And hereupon he observes :

“I have no doubt that the first paragraph in his address refers to the meetings of the Executive Committee of the Anti-State Church Association, at the close of which this Convention was concocted. The last paragraph also reveals with equal frankness the fact that the object of the originators of this movement was to turn the proposed question of the Maynooth Endowment Bill into an occasion to assail all establishments rather than “merely to secure the defeat” of the endowment of Popery. This distinguishes the so-called “Dissenting Conference" from the one that preceded it in London and the one that followed it in Dublin. Those, with singleness of purpose sought the defeat of the Government measure by the union of all sincere Protestants of every denomination; whilst the leaders at Crosby Hall thought it a more important object to declaim against the Established Churches of their Protestant brethren, than to check the progress of the Romish priesthood towards national succour and aggrandisement.'

“Thus Dr. Cox, as the Provisional Chairman, said

“. It is my duty to explain at the opening of the Conference, that we do not meet on the anti-Popish ground of hostility to the Maynooth grant.......I concur with gentlemen who think that Popery ought not to be endowed, and that dissent ought not to be endowed. We meet upon the principles of no endowment in religion. Our object is to stand by the ground of our Norconformity.'

“ The Rev. J. H. Hinton said

"We are not to confine our hostility to the measure of the endowment of Maynooth...... We must take this occasion to direct our energies with zeal and determination towards obtaining a separation of Church and State. If the Dissenters were to let this opportunity pass without girding on their armour afresh for this conflict, they would be guilty of a greater folly and dereliction of duty than I, for one, can venture to ascribe to them.'

"All the resolutions of the Conference are constructed on this principle; and therefore the reader will not find a sentence throughout the whole of them which expresses an honest Protestant abhorrence of the doctrinal, ritual, or practical absurdities of Popery, as taught at the College of May. nooth."

Mr. Blackburn, however, is a thorough Protestant. He has evidently taken some pains to understand the true nature of Popery, and he has a scriptural abhorrence of that mystery of iniquity. We are afraid that a large portion of the Dissenters—like the vast majority (we regret to say it) of all classes in this country -know nothing at all about it; and they have, therefore, ceased to be Protestants; they are unworthy of the name. And, in regard to the great subject of Christian union, which now excites so much attention, we must say that, while we can very well understand how Churchmen and Dissenters may work together, in love and union, on the ground of a common and decided Protestantism, in stedfast opposition to a common foe, we do not think that there can be (for any long continuance) any unity of action between true Churchmen and the Non-Protestant Dissenters, whose conduct scems to shew that they hate the Church of England and the principle of an establishment, much more than they hate Popery.

But to return to Mr. Blackburn's pamphlet. Having stated the part which he took in the proceedings of the Anti-Maynooth Conference at Dublin, at which he disclaimed the proceedings of the Crosby Hall Conference, and denied that they were any fair exposition of the sentiments of the general body of the Dissenters in England, he proceeds,

IJ. To give us “ the censures of the journalists" upon his conduct. And here we cannot but admire that perfect fearlessness, the evident result of a conscious integrity, with which Mr. Blackburn transcribes, at full length, all the evil that his adversaries could devise to say against him. We may dismiss this part of the book very briefly. The point of all the accusations seems to be, that Mr. Blackburn, being a Dissenter, preferred the interests of our common Protestantism, to the particular objects of Dissenters, as such. A grave offence truly !

III. We have Mr. B.'s vindication of his own opinions, with regard to the character of the Crosby Hall Conference, the character of William III., the sympathy of Dissenters with the Church of Ireland, and the cajoleries of the Irish Roman Catholic leaders. On the latter point, we particularly rejoice to see that Mr. B.'s eyes are opened. He sees and confesses that the Dissenters have been, in days past, deceived by O'Connell, and his pretences of zeal for the voluntary principle and civil and religious liberty. This confession is manly, and we honour Mr. Blackburn for it. We have only time and space for the following extracts.

“I protest also against the assertion that the history of the Irish Roman Catholics ' furnishes the most demonstrative vindication of the voluntary principle.' Popery and Voluntaryism! Why, Voluntaryism is the manifestation of love, and Popery is the religion of fear. The ghostly terrors of Popery have been employed from the dark ages until now, throughout Papal Europe and the British Isles, to wring from the tenacious grasp of worldly but superstitious persons donations and bequests in favour of the institutions and clergy of the church of Rome. This notorious fact led to the enactment of the law of death-bed in Scotland-of the Mortmain Act in England, and of those chapters in the Code Napoleon, which render the confessor incapable of inheriting from his dying penitent. And by some provisions in the Charitable Bequests Bill for Ireland, which recently passed the legislature, it seems that similar safeguards are still thought to be necessary. Sacerdotal maledictions and purgatorial fires are sweet motives to Voluntaryism certainly!”

“ These events in Ireland, Canada, and the United States, must be known at Conciliation Hall. 'Thé repeal wardens’ at home, and the sympathisers' in North America, have most likely informed the Repeal Association of these and analogous proceedings, or if not, they must know them through the public journals. Yet I have never seen or heard, that in a single instance, Mr. O'Connell has denounced the spirit of persecution when betrayed by his own priests and partisans. Espartero was the subject of his long and indignant orations for invading the rights of the clergy of Spain ; but when did he raise his voice against the priests of Achill for invading the rights of the converts of Protestantism? Either Mr. O'Connell will not, or dare not, apply his oft-repeated maxims of religious liberty to the principles and practices of his own church. I do not suspect him of a want of inclination, for I presume he is a good-natured and benevolent man, but I believe he dare not that he is the puppet and the tool of the Popish hierarchy in Ireland, the creature of a system which teaches its advocates to fawn and flatter when in adversity, but in prosperity to revile, proscribe, and persecute even unto death those who dare to dissent from its tyrannical assumptions. Look to Madeira, to the Savoy, to Tahiti, and learn what all history confirms, that Popery cannot tolerate religious freedom, and that those Dissenters who have relied on the Irish eloquence of Mr. O'Connell in favour of it, have been fairly humbugged.

Nor do I regard the conduct that has been pursued respecting the National System of Education to have been more honest."

The pamphlet ends with “A concluding Appeal to Evangelical Protestant Dissenters,”—which we should be glad to transcribe entire : but in truth our desire is, that our readers should get the pamphlet and read it for themselves. We shall therefore only quote the last paragraph :

“ And now, in conclusion, I would express my continued satisfaction in my connexion with the Anti-Maynooth Committee. It has brought me to love and honour many gentlemen of other communions in whom I have rejoiced to see the mind of Jesus Christ ; my charity has been enlarged with my knowledge, and I am thoroughly convinced that a cordial recognition of the excellencies of other denominations is perfectly compatible with a conscientious preference for my own.”






CHURCH, Translated into English. By the Rev. John R. COTTER, A.M., Rector of Innishannon. Dublin : Curry. 1845.

It is often the case that, in matters of popular discussion and contest, men are very ignorant of the subject on which they lavish praise or blame. Accustomed to go along with a party, to take certain things for granted, to use familiarly with a certain force conventional terms, as signs of a combination of ideas, they speak in the same strain as their associates, without having been possessed of that distinct knowledge, which would warrant their observations. This is very much the case with the liturgical office or mass-book of the Church of Rome. It is written in Latin-in a language dead and obsolete to the whole host of worshippers, and being only partially translated into the modern tongues, it is little known in its real merits to its most violent supporters; and coming rarely across the observation of Protestants at all, or in a language in which they cannot fully estimate its merits, they know little of that mass of error in detail, which they have learned on the authority of others to condemn. The case is widely different when a book is freely circulated in the vulgar tongue. Like the Grecian artist's picture exposed in the market-place, every one looks at the English Common Prayer-book from corner to corner; every one is ready with a remark; many a "sutor" ventures beyond his “ crepidam ;” and if there is any one thing which can be fairly counted a blot or a blunder, everybody's finger can point to the defective place; whilst the Mass-Book, teeming with errors,


5 Y

but veiled under the thick dark varnish of an unspoken tongue, may pass off for beauties, those defects, which even an amateur, if he saw them distinctly, would disapprove and condemn, but which, in their misty gloom, he now reverences upon the principle, "omne ignotum pro magnifico.'

Mr. Cotter, therefore, has done good service to both churches, and to the whole British population, by putting us in possession of a translation of the missal, or mass-book of the Romish church. Both Protestants and Romanists have now the ready opportunity of knowing intimately one of the subjects of their contention. His version of the mass-book will also be of peculiar value to a great number of persons who have been much deceived by their spiritual teachers as to the superiority of the Romish ritual over our plain and scriptural liturgy. It is a lamentable fact, that in our Protestant church a distaste towards the simplicity of its offices has extensively arisen. The grandeur of that scriptural simplicity is lost sight of; the appreciation of its momentous spiritual truths bas declined ; and instead of a desire for the unction of revealed truth, men are desiderating the scenic pomp, and the winding procession, the choral service, and the surpliced choir, the complicated chant, and the theatrical anthem, the decorated architecture, and the storied glass ; and they have been taught by men, who really are nothing better than dishonest renegades to their specific written engagements, that in the missal of Rome there is a sublimity of mystery, to be sighed after in vain in the dull and drony book of common-prayer. They who have been thus tampered with, and rendered discontented, may now judge for themselves. Let them give to the pretensions of this book a deliberative investigation in the light of scriptural truth; and we question very much whether they will thenceforth allow themselves to be seduced much further down the declivity of “the Latin way,” or take with their recent Tractarian leaders the last reluctant, but inevitable leap, into the abyss of Popery. A few indefinite and lazy praises may give the mass-book a fallacious magnitude and dignity; but a close acquaintance with its true character will surely expose it as

a series of burdensome, vain, and silly forms, of little meaning and utility, and a poor and sapless substitute for that intelligent and spiritual, devotion which breathes through the whole volume of the written word. Let the few unhappy men, who have played around the Romish birdlime till they have been caught by it, try what that system will now effect towards giving them peace and spiritual elevation. Let them silence, if they can, the inward witness of onceknown truth-let them learn with slavish diligence in the subordinate degrees of the Romish diaconate, the bowings and bendings,

« VorigeDoorgaan »