by a need that brought him who felt it to seek relief at Christ's Hand.

And this coming to Himself He treats almost like a personal compliment. Men were ignorant, they needed teaching, but if they admitted their ignorance in the form of asking enlightenment from Him, He gave as though He had received a mark of courtesy and repaid it with lavish generosity. You see this generosity of soul in His treatment of Nicodemus, but you see it no less in His miracles of multiplying food. The multitudes had listened to Him at some personal cost. He would not let them suffer by it. So at Cana, His host would have been shamed before his guests if the supply of wine had run short, and this shortage would apparently have been due to our Lord increasing the number of the guests beyond expectation. Our Lord therefore supplied the need without ostentation and with the least possible publicity. The miracle was a 'sign' (onμeîov), and a 'sign' of the Kingdom of Heaven, where men are Princes of the Blood and shew it by their feelings and conduct. Nothing so convinces us of Christ's royalty as this delicacy of consideration. And this was His peculiar glory.

One last word as to the value of Dr. Illingworth's books as a whole. He is a prince among apologists, and in an age which has been trained to represent its experience in categories of science and philosophy, apologetic has a very high value. The mystic may have an immediate certainty of the faith, but even for him it will be no slight gain if he colligate his experience with other classes of facts. Such a process may reveal the distinction between convictions which have the right to dominate him, and personal idiosyncrasies which control his mind with no such right. But apologetic does more than this. To help us to see the whole created universe as built up on principles inherent in the life of God Himself, is at least to remove stumbling blocks from the acceptance of the Christian Creed. Apologetic cannot of itself give the life, but it can roll away the stone. By manifesting consistency of principle it enables us to realize how the human life of

Christ was but a lower analogue of His eternal life as the Son of God. That' Kenosis' of Himself in the act of His becoming man is the law of His life on earth, and the law of the Divine life of God in heaven. The generation of the Son is the generosity of the Father, is the outpouring of Himself, the self-surrender, which is Love the Holy Ghost. To know God is to be the 'spectator of all existence.' It is this identity of principle throughout, which shews the creature as the work of God, and shews God as the generous Author of creaturely being, and we owe Dr. Illingworth a far greater debt than words can pay in having opened for us the intellectual eye and shewn us that the objects of its vision are all of one with the God and His Christ perceived in the beatific vision of faith.

F. J. BADCOCK.

ART. VIII. THE ISSUES OF THE WAR.

I. Germania contra Mundum. By the EARL OF CROMER. (London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd. 1915.)

2. What is at Stake in the War? By R. W. SETON-WATSON, D.Litt. 'Papers for War Time,' No. 35. (London : Milford. 1915.)

3. Norddeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung, Freitag den 20 August 1915. 'Rede des Reichskanzlers im Reichstage,' Sitzung vom Donnerstag, 19 August 1915.

4. Echos de Guerre-France et Kultur. Par M. L'Abbé M. M. GORSE, Docteur en Théologie. (Paris: Pierre Téqui. 1915.)

5. The German War and Catholicism. Published under the direction of Mgr. ALFRED BAUDRILLART, Rector of the Catholic Institute of Paris, and under the distinguished Patronage of the Catholic Committee of French Propaganda. (Paris: Blond and Gay. 1915.)

6. The Visions of Youth. By the BISHOP OF WINCHESTER. 'Papers for War Time,' No. 25. (London: Milford. 1915.)

7. So as by Fire: Notes on the War. By HENRY SCOTT HOLLAND, D.D., D.Litt. Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Oxford and Canon of Christ Church. (London: Wells Gardner, Darton and Co. Ltd. 1915.)

8. The Neutrality of the United States in Relation to the British and German Empires. By J. SHIELD NICHOLSON, SC.D., LL.D., F.B.A., Professor of Political Economy in the University of Edinburgh. (London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd. 1915.)

9. How goes the War? By G. W. PROTHERO, Litt.D., LL.D. Issued by the Central Committee for National Patriotic Organisations. (London: 62 Charing Cross, W.C. 1915.)

RECENT events and in particular the successes of the enemy in the East have led to various declarations on the part of Germany as to its aims and purpose in this war. That the contest in which we are involved is even more grave than we had anticipated must have become clear to every thoughtful person. We seem only to be at the beginning of our efforts, rather than at the end. It is essential therefore that we should make up our minds very clearly what we are fighting for, what our opponents are aiming at, and what is involved as regards the future of Europe and of the British Empire.

Among the literature that lies before us we have two pamphlets of marked ability-one by Lord Cromer, Germania contra Mundum, the other by Dr. Seton-Watson, What is at Stake in the War? Lord Cromer writes from the point of view of an experienced diplomatist who for twenty-four years occupied the most difficult post in the service of his country, where he had a clear insight into the diplomatic methods of the great European Powers, and where he had to observe with the utmost care every change in the diplomatic position. He had the power necessary to carry on his work and bring it (so far as any man could) to a successful conclusion in spite of obstacles which might to most men have seemed insuperable. There is no one whose judgement we should expect to be wiser or more

sober, no one whose statement we should listen to more attentively, when he feels it, as he does, his duty to express his opinion. He believes

'that it is at the present time the bounden duty of everyone who can, in however small a degree, gain the ear of the public, and who, from advancing years or other causes, is incapacitated from rendering other and more valuable services, to use his voice and pen in order to bring home to his countrymen and countrywomen the realities of the situation.'

Dr. Seton-Watson's qualifications are different. He has not the practical experience of politics or diplomacy, and it would not be unfair to suggest that there is a touch of the ideal and the impracticable in his proposals. But he has an intimate geographical and historical knowledge of the countries of Eastern Europe. He knows what the problems are, and is full of sympathy with the aspirations of those countries. Like others, he is perhaps a little too anxious to re-arrange the map of Europe-a proceeding which in practice would be found more difficult and less satisfactory than on paper. But it is the aims of the combatants on both sides that we are concerned with, and Dr. Seton-Watson interprets with fuller knowledge the results which the ordinary citizen of this country hopes to attain from this war.

The contrast afforded by the difference between the creed of the Allies and the creed of Germany will become very apparent as we proceed. We have not only the responsible utterances of the German Chancellor, we have a remarkable programme adopted by a number of German professors and other intellectuals' at a meeting held on June 20, for the purpose of the presentation of a petition to the German Imperial Chancellor. We can compare statesman with statesman, and intellectual and journalist with their German rivals.

Now what is the definite aim of Germany? Let us hear the Chancellor.

'No! This gigantic world's war, which makes the joints of the world gape open, will not bring back the old bygone

situation. A new one must arise. If Europe shall come to peace it can only be possible by the inviolable and strong position of Germany. The English policy of the balance of power must disappear, because it is, as the English poet, Bernard Shaw, recently said, a hatching oven for wars.'

Now as there are other persons besides Mr. Bernard Shaw who are prepared to criticize this policy of the balance of power, let us ask for a moment what to reject it. means. It means this, that Germany is to be so strong that it may arrange the map of Europe as it will; that if it desires to do anything to any other nation, no one is to be able to prevent it; that it shall be able to treat the rest of Europe as Prussia for example treated Poland, or Germany in 1870 and since has treated Alsace and Lorraine. On the other hand the very circumstances of their position will secure that no such policy can be that of the Allies. Let us hear Dr. Seton-Watson :

'One fact has already become abundantly clear since those words were uttered-that whereas the victory of the Central Powers means an absolute German hegemony over enemies and allies alike, the victory of the Entente will be the joint work of an ever-expanding group of Powers. While Germany, if she wins, will justly regard herself as having saved Austria-Hungary from destruction, not one of her rivals, in the event of the triumph of the Entente, will be able to claim a monopoly of the credit. Each will have contributed to the common cause, but in each case that contribution will have been an indispensable part of the total effort. Here at least it is possible to find some consolation. The victory of William II would be a victory for the spirit which inspired Louis XIV or the first Napoleon, a reversion to the vanishing era of insolent conquest and plunder. The victory of the Allies will be a victory for Europe and the European system.'

We have quoted the Imperial Chancellor as to the aims of Germany: let us quote our own Prime Minister as to the aims of England. They are, so he said on September 19, 'firstly to vindicate the sanctity of treaty obligations and what is properly called the public law of Europe; secondly to assert and to enforce the independence of free states, relatively small

VOL. LXXXI.-NO. CLXI.

N