the productions of the seventeenth century. As "they who are whole
need not a physician, but they who are sick," so in proportion to
the decline of faith were the excitements to faith, or rather to
credulity: just in proportion as men were less inclined to believe
were the wonders multiplied which they were called on to believe.

I have not spoken of the influence of Jesuitism on art. This Order
kept alive that devotion for the Madonna which their great founder
Loyola had so ardently professed when he chose for the "Lady" of
his thoughts, "no princess, no duchess, but one far greater, more
peerless." The learning of the Jesuits supplied some themes not
hitherto in use, principally of a fanciful and allegorical kind, and
never had the meek Mary been so decked out with earthly ornament
as in their church pictures. If the sanctification of simplicity,
gentleness, maternal love, and heroic fortitude, were calculated
to elevate the popular mind, the sanctification of mere glitter and
ornament, embroidered robes, and jewelled crowns, must have tended
to degrade it. It is surely an unworthy and a foolish excuse that, in
thus desecrating with the vainest and most vulgar finery the beautiful
ideal of the Virgin, an appeal was made to the awe and admiration
of vulgar and ignorant minds; for this is precisely what, in all
religious imagery, should be avoided. As, however, this sacrilegious
millinery does not come within the province of the fine arts, I may
pass it over here.

Among the Jesuit prints of the seventeenth century, I remember one
which represents the Virgin and Child in the centre, and around are
the most famous heretics of all ages, lying prostrate, or hanging by
the neck. Julian the Apostate; Leo the Isaurian; his son, Constantine
Capronymus; Arius; Nestorius; Manicheus; Luther; Calvin:--very