under the title Exposition, &c., tome i., pp. 279, &c., confirms what is admitted above, and informs us, that Wake's copy is now in the Archiepiscopal library at Lambeth. He mentions another as in possession of Mercier, l'Abbé Saint Leger, containing 174 pages*, enriched with notes by Bossuet. The third known copy he states as belonging to M. Debure, senior. He adds an account of a most foolish mistake for a Frenchman and a man of letters, in the instance of the Abbé Rive, who supposed himself possessed of one of these rarities, which proved to be a copy of the second edition in 1673. Barbier indeed has added a mistake of his own in giving to the first edition (the acknowledged one, so I always number them) at page 185, fourth line from the top after the word Dieu, the addition which exists in subsequent editions pour conduire tout le troupeau dans ses voyes. It certainly is wanting in my copy of the first nominal edition.

That edition appeared in the end of the same year, 1671, accompanied with the approbation of the Archbishop of Rheims and ten Bishops, and with the royal licence, dated August, registered November, and achevé d'imprimer pour la pre

* In Brueys' Réponse, &c., the pages appear to be by calculation from the last-mentioned, compared with the acknowledged first edition, about 172. See Avertissement, § 20.

mière fois le premier Decembre, 1671* ; but without any approbation of the Sorbonne, and, what is more, without any APPROBATION of the POPE. The volume has 189 pages.

The second edition, as has been stated, issued in 1673; the third, mentioned in Bossuet's first letter, in 1676; the fourth in 1680 †, of which some account will be necessary.

This edition has several important peculiarities. It is preceded by a laboured Avertissement, and if not by the attestation of the Sorbonne, which may be accounted for variously, by the long sought, and at last obtained, Approbation (as it is called) of the Pope-not Clemens X., who was not to be won to that act of grace, but his successor, Innocent XI. Several other approbations of high officials in the Roman church are added, to silence the whispers that the holy see was not quite favourable. The Avertissement was written sufficiently early, to allow the hope, that the secret might yet be kept of there being anything more than several copies in manuscript of the Exposition before the first acknowledged edition; and to permit the bold assertion, that le livre fut im

* This appears to be mere form, and not intended to deceive, though really a falsehood.

† Walch, in his Biblioth. Theol., makes the date 1679, which is of no consequence. It could not be earlier, as appears by the date of the Pope's Breve. Both may be right.

primé pour la PREMIERE fois sur la FIN de l'année 1671. This assertion cannot be explained like the official form of a printer's licence. It will, it must, be understood in its literal sense, which the Bishop knew to be false. The writer expatiates upon the marks of approbation which his work had received from Rome, and affirms of it, il a enfin esté approuvé par le Pape mesme de la manière la plus authentique et la plus expresse qu'on pust attendre. This assertion is repeated in nearly the same terms. We shall see, in time, to what it amounts. He likewise details, with apparent triumph, the different translations of his work into English, Irish, Latin, Flemish, German, and particularly Italian. To this last he naturally assigns the chief value, as coming from Rome, and supported by various Italian testimonials. The praise which he bestows upon the exactitude of its execution is significant and intelligible-où un seul mot mal rendu pouvoit gaster tout l'Ouvrage. If it would not have occupied too much space I should with pleasure have examined rather minutely the eight testimonials, with which the author has fortified himself, in addition to that in the first edition, from Italian Cardinals, the Master of the Sacred Palace, the head Librarian of the Vatican, and others; in most of which the approbation is pretty dexterously measured. But

one, and the principal, cannot be dismissed without some observation, the fruit of about ten years' patient expectation, the Breve of his Holiness, INNOCENT XI.* And let the reader carefully weigh the terms in which the assumed and boasted approbation is expressed. Libellus de Catholicæ Fidei Expositione a Fraternitate tua compositus, nobisque oblatus ea doctrina eaque methodo ac prudentia scriptus est, ut perspicua brevitate legentes doceat et extorquere possit etiam ab invitis Catholicæ veritatis confessionem. Itaque non solum a nobis commendari, sed ab omnibus legi, atque in pretio haberi meretur. Ex eo sane non mediocres in orthodoxa Fidei propagationem, quæ nos præcipue cura intentos ac solicitos habet, utilitates redundaturas, Deo bene juvante, confidimus; &c. Here it will be obvious, that the whole amount of the commendation is the ability discovered in the work, and its aptitude to overturn heresy and procure converts. I note and repeat the word commendation; for it can escape none, how cautiously the word approbation, in any form, is avoided. The other instance of dexterity in the Breve concerns doctrine. It was a main object with the Expositor to obtain papal sanction in this respect and certain it is the word doctrina

*Dated Jan. 4, 1679.

is used, but in a sense at best ambiguous, and, according to the natural construction, signifying learning only. No wonder his holiness, after escaping so successfully, started off with agile satisfaction to the safe subjects, the preceptorship to the Dauphin, and the writer's devotedness to the Roman see. And let it not be supposed, that this Expositor of the Faith was not aware of the reserve of the Pontiff; for in the French translation given of this, as of the other, documents, the point of doctrine in the desired sense is intended to be secured by separating it from the other predicates thus contient une doctrine, et est composé avec une methode, &c. propre, &c.* And the consciousness of the translator is still more perceptible, with respect to the omitted approbation, by giving, as a version of commendari, loûé et approuvé de Noust. And now let the Bishop of Meaux's friends make the best they can of the pontifical approbation, so express that no one can any longer doubt that his book contains the pure doctrine of the Church and of the Holy

*The English translation of 1685 of course does the same; although with the original before the author.

See LAVAL, Hist. of Reformation in France, vol. iv., book viii., pp. 1167, 8, where the Reformers are stated to have been forbidden by a decree of government in 1679, to publish any book without Attestation and Certificate, because they pretended, that Ministers had no right to approve, but only to certify.