Those conversant with the history of mediaeval education are generally aware of the fact that clerks studying in a theological faculty were permitted, during the thirteenth century, to enjoy their ecclesiastical rents in absentia1. The Super Speculam of Honorius III is often cited as the basis of this practice, although many scholars also know that the custom was in use, on a local scale, before 1219. The present writer does not wish, at the moment, to inquire into the origins of the practice, nor does he intend to offer any new interpretation of Honorius' famous bull.

A recent article on tyrannicide in an authoritative Catholic reference work states that there exist few official pronouncements of the Church on this controversial subject2. The only ruling on the legitimacy of putting to death a tyrannical ruler mentioned is the highly ambiguous decree of the Council of Constance in 1415. In the interest of greater accuracy and fuller historical knowledge it may be in place to bring to light a secret brief on tyrannicide issued in 1615 by Pope Paul V in which he approved and renewed the decree of Constance. This brief assumes special significance in view of the fact that until then the earlier decree had never been explicitly confirmed by any pope and thus could be considered as not binding. Moreover, the circumstances under which the brief was issued have received inadequate, and sometimes deliberately distorted, treatment that calls for clarification and correction.

With justification American historians emphasize the rise of democratic government during the Colonial Period. The will of the colonists to determine their own affairs grew with greater force after their departure from the mother country. Within the colonies themselves they successfully demanded greater liberty in their political institutions.1 Free representation was strengthened by the plea for free conscience in a common effort to transform the outward political forms which they had left behind in seventeenth century England. In this process new understanding of the State was developing.

Many students of John Wesley have examined his economic ideas;2 few have appreciated their range. At least three sources molded the economic thought of the founder of Methodism. Only one of them, the Christian ethical tradition, has been studied with sufficient care. It was, to be sure, the first and most prominent source. But it was followed, first by Wesley's reaction to certain acute social problems which forced themselves on his attention during the 1770's, then by the thought of one of the most prominent economists of that day, the Rev. Josiah Tucker, Dean of Gloucester. These later stimuli led Wesley to consider a problem which disturbed many of his contemporaries, the problem of the extent to which a government should be allowed to control commerce and industry. His thinking on this problem is important, not because of its sophistication, but because of the tremendous influence Wesley exerted on public opinion, through his uncommonly effective preaching, organizing, and writing.3

In an essay written in 19291 Professor Tillich concluded that the sacraments continue to exist in modern Protestantism largely through historical impetus. The conservatism of custom and a vague awareness that their observance is somehow due to our Lord are apparently sufficient to prevent their total extinction. The last generation has of course witnessed a liturgical revival in our churches; but this new interest is by no means universal and appears on the whole to be superficial. It is less devoted to an understanding of Christian faith which might require liturgical expression than to the ornamentation of the places and procedures of worship. Its activity is rooted less in theology than in aesthetics and psychology, being perhaps more often an expression of cultural sophistication than of any serious appreciation of the sacramental quality of Christian life.

Historians are wary of surveys of neatly packaged periods of time such as the decade. However, an attempt to survey progress in the field of American Catholic history might be excused if it settled on the period of the last ten years. There are two reasons for this decision. First, it was just ten years ago that the late Thomas F. O'Connor in his presidential address to the American Catholic Historical Association spoke on trends and what, for some unexplained reason, he called ominously “portents” in the writing of American Catholic history. We have, therefore, in his remarks some mark from which to judge forward movement. The second reason for restricting an examination of this matter to the last decade is that the year 1946 marked the first formal entrance of John Tracy Ellis into the circle of historians of American Catholicism.