thing to show how much there is in common between England and Rome, and quite another to argue that there is no difference.  Mr. Ward’s refusal to allow a reasonable and a Catholic interpretation to the doctrine of the Articles on Justification, though such an understanding of it had not only been maintained by Bishop Bull and the later orthodox divines, but was impressed on all the popular books of devotion, such as the Whole Duty of Man and Bishop Wilson’s Sacra Privata; and along with this, the extreme claim to hold compatible with the Articles the “whole cycle of Roman doctrine,” introduced entirely new conditions into the whole question. Non hoec in foedera was the natural reflection of numbers of those who most sympathised with the Tractarian school.  The English Church might have many shortcomings and want many improvements; but after all she had something to say for herself in her quarrel with Rome; and the witness of experience for fifteen hundred years must be not merely qualified and corrected, but absolutely wiped out, if the allegation were to be accepted that Rome was blameless in all that quarrel, and had no part in bringing about the confusions of Christendom.  And this contention was more and more enforced in Mr. Ward’s articles in the British Critic—­enforced, more effectively than by direct statement, by continual and passing assumption and implication.  They were papers of considerable power and acuteness, and of great earnestness in their constant appeal to the moral criteria of truth; though Mr. Ward was not then at his best as a writer, and they were in composition heavy, diffuse, monotonous, and wearisome.  But the attitude of deep depreciation, steady, systematic, unrelieved, in regard to that which ought, if acknowledged at all, to deserve the highest reverence among all things on earth, in regard to an institution which, with whatever faults, he himself in words still recognised as the Church of God, was an indefensible and an unwholesome paradox.  The analogy is a commonly accepted one between the Church and the family.  How could any household go on in which there was at work an animus of unceasing and relentless, though possibly too just criticism, on its characteristic and perhaps serious faults; and of comparisons, also possibly most just, with the better ways of other families?  It might be the honest desire of reform and improvement; but charity, patience, equitableness, are virtues of men in society, as well as strict justice and the desire of improvement.  In the case of the family, such action could only lead to daily misery and the wasting and dying out of home affections.  In the case of a Church, it must come to the sundering of ties which ought no longer to bind.  Mr. Ward all along insisted that there was no necessity for looking forward to such an event.  He wished to raise, purify, reform the Church in which Providence had placed him; utterly dissatisfied as he was with it, intellectually