THE FIRST SHAM,

THE SHAM
SHAM PETER,

CALLED

THE POP E.

[In the present number of "THE BIBLE AND THE PEOPLE," we have departed from our usual method of five divisions, in order to insert in one complete number, three Lectures, delivered in the Town Hall, Birmingham, on Tuesday Evenings, September 23rd, 30th, and October 7th, by the Rev. BREWIN GRANT, B.A. From the effect produced by their delivery, upon a very large and intelligent auditory, it was thought they would not be unacceptable to the readers of "THE BIBLE AND THE PEOPLE." Whilst for the convenience of non-subscribers, they will be reprinted in a separate form, and neatly bound for separate use and preservation. It is possible, that some of our subscribers may also avail themselves of the distinct publication, whilst having the Lectures in this extraordinary number bound up with the first volume of "THE BIBLE AND THE PEOPLE."

We take this opportunity of thanking our numerous subscribers; and requesting their hearty concurrence in extending the Periodical, especially for the next year's issue. The present number will serve as an additional pledge of the important principles maintained with intelligence and vigour in our columns; nor are we without hopes and resources for great advances in the depth, variety, freshness, and interest, with which the Scriptural views propounded, will in future be maintained. And we rely with confidence on the lovers of Bible-truth to aid us in this sacred enterprise. THE EDITOR OF THE BIBLE AND the People.]

THE perfection of principle demands that in the pursuit and advocacy of truth, we should not pervert or betray it to narrow aims, personal ends or party purposes; that we should consecrate ourselves to the truth, and not desecrate the truth to ourselves, our passions, prejudices, or preferences; in a word, it requires that we should be annihilated whilst CHRIST the Lord of truth, the truth impersonated, is alone exalted; so that when the disciples look around, they shall "see no man save JESUS ONLY;" as the one grand and sublime figure for the adoration of the world.

If we thus love the truth, with a pure heart fervently, we shall escape that censure perhaps too severely applied by Goldsmith to Burke;-that he to party, gave up what was meant for mankind."

Whilst however, we should thus be free as far as in us lies, from personal aims and private regards, it may be as useful to others, as it is honourable to the advocate of truth, that his motives should be clear, and his principles of argument and action freed from obscurity and suspicion.

VOL. I.

o 3

Not that calumny and prejudice can ever be satisfied, for these by the alchemy of hostile criticism turn gold into dross, see evil in good, find out that firmness is obstinacy; devotedness, cant; cheerfulness, levity; wit, profaneness; liberty, licentiousness; inquiry, presumption; reproof, slander; reform, destruction; earnestness, bigotry; reasoning, lawlessness! Such caprices we may not satisfy; nevertheless, we must aim so to speak and act, "that they of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of us," (Titus ii., 8) except that by the perversion of their reason, they will "say all manner of evil against us falsely."

Not for himself merely, but mainly for the good of the adversary, as well as for the establishment of the faithful, must the advocate of truth defend his own character, that none may have either fair pretences or solid reasons for stumbling, because the truth is degraded by its defenders, as a keen and well-polished sword thrust into a rusty scabbard, to lose at once its edge and its lustre. Even the Lord Jesus himself condescended to the weakness of the Jews, and referred to the testimony of John for their sakes, not for his own: I receive not testimony from man; but these things I say, that ye might be saved." (John v., 34.) With a desire to imitate this spirit, however imperfectly, we may be allowed & few brief introductory observations on such points as may in the estimation of some invalidate our testimony on this and on a late occasion,* against the absurdities, presumption, and superstitions of the Romish priesthood.

66

For so logical are our opponents, that everything to the disadvantage of our persons is set down to the discredit of our cause; and thus Christ is rejected, because Peter denied and Judas betrayed him. The first question a Romish priest or advocate asks respecting a Christian champion is, not what arguments does he use, but who is he, of what standing, and has he never fallen? If there be no flaw in his argument, is there no hole in his coat?

And to satisfy themselves they may search the central registers of the Jesuits, in which we have reason to suspect every dangerous man is noted down, both as to the height of his stature and of his genius; the colour of his hair and of his principles, together with any scandal that may be whispered or proved. And these memoranda are the arguments of the Jesuits, those universal eavesdroppers and merchants of scandal, over whose central department should be written-"rubbish shot here;" whose agents are the street-sweepers and scavengers of the world, the spiritual commissioners of the sewers; who closing their eyes to the open glory and strength of the metropolis of Protestantism, forgetting the Great Exhibition of the Industry of all Nations, the thronging intelligent population, the arsenals of warfare, and docks of merchandise,-forgetting all these, descend from the slums of Westminster into some main sewer, with a smoky torch, to discover and disturb the rats that have retired, and find in these the "palmary arguments" of the Protestant faith!

Blind moles, who burrow in the earth to hunt and chain the Protestant eagle, that is glancing and soaring towards the sun.

Do we misrepresent or falsify the logic of Rome? Are not all men who have left their communion, proofs and instances of their appetite for * In the Oddfellows' Hall, Birmingham, four "Orations to the Oratorians," &c.

slander, and their feebleness of reasoning? Do they not say to Achilli"You are already dead;" and, accordingly, do not the vultures of defamation, snuff the wind in the distance, and gather themselves around the dead body to pluck out the eyes, and leave a skeleton reputation that has been cleaned by their bills, and that has sharpened, but not satisfied, their rapacity?

Is it the Duke of Norfolk that leaves them? he is then of course a dotard; but his son will not follow his apostacy: he, good easy soul, (thus prophesy the priests)—will remain true to Rome, out of compliment to those pious persons who have been false to his father!*

Is it Gavazzi? Then the lower journals of Romanism shall traduce him as an apostate Atheist priest; but this shall be general and anonymous slander; for no living priest, bishop, or cardinal in England dare in his own proper person breathe upon the pure mirror of Gavazzi's honour; the underlings fear the man whose voice swells the hearts of the people, and shakes the foundations of the Vatican.

Not to enlarge on this prolific theme, the Roman vultures feeding on the spiritual repast of murdered reputations, we will venture a few words on the method that may be, and is, adopted to invalidate our own testi

mony.

Two things are whispered: first, we do this for popularity; to gain reputation, because Dr. Newman is a great man.

Most people will admit that in one point there is some little exaggeration, or, at any rate, some striking information that may well be denominated news-namely that Dr. Newman is a great man.

Whether it be an improper thing to aim at popularity, we leave to the priests who would pay any price for it. For the sake of others, however, as well as ourselves, we may meet this cheap and common charge"he aims at popularity." What man in business does not aim at being popular, that is, extending his connexion? What teacher of truth does not seek to extend the circle of his scholars? It is the duty of every one who believes he has something worth hearing to try and secure an auditory. But if it be intended, as no doubt it is, that this is done at the expense of integrity, then it is as a priest's argument, as offensive to good manners as it is unfounded in reason. Every one knows that for ourselves, had popularity been our aim, we should have entered a fastsailing clipper, and all throughout have gone on quite a different tackwaiting for the "trade-winds."

At the same time, it has never been pleasant to our feelings to wound those of others by the statement of what we in conscience believed; and we trust to be withheld from any compromise of truth for outward union, or the applause of men.

They are the disturbers of the peace, the destroyers of union, who, for the sake of diversity of opinions on circumstantial questions, divide the communion of saints into isolated parties; and on the other hand, they are traitors to conscience and Christ, whose union is compromise. Let us unite where we can, and differ where we must, and respect each other for the exercise of that private judgment, the right to which we are united in defending.

*It is rumoured that this prophecy is already falsified. P.D.

The second invalidating circumstance adduced against us, in low murmurs, to weaken our testimony is, that we have CHANGED SIDES. Now there is no more harm in this, than in aiming for proper purposes at popularity; they should change sides who find out their mistake.

But it is only in one direction that it is a disgrace to change; the Duke of Norfolk is of course an apostate-a fickle man, like Luther; or like Peter, who changed his trade, and left the fisherman's boat and ring to the Pope: these were sins; but it is the glory of Newman and Company to have changed sides, though Dr. Newman himself declared that "what is sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander." Now, since "the goose' has had a share, why should not we?

The priests' pupils ask, how is it possible that ordinary men should judge of objections to Rome, when such learned men have changed to it? They forget that Newman's brother, equally learned, and quite as legendary and poetical in argument and language, has changed into an infidel; but they proceed to diminish our arguments,-for we have changed,—and changelings say so!

Let it be enough, then, that the argument cuts many ways; but we add, that it does not cut this way, for we have NOT changed in any point, either of opinion or conduct, in this controversy.

Setting aside the general growth of intellect and character, inevitable even in our short course of public life, of writing and speaking, we know of no change in any important sentiment, religious or political, beyond a clearer acquaintance with those principles and their foundations; a love to them from free and fearless reason, which has confirmed the conviction and deepened the love of those views which, under the blessing of God, it was our happiness to imbibe from parents whose character was founded in that Protestant school-the education of the divine world.

Holding to this infallible guide, unlike Newman, we have not veered about; and though we never signed creeds nor articles, the creed which God gave is engraven on our intellect and conscience, and we desire nothing more than that it may be transferred completely to our heart and life.

As for the present question, when did we ever, either in secret or on the house-tops, utter a different view of Popery to that we now advocate, and trust we shall advocate to the end? Was it in the Papal Aggression agitation? Did we then side with the Roman superstition, or only advocate a liberty for the Romanist which we knew he would not reciprocate? And because in our straight course, (consistent with itself, however different from the principles of others, to whom we allow an equal liberty,)— because in this straight course we came up with those who go zig-zag, and who met us at that point,-are we therefore to fraternise with priests because we demanded a fair field and no favour to fight them with Bible weapons? No, we have made good our word, and if any men were so duped by priests as to echo them and say, "he that is not against us is on our side," let them now learn that "he who is not for us is against us;" that we were on the side of their liberty, but not of their mummery. This we said then; this we say again. But, certainly, they have not borne themselves so meekly as to give any fresh reason from their conduct to intensify our liberal principles; they have done their best to dis

gust and insult those who contended for their liberty-a liberty to endow Wiseman with a tail that requires ten men and himself to carry: which, if a man can pay for, he may be allowed in law; but no man in creation can be licensed by reason to wear such long petticoats.

We certainly are not impassible to the galling insolence and pretensions of these lords over God's heritage, their ignoring of all else, and setting up the monopoly of their ignorant and impudent usurpation: we believe they would take advantage of our liberty, to extinguish it; and they have said as much in broad hints in their infamous publications; still, though they are an organised conspiracy against the liberties of mankind: more "invidious and insolent, insolent and invidious" (the changes rung on Newman's bells), against the majesty of man than the majesty of the Queen; more dishonouring to the priesthood of Christ and the throne of God, than to the clergy of England and the throne of Victoria; still, we so rely on God's guardian providence, and the trusty sword of the divine Spirit, as for ourselves to disclaim all other aid. And those Protestants who might lament our position in that controversy, would have to be as blind as the priests are deceitful, to imagine that our position then was from any love to Rome; and now we have turned and changed, as the sunflower turns; we have kept our face towards the sun of God's truth, from which Rome ever turns away, and blinks herself whilst she blindfolds the people.

It would be as unwise, as it is unnecessary, to revive that controversy; nor are we here urging our views on others, but demonstrating our own consistency, and therefore our own unimpeachable testimony against that deadly delusion which ever has had, and ever shall have, our most uncompromising and persevering hostility, in public and private, by word and by pen.

And as long as God gives us a judgment to exercise, its most vigorous efforts will be used to expose to the scorn and indignation of mankind, the trickery of these spiritual tyrants: nor do we despair of leaving behind us an artillery of spiritual power, that shall speak when we are gone; writings on these matters, "which the world will not willingly let die," until Rome is dead against whom they are and will be written; and even then, they may be preserved and embalmed in the memory of the emancipated nations of Europe, as we shew the manacles of a captured slave ship, and preserve the monuments of by-gone wickedness, fraud and rapine, as a terror to evil doers; by the spiritual pillory in which these malefactors will be held up to the wonder and derision of coming ages.

If we had done nothing else than edit "THE SWALLOWELL FAMILY;" the art of swallowing reduced to a science, for the health of Wilberforce and Company, it would be a sufficient pledge of our future course; but they who have read "The Keys of the Kingdom, and who Stole them;"+ "Peter's Keys, and the Pope's Picklocks;t" "Rome's Logic;"§ and other productions written before the Aggression, will clearly understand our infallible consistency; and every priest in the kingdom knows well what to reckon on: and they know well with what class of Protestants they have the least disposition to appear in open controversy: they know * A reprint from the "Bible and the People," with Notes and Additions.

Ward and Co., ltd.

† Articles in the " Bible and the People."

Ibid.

Ibid.