actually the spiritual force of faith. The movement which it led had its origin among the people; it was animated by the deepest and strongest faith; its first leaders represented the highest intelligence of the community, and glowed with the fire of a sincere faith uniting them with the people. Thus in this movement were concentrated immense spiritual forces, which, after many years of struggle, compelled the surrender of the ancient faith.

To-day conditions differ altogether. From the side of the State discord, has arisen between the religion of the people and the political organisation of the Church. From the other quarter of intelligence has sprung a still more striking disunion between religion and its scientific construction. Theological science-no longer restricted to its original function of studying and comprehending religious beliefs-threatens to absorb all belief by submitting it as a phenomenon and external object of investigation to the unsparing critical analysis of reason. Political science has established a carefully elaborated doctrine of the definite severance of Church from State, in consequence of which, by the operation of a law admitting no division of supreme power, the Church inevitably appears as an institution subordinate to the State. Together with this, the State appears, according to the new conception, as an institution detached from every religion and indifferent to all. It is natural that, from this point of view, the Church appears merely as an institution satisfying one of the needs of the population recognised by the State-namely, the need of religion; and the modern State, while

exercising over this institution control and supervision, in no way troubles about religion itself. For the State, as the supreme political institution, such a theory is attractive: it assures it complete autonomy, the elimination of opposition, and the simplification of all the operations of its ecclesiastical policy. But such assurances are delusive; for this theory, evolved in the studies of ministers and scholars, the conscience of the people will not accept. In all that relates to religion the masses demand simplicity and completeness, which satisfy their minds, and they reject all artificial ideas, instinctively discerning their diversity from truth. Political theorists will accept the retention of their offices by priests and professors who-as unhappily often occurs in Germany - publicly declare their disbelief in the divinity of our Saviour. The conscience of the people will never accept such an interpretation of the priestly office, but will reject it with abhorrence as a falsehood. Unhappy and hopeless is the position of the ruling power when in its dispositions in matters of religion the masses everywhere detect falsehood and infidelity.

II

The separation of Church and State was treated remarkably by the ex-priest Hyacinthe in his public lectures delivered in Geneva, in the spring of 1863 War to the knife with the Church-this is the fancy of the revolutionary party, or, at least, of its extreme representatives, who in politics call themselves