Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

66

my blood." At length, a series of sentences against him was crowned by a final judgment, which issued in his martyrdom. At his execution he preserved a tranquil mien. 'My friends," he said at the gallows, "I am not here as a thief or a murderer, but for the sake of the Gospel." A cross was presented to him to kiss, from which turning away, he was raised at the instant into the air, crying frequently and earnestly, My God, forsake me not, that I may not forsake thee.' The hour of agony was now over, and the tried spirit of Anne Du Bourg entered into rest.

66

We have glanced rather at the biographical than at the historical parts of the work. These latter will also be found interesting, and will be new to those whose studies have not extended to the ecclesiastical history of France in the middle of the sixteenth century.

The concluding passage of the volume may be quoted, as agreeing with Coleridge's maxim, that inconsistent good is no match for consistent evil :

"When,' it has been triumphantly asked, 'in the contest between truth and error, has the latter ever prevailed?" We fear it may be answered, in this state of being, Many times.' Let all, then, who love the truth, contend earnestly for it, with that justice, charity, and moderation which become the cause; for, to be faithful and stedfast in this contest, is one of the duties which God has committed to man."

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

ment of Sir Edward Coke (pp. 16—67) respecting the royal supremacy over all causes, spiritual and ecclesiastical, as well as civil, within these realms; and the long course of determined resistance to the encroachments and arrogance of the Pope, which has characterized the legislative proceedings of this country through a long succession of ages, and even in what are commonly called Roman Catholic times: and that of the AttorneyGeneral for Ireland, (pp. 74—110,) explaining the causes that moved, and almost enforced the English nation to make the statutes of Præmunire. The bold and manly manner in which our ancestors dealt with, and spoke of the Pope and Popery, is well worthy of the consideration and imitation of modern statesmen.

The Appendix contains a number of important documents, either with special reference to the recent aggression, or throwing light upon the principles and proceedings of the Romanists in reference to it. We would call special attention to Appendix (G) (pp. 144-155); which also has been published as a separate Tract by the Protestant Association.

BABYLON, AND THE BANKS OF THE EUPHRATES. pp. 192. Religious Tract Society.

This number of the Society's monthly series is devoted to the banks of a river which, in the interest of its Scripture associations, yields only to the Jordan. The Euphrates claims connexion with the paradise of unfallen man. Abraham's native land lay upon its eastern border, and the empire of Solomon extended to its shore. By its side rose Babylon,— once "the glory of kingdoms,”—now represented by vast heaps of blackened bricks, impressive manifestations of its ancient dignity and size. Exiled Jews wept upon the river's brink. In its vicinity, Daniel witnessed a good confession, and his three companions underwent their fiery trial.

Light, as well as heat, is essential to the maintenance of personal reli

REVIEWS-POPISH CONSPIRACY.

gion; and in this little volume the reader will find a help to the study of some of those parts of the Old Testament which more especially present fields of inquiry to the intellect.

POPISH CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE CIVIL AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY OF GREAT BRITAIN a Sermon preached at the Parish Church, Brewood, by the REV. JOHN MUELHEISEN, M. E. L.A., Curate. Second Edition. pp. 44.

J. H. Jackson.

Of the vast mass of sermons and pamphlets which Dr. Wiseman's newfangled hierarchy has brought into being, but few have had the good fortune to have a second birth, in the shape of a second edition. Mr. Muelheisen of Brewood is amongst these fortunate authors, and we have therefore searched into his pages to ascertain the cause of such a distinction.

We find that the publication consists of two parts, the first giving an interesting statement of the author's own knowledge of the difference between the Church of Rome and all the Churches of Christendom,

"This knowledge was acquired, we presume, while the author was engaged in a missionary capacity in Africa the East; and while he could look with unmingled pity on the Mahomedan superstition, and while he received courteous treatment and the acknowledgment of christian brotherhood, from the Churches of the East, he cannot forget that the Church of Rome is the only Church he has met with on earth, which looks upon him as a heretic, and brands the community to which he belongs as schismatical." Preface, p. 12.

In the sermon itself, the author draws a strong but faithful picture of Popery in its sinful and aggressive, yet falling, character; he paints very truthfully the unfaithful part, which, as a Protestant nation, we have acted in favour of Popery; and he strongly, but not too strongly, denounces those ministers within our own Church, who have long been attempting to sap and to destroy the distinctive Protestantism of our national Christianity. We have long intended to notice Mr.

93

Muelheisen's larger Work-" Genuine and Spurious Religion," 2 vols. 8vo,— published some months since; an intention we hope to carry into effect in our next number.

THE QUEEN, OR THE POPE? The Question considered in its Political, Legal, and Religious Aspects: in a Letter to SPENCER H. WALPOLE, Esq., Q.C., M.P. By SAMUEL WARREN, ESQ., F. R. S., of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law. William Blackwood & Sons.

This is the ablest pamphlet that we have met with on the subject of the recent "insolent and insidious" aggression of the court and see of Rome. We commend it to the careful perusal of all our readers. And we especially wish that all our statesmen, and the members of both Houses of Parlia

ment, would diligently study it, and

take heed for the future not to be so easily beguiled and bamboozled by the agents and emissaries of Rome, who evidently endeavour by all means, direct and indirect, to creep into our counsels, and to influence the proceedings of all our public men.

A FATHER'S THOUGHTS ON BAPTISM. By W. H. MADDEN, M.D. Fcap. pp. 111. J. H. Jackson.

We cannot in the present number do justice to Dr. Madden's excellent little work on Baptism. Threadbare and vexing as is the whole controversy to many minds, we nevertheless feel great satisfaction in perusing the deep and earnest convictions of the mind of "a Layman" who, when induced, as he says in his preface, "by circumstances of a private nature,' to examine the whole subject of Baptism, has given us the fruits of his meditation in these thoughtful and well written pages.

Dr. Madden starts with the allimportant question,-"Does the word of God tell me that my children are regenerated in Baptism?"

We shall hope next month to follow the excellent writer of this trea

tise through his arguments, and we promise to examine most impartially the result at which he arrives. Meantime we unhesitatingly say, that

it deserves the attentive perusal of christian parents who may be somewhat doubtful on the subject of Infant Baptism.

Intelligence.

ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES ASSUMPTION

BILL.

AFTER a protracted discussion in the House of Commons, which gave opportunity to some of the Romanists and their allies to manifest what spirit they are of, we have at length before us the "Ecclesiastical Titles Assumption Bill," which was ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on the 14th inst. The first reading was carried by an immense majority, 395 to 63,-more than six to one. This would look well, if the Bill itself looked well. But what is it worth? Is this the fruit of all the anti-papal agitation which has stirred the whole country? In the beginning of November Lord John Russell expressed, in pretty strong terms, his indignation and alarm on considering “the late aggression of the Pope upon our Protestantism;" which he justly charac

terized as "insolent and insidious." He then observed, most truly and aptly,

"There is an assumption of power in all the documents which have come from Rome, a pretension to supremacy over the realm of England, and a claim to sole and undivided sway, which is inconsistent with the Queen's supremacy, with the rights of our bishops and clergy, and with the spiritual independence of the nation,

as asserted even in Roman Catholic times." (Letter to the Bp. of Durham.)

He further pledges himself in that letter,

"That the present state of the law shall be carefully examined, and the propriety of adopting any proceedings with reference to the recent assumptions of power deliberately considered."

This was understood to be a sort of pledge, that, if legal proceedings were deemed unadvisable, then parliamentary proceedings would be adopted to meet the exigency of the case.

We have now before us the Bill, which is the sum total of the result of more than three months of deliberate consideration; and this Bill has been characterized, most justly, as THE

GROSSEST INSULT ΤΟ THE COMMON

SENSE OF ENGLISHMEN WHICH HAS

EVER BEEN OFFERED WITHIN THE MEMORY OF MAN.

We cordially concur in this judgment,-whether we consider the preamble, the enactments, or the penalties proposed in this Bill.

The preamble says,—

the recited enactment (in the Bill of 1829) "Whereas it may be doubted whether extends to the assumption of the title of Archbishop or Bishop of a pretended province or diocese, &c.; and whereas it is expedient to prohibit the assumption of such titles in respect of any places within the United Kingdom: Be it enacted therefore, that titles to pretended sees or dioceses, &c., in the United Kingdom are not to be assumed, under a penalty of £100, to be recovered as provided by the recited act:"

That is to say, by information in the name of her Majesty's Attorney-General!!! Which leaves the country at the mercy of the Attorney-General, or the Ministry, for the time being!

And the fact is, that ever since the passing of that Bill, every Government which has existed, of whatever party-name, has neglected its duty, broken faith with the country, violated the pledges on the faith of which that Bill was passed, and treated the protective provisions of that Bill, just as if they had been so much waste paper.

And the present Bill provides very carefully, that this system of mockery and delusion shall still continue!!!

Can we wonder that, when such a Bill was brought in, a well known instrument and nominee of the Popish faction should rise up and leave the

INTELLIGENCE-ECCLESIASTICAL TITLES BILL.

House,-declaring, that such a Bill was not worth opposing? Can we help suspecting that, directly or indirectly, Dr. Wiseman himself was consulted in reference to it?

Again, can any scriptural Protestant be at all surprised at what has transpired since the introduction of a Bill which insulted the common sense and conscientious convictions of Protestants, without even conciliating the Romanists,-which is considered as an insult by both parties! Lord John Russell was very nearly beaten on one question, and beaten two to one upon another. All is confusion; and he and his colleagues have been compelled to resign. The difficulties of constructing a Cabinet are felt on all sides. No party is able to govern the country. Lord Stanley cannot form an administration. Whether Lord John Russell can succeed in his efforts remains to be proved. The prospect is not encouraging. Can we expect it to be otherwise, when the last thing thought of is (which should be first) to take the word of God as the only rule and standard, and to say boldly, in dependence on the Lord, By this Word we stand or fall!

But, to return to Lord John Russell: what becomes of his Letter, and of his Speech on introducing the Bill? Was all this vox et preterea nihil? Can he not be persuaded to understand, that British Protestants want from him deeds not words? Why can he not be persuaded to cast himself boldly upon the Protestant feeling of his country, and to bring in a Bill which shall indeed take the Bull by the horns, and make it penal, punishable with banishment for life, to introduce any Popish Bull or instrument whatsoever into any part of her Majesty's dominions, but such as are permitted by her Majesty's Government, and first of all inspected by competent persons, who are really acquainted with the true nature and character of Popery?

We believe that nothing has been done in the way of legislation respecting the Romanists for many years, without carefully consulting the Romish Hierarchy, or some of their

95

creatures. The influence of the Romish priesthood is felt in the Court, and in the Cabinet; and probably there is not a member of the Cabinet who is not beset with their solicitations and intrigues. But do they ever consult faithful Protestants? There are excellent Protestant ministers and laymen, who have made Popery the study of their lives,-who know what it is, and will honestly state facts, and refer to documents and authorities. Do our statesmen ever consult such men? Do they avail themselves of their wisdom and knowledge? Or do they rather take counsel of Popish priests, who are liars and deceivers by trade? and who evidently can never be trusted, even upon their oaths, when the interests of their Church are concerned,-as must be clear to every one who has ever studied the Digest of Evidence on the State of Ireland by Phelan and O'Sullivan.

We wish we could add some intelligence as to what Evangelical Protestants are doing, or preparing to do, in reference to this miserable Bill. Are they awake and alive? or are they content to sit still, while the Protestantism of the nation is betrayed,—in the selfish hope that Lord John Russell will do something for the Evangelical Party, in opposition to the Tractarian? Is the cause of Protestant truth, and the safety or welfare of our country, to be sacrificed to the interests of a party?- for it will amount to nothing better than this, if the Evangelical clergy and laity be not true and faithful to their Protestant principles. If, on the contrary, they are now true and faithful, they will prove themselves to be,—as we have always maintained that they are,

the only genuine representatives of the Confessors, Reformers, and Martyrs, of the Church of England,―the only true Churchmen.

The discussions in the Houses of Parliament have presented some curious revelations of character. Among others, a Roman Catholic nobleman, Lord Camoys, made a good old English speech on the Address, which we read, on the whole, with much satisfaction. But when we came to that part in which he boasted of his family

having always been, from generation to generation, true Roman Catholics, and faithful to the Church of their fathers, we could not help wondering at the very childish way in which an otherwise sensible man can set aside the duty which is so plainly enjoined in Scripture, "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." (1 Thess. v. 21.) Would it have been any praise, any matter of boasting, to Hezekiah or Josiah, that they had continued faithful to the idolatry of their fathers, Ahaz and Amon, instead of forsaking such folly and wickedness, to serve the God of Israel? On the

principle adopted and gloried in by Lord Camoys, what would his first ancestor have done, who renounced the idolatry of our Heathen ancestors to embrace the Catholic Faith? He would have lived and died a Heathen Idolater! And would this English nobleman, in the nineteenth century, and with the Bible to refer to if he will,- would he really maintain, that it would then have been his duty to continue a Heathen Idolater, because, forsooth, all his fathers were such before him? Yet this would be the legitimate carrying out of his own principle!

-a

On the contrary, the Scripture says, "My dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say." (1 Cor. x. 14, 15.) And what have we in those words, but the duty of private judgment,DUTY enjoined on every man by God's own word,-laying upon each individual a solemn responsibility, from which he cannot escape, to "search the Scriptures" for himself,-to receive the word of God, by whomsoever preached, with all readiness of mind, and to search the Scriptures daily whether these things are so. This is true nobility. (Acts xvii. 11.) But is not he unworthy of the name of a reasonable being who prefers the childish vanity of seeming to be consistent with himself or his family, to the manly dignity of being in the right?

THE TRACTARIAN CHURCHES, AND THE BISHOP OF LONDON.

It is with great regret that we are still compelled to draw the attention of our readers to this painful subject. Nothing can be more unsatisfactory than the position the Bishop of London occupies in relation to the entire Church. He knows that the Church of England utterly refuses the mummeries of the Tractarian imitation of Romanism; he himself affects to denounce them also; he issues private monitions, remarkable only for their timidity and their pointless, and therefore ineffectual, animadversions. He at length succeeds in procuring the resignation of one or two Incumbents; but the whole Church is astonished and scandalized by, we fear, the too accurately reported characters of the men he appoints to the vacancies. It really appears as if the outgoing Incumbents had made terms with his Lordship, and almost secured the nomination of their successors, before giving up possession of their benefices. Has the Bishop of London no friend faithful enough to tell his Lordship how completely he loses the confidence of the clergy and laity of the metropolitan diocese, by a course of conduct which we can scarcely call ambiguous; for while in words he condemns the Bennetts and the Dodsworths of the Church, it has been his Lordship's constant policy to promote the very men who have been foremost in this Romanizing movement; and his Lordship cannot reflect with much complacency on his appointment of those who have at length been forced to forsake the sham for the reality. If there be difficulties in the execution of the ecclesiastical law, in dealing with such cases as St. Andrew's, Wells-street, and other nurseries of Rome, let the Bishop, after due deliberation, come down and seek from an English Parliament, that assistance which we feel certain would be promptly accorded. What a spectacle of indecision, weakness, and of ineffective authority, does the Episcopate now present to Romanists and Dissenters.

LONDON: J. H. JACKSON, ISLINGTON GREEN.

« VorigeDoorgaan »