to which we have referred. On this foundation, however, he contrived to build, in the course of ages, a Babel of lies, whose top aspired to heaven. But as this vast fabric increased in extent and in height, both the arch-contriver, and those whom he employed in building it, became insolent and overbearing; and in their pride and security proceeded to such impudent lengths in absurdity and wickedness, that the earth groaned under the burden of their iniquities. Men of their own party, and devoted to their cause, cried shame upon them ; and a handle was given to Luther and the other Reformers, whom God raised up in His own good time, to expose the monstrosity of the whole system; for its enormities became manifest to all in whom even natural conscience was not utterly extinct. Then commenced a struggle which shook this mighty Babel to its base, and nearly one half of Europe was delivered from Popish thraldom. Then Antichrist trembled on his throne, and his whole empire seemed tottering to its fall. He had become too reckless and secure. Presuming on long-established dominion, he had overshot the mark; and he now found that he could not carry things with such a high hand as before. For his empire was founded in opinion, which, so long as he had it on his side, enabled the spiritual to command and direct the temporal power: but men now began to think, and were stirred up to search the Scriptures; and specious appearances had been so much neglected, all bounds of decency and propriety so grossly and glaringly transgressed, that even superficial observers were disgusted. It was vain to rage in persecution and cruelty: the blood of the martyrs proved the seed of the church. The horrible cruelties to which the Papists had recourse, only increased the feelings of disgust and execration which their pride, luxury, and licentiousness had excited throughout a large portion of Europe. Something must, therefore, be done to maintain this empire of evil, in those countries which yet acknowledged the dominion and authority of Rome. The circumstances of the times were now changed. The Reformation was a new era in the history of Europe, moral, political, and intellectual, as well as religious. To meet these altered circumstances, it was necessary that Popery should change its policy. Its nature could not be changed. It is not possible, in the nature of things, that that which is evil, and comes from the evil one,' should grow better. Popery, therefore, could not improve itself. It might become more specious: it might superadd the cunning of the fox to the fury of the tiger; the subtlety of the serpent to his venom. And this it found itself obliged to do. At the moment of Luther's first attack, the Church of Rome was careless and

secure, and its first efforts against him were characterized by feebleness and folly. But as the conflict proceeded, more craft and cunning were exercised in opposing him; and, as the Reformation advanced, and it became evident what a mighty power was put forth in attacking the man of sin, we see him gradually putting forth all the powers of subtlety and artifice which he possessed; and, in this sense,

Collecting all his might,

Like Teneriffe or Atlas unremov'd,

he puts himself in a position to keep what remained to him, and, if possible, to regain some portion of the dominion which he had lost. The Council of Trent assembled.

In the proceedings and decrees of this celebrated assembly, two things must be observed: 1st, The declaration and confirmation of all the abominable errors which, during so many preceding ages, had been gradually introduced into the church; and, 2dly, The adoption of a system of caution and subtlety in stating and maintaining those errors, which made them more specious and deceitful. Of this latter point we must speak more at large hereafter what we wish to point out at present is, that all the false doctrines of the Church of Rome were by this Council defined and declared as articles of faith; imposed and riveted upon the minds and consciences of all Roman Catholics for ever after, without any hope of renunciation or amendment. This is the more worthy of remark, because so fair an opportunity of consideration, repentance, and renunciation had been given. A most powerful appeal to the Scriptures had been made; false doctrine had been exposed; the guilt and danger of those who maintained it had been faithfully set before them; the true doctrines of the Gospel had been clearly and fully stated; and a general council was now met to discuss and settle the various questions which had arisen. Had there been any disposition to renounce falsehood and embrace the truth, now was the time. Amid the vast variety of traditions and decrees out of which they had to choose, they might at least have selected all those which came nearest to the truth; and, without renouncing the specious appearance of infallibility and immutability (which was not to be expected), they might have renounced and condemned many errors, as the private and unauthorized opinions of those who had more publicly maintained them, instead of pledging their church to them for ever, and solemnly setting the seal of Papal infallibility upon them. That so favourable an opportunity was neglected, proves that the system of Popery was utterly incapable of amendment; that it was characterized by an immutability in evil and falsehood,

which too plainly shews that we are not to look for its amelioration, but its destruction. We consider the Council of Trent as having placed the Church of Rome in a far more awful position than before; as having branded its forehead with the mark of final impenitence and obduracy, and sealed it to the day of perdition.

We have deemed it necessary to advert to these facts, in order to shew on what ground we conclude so absolutely that, in upholding false, unscriptural, idolatrous, and blasphemous doctrine, the Church of Rome is immutable. For many ages it was, in respect to the accumulation of errors, growing worse and worse. Had it been capable of amendment, the Reformation and the Council of Trent gave the fittest opportunity, both as to time and circumstances. But, instead of amendment, we observe a confirmation and condensation of evil: we see this apostate church concentrating all its powers, to set itself for ever in obstinate opposition to all improvement. To know what its doctrines really are, we need, then, only refer to the acts and decrees of the Council of Trent, and to the Creed of Pope Pius IV., published immediately after the dissolution of that council (in 1564). Since that period the Pope has governed the church without the help or necessity of any general council: so that all hope of any renunciation of the errors of Popery is utterly precluded.

There is, as we have said, but little information as to the doctrines of Popery in the volume before us: one remarkable instance, however, of the direct and gross idolatry of the Church at Rome is brought forward, and commented upon at some length. The passage is extracted from the evidence of Dr. Doyle before the Commissioners of Education. We transcribe it, as it stands in one of the notes, with three brief annotations of the editors upon it.

'In your evidence before the Lords' Committee, you have distinctly stated, that no prayer is ever offered up to the Virgin, except in her quality of intercessor?'Yes.'

"In a printed paper, entitled, The Rules of the Christian Doctrine Society, the Pope's bull incorporating that society is professed to be set forth, in which the commissioners observe this passage: "An indulgence of three hundred days is granted for ever, to all those who, with a devout and contrite heart, repeat the three following verses or ejaculatory prayers: Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, assist me in my last agony. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, I offer you my heart and soul. Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, may I breathe forth my soul to you in peace." Does it appear to you, that the Virgin is distinguished by her quality of intercessor in the manner she is here addressed ?'-Not in the form of the words, but in the mind of the Christian; he knows he addresses the Saviour as his God, and the blessed Virgin or St. Joseph as an intercessor. The prayer is the act of the mind; and when the person makes this distinction, as he always

does in his mind *, the form of the words he uses is to be understood conformably to the sense in which he uses them.'

'Does this sentence, "Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, may I breathe forth my soul to you in peace," call upon the Virgin Mary as an intercessor?'-'I do not know that it calls upon her for any distinct act of intercession, but it implies, God grant me admittance into the society of the saints +.'

"Again, "Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, I offer you my heart and soul;" will you explain what practical intercession she is called on to perform there?'-'It is not so much an act of intercession which she is there prayed to exercise, as an act of devotion which is offered to her, and such as may properly be offered to a saint entitled to respect from her high place in heaven."

Then in that last mentioned prayer she is not applied to as an intercessor?''I cannot say that she is; but the prayer is rather an act of praise offered on account of her exalted rank in heaven.'

'Is it not an act of worship as far as the Saviour is concerned?'-"Yes; I thinkt, with respect to him, it implies a total resignation of the heart into his hands, as the supreme arbiter of our future destiny. As far as they (the saints) are concerned, it is an offering of devotion to them, and an implied prayer to them, as well as an act of affection, that they would assist us in our approaching to God.' 'Then that sentence is, in fact, when properly understood, an act of adoration so far as our Saviour is concerned, but not so far as the Virgin or Joseph is concerned?'' Certainly not to the extent, or at all as the Saviour is adored, but we respect them as saints, and reverence them with affection and devotion.'

*It appears from this, that if a devout Roman Catholic be free from idolatry, he is so notwithstanding the language of his prayers. Is it not hard that a man cannot even pray without a mental reservation?

This implied sense seems to make Jesus a saint, as well as Mary and Joseph.

Even Dr. Doyle is not sure of the degree of mental distinction which the language of these prayers will allow. How then is a peasant to be secure against the curses pronounced by Gother and Dr. Murray?-If he judge by the words, he will make Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, a Trinity, either of Divine, or of glorified human persons; and, in either case, will incur the anathema of those very pastors by whom the words are enjoined. Part. II. pp. 269, 270.

We should not forget to add to this precious extract the conclusion of the above-quoted Indulgence, which we find in another part of the work:

An indulgence of 100 days is granted, for devoutly and contritely repeating any of these ejaculations, applicable in both cases to the souls in purgatory. Pius VII., 28th April 1807. N. B. This indulgence is gained as often in the day, as the devotion is performed. Part I. p. 250.

Can any thing be more lame and miserable than these attempts of Dr. Doyle to explain away the plain language of the prayer, and to evade the charge of idolatry? And let it be remembered, that this same Dr. Doyle is one of their champions; one of the most learned and distinguished of the advocates of the Popish cause at present. And this man affirms upon oath, that no prayer is ever offered up to the Blessed Virgin, except in her quality of intercessor! Protestants will, moreover, remember, that, even if it were so, his church would not be clear

from the charge of idolatry: for to pray to the saints to intercede for us would still be absurd, unscriptural, and idolatrous, and a blasphemous interference with the glorious office and dignity of our only High Priest, Mediator, and Intercessor, Jesus Christ. It seems, however, that neither the Commismissioners of Education, nor the Committees of the Houses of Parliament, had sufficient knowledge of the Scriptures, and of Protestant principles, to point this out to Dr. Doyle, or to tell him, that, by his own shewing, he was still an idolater.

To enter further upon the consideration of doctrines we must turn aside entirely from the book which we are reviewing, which we are unwilling to do, as it contains so much important matter upon other points, in regard to which we assert that the Church of Rome is unchanged. We pass on, therefore, to the arrogance and extravagance of its claims and pretensions. On this head we have abundant information in the Second Part of the Digest. And here we cannot forbear to quote one most appalling instance of the arrogant language which a Roman Catholic can use, not towards man, but towards the Almighty Himself. It is a passage from the Maynooth Class-book, given in evidence before the House of Lords by the Archbishop of Dublin. It contrasts the state of a Protestant and that of a Roman Catholic, at the last day.

The Protestant, it says, can plead no other principle of faith and action, than his private judgment, with which he has searched the Scriptures for himself. How different the lot of the Catholic, although (which, yet, God forbid that we should believe) he should have fallen into error through his obedience to the decrees of the church! Can he not, when interrogated on this head, confidently say to the Supreme Judge: Lord, if that which we have followed be an error, THOU, EVEN THOU, HAST DECEIVED US, by thy clear and reiterated precept that, unless we wished to have our part with the heathen, we should hear the church as we hear Thee? Thou thyself hast deceived us, by thy Apostles, by the pastors and doctors whom thou hast ordained in the church, for the perfecting of the saints, and the building up of thy body. Thou thyself hast deceived us, by thy church, which is called by the Apostle, the pillar and ground of truth. For she has always exacted from her children a firm assent, in heart and mind, to her decrees, in thy name denouncing an eternal anathema against the rebellious.......Confidently, then, we say, Oh Lord, if it be an error which we have followed, Thou Thyself hast deceived us, and

WE ARE EXCUSED.

Could any one have imagined, without having actually read the passage, that even the Church of Rome could have supposed any one of the children of men as holding forth such language to the Almighty, under any circumstances? We have shev'n in the last quotation what unintelligible language (according to Dr. Doyle's own interpretation) the Church of Rome puts into the mouths of her votaries-language which, if his interpretation be correct, is utterly incomprehensible, saying one