[3] Const., part vi, chap. i.[4] “Since the delivery of the lecture, a Roman Catholic gentleman has complained of the use then made of this Constitution, and stated that it means “that the Constitutions do not bind under pain of mortal or venial sin, unless,” &c. I cannot undertake to decide what may have been the intentions of the author, but I can fearlessly appeal to the opinion of any Latin scholar as to the grammatical accuracy of the translation given above. The original is as follows:—‘Cum exoptet Societas universas suas Constitutiones, declarationes, ac vivendi ordinem, omnino juxta nostrum Institutum, nihil ulla in re declinando, observari; optet etiam nihilominus suos omnes securos esse, vel certÈ adjuvari, ne in laqueum ullius peccati, quod ex vi Constitutionum hujusmodi, aut ordinationum proveniat, incidant: Visum est nobis in Domino prÆter expressum votum, quo Societas Summo Pontifici, pro tempore existenti, tenetur, ac tria alia essentialia paupertatis, castitatis, et obedientiÆ, nullas Constitutiones, Declarationes, vel ordinem ullum vivendi, posse obligationem ad peccatum mortale vel veniale inducere; nisi Superior ea in nomine Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, vel in virtute obedientiÆ juberet: quod in rebus, vel personis illis, in quibus judicabitur, quod ad particulare uniuscujusque, vel ad universale bonum multum conveniet, fieri poterit: [et loco timoris offensÆ, succedat amor et desiderium omnis perfectionis; et ut major gloria et laus Christi Creatoris ac Domini Nostri consequatur].’ With the single additional remark, that the version thus excepted against is by no means an exclusively Protestant one, but has been adopted by most competent Roman Catholic authorities, I would earnestly recommend to my readers, of either communion, the perusal of the third letter in the Rev. Canon Wordsworth’s ‘Sequel to Letters to M. Gordon,’ where this very Constitution and this same objection are fully discussed and disposed of. Supposing, however, that the criticism, the logic, and the historical research of that eminently learned divine should fail to satisfy the Roman Catholic reader, let him substitute for the above supposed doubtful passage the following, respecting which there can be no dispute: ‘They should permit themselves to be moved and directed, under Divine Providence, by their Superiors, just as if they were a corpse, which allows itself to be moved and handled in any way, or as the staff of an old man, which serves him whenever and in whatever thing he who holds it in his hand pleases to use it.—Const., part vi, chap. i.’”[7] Vide Summa, 2. 2. quoest. clxxxvi, art. ix, where St. Thomas, in treating of this very question of the obligatory force of the rules of Religious, uses the phrase nine times.[8] There is a Review of Dr. Wordsworth’s “Sequel,” in the Dublin Review for July, 1848.[14] “Thou shalt hear a voice behind thee, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it.”