departures add to the value of the work for the English-speaking reader of to-day. The clear print and excellent paper add no little to the pleasure, which every Catholic will find in the persual of this very meritorious work. There is a widespread and growing desire on the part of Catholics and non-Catholics as well to learn the history of the liturgy of the Catholic Church, and particularly to learn the meaning of the ceremonies of the Mass. Father Berry has earned the lasting gratitude of the English-speaking world by placing in accessible form and in simple, clear language the history and the inward meaning of the Eucharistic liturgy. The author is describing a very general condition when he says: "Ignorance of the historical origin and the literal significance of the various parts of the Mass results in a lack of that devotion and edification which the ceremonies of their very nature ought to produce. This ignorance may even result in a real injury by giving room for a feeling which, perhaps, we would not confess even to ourselves; a hazy impression that, after all, these ceremonies-the peculiar vestments, the movements of the priest, the prayers now chanted, now murmured--make up but a beautiful extravaganza. But let us grant that we do not experience this rather irreverent feeling, because, being profoundly Catholic, we regard with reverence whatever the Church does, even though we do not understand it all. Yet, if a non-Catholic were to question us concerning the Mass and its ceremonies, would we be able to answer him? Would we be able to explain to him the origin and meaning of what he saw? Both propriety and Christian duty require that we give a reason for what we do and what we think as Christians." The need referred to here has long been felt by the Catholic laity who constantly seek for some convenient source of information on these topics. The Catholic Encyclopedia offered the first available source of information, and if it rendered no other service but this to the cause of Catholicism, it would have justified its existence. Naturally, however, the matter is treated in the Encyclopedia under a multitude of different headings and the busy Catholic desires some more convenient form. The Encyclopedia is still beyond the reach of many, and it is somewhat too cumbersome and elaborate for children. The present volume, moreover, is peculiarly suited to the needs of those who are groping their way towards the Catholic Church. THOMAS EDWARD SHIELDS. Industrial Studies, United States, Nellie B. Allen, Boston, Ginn & Co., 1910, pp. X-335. This volume gives a very readable account of the industries carried on in this country. The titles of its seventeen chapters give a good idea of the practical character of the work: Introduction, Position and Size, Surface and Drainage, Climate and Soil, Waterways and Railroads, Cotton, Sugar, Fruit, Wheat, Corn, Coal, Iron, Gold and Silver, The Cattle and Beef Industry, The Sheep and Wool Industry, Lumbering and Allied Industries, Fisheries. The work has a comprehensive alphabetical index and one hundred and twenty-five excellent illustrations. It cannot fail to render valuable service in the classroom. It will prepare the children for a more extended study of economics as well as for industrial training and it will clothe the study of geography with interest. The language is simple, the style clear, and the facts are presented in a way to hold the attention of the reader. THOMAS EDWARD SHIELDS. Educational Review SEPTEMBER, 1911 THE SEMINARY AND THE EDUCATIONAL At first glance, this title seems to be artificial. It implies, apparently, an attempt to bring into direct relation two things which have little or nothing in common. And it may even suggest that the purpose of this discussion is to discover, perhaps to devise the function which the seminary does or should perform in the general work of education. Such, however, is not the scope of this paper; and, if I may speak in advance for those who will present different aspects of the subject, they have no such undertaking in hand. We are all, I think, agreed that the priest, and therefore his training, and therefore again the institution which gives that training, are very closely related to the whole educational movement. There is hardly a phase, positive or negative, in this movement that does not in some way affect religion and consequently demand the attention of those with whom the cause of religion is the supreme consideration. Nor can we, on the other hand, point to any institution which in the nature of things and their normal course, has richer opportunities for influencing education than the seminary has. Passing over the various details of its work, let this essential feature be emphasized: the seminary realizes on the highest plane that Christian ideal according to which the whole *Read in the Seminary Department of the Catholic Educational Association, Chicago, June 27, 1911. man is educated. Its one purpose is to fit men for right thinking and righteous action in order that they in turn may impart the truth of salvation to others and walk before them in the way of life. In a word the seminary is engaged in the training of teachers and for this very reason it can neither of its own accord hold aloof from education in general nor be legitimately excluded from its due share in giving to education its direction and character. It is true that the function of the seminary is a special one; it admits but one class of students and that by no means the largest; it offers a course of study that includes a well-defined series of subjects; and it is in no hurry to modify its curriculum or to depart from its traditional methods. Add to these conservative elements the necessity of a discipline which withdraws the student in large measure from every-day contact with the world, and it will be readily seen why the seminary is often thought of as an out-of-the-way place in which young men, by some archaic mysterious process, are gradually transformed into preachers and priests. But it is no less intelligible that the secular educator should regard the seminary, if he give it any thought at all, as a negligible quantity in his reckoning. He is so accustomed to dealing with factors that are flexible, his idea of progress is so fully bound up with the idea of perpetual motion, and his concept of life lays such emphasis on change in adaptation to change, that with his rather vague notion of the seminary, he is apt to pass it over as an institution which neither cares to advance in its own line nor takes much concern of the forward movement in any other line. This misunderstanding arises from the application of a right principle to a wrong statement of fact as alleged. We all admit that the chief symptom of vitality is adjustment and that any institution that aims either at service or at influence must possess and manifest the power of adjustment. Now, it would be strange indeed if the semi nary, with its intensely practical purposes, were lacking in this vital power of shaping its work with a view to actual conditions. That in point of fact it does possess this power, I now take for granted. And I further insist that the seminary has in itself the capacity not only to meet the demands that may reasonably be made upon it, but also to affect in a helpful way the movement by which those demands are created. In my view, then, our question reduces to this: How shall the seminary use its abilities and its opportunities to the best advantage? Or again, and more directly, how shall it contribute its share to the solution of the general educational problem? Here again we encounter the difficulty of vagueness, but this time it looms up from the opposite quarter. For when we call on the general problem to come forward, we find ourselves confronted by a multitude of problems each of which has its claims and more than one advocate to support them. There are questions of finance and administration, of organization and control, of ideals and principles and curricula and methods-to say nothing of theories and experiments. All these clamor for settlement and no doubt a good deal of thought will be spent in the settling. But back of them all and giving to each its relative value there is a problem that is more than general; it is essential; and that is precisely how to educate. Given an ideal, however exalted, and the question is how to attain it. Given the requisite material means and the best possible organization-we have still to ask to what uses they shall be applied. And when any method is proposed which assures speedy or brilliant results, we have to subject it to the one final test-does it really educate? Mark well; I do not say that this is the problem of absolutely highest importance, as though the means should rank before the end or the processes count for more than the final outcome. Much less is it my intention |