bushe began the erection of a church at Norfolk. His successors were the Very Rev. Leonard Neale, afterwards Archbishop of Baltimore (see Baltimore, Archdiocese of), Revs. Michael Lacy, Christopher Delaney, Joseph Stokes, Samuel Cooper, J. VanHorsigh, and A.L. Hitzelberger. Bishops of Richmond (1) Right Rev. Patrick Kelly, D.D., consecrated first Bishop of Richmond, 24 Aug., 1820, came to reside at Norfolk, where the Catholics were much more numerous than at Richmond, 19 Jan., 1821. The erection of Virginia into a diocese had been premature and was accordingly opposed by the Archbishop of Baltimore. Because of factions and various other difficulties, Bishop Kelly soon petitioned Rome to be relieved of his charge. He left Virginia in July, 1822, having been transferred to the See of Waterford and Lismore, where he died, 8 Oct., 1829. Archbishop Marechal of Baltimore was appointed administrator of the diocese. Rev. Timothy O'Brien, who came as pastor to Richmond in 1832, did more for Catholicism during his eighteen years' labour than any other missionary, excepting the Bishops of the See. In 1834 he built St. Peter's Church, afterwards the cathedral, and founded St. Joseph's Female Academy and Orphan Asylum, bringing as teachers three Sisters of Charity. (2) The Right Rev. Richard Vincent Whelan, D.D., consecrated 21 March, 1841, established the same year, on the outskirts of Richmond, St. Vincent's Seminary and College, discontinued in 1846. Leaving Rev. Timothy O'Brien at St. Peter's, Richmond, the Bishop took up his residence at the seminary, and acted as president. In 1842 Bishop Whelan dedicated St. Joseph's Church, Petersburg, and St. Patrick's Church, Norfolk, and the following year that of St.Francis at Lynchburg. In 1846 he built a church at Wheeling and,two years later, founded at Norfolk St. Vincent's Female Orphan Asylum. Wheeling was made a separate see, 23 July, 1850, and to it was transferred Bishop Whelan. (3) Right Rev. John McGill, D.D., consecrated 10 Nov., 1850, was present in Rome in 1854 when the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception was proclaimed. By pen and voice he opposed Knownothingism. In 1855 Bishop McGill convened the First Diocesan Synod. During the yellow fever plague of the same year, Rev. Matthew O'Keefe of Norfolk and Rev. Francis Devlin of Portsmouth won renown; the latter dying a martyr to priestly duty. In 1856 St. Vincent's Hospital, Norfolk, was founded. Alexandria, formerly in the Baltimore archdiocese as part of the District of Columbia, but ceded back to Virginia, was annexed to the Richmond diocese, 15 Aug., 1858. In 1860 the bishop transferred St. Mary's German Church, Richmond, to the Benedictines. During the Civil War Bishop McGill wrote two learned works, "The True Church Indicated to the Inquirer", and "Our Faith, the Victory", republished as "The Creed of Catholics". The bishop established at Richmond the Sisters of the Visitation, and at Alexandria the Sisters of the Holy Cross. He also took part in the Vatican Council. Bishop McGill died at Richmond, 14 January, 1872. (4) Right Rev. James Gibbons, D.D. (afterwards archbishop and cardinal), consecrated titular Bishop of Adramyttum to organize North Carolina into a vicariate, 16 Aug., 1868, was appointed Bishop of Richmond, 30 July, 1872. He established at Richmond the Little Sisters of the Poor, and St. Peter's Boys' Academy. Erecting new parishes, churches, and schools, making constant diocesan visitations, frequently preaching to large congregations of both Catholics and non-Catholics, Bishop Gibbons, during his short rule of five years, accomplished in the diocese a vast amount of religious good. Made coadjutor Bishop of Baltimore, 29 May, 1877, he succeeded Archbishop Bayley in that see, 3 Oct., 1877. (5) Right Rev. John Joseph Keane, D.D. (afterwards archbishop), consecrated, 25 Aug., 1878. Gifted with ever-ready and magnetic eloquence, Bishop Keane drew great numbers of people to hear his inspiring discourses. He held the Second Diocesan Synod in 1886, and introduced into the diocese the Josephites and the Xaverian Brothers. Bishop Keane was appointed first Rector of the Catholic University, Washington, 12 Aug., 1888, created titular Archbishop of Damascus, 9 Jan., 1897, and transferred to the See of Dubuque, 24 July, 1900. (6) Right Rev. Augustine Van De Vyver, D.D., consecrated, 29 Oct., 1889, began an able and vigorous rule. On 3 June, 1903, he publicly received the Most Rev. Diomede Falconio, Apostolic Delegate, who the following day laid the cornerstone of the new Sacred Heart Cathedral, one of the most artistic edifices in the country, designed by Joseph McGuire, architect, of New York. A handsome bishop's house and a pastoral residence adjoin the cathedral. The latter was solemnly conscrated by Mgr. Falconio on 29 Nov., 1906. The event was the most imposing Catholic ceremony in the history of the diocese. Besides Cardinal Gibbons, and the Apostolic Delegate, there were present 18 archbishops and bishops. Bishop Van De Vyver convened a quasi-synod, 12 Nov., 1907, which approved the decrees of the Second Synod and enacted new and needed legislation. In 1907 the Knights of Columbus held at the Jamestown Exposition their national convention and jubilee celebration, participated in by the Apostolic Delegate, and several archbishops and bishops; while the following year the St. Vincent de Paul Society held a similar celebration in Richmond. In June, 1909, St. Peter's (Richmond) handsome new residence and the adjoining home of the McGill Union and the Knights of Columbus were completed, at a total cost of about $50,000. In the following autumn St. Peter's Church (the old cathedral) celebrated the diamond jubilee of its existence. With it, either as bishops or as priests, are indelibly linked the names of Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishops Keane and Janssens,and Bishops Van De Vyver, Whelan, McGill, Becker, Kelley and O'Connell of San Francisco. Most Rev. John J. Kain, deceased archbishop of St. Louis, had also been a priest of the diocese. Bishop Van De Vyver introduced into the diocese the Fathers of the Holy Ghost; additional Benedictine and Josephite Fathers and Xaverian Brothers; the Christian Brothers; additional Sisters of Charity; the Benedictine and Franciscan Sisters; Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, of the Blessed Sacrament and of the Perpetual Adoration. Under his regime have been founded 12 new parishes, 32 churches, 3 colleges, 4 industrial schools, 2 orphan asylums, 1 infant asylum (coloured), and many parochial schools. Notable Benefactors Mr. and Mrs. Thomas Fortune Ryan, of New York, the former donating, the latter furnishing, the imposing Sacred Heart Cathedral (nearly $500,000), together with other notable benefactions. Mrs.Ryan has built churches, schools, and religious houses in various parts of the state. Other generous benefactors were Right Rev. Bernard McQuaid, D.D., Joseph Gallego, John P. Matthews, William S. Caldwell, Mark Downey, and John Pope. Statistics (1911) Secular priests, 50; Benedictines, 10; Josephites, 6; Holy Ghost Fathers, 2; Brothers, Xaverian, 35; Christian, 12; Sisters of Charity, 60; of St. Benedict, 50; Visitation Nuns, 23; Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, Kentucky, 20; of the Holy Cross, 20; Little Sisters of the Poor, 18; Sisters of the Blessed Sacrament, 18; of St. Francis, 12; of Perpetual Adoration, 10; parishes with resident priests, 35; msisions with churches, 48; colleges, 3 (1 coloured), academies, 9; parochial schools, 26; industrial schools, 4 (2 coloured); orphan asylums, 4; infant asylums, 1 (coloured); young people attending Catholic institutions, 7500; home for aged, 1 (inmates, 200); Catholic Hospital, 1 (yearly patients, 3000). Catholic Societies Priests' Clerical Fund Association; Eucharistic League; Holy Name; St. Vincent dePaul; League of Good Shepherd; boys' and girls' sodalities; tabernacle, altar, and sanctuary societies; women's benevolent and beneficial; fraternal and social, such as Knights of Columbus, Hibernians, and flourishing local societies. Of parishes there are one each of Germans, Italians, and Bohemians, and 4 for the coloured people. Catholic population, 41,000. The causes of growth are principally natural increase and conversions, there being little Catholic immigration into the diocese. Magri, The Catholic Church in the City and Diocese of Richmond (Richmond, Virginia, 1906); Parks, Catholic Missions in Virginia (Richmond, 1850); Keiley, Memoranda (Norfolk, Virginia, 1874); Proceedings of the Catholic Benevolent Union (Norfolk, 1875); The Metropolitan catholic Almanac (Baltimore, 1841-61); Catholic Almanac and Directory (New York, 1865-95); Catholic Directory (Milwaukee, 1895-9); Official Catholic Directory (Milwaukee, 1900-11); Hughes, The History of the Society of Jesus in North America, Colonial and Federal (London, 1907); Shea, The History of the Catholic Church in the United States (Akron, Ohio, 1890); foreign references cited by Shea (I, bk II, i,106, 107, 149, 150); Navarette, Real Cedula que contiene el asiento capitulado con Lucas Vasquez de Ayllón; Coleccion de Viages y Descubrimientos (Madrid, 1829), ii, 153, 156; Fernandez, Historia Ecclesiastica de Nuestros Tiempos (Toledo, 1611); Quiros, Letter of 12 Sept., 1570; Rogel, Letter of 9 Dec., 1520; Barcia, Ensayo Cronologico, 142-6; Tanner, Societas Militaris, 447-51. F. JOSEPH MAGRI Ricoldo Da Monte di Croce Ricaldo da Monte di Croce (PENNINI.) Born at Florence about 1243; d. there 31 October, 1320. After studying in various great European schools, he became a Dominican, 1267; was a professor in several convents of Tuscany (1272-99), made a pilgrimage to the Holy Land (1288), and then travelled for many years as a missionary in western Asia, having his chief headquarters at Bagdad. He returned to Florence before 1302, and was chosen to high offices in his order. His "Itinerarium" (written about 1288-91; published in the original Latin at Leipzig; 1864; in Italian at Florence, 1793; in French at Paris, 1877) was intended as a guide-book for missionaries, and is an interesting description of the Oriental countries visited by him. The "Epistolæ de Perditione Acconis" are five letters in the form of lamentations over the fall of Ptolemais (written about 1292, published at Paris, 1884). Ricoldo's best known work is the "Contra Legem Sarracenorum", written at Bagdad, which has been very popular as a polemical source against Mohammedanism, and has been often edited (first published at Seville, 1500). The "Christianæ Fidei Confessio facta Sarracenis" (printed at Basle, 1543) is attributed to Ricoldo, and was probably written about the same time as the above mentioned works. Other works are: "Contra errores Judæorum" (MS. at Florence); "Libellus contra nationes orientales" (MSS. at Florence and Paris); "Contra Sarracenos et Alcoranum" (MS. at Paris); "De variis religionibus" (MS. at Turin). Very probably the last three works were written after his return to Europe. Ricoldo is also known to have written two theological works--a defence of the doctrines of St. Thomas (in collaboration with John of Pistoia, about 1285) and a commentary on the "Libri sententiarum" (before 1288). Ricoldo began a translation of the Koran about 1290, but it is not known whether this work was completed. MANDONNET in Revue Biblique (1893), 44-61, 182-202, 584-607; ECHARD-QUÉTIF, Script. Ord. Proed., I, 506; TOURON, Hist. des Hommes illus. de l'ordre de St. Dom., I, 759-63; MURRAY, Discoveries and Travels in Asia, I, 197. J.A. MCHUGH Riemenschneider Tillmann Riemenschneider One of the most important of Frankish sculptors, b. at Osterode am Harz in or after 1460; d. at Würzburg, 1531. In 1483 he was admitted into the Guild of St. Luke at Würzburg, where he worked until his death. In the tombstone of the Ritter von Grumbach he still adheres to the Gothic style, but in his works for the Marienkapelle at Würzburg he adopts the Renaissance style, while retaining reminiscences of earlier art. For the south entrance he carved, besides an annunciation and a representation of Christ as a gardener, the afterwards renowned statues of Adam and Eve, the heads of which are of special importance. There also he showed his gift of depicting character in the more than life-size statues of Christ, the Baptist, and the Twelve Apostles for the buttresses. Elsewhere indeed we seek in vain for the merits of rounded sculpture. He had a special talent for the noble representation of female saints (cf. for example, Sts. Dorothea and Margareta in the same chapel, and the Madonna in the Münsterkirche). A small Madonna (now in the municipal museum at Frankfort) is perfect both in expression and drapery. Besides other works for the above-mentioned churches and a relief with the "Vierzehn Nothelfer" for the hospital (St. Burkhard), he carved for the cathedral of Würzburg a tabernacle reaching to the ceiling, two episcopal tombs, and a colossal cross--all recognized as excellent works by those familiar with the peculiar style of the master. Riemenschneider's masterpiece is the tomb of Emperor Henry II in the Cathedral of Bamberg; the recumbent forms of the emperor and his spouse are ideal, while the sides of the tomb are adorned with fine scenes from their lives. The figures instinct with life, the drapery, and the expression of sentiment, are all of equal beauty. Among his representations of the "Lament over Christ", those of Heidingsfeld and Maidbrunn, in spite of some defects, are notable works; resembling the former, but still more pleasing, is a third in the university collection. The defects in many of his works are probably to be referred for the most part to his numerous apprentices. There are a great number of other works by him in various places, e.g. a beautiful group of the Crucifixion in the Darmstadt Museum, another at Volkach am Main representing Our Lady surrounded by a rosary with scenes from her life in relief and being crowned by angels playing music--the picture is suspended from the roof. There is a second Meister Tillmann Riemenschneider, who carved the Virgin's altar in Creglingen. This bears so close a resemblance to the works of the younger "Master Dill", that recently many believed it should be referred to him; in that case, however, he would have executed one of his best works as a very young man. BODE, Gesch. der deutschen Plastik (Berlin, 1885); WEBER, Leben u. Wirken T. Riemenschneiders (2nd ed., Würzburg, 1888); TONNERS, Leben u. Werke T. Riemenschneiders (Strasburg, 1900); ADELMANN in Walhalla, VI (1910). G. GIETMANN Cola di Rienzi Cola di Rienzi (i.e., NICOLA, son of Lorenzo) A popular tribune and extraordinary historical figure. His father was an innkeeper at Rome in the vicinity of the Trastevere; though it was believed that he was really the son of the Emperor Henry VII. His childhood and youth were passed at Anagni, with some relatives to whom he was sent on the death of his mother. Though he was thus brought up in the country he succeeded in acquiring a knowledge of letters and of Latin, and devoted himself to a study of the history of ancient Rome in the Latin authors, Livy, Valerius Maximus, Cicero, Seneca, Boethius, and the poets. When his father died he returned to Rome and practised as a notary. The sight of the remains of the former greatness of Rome only increased his admiration for the city and the men described in his favourite authors. Contemplating the condition in which Rome then was in the absence of the popes, torn by the factions of the nobles who plundered on all sides and shed innocent blood, he conceived a desire of restoring the justice and splendour of former days. His plans became more definite and settled when his brother was slain in a brawl between the Orsini and the Colonna. Thenceforth he thought only of the means of breaking the power of the barons. To accomplish this he had first to win the favour of the populace by upholding the cause of the oppressed. In consequence of this and on account of the eloquence with which he spoke in Latin, he was sent to Avignon in 1343 to Clement VI, by the captain of the people, to ask him to return to Rome and grant the great jubilee every five years. Cola explained to the pope the miserable condition of Rome. Clement was much impressed, and appointed him to the office of notary (secretary) of the Camera Capitolina, in which position he could gain a better knowledge of the misfortunes of the city. Cola then by his public discourses and private conversations prepared the people; a conspiracy was formed, and on 19 May, 1347, he summoned the populace to assemble the following day in the Campidoglio. There Cola explained his plans and read a new democratic constitution which, among other things, ordained the establishment of a civic militia. The people conferred absolute power on him; but Cola at first contented himself with the title of tribune of the people; later, however, he assumed the bombastic titles of Candidatus Spiritus Sancti, Imperator Orbis, Zelator Italiæ, Amator Orbis et Tribunus Augustus (candidate of the Holy Spirit, emperor of the world, lover of Italy, of the world, august tribune). He was wise enough to select a colleague, the pope's vicar, Raymond, Bishop of Orvieto. The success of the new regime was wonderful. The most powerful barons had to leave the city; the others swore fealty to the popular government. An era of peace and justice seemed to have come. The pope, on learning what had happened, regretted that he had not been consulted, but gave Cola the title and office of Rector, to be exercised in conjunction with the Bishop of Orvieto. His name was heard everywhere, princes had recourse to him in their disputes, the sultan fortified his ports. Cola then thought of reestablishing the liberty and independence of Italy and of Rome, by restoring the Roman Empire with an Italian emperor. In August, 1347, two hundred deputies of the Italian cities assembled at his request. Italy was declared free, and all those who had arrogated a lordship to themselves were declared fallen from power; the right of the people to elect the emperor was asserted. Louis the Bavarian and Charles of Bohemia were called upon to justify their usurpation of the imperial title. Cola flattered himself secretly with the hope of becoming emperor; but his high opinion of himself proved his ruin. He was a dreamer rather than a man of action; he lacked many qualities for the exercise of good government, especially foresight and the elements of political prudence. He had formed a most puerile concept of the empire. He surrounded himself with Asiatic luxury, to pay for which he had to impose new taxes; thereupon the enthusiasm of the people, weary of serving a theatrical emperor, vanished. The barons perceived this, and forgetting for the moment their mutual discord, joined together against their common enemy. In vain the bell summoned the people to arms in the Campidoglio. No one stirred. Cola had driven out the barons, but he had not thought of reducing them to inaction; on the contrary he had rendered them more hostile by his many foolish and humiliating acts. Lacking all military knowledge he could offer no serious resistance to their attacks. The discontent of the people increased; the Bishop of Orvieto, the other Rector of Rome, who had already protested against what had occurred at the convention of the Italian deputies, abandoned the city; the pope repudiated Cola in a Bull. Thus deserted, and not believing himself safe, he took refuge in the Castle of S.Angelo, and three days later (18 Dec., 1347) the barons returned in triumph to restore things to their former condition. Cola fortunately succeeded in escaping. He sought refuge with the Spiritual Franciscans living in the hermitages of Monte Maiella. But the plague of 1348, the presence of bands of adventurers and the jubilee of 1350 had increased the mysticism of the people and still more of the Spirituals. One of the latter, Fra Angelo, told Rienzi that it was now the proper moment to think of the common weal, to co-operate in the restoration of the empire and in the purification of the Church: all of which had been predicted by Joachim of Flora, the celebrated Calabrian abbot, and that he ought to give his assistance. Cola betook himself thence to Charles IV at Prague (1350), who imprisoned him, either as a madman or as a heretic. After two years Cola was sent at the request of the pope to Avignon, where through the intercession of Petrarch, his admirer, though now disillusioned, he was treated better. When Innocent VI sent Cardinal Albornoz into Italy (at the beginning of 1353) he allowed Cola di Rienzi to accompany him. The Romans, who had fallen back into their former state of anarchy, invited him to return, and Albornoz consented to appoint him senator (sindaco) of Rome. On 1 Aug., 1354, Rienzi entered Rome in triumph. But the new government did not last long. His luxury and revelry, followed by the inevitable taxation, above all the unjust killing of several persons (among whom was Fra Moriale, a brigand, in the service of Cola), provoked the people to fury. On 8 Oct., 1354, the cry of "Death to Rienzi the traitor!" rose in the city. Cola attempted to flee, but was recognized and slain, and his corpse dragged through the streets of the city. Cola represented, one might say, the death agony of the Guelph (papal-national-democratic) idea and the rise of the classical (imperial and æsthetic) idea of the Renaissance. Vita Nicolai Laurentii in MURATORI, Antiquitates; Vita Nicolai Laurentii, ed. DEL Rè (Florence, 1854); GABRIELLI, Epistolario de Cola Rienzo (Rome, 1890); PAPENCORDT, Cola de Rienzo und seine Zeit (Hamburg, 1841); RODOCANACHI, Cola di Rienzo (Paris, 1888). U. BENIGNI Rieti Rieti (REATINA). Diocese in Central Italy, immediately subject to the Holy See. The city is situated in the valley of the River Velino, which, on account of the calcareous deposits that accumulate in it, grows shallower and imperils the city, so that even in ancient days it was necessary to construct canals and outlets, like that of Marius Curius Dentatus (272 B.C.) which, repaired and enlarged by Clement VIII, has produced the magnificent waterfall of the Velino, near Terni. The city, which was founded by the Pelasgians, was the chief town of the Sabines, and became later a Roman municipium and prefecture. After the Longobard invasion it was the seat of a "gastaldo", dependent on the Duchy of Spoleto. It was presented to the Holy See by Otto I in 962; in 1143, after a long siege, it was destroyed by King Roger of Naples. It was besieged again in 1210 by Otto of Brunswick when forcing his way into the Kingdom of Naples. In the thirteenth century the popes took refuge there on several occasions, and in 1288 it witnessed the coronation of Charles II of Naples; later an Apostolic delegate resided at Rieti. In 1860, by the disloyalty of a delegate, it was occupied by the Italian troops without resistance. Rieti was the birthplace of Blessed Colomba (1501); in the sixth century it contained an Abbey of St. Stephen; the body of St. Baldovino, Cistercian, founder of the monastery of Sts. Matthew and Pastor (twelfth century) is venerated in the cathedral. Near Rieti is Greccio, where St. Francis set up the first Christmas crib. The cathedral is in Lombard style, with a crypt dating from the fourth or fifth century. It should be remarked that in medieval documents there is frequent confusion between Reatinus (Rieti), Aretinus (Arezzo), and Teatinus (Chieti). The first known Bishop of Rieti is Ursus (499); St. Gregory mentions Probus and Albinus (sixth century). The names of many bishops in the Longobard period are known. Later we meet with Dodonus (1137), who repaired the damage done by King Roger; Benedict, who in 1184 officiated at the marriage of Queen Constance of Naples and Henry VI; Rainaldo, a Franciscan (1249), restorer of discipline, which work was continued by Tommaso (1252); Pietro Guerra (1278), who had Andrea Pisano erect the episcopal palace with materials taken from the ancient amphitheatre of Vespasian; Lodovico Teodonari (1380), murdered while engaged in Divine service, on account of his severity, which deed was cruelly punished by Boniface IX; Angelo Capranica (1450), later a cardinal; Cardinal Pompeo Colonna (1508), who for rebellion against Julius II and Clement VII was twice deprived of his cardinalitial dignity; Scipione Colonna (1520), his nephew, took part in the revolt against Clement VII in 1528, and was killed in an encounter with Amico of Ascoli, Abbot of Farfa; Marianus Victorius (1572, for a few days), a distinguished writer and petrologist; Giorgio Bolognetti (1639), restored the episcopal palace and was distinguished for his charity; Gabrielle Ferretti (1827), later a cardinal, a man of great charity. At present the diocese contains 60 parishes, 142,100 inhabitants, 250 secular priests, 7 religious houses with 63 priests, 15 houses of nuns; 2 educational establishments for boys, and 4 for girls. CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, V; DE SANCTIS, Notizie stor iche di Rieti (Rieti, 1887); MARONI, Commentarii de Ecclesia Reatina (Rome, 1753). U. BENIGNI Abbey of Rievaulx Abbey of Rievaulx (RIEVALL.) Thurston, Archbishop of York, was very anxious to have a monastery of the newly founded and fervent order of Cistercians in his diocese; and so, at his invitation, St. Bernard of Clairvaux sent a colony of his monks, under the leadership of Abbot William, to make the desired foundation. After some delay Walter Espec became their founder and chief benefactor, presenting them with a suitable estate, situated in a wild and lonely spot, in the valley of the rivulet Rie (from whence the abbey derived its name), and surrounded by precipitous hills, in Blakemore, near Helmesley. The community took possession of the ground in 1131, and began the foundation, the first of their order in Yorkshire. The church and abbey, as is the case with all monasteries of the order, were dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary. At first their land being crude and uncultivated, they suffered much until, after a number of years, their first benefactor again came to their assistance and, later on, joined their community. Their land, also, through their incessant labours, eventually became productive, so that, with more adequate means of subsistence, they were able to devote their energies to the completion of church and monastic buildings, though these were finished only after a great lapse of time, on account of their isolation and the fact that the monastery was never wealthy. The constructions were carried on section by section, permanent edifices succeeding those that were temporary after long intervals. The final buildings, however, as attested by the magnificent, though melancholy, ruins yet remaining, were completed on a grand scale. Within a very few years after its foundation the community numbered three hundred members, and was by far the most celebrated monastery in England; many others sprang from it, the most important of them being Melrose, the first Cistecian monastery built in Scotland. Rievaulx early became a billiant centre of learning and holiness; chief amongst its lights shone St. Aelred, its third abbot (1147-67), who from his sweetness of character and depth of learning was called Bernardo prope par. He had been, before his entrance into the cloister, a most dear friend and companion of St. David, King of Scotland. History gives us but scant details of the later life at Rievaulx. At the time of its suppression and confiscation by Henry VIII the abbot, Rowland Blyton, with twenty-three religious composed its community. The estates of this ancient abbey are now in the possession of the Duncombe family. MANRIQUE, Annales Cistercienses (Lyons, 1642); MARTENE AND DURAND, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum, IV (Paris, 1717); HENRIQUEZ, Phoenix reviviscens (Brussels, 1626); DUGDALE, Monasticon Anglicanum, V (London, 1817-30); Cartularium abbatiae de Rievalle in Surtees' Soc. Publ. (London, 1889); St. Aelred, Abbot of Rievaulx (London, 1845); OXFORD, Ruins of Fountains Abbey (London, 1910); HODGES, Fountains Abbey (New York, 1904). EDMOND M. OBRECHT Caspar Riffel Caspar Riffel Historian, b. at Budesheim, Bingen, Germany, 19 Jan., 1807, d. at Mainz, 15 Dec., 1856. He studied under Klee at Mainz and Bonn and under Möhler at Tübingen. After his ordination to the priesthood, 18 Dee., 1830, he was named assistant priest at Bingen. In 1835 he was appointed to a parish at Giessen, and to the chair of moral theology in the local theological faculty. His transfer to the professorship in Church history followed in 1837. The publication of the first volume of his Church history in 1841 aroused a storm of indignation among Protestants, to whom his accurate though not flattering account of the Reformation was distasteful. The Hessian Government hastened to pension the fearless teacher (19 Nov., 1842). This measure caused intense indignation among the diocesan Catholic clergy, who denounced the Protestant atmosphere of the university. Riffel retired to Mainz, where Bishop von Ketteler appointed him in 1851 professor of Church history in his newly organized ecclesiastical seminary. Death put a premature end to the teaching of this Catholic educator, who contributed largely to the restoration of a truly ecclesiastical spirit among the German clergy. He wrote: "Geschichtliche Darstellung des Verhältnisses zwischen Kirche und Staat", Mainz, 1836; "Predigten auf alle Sonn- und Festtage des Jahres", Mainz, 1839-40, 3rd ed., 1854; "Christliche Kirchengeschichte der neuesten Zeit", Mainz, 1841-46; "Die Aufhebung des Jesuitenordens", 3rd ed., Mainz, 1855. GOYAU, L'Allemagne religieuse: le Catholicisme, II (Paris, 1905), 313. N.A. WEBER St. John Rigby St. John Rigby English martyr; b. about 1570 at Harrocks Hall, Eccleston, Lancashire; executed at St. Thomas Waterings, 21 June, 1600. He was the fifth or sixth son of Nicholas Rigby, by Mary, daughter of Oliver Breres of Preston. In the service of Sir Edmund Huddleston, at a time when his daughter, Mrs. Fortescue, being then ill, was cited to the Old Bailey for recusancy, Rigby appeared on her behalf; compelled to confess himself a Catholic, he was sent to Newgate. The next day, 14 February, 1599 or 1600, he signed a confession, that, since he had been reconciled by the martyr, John Jones the Franciscan, in the Clink some two or three years previously, he had declined to go to church. He was then chained and remitted to Newgate, till, on 19 February, he was transferred to the White Lion. On the first Wednesday in March (which was the 4th and not, as the martyr himself supposes, the 3rd) he was brought to the bar, and in the afternoon given a private opportunity to conform. The next day he was sentenced for having been reconciled; but was reprieved till the next sessions. On 19 June he was again brought to the bar, and as he again refused to conform, he was told that his sentence must be carried out. On his way to execution, the hurdle was stopped by a Captain Whitlock, who wished him to conform and asked him if he were married, to which the martyr replied, "I am a bachelor; and more than that I am a maid", and the captain thereupon desired his prayers. The priest, who reconciled him, had suffered on the same spot 12 July, 1598. [ Note: Both John Rigby and the Franciscan priest, John Jones, were canonized by Pope Paul VI in 1970 among the Forty Martyrs of England and Wales, whose joint feastday is kept on 25 October.] CHALLONER, Missionary Priests, II (London, 1878), n. 117; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., V, 420; Chatham Society's Publications, LXXXI (1870), 74. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Nicholas Rigby Nicholas Rigby Born 1800 at Walton near Preston, Lancashire; died at Ugthorpe, 7 September, 1886. At twelve years he went to Ushaw College, where he was for a time professor of elocution. Ordained priest in September, 1826, he was sent to St. Mary's, Wycliffe, for six months, and was then given the united missions of Egton Bridge and Ugthorpe. After seven years the two missions were again separated, and he took up his residence at Ugthorpe. There he built a church (opened in 1855), started a new cemetery, and founded a middle-class college. About 1884 he resigned the mission work to his curate, the Rev. E.J. Hickey. His obituary notice, in the "Catholic Times" of 17 September, 1886, gives a sketch of his life. He wrote: "The Real Doctrine of the Church on Scripture", to which is added an account of the conversion of the Duke of Brunswick (Anton Ulrich, 1710), and of "Father Ignatius" Spencer (1830), (York, 1834), dedicated to the Rev. Benedict Rayment. Other works, chiefly treatises on primary truths, or sermons of a controversial character, are described in Gillow, "Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath." PATRICK RYAN Right Right Right, as a substantive (my right, his right), designates the object of justice. When a person declares he has a right to a thing, he means he has a kind of dominion over such thing, which others are obliged to recognize. Right may therefore be defined as a moral or legal authority to possess, claim, and use a thing as one's own. It is thus essentially distinct from obligation; in virtue of an obligation we should, in virtue of a right, we may do or omit something. Again, right is a moral or legal authority, and, as such, is distinct from merely physical superiority or pre-eminence; the thief who steals something without being detected enjoys the physical control of the object, but no right to it; on the contrary, his act is an mjustice:, a violation of right, and he is bound to return the stolen object to its owner. Right is called a moral or legal authority, because it emanates from a law which assigns to one the dominion over the thing and imposes on others the obligation to respect this dominion. To the right of one person corresponds an obligation on the part of others, so that right and obligation condition each other. If I have the right to demand one hundred dollars from a person, he is under the obligation to give them to me; without this obligation, right would be illusory. One may even say that the right of one person consists in the fact that, on his account, others are bound to perform or omit something. The clause, "to possess, claim, and use, anything as one's own", defines more closely the object of right. Justice assigns to each person his own (suum cuique). When anyone asserts that a thing is his own, is his private property, or belongs to him, he means that this object stands in a special relation to him, that it is in the first place destined for his use, and that he can dispose of it according to his will, regardless of others. By a thing is here meant not merely a material object, but everything that can be useful to man, including actions, omissions, etc. The connexion of a certain thing with a certain person, in virtue of which the person may declare the thing his own, can originate only on the basis of concrete facts. It is an evident demand of human reason in general that one may give or leave one's own to anyone; but what constitutes one's own is determined by facts. Many things are physically connected with the human per-son by conception or birth--his limbs, bodily and mental qualities, health, etc. From the order imposed by the Creator of Nature, we recognize that, from the first moment of his being, his faculties and members are granted a person primarily for his own use, and so that they may enable him to support himself and develop and fulfil the tasks appointed by the Creator for this life. These things (i.e., his qualities, etc.) are his own from the first moment of his existence, and whoever injures them or deprives him of them violates his right. However, many other things are connected with the human person, not physically, but only morally. In other words, in virtue of a certain fact, everyone recognizes that certain things are specially destined for thc use of one person, and must be recognized as such by all. Persons who build a house for themselves, make an implement, catch game in the unreserved forest, or fish in the open sea, become the owners of these things in virtue of occupation of their labour; they can claim these things as their own, and no one can forcibly appropriate or injure these things without a violation of their rights. Whoever has lawfully purchased a thing, or been presented with it by another, may regard such thing as his own, since by the purchase or presentation he succeeds to the place of the other person and possesses his rights. As a right gives rise to a certain connection between person and person with respect to a thing, we may distinguish in right four elements: the holder, the object, the title, and the terminus of the right. The holder of the right is the person who possesses the right, the terminus is the person who has the obligation corresponding to the right, the object is the thing to which the right refers, and the title is the fact on the ground of which a person may regard and claim the thing as his own. Strictly speaking, this fact alone is not the title of thc right, which originates, indeed, in the fact, but taken in connection with thc: principle that one must assign to each his own property; however, since this principle may be presupposed as self-evident, it is customary to regard the simple fact as the title of the right. The right of which we have hitherto been speaking is individual right, to which the obligation of commutative justice corresponds. Commutative justice regulates the relations of the members of human society to one another, and aims at securing that each member renders to his fellow-members what is equally theirs. In addition to this commutative justice, there is also a legal and distributive justice; these virtues regulate the relations between the complete societies (State and Church) and their members. From the propensities and needs of human nature we recognize the State as resting on a Divine ordinance; only in the State can man support himself and develop according to his nature. But, if the Divine Creator of Nature has willed the existence of the State, He must also will the means necessary for its maintenance and the attainment of its objects. This will can be found only in the right of the State to demand from its members what is necessary for the general good. It must be authorized to make laws, to punish violations of such, and in general to arrange everything for the public welfare, while, on their side, the members must be under the obligation corresponding to this right. The virtue which makes all members of society contribute what is necessary for its maintenance is called legal justice, because the law has to determine in individual cases what burdens are to be borne by the members. According to Catholic teaching, the Church is, like the State, a complete and independent society, wherefore it also must be justified in demanding from its members whatever is necessary for its welfare and the attainment of its object. But the members of the State have not only obligations towards the general body; they have likewise rights. The State is bound to distribute public burdens (e.g. taxation) according to the powers and capability of the members, and is also under the obligation of distributing public goods (offices and honours) according to the degree of worthiness and services. To these duties of the general body or its leaders corresponds a right of the members; they can demand that the leaders observe the claims of distributive justice, and failure to do this on the part of the authorities is a violation of the right of the members. On the basis of the above notions of right, its object can be more exactly determined. Three species of right and justice have been distinguished. The object of the right, corresponding to even-handed justice, has as its object the securing for the members of human society in their intercourse with one another freedom and independence in the use of their own possessions. For the object of right can only be the good for the attainment of which we recognize right as necessary, and which it effects of its very nature, and this good is the freedom and independence of every member of society in the use of his own. If man is to fulfil freely the tasks imposed upon him by God, he must possess the means necessary for this purpose, and be at liberty to utilize such independently of others. He must have a sphere of free activity, in which he is secure from the interference of others; this object is attained by the right which protects each in the free use of his own from the encroachments of others. Hence the proverbs: "A willing person suffers no injustice" and "No one is compelled to make use of his rights". For the object of the right which corresponds to commutative justice is the liberty of the possessor of the right in the use of his own, and this right is not attained if each is bound always to make use of and insist upon his rights. The object of the right which corresponds to legal justice is the good of the community; of this right we may not say that "no one is bound to make use of his right", since the community---or, more correctly, its leaders--must make use of public rights, whenever and wherever the good of the community requires it. Finally, the right corresponding to the object of distributive justice is the defence of the members against the community or its leaders; they must not be laden with public burdens beyond their powers, and must receive as much of the public goods as becomes the condition of their meritoriousness arid services. Although, in accordance with the above, each of the three kinds of rights has its own immediate object, all three tend in common towards one remote object, which, according to St. Thomas (Cont. Gent., III, xxxiv), is nothing else than to secure that peace be maintained among men by procuring for each the peaceful possession of his own. Right (or more precisely speaking, the obligation corresponding to right) is enforceable at least in general--that is, whoever has a right with respect to some other person is authorized to employ physical force to secure the fulfilment of this obligation, if the other person will not voluntarily fulfil it. This enforceable character of the obligation arises necessarily from the object of right. As already said, this object is to secure for every member of society a sphere of free activity and for society the means necessary for its development, and the attainment of this object is evidently indispensable for social life; but it would not be sufficiently attained if it were left to each one's discretion whether he should fulfil his obligations or not. In a large community there are always many who would allow themselves to be guided, not by right or justice, but by their own selfish inclinations, and would disregard the rights of their fellowmen, if they were not forcibly confined to their proper sphere of right; consequently, the obligation corresponding to a right must be enforceable in favour of the possessor of the right. But in a regulated community the power of compulsion must be vested in the public authority, since, if each might employ force against his fellowmen whenever his right was infringed, there would soon arise a general conflict of all against all, and order and safety would be entirely subverted. Only in cases of necessity, where an unjust attack on one's life or property has to be warded off and recourse to the authorities is impossible, has the individual the right of meeting violence with violence. While right or the obligation corresponding to it is enforceable, we must beware of referring the essence of right to this enforcibility or even to the authority to enforce it, as is done by many jurists since the time of Kant. For enforcibility is only a secondary characteristic of right and does not pertain to all rights; although, for example, under a real monarchy the subjects possess some rights with respect to the ruler, they can usually exercise no compulsion towards him, since he is irresponsible, and is subject to no higher authority which can employ forcible measures against him. Rights are divided, according to the title on which they rest, into natural and positive rights, and the latter are subdivided into Divine and human rights. By natural rights are meant all those which we acquire by our very birth, e.g. the right to live, to integrity of limbs, to freedom, to acquire property, etc.; all other rights are called acquired rights, although many of them are acquired, independently of any positive law, in virtue of free acts, e.g. the right of the husband and wife in virtue of the marriage contract, the right to ownerless goods through occupation, the right to a house through purchase or hire, etc. On the other hand, other rights may be given by positive law; according as the law is Divine or human, and the latter civil or ecclesiastical, we distinguish between Divine or human, civil or ecclesiastical rights. To civil rights belong citizenship in a state, active or passive franchise, etc. V. CATHREIN St. Rimbert St. Rimbert Archbishop of Bremen-Hamburg, died at Bremen 11 June, 888. It is uncertain whether he was a Fleming or a Norman. He was educated at the monastery of Turholt near Brügge in Flanders. There St. Ansgar, first Archbishop of Hamburg, became acquainted with him, and later made him his constant companion When Ansgar died on 2 February, 865, Rimbert was chosen his successor. Pope Nicholas I sent him the pallium in December, 865. As Ansgar's missionary system was based on a connection with the Benedictine Order, Rimbert became, shortly after his consecration, a monk at Corvey, and subsequently made missionary journeys to West Friesland, Denmark, and Sweden, but concerning these unfortunately we have no detailed information. In 884 he succeeded in putting to flight the Norman marauders on the coast of Friesland; in remembrance of this incident he was later held in special veneration in Friesland. Among his episcopal achievements the foundation of a monastery in Bücken near Bremen and his care for the poor and sick are especially emphasized. Historians are indebted to him for a biography of St. Ansgar, which is distinguished by valuable historical information and a faithful character sketch. On the other hand, the biography of Rimbert himself, written by a monk of Corvey, is, while very edifying, poor in actual information; hence we know so little of his life. KLEMENS LÖFFLER Council of Rimini Council of Rimini The second Formula of Sirmium (357) stated thc doctrine of the Anomoeans, or extreme Arians. Against this the Semi-Arian bishops, assembled at Ancyra, the episcopal city of their leader Basilius, issued a counter formula, asserting that the Son is in all things like the Father, afterwards approved by the Third Synod of Sirmium (358). This formula, though silent on the term "homousios", consecrated by the Council of Nicaea, was signed by a few orthodox bishops, and probably by Pope Liberius, being, in fact, capable of an orthodox interpretation. The Emperor Constantius cherished at that time the hope of restoring peace between the orthodox and the Semi-Arians by convoking a general council. Failing to convene one either at Nicaea or at Nicomedia, he was persuaded by Patrophilus, Bishop of Scythopolis, and Narcissus, Bishop of Neronias, to hold two synods, one for the East at Seleucia, in Isauria, the other for the West at Rimini, a proceeding justified by diversity of language and by expense. Before the convocation of the councils, Ursacius and Valens had Marcus, Bishop of Arethusa, designated to draft a formula (the Fourth of Sirmium) to be submitted to the two synods. It declared that the Son was born of the Father before all ages (agreeing so far with the Third Formula); but it added that when God is spoken of, the word ousia, "essence ', should be avoided, not being found in Scripture and being a cause of scandal to the faithful; by this step they intended to exclude the similarity of essence. The Council of Rimini was opened early in July, 359, with over four hundred bishops. About eighty Semi-Arians, including Ursacius, Germinius, and Auxentius, withdrew from the orthodox bishops, the most eminent of whom was Restitutus of Carthage; Liberius, Eusebius, Dionysius, and others were still in exile. The two parties sent separate deputations to the emperor, the orthodox asserting clearly their firm attachment to the faith of Nicaea, while the Arian minority adhered to the imperial formula. But the inexperienced representatives of the orthodox majority allowed themselves to be deceived, and not only entered into communion with the heretical delegates, but even subscribed, at, Nice in Thrace, a formula to the effect merely that the Son is like the Father according to the Scriptures (the words "in all things" being omitted). On their return to Rimini, they were met with the unanimous protests of their colleagues. But the threats of the consul Taurus, the remonstrances of the Semi-Arians against hindering peace between East and West for a word not contained in Scripture, their privations and their homesickness--all combined to weaken the constancy of the orthodox bishops. And the last twenty were induced to subscribe when Ursacius had an addition made to the formula of Nice, declaring that the Son is not a creature like other creatures. Pope Liberius, having regained his liberty, rejected this formula, which was thereupon repudiated by many who had signed it. In view of the hasty manner of its adoption and the 1ack of approbation by the Holy See, it could have no authority. In any case, the council was a sudden defeat of orthodoxy, and St. Jerome could say: "The whole world groaned in astonishment to find itself Arian". U. BENIGNI Rimini Rimini DIOCESE OF RIMINI (ARIMINUM). Suffragan of Ravenna. Rimini is situated near the coast between the rivers Marecchia (the ancient Ariminus) and Ausa (Aprusa). Coast navigation and fishing are the principal industries. The thirteenth-century cathedral (San Francesco) was originally Gothic, but was transformed by order of Sigismondo Malatesta (1446-55) according to the designs of Leone Baptista Alberti and never completed; the cupola is lacking, also the upper part of the façade; in the cathedral are the tombs of Sigismondo and his wife Isotta. The plastic decorations of the main nave and some of the chapels, a glorification to Sigismondo and Isotta, are by Agostino di Duccio, and breathe the pagan spirit of the Renaissance. On the southern side are the tombs of illustrious humanists, among them that of the philosopher Gemistus Pletho, whose remains were brought back by Sigismondo from his wars in the Balkans. There is a remarkable fresco of Piero della Francesca. In San Giuliano is the great picture of Paul Veronese representing the martyrdom of that saint, also pictures of Bittino da Faenza (1357) dealing with some episodes of the saint's life. Among the profane edifices are the Arch of Augustus (27 B. C.), the remains of an amphitheatre, and the five-arched bridge of Augustus over the Marecchia. The town hall has a small but valuable gallery (Perin del Vaga, Ghirlandajo, Bellini, Benedetto Coda, Tintoretto, Agostino di Duccio); the Gambalunga Library (1677) has valuable manuscripts. There is an archæological museum and a bronze statue of Paul V; the castle of Sigismondo Malatesta is now used as a prison. Ariminum was built by the Umbri. In the sixth century B. C. it was taken by the Gauls; after their last defeat (283) it returned to the Umbri and became in 263 a Latin colony, very helpful to the Romans during the late Gallic wars. Rimini was reached by the Via Flamminia, and here began the Via Æmilia that led to Piacenza. Augustus did much for the city and Galla Placida built the church of San Stefano. When the Goths conquered Rimini in 493, Odoacer, besieged in Ravenna, had to capitulate. During the Gothic wars Rimini was taken and retaken many times. In its vicinity Narses overthrew (553) the Alamanni. Under Byzantine dominion it belonged to the Pentapolis. In 728 it was taken with many other cities by the Lombard King Liutprand but returned to the Byzantines about 735. King Pepin gave it to the Holy See, but during the wars of the popes and the Italian cities against the emperors, Rimini sided with the latter. In the thirteenth century it suffered from the discords of the Gambacari and Ansidei families. In 1295 Malatesta I da Verucchio was named "Signore" of the city, and, despite interruptions, his family held authority until 1528. Among his successors were: Malatesta II (1312-17); Pandolfo I, his brother (d. 1326), named by Louis the Bavarian imperial vicar in Romagna; Ferrantino, son of Malatesta II (1335), opposed by his cousin Ramberto and by Cardinal Bertando del Poggetto (1331), legate of John XXII; Malatesta III, Guastafamiglia (1363), lord also of Pesaro; Malatesta IV l'Ungaro (1373); Galeotto, uncle of the former (1385), lord also of Fano (from 1340), Pesaro, and Cesena (1378); his son Carlo (1429), the noblest scion of the family, laboured for the cessation of the Western Schism, and was the counsellor, protector, and ambassador of Gregory XII, and patron of scholars; Galeotto Roberto (1432); his brother Sigismondo Pandolf (1468) had the military and intellectual qualities of Carlo Malatesta but not his character. He was tyrannous and perfidious, in constant rebellion against the popes, a good soldier, poet, philosopher, and lover of the fine arts, but a monster of domestic and public vices; in 1463 he submitted to Pius II, who left him Rimini; Robert, his son (1482), under Paul II nearly lost his state and under Sixtus IV became the commanding officer of the pontifical army against Alfonso of Naples, by whom he was defeated in the battle of Campo Morto (1482); Pandolfo V, his son (1500), lost Rimini to Cesare Borgia (1500-3), after whose overthrow it fell to Venice (1503-9), but was retaken by Julius II and incorporated with the territory of the Holy See. After the death of Leo X Pandolfo returned for several months, and with his son Sigismondo held tyrannous rule. Adrian VI gave Rimini to the Duke of Urbino, the pope's vicar. In 1527 Sigismondo managed to regain the city, but the following year the Malatesta dominion passed away forever. Rimini was thenceforth a papal city, subject to the legate at Forlì. In 1845 a band of adventurers commanded by Ribbotti entered the city and proclaimed a constitution which was soon abolished. In 1860 Rimini and the Romagna were incorporated with the Kingdom of Italy. Rimini was probably evangelized from Ravenna. Among its traditional martyrs are: St. Innocentia and companions; Sts. Juventinus, Facundinus, and companions; Sts. Theodorus and Marinus. The see was probably established before the peace of Constantine. Among the bishops were: Stennius, at Rome in 313; Cyriacus, one of his successors, sided with the Arians; under St. Gaudentius the famous Council of Rimini was held (359); he was later put to death by the Arians for having excommunicated the priest Marcianus; Stephanus attended at Constantinople (551); the election of Castor (591) caused much trouble to St. Gregory I, who had to send to Rimini a "visitor"; Agnellus (743) was governor of the city subject to the Archbishop of Ravenna; Delto acted frequently as legate for John VIII; Blessed Arduino (d. in 1009); Uberto II is mentioned with praise by St. Peter Damian; Opizo was one of the consecrators of the Antipope Clement III (Guiberto, 1075); Ranieri II degli Uberti (1143) consecrated the ancient cathedral of St. Colomba; Alberigo (1153) made peace between Rimini and Cesena; Bonaventura Trissino founded the hospital of Santo Spirito; under Benno (1230) some pious ladies founded a hospital for the lepers, and themselves cared for the afflicted. At the end of the thirteenth century the Armenians received at Rimini a church and a hospital. From 1407 Gregory XII resided at Rimini. Giovanni Rosa united the eleven hospitals of Rimini into one. Under Giulio Parisani (1549) the seminary was opened (1568). Giambattista Castelli (1569) promoted the Tridentine reforms and was nuncio at Paris. Andrea Minucci was severely tried during the French Revolution; under him the Malatesta church (San Francesco) became the cathedral. The diocese has 124 parishes, 125,400 inhabitants, 336 priests, 10 houses of religious with 56 priests, 24 houses of religious women, who care for the hospitals, orphanages, and other charitable institutions, or communal and private schools. There are also 1 school for boys and 3 for girls. CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia, II; NARDI, Cronotassi dei pastori della Chiesa di Rimini (Rimini, 1813); TONINI, Storia civile e sacra di Rimini (6 vols., Rimini, 1848-88); IDEM, Compendio della storia di Rimini (1896); YRIARTE, Rimini: Etudes sur les lettres et les arts à la cour des Malatesta (Paris, 1882). U. BENIGNI Rimouski Rimouski DIOCESE OF RIMOUSKI (SANCTI GERMANI DE RIMOUSKI) Suffragan of Quebec, comprises the counties of Bonaventure, Gaspé (except Magdalen Islands), Rimouski and the greater part of Temiscouata, and forms the eastern extremity of the province of Quebec. At the extreme point of the Gaspé peninsula (formerly called Honguedo), Jacques Cartier landed on his first voyage of discovery (1534) and planted a cross with the royal arms of France. The Souriquois or Micmacs occupied the shores of Baie des Chaleurs, and their successive missionaries, Recollets, Capuchins, Jesuits, amongst them Father Labrosse, and Spiritians (or priests of the seminary of the Holy Ghost), including the celebrated Pierre Maillard, ministered to that region of the Rimouski diocese. The first Mass was celebrated near the city of Rimouski, at a place since called Pointe-au-Père, by the Jesuit Henri Nouvel, in 1663, on his way to the Papinachois and Montagnais of Tadoussac, on the north shore. The first settler at Rimouski was Germain Lepage (1696), whose patronymic was chosen as titular of the future parish and diocese. The seigniory had been conceded to his son René in 1688. The latest statistics give 120 churches and chapels, with 148 priests. Two wooden churches were built at Rimouski, in 1712 and 1787 respectively; the first stone church, 1824, was replaced by the present cathedral in 1854. Before the creation of the see, Rimouski was successively visited by Bishops Hubert (1791), Denaut (1798), Plessis (1806-14-22), Panet (1810-26), Signay (1833-38-43), Turgeon (1849), and Baillargeon (1855-60-65). The see was created and its first titular nominated on 15 January, 1867, and acquired civil incorporation ipso facto the same day, according to the law of the country. The first bishop, Jean-Pierre-François Laforce-Langevin, was b. at Quebec, 22 Sept., 1821, and ordained on 12 Sept., 1844. as director of the Quebec seminary he was one of the joint founders of Laval University (1852). He successively filled the offices of pastor to the parishes of Ste Claire and Beauport, and of principal of Laval Normal School. He was consecrated 1 may, 1867, resigned 1891, and died 1892. He completed the organization of a classical college previously founded by the Abbés C. Tanguay and G. Potvin and adopted it as the seminary of the diocese. He introduced the Sisters of the Congregation of Notre-Dame (Montreal) and sanctioned the foundation (1879) of the Sisters of the Most Holy Rosary, a flourishing institute largely due to the zeal of Vicar-General Langevin, his brother. Bishop Langevin established the cathedral chapter in 1878. The second bishop, still in office, André-Albert Blais, b. at St-Vallier, P.Q., 1842, studied at the college of Ste Anna de la Pocatière, graduated in Rome Doctor of Canon Law, and taught the same branch at Laval University. He was consecrated bishop 18 May, 1890, and took possession of the see in 1891. Bishop Blais created many new parishes in the diocese, and founded a normal school under the management of the Ursulines. The clergy, exclusively French-Canadian, study classics and philosophy at the diocesan seminary, and theology principally at Laval University, in some cases at the Propaganda, Rome. (For parochial system, incorporation of religious institutions, etc. see CANADA, and QUEBEC, PROVINCE OF.) There are no cities besides Rimouski, but all the larger rural parishes have fine churches and convent-schools; the only domestic mission is that of the Micmacs at Ristigouche, under the care of the Capuchins. Besides a Priests' Aid Society, there are several benevolent and mutual aid societies for the laity. The religious orders of men are the Capuchins, Eudists, and Brothers of the Cross of Jesus; those of women are the Ursulines, Sisters of Charity, of the Good Shepherd (teaching), of the Holy Rosary, of the Holy Family, and the Daughters of Jesus. Retreats for the clergy are given each year; conferences to discuss theological cases take place every three months. Nearly all the secular clergy (110 our of 137) belong to the Eucharistic league. Out of a total Catholic population of 118,740, only 3695 are not French Canadians. The Indians number 610. The Protestant element amounts to 8798. There is no friction between these different elements and no difficult racial problem to solve, the parishes containing an English-speaking element as well as the Micmacs being instructed in their native tongues. GUAY, Chroniques de Rimouski (Quebec, 1873); Le Canada ecclesiastique (Montreal, 1911). LIONEL LINDSAY Rings Rings In General Although the surviving ancient rings, proved by their devices, provenance, etc., to be of Christian origin, are fairly numerous (See Fortnum in "Arch. Journ.", XXVI, 141, and XXVIII, 275), we cannot in most cases identify them with any liturgical use. Christians no doubt, just like other people, wore rings in accordance with their station in life, for rings are mentioned without reprobation in the New Testament (Luke, xv, 22, and James, ii, 2). Moreover, St. Clement of Alexandria (Paed., III, c. xi) says that a man might lawfully wear a ring on his little finger, and that it should bear some religious emblem--a dove, or a fish, or an anchor - though, on the other hand, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, and the Apostolic Constitutions (I, iii) protest against the ostentation of Christians in decking themselves with rings and gems. In any case the Acts of Sts. Perpetua and Felicitas (c. xxi), about the beginning of the third century, inform us of how the martyr Saturus took a ring from the finger of Pudens, a soldier who was looking on, and gave it back to him as a keepsake, covered with his own blood. Knowing, as we do, that in the pagan days of Rome every flamen Dialis (i.e., a priest specially consecrated to the worship of Jupiter) had, like the senators, the privilege of wearing a gold ring, it would not be surprising to find evidence in the fourth century that rings were worn by Christian bishops. But the various passages that have been appealed to, to prove this, are either not authentic or else are inconclusive. St. Augustine indeed speaks of his sealing a letter with a ring (Ep. ccxvii, in P.L., XXXIII, 227), but on the other hand his contemporary Possidius expressly states that Augustine himself wore no ring (P.L., XXXII, 53), whence we are led to conclude that the possession of a signet does not prove the use of a ring as part of the episcopal insignia. However, in a Decree of Pope Boniface IV (A.D. 610) we hear of monks raised to the episcopal dignity as anulo pontificali subarrhatis, while at the Fourth Council of Toledo, in 633, we are told that if a bishop has been deposed from his office, and is afterwards reinstated, he is to receive back stole, ring, and crosier (orarium, anulum et baculum). St. Isidore of Seville at about the same period couples the ring with the crosier and declares that the former is conferred as "an emblem of the pontifical dignity or of the sealing of secrets" (P.L., LXXXIII, 783). From this time forth it may be assumed that the ring was strictly speaking an episcopal ornament conferred in the rite of consecration, and that it was commonly regarded as emblematic of the betrothal of the bishop to his Church. In the eighth and ninth centuries in MSS. of the Gregorian Sacramentary and in a few early Pontificals (e.g., that attributed to Archbishop Egbert of York) we meet with various formulae for the delivery of the ring. The Gregorian form, which survives in substance to the present day, runs in these terms: "Receive the ring, that is to say the seal of faith, whereby thou, being thyself adorned with spotless faith, mayst keep unsullied the troth which thou hast pledged to the spouse of God, His holy Church." These two ideas--namely of the seal, indicative of discretion, and of conjugal fidelity--dominate the symbolism attaching to the ring in nearly all its liturgical uses. The latter idea was pressed so far in the case of bishops that we find ecclesiastical decrees enacting that "a bishop deserting the Church to which he was consecrated and transferring himself to another is to be held guilty of adultery and is to be visited with the same penalties as a man who, forsaking his own wife, goes to live with another woman" (Du Saussay, "Panoplia episcopalis", 250). It was perhaps this idea of espousals which helped to establish the rule, of which we hear already in the ninth century, that the episcopal ring was to be placed on the fourth finger (i.e., that next the little finger) of the right hand. As the pontifical ring had to be worn on occasion over the glove, it is a common thing to find medieval specimens large in size and proportionately heavy m execution. The inconvenience of the looseness thus resulting was often met by placing another smaller ring just above it as a keeper (see Lacy, "Exeter Pontifical", 3). As the pictures of the medieval and Renaissance periods show, it was formerly quite usual for bishops to wear other rings along with the episcopal ring; indeed the existing "Caeremoniale episcoporum" (Bk. II, viii, nn. 10-11) assumes that this is still likely to be the case. Custom prescribes that a layman or a cleric of inferior grade on being presented to a bishop should kiss his hand, that is to say his episcopal ring, but it is a popular misapprehension to suppose that any indulgence is attached to the act. Episcopal rings, both at an earlier and later period, were sometimes used as receptacles for relics. St. Hugh of Lincoln had such a ring which must have been of considerable capacity. (On investiture by ring and staff see Investitures, Conflict of.) Besides bishops, many other ecclesiastics are privileged to wear rings. The pope of course is the first of bishops, but he does not habitually wear the signet ring distinctive of the papacy and known as "the Ring of the Fisherman" (see below in this article), but usually a simple cameo, while his more magnificent pontifical rings are reserved for solemn ecclesiastical functions. Cardinals also wear rings independently of their grade in the ecclesiastical hierarchy. The ring belonging to the cardinalitial dignity is conferred by the pope himself in the consistory in which the new cardinal is named to a particular "title". It is of small value and is set with a sapphire, while it bears on the inner side of the bezel the arms of the pope conferring it. In practice the cardinal is not required to wear habitually the ring thus presented, and he commonly prefers to use one of his own. The privilege of wearing a ring has belonged to cardinal-priests since the time of Innocent III or earlier (see Sägmüller, "Thatigkeit und Stellung der Cardinale", 163). Abbots in the earlier Middle Ages were permitted to wear rings only by special privilege. A letter of Peter of Blois in the twelfth century (P.L., CCVII, 283) shows that at that date the wearing of a ring by an abbot was apt to be looked upon as a piece of ostentation, out in the later Pontificals the blessing and delivery of a ring formed part of the ordinary ritual for the consecration of an abbot, and this is still the case at the present day. On the other hand: there is no such ceremony indicated in the blessing of an abbess, though certain abbesses have received, or assumed, the privilege of wearing a ring of office. The ring is also regularly worn by certain other minor prelates, for example prothonotaries, but the privilege cannot be said to belong to canons as such (B. de Montault, "Le costume, etc.", I, 170) without special indult. In any case such rings cannot ordinarily be worn by these minor prelates during the celebration of Mass. The same restriction, it need hardly be said, applies to the ring which is conferred as part of the insignia of the doctorate either of theology or of canon law. The plain rings worn by certain orders of nuns and conferred upon them in the course of their solemn profession, according to the ritual provided in the Roman Pontifical appear to find some justification in ancient tradition. St. Ambrose (P.L., XVII, 701, 735) speaks as though it were a received custom for virgins consecrated to God to wear a ring in memory of their betrothal to their heavenly Spouse. This delivery of a ring to professed nuns is also mentioned by several medieval Pontificals, from the twelfth century onwards. Wedding rings, or more strictly, rings given in the betrothal ceremony, seem to have been tolerated among Christians under the Roman Empire from a quite early period. The use of such rings was of course of older date than Christianity, and there is not much to suggest that the giving of the ring was at first incorporated in any ritual or invested with any precise religious significance. But it is highly probable that, if the acceptance and the wearing of a betrothal ring was tolerated among Christians, such rings would have been adorned with Christian emblems. Certain extant specimens, more particularly a gold ring found near Arles, belonging apparently to the fourth or fifth century, and bearing the inscription, Tecla vivat Deo cum marito seo [suo], may almost certainly be assumed to be Christian espousal rings. In the coronation ceremony, also, it has long been the custom to deliver both to the sovereign and to the queen consort a ring previously blessed. Perhaps the earliest example of the use of such a ring is in the case of Judith, the step-mother of Alfred the Great. It is however in this instance a little difficult to determine whether the ring was bestowed upon the queen in virtue of her dignity as queen consort or of her nuptials to Ethelwulf. Rings have also occasionally been used for other religious purposes. At an early date the small keys which contained filings from the chains of St. Peter seem to have been welded to a band of metal and worn upon the finger as reliquaries. In more modern times rings have been constructed with ten small knobs or protuberances, and used for saying the rosary. Babington in Dict. Christ. Antiq.; Leclercq in Dict. dæarch. chret., I (Paris, 1907), s. v. Anneaux; Deloche, Etude historique et archeologique sur les anneaux (Paris, 1900); Du Saussay, Panoplia episcopalis (Paris, 1646), 175-294; Dalton, Catalogue of early Christian Antiquities in the British Museum (London, 1901); Barbier de Montault, Le costume et les usages ecclesiastiques selon la tradition romaine (Paris, 1897-1901). HERBERT THURSTON The Ring of Fisherman The Ring of the Fisherman The earliest mention of the Fisherman's ring worn by the popes is in a letter of Clement IV written in 1265 to his nephew, Peter Grossi. The writer states that popes were then accustomed to seal their private letters with "the seal of the Fisherman", whereas public documents, he adds, were distinguished by the leaden "bulls" attached (see BULLS AND BRIEFS). From the fifteenth century, however, the Fisherman's ring has been used to seal the class of papal official documents known as Briefs. The Fisherman's ring is placed, by the cardinal camerlengo on the finger of a newly elected pope. It is made of gold