25 NOVEMBER 1871, Page 22

Mr. T. W. Allies complains, in a letter of which

we quote the essential part, of our notice of his wogs, St. _Peter, lie's Name and His Office :— " You ask, ' Is it an established interpretation among Roman Oathelie theologians that "the one Shepherd of the one fold" is St. Peter ? We should have thought that the words applied to Ono greater even than 'the Prince of the Apostles."' Now, I ask, what Catholic ever maintained that the one Shepherd of the one Fuld was not our Lord ? My book turns entirely upon ;mother queetiou. By a long argument, mainly deduced from a very great nember of Scriptural passages, it attempts to prove that our Lord, in that very character of the one Shepherd, appointed St. Peter, and the successor of St. Peter in every ago of the Church, to represent Himself visibly in order to main- tain the unity of the one Fold. Does the appointment of it viceroy pre- suppose the existence, or the non-existence, of the sovereign whom he represents ? D009 the delegated authority of the one interfere with the supreme authority of the other ? Does the bishop in his diocese dethrone Christ ? No opiecopalinn will allow this. Why, then, does the Popo in the whole Church ? Is a Prefect's eppointment more important or more legitimate than a Viceroy's? or does Lord Mayo usurp Queue Victoria's place as Empress of India? If you impeached the proofs contained in my book ; if you denied and eupperted by proof your denial that a Visible Head had been appointed to represent the In- visible, that would be legitimate and fair, and I should have nothing to complain of, But to confound visible with invisible headship, sub- ordinate with plenary power, derived with original authority, is an un- clearness unworthy of you ; and to suppose the greatest community in Christendom guilty of such a confusion is no lees an unfairness, which I am confident you will repudiate when it has been pointed out

. to you.—I am, Sir, &o., T. W ALLIES."

Our question was suggested by the dedication, which runs thus:—

" To Peter, Prince of the Apostles, the Rock of the Chureh, against which the Gates of Hell shall not prevail, the Bearer of the Keys, the Binder and Looser on Earth and in Heaven, the Coufirmar of hi Brethren, the Shepherd of the Fold."

We supposed that these last words had reference to the expression, "There shall be one fold and one Shepherd." If no such reference was intended, though this we do not gather from Mr. Allies's letter, we regret the error. If it was, we cannot think the explanation satisfactory. It is right, he says, to speak of St. Peter as "the Shepherd," because he is the representative of Christ. But surely the illustrations which he uses toll against him. Would it be right to speak of a Viceroy se "King "? What would the natives of India think if such a title were given to Lord Mayo? It is the charge which we Protestants venture to bring against the Church of Rome, though she is "the great community of Christendom," that she does' confound visible with invisible headship, subordinate with plenary power ;" that this confusion corrupts her theo- logy and her religious life, obscuring with an elaborate cultus of human objects the worship of the Supreme.