most rational criticism, looking to intrinsic merit, rather than the current of popular applause, or the prejudices of popular opinion; seeking in all things to gratify as well as to enlighten, to give the vivid tints and splendid colours of the Aurora as well as its dazzling and majestic light. "The conductors of this work are of opinion, that the advancement of mankind in civilisation has been attended with the most promising results the intellect of the human race progresses; mind asserts its mastery over matter; powers, both rational and physical, become developed as the mind becomes fitted to receive them; and, above all, Religion and a spirit of Practical Christianity become wider spread as their Doctrines become better known and appreciated. To all those who are interested in the progress of the moral and intellectual being - the warfare of the spiritual against the animal; to all searchers into the philosophy of the mind, The Aurora will be as a day-star pointing unto Truth; thus, while the world is agitated with conflicting opinions, and the human mind perplexed with anxiety and doubt, the Aurora will appear as a friend and a monitor, seeking alone to investigate and arrive at a higher and more exalted state of being."

Such, O most sagacious, knowing, and placable of critics, are the words of this singular prospectus, which has attracted the credence of the esoteric adepts, the censure of the oi noλot, and the astonishment of all. In relation to it we shall cite a passage from a French philosopher, quoted by Mr. Murphy, the arch-prophet of weatherology,-" Si ces pensées ne plaisent à personne, elles pourront n'être que mauvaises : mais je les tiens pour détestables si elles plaisent à tout le monde."

So much by way of exordium. Let me now proceed to the illustration of our text. That text frequently contains the word Catholicity. If my readers ask what I mean by Catholicity? I answer, no more or less than universality, which is its English synonym. Let it be plainly understood once for all, that we generally use the word catholicism in this its original and classical sense. To our thinking the word catholicism implies that doctrine of divine and universal truth which has been ever cherished by the catholic and universal church in Heaven and earth; that truth, which is the delight of "the spirits of just men made perfect," gathered from ages and nations, and confirmed by the great current of judicious decisions. It is this catholicism to which Lord Bacon alludes, when he says, "In religion is it safest to follow the great wheel of the Church." He means of that church universal, that ecclesia in ecclesia, which spiritually exists amid all particular churches. It is this catholicism to which Selden has given us this exact direction,— "He that avoids the disputing levity of the sceptics, yet, being able, takes to himself their liberty of enquiry, is in the only way that, in all kinds of studies, leads and lies open even to the sanctuary of truth; while others that are servile to common opinion and vulgar suppositions, can rarely hope to be admitted nearer than into the bare court of her temple, which too speciously often counterfeits her inmost sanctuary." We may sometimes apply this epithet, catholic, to universal truthsearchers among various religious sects, be they Jews, Papists, Protestants, Conformists, or Nonconformists, but we can only apply it to them in a complimentary and secondary sense; for the true catholicity diminishes exactly in the same ratio as sectarianism increases.

N. S.-VOL. II.

A A

When

ever we can, with any decent adherence to truth, compliment a man by this august epithet-eatholic, we do so; but this is always with such drawbacks and deductions as his own one-sidedness and partiality demand. It is clear, for instance, that the relative catholicity of those Jews, Papists, Protestants, Tories, Whigs, Radicals, &c., must be very minute, who are always insisting on the dogmas of their particular sect or party, schism or faction, and hurling the anathemas of damnation on all their antagonists.

Such is the design of Apollo, in the pages of which, the friends of Coleridge will unfold their views. It will endeavour to assume the loftiest position which a periodical can occupy, as the organ of divine and universal truth. In attempting to evolve that truth, it will elucidate the highest and most recondite branches of that heaven-revealed theology, that catholic and universal divinity, which all churches, Jewish, Roman, Catholic and Protestant, share in different degrees of intensity and purity. It will illustrate what is true and admirable in each, with as little as possible of the sectarian prejudice and one-sidedness which is so often lamented in many religious publications.

Apollo will likewise be especially sedulous to elucidate the grand science of Theosophy so called. This Theosophy is the adytal science of lodges of initiation, ancient and modern. It stands exactly between the ecclesiastical sciences of the Church, and the scholastic philosophy of the schools. It is the appropriate generic name of that vast body of learning which comprises freemasonry, mythology, pneumatology, hieroglyphics, astrology, alchemy and all the occult and mystical sciences and arts that have been cultivated in lodges of initiation. This range of theosophic learning occupies about a third of all the books which have ever been written. A familiarity with it is absolutely necessary to unfold many of the doctrines of Church theology which is above it, and scholastic philosophy which is below it. Yet since the date of the famous Theosophic transactions, to which Cudworth, More, Rust, and Glanville contributed, little has been done for Theosophy in this nation. That noble branch of it which is entitled Freemasonry, has been more fortunate, in being illustrated by excellent scholars, such as Ramsay, and Oliver, and several of the writers in the Freemasonic Magazine. Still, however, much remains to be effected in elucidating the sciences of initiation, connected as they are with the entire history of literature. There are many portions of the occult sciences as admirable and radiant as there are other things atrocious and horrible.

In politics, as I have already asserted, I shall steadily support the syncretic and coalitionary course which Guizot has adopted in France. I shall do so because I believe that the only true conservatism— that conservatism which alone can preserve the glories of the British empire, will consist in the coalitionary administrations of our worthiest and wisest statesmen, selected for their real respectability and experience, from all sects and parties. I should rejoice to see such men as the Duke of Norfolk, Lord Clifford, Lord Shrewsbury, the Duke of Wellington, Sir Robert Peel, Lord Brougham, Lord Stanley and Lord John Russell, form a strong coalitionary administration which alone can stand in times like these. Such men are essentially too noble and too

great for party. They wrong themselves, they wrong their country, by following the example of the statesman,

Who, born for the universe, narrowed his mind,

And to party gave up what was meant for mankind.

All parties have their several merits and defects, which in case of a wise coalition might be harmonised to patriotic concord; in which even the lowest notes would not be without use. But by the present partisantic and divisional policy, so powerfully condemned by all grave authorities, these constituent elements of a representative administration are separated and antagonised. Hence, the unnumbered mischiefs that attend the progress, schisms, and factions in our land, and the endless jealousies and recriminations that are worthy of the infernal regions.

For my part, I will likewise strive to support my principles in reference to jurisprudence; and the legal reforms which have become so intensely necessary. I will freely discuss the most interesting topics of science, literature, and the arts, as they emerge upon the tide of times.

It is indeed a bold undertaking for any one periodical to assume so lofty and so wide a sphere of intellectual agency-for any one periodical to embrace all those questions of the Church, the lodge, and the schools of philosophy, science literature and art, which are so ably discussed in many periodicals of a more partial character.

But bold as the undertaking may be, I shall endeavour, if well supported, to do justice to my design and purpose. In doing so I rather seek to enter into fair competition and generous emulation with contemporary periodicals than indulge any hostile or pitiful animosity. This sentiment, I know I shall certainly find reciprocated by all those scholars best worthy of the name who conduct the periodical press. Such men are too conversant with the first principle of honour; "do as you would be done by," as the proverb expresses it; aye, and too nobleminded to monopolise the prizes that should be open to all fair candidates. With such spirits I love to encounter, "and will this brother's wager frankly pay."

It is therefore without one spark of hostility, that I would now emulate the example of the brilliant periodicals, whose talents I have always admired, and to whose pages I have so often contributed. If ever I am obliged to censure these old friends whom I would rather praise, it shall be done with a kindly recollection of Othello's rule, "Nothing extenuate, nor set down aught in malice." As to the rest, who shall be nameless, I expect my full share of abuse from those who excell in nothing so much as in slandering the works they cannot rival. We hope that the spirit of Apollo is not to be quenched by any such extinguishers as theirs.

For myself, I have not the slightest fear of the result of such coalitionary policy. If I find any thing invincibly proved by Erasmus, Grotius, and Paley, it is this general principle-that truth is surest to triumph where she has fair play and open field. I believe that true religion will flourish in proportion as Jews, papists, and protestants are placed on the same equal privileges; and that true policy will gain ground in proportion, as Tories, Whigs, and Radicals, are treated generously and impartially. I have this full confidence, that truth is strongest and must

prevail, but then she must have an open arena, where her champions may meet their antagonists on level ground. Her genuine knights ask nothing else, they scorn to take the advantages that befit the sneaking coward. If by such dastardly means they were to get their antagonist under, or keep him under, their victory would be little better than defeat. They take a nobler view of their cause, and pay it a finer compliment; they are not afraid to trust it, for it is the cause of God and heaven. Like the freeborn son of chivalry, they would fight a gallant battle, sans peur et sans reproche. Far from dreading the strength of their opponents, they rejoice in it because they are sensitive of what Scott has termed

The deep stern joy which warriors feel
In foemen worthy of their stee!.

It has been the hardest task of truth-searchers to infuse this glorious confidence into the minds of men. We shew by incessant illustrations, magna est veritas et prævalebit, but the people will not believe it. It is well that the heroic champions of religion and liberty were not thus afraid to trust the truth. They sought that equal competition which our contemporaries so morbidly dread. They would not annihilate the divine omnipotence of their cause, by identifying it with the arm of flesh. They abhorred exclusiveness, because they knew that in proportion as men attempt monopoly they insure ruin. It was in the grandest science of eternal morals that Adam Smith discovered this great principle of catholicity, which he applied so triumphantly to trade and commerce. He shewed that monopolists were not only the enemies of their country, but of themselves, because they gradually excited external antagonism, while they boasted internal unity. The fact has confirmed his theory, and monopoly after monopoly has been abolished according to his prediction, though no one would believe him in his day and generation.

And so it will be yet in the augustest affairs of British government. From the very throne of majesty, a system of equal patronage is beginning to extend as from a centre of light, to the murkiest circumferences of sectarianism. We depicted long ago, the irresistible necessity of national instincts, and national wants, which still urges forward the resplendent catastrophe. Its advocates are obedient to a far greater law than they violate; they promote the universal interests of philanthropy and patriotism, though they may offend schismatic prejudices. They seek to encourage and foster all honourable and useful establishments, while they would deprive exclusive institutions of their exclusiveness.

A great number of British writers are gradually making an approximation to the Catholic and Syncretic policy, which is alike benignant to Jews, papists, and protestants. I see its indications in the better-informed portion of the Roman Catholics. O'Croly, the Dublin Review, and the Catholic Magazine, have exhibited symptoms of this liberal spirit. I see similar indications among the Oxford Divines, in the British Magazine, and their other organs. I see indications of it in Mr. Noel's Low Church Party, and the City Mission and Religious Tract Societies. I see it in the recent Prize Essay, entitled Schism, which deserves a more extended notice. I see it in many Dissenting

publications, as Harris's Union, and other similar works of great talent. I see it in an eccentric periodical of much merit, entitled the Inquirer, representing the views of the Reformed Quakers, and the Providentialists or Plymouth Brethren, an extraordinary and rapidly increasing sect. And we see it among the Unitarian publications, especially those of the American Channing.

Such are the symptoms of advancing Syncretism. Most of these advocates, however, seem afraid to carry out their own principles of Union into its legitimate consequences. They want a catholicism, which shall still be sectarian. They ask for a universalism, which shall still leave their favourite party predominant. They seek to destroy all the monopolies of their antagonists, but to hug and lick their own in inviolable safety. For me, I agree with the Satyr in the fable, and rather suspect men who blow hot and cold with one breath. If the principle of Union and Catholicity be a sound principle, the further we follow out its legitimate deductions the better. By granting the truth of the principle of Unionism, and then shrinking from its inevitable conclusions, men only make themselves ridiculous. If the theory of free trade is to be allowed in religion and politics, as well as in commerce, then do away with monopolies. If fair play and equal favour is to be the order of the day, then all exclusive institutions must run their chance with the rest.

In this consideration lies the nucleus of all the real difficulties that beset our cabinet. By the syncretic and coalitionary system alone will our political forces ever gravitate to their approximate equilibrium, and induce harmony, peace and prosperity. Nothing short of this will ever reach the essential causes of discord, faction and sedition. It has been by the narrow, short-sighted and one-sided jurisprudence of several partisantic administrations that our friends have been cooled, and our enemies heated. In accordance with this mutilated sophistry, England has swallowed Ireland, and has never succeeded in digesting her. Hinc illa lacrymæ. Dawn, dawn, O blessed day, when, to use old Spenser's words, "The laud that, on account of its angryness, was wont to be called Ireland, shall become the land of concord and tranquillity!" The foregoing remarks apply with equal force to our foreign colonies. But the ghost of Dr. Johnson is even now whispering in my ear, "All things that have a conclusion must be brought to a termination." I must therefore add to the number of conclusions in which nothing is concluded, and adjourn the debate till-" I don't know when."

ALERIST.