grounds of it: and, when I first took up the book, I was simple enough to expect that (at least for common decency's sake) there would be some exposition of the Scriptural grounds on which we should receive and believe the great and blessed truths of the Nicene Creed, the doctrines of the Trinity, and the Incarnation, and the Atonement, and those which are immediately connected with them. But not one word of these. No: these are passed by without either Scriptural proof, or exposition and enforcement! and the Romish bishop comes at once 'to the Article of the Church' (which in the Athanasian Creed is not so much as named), and uses all his ingenuity to prove, that this Church must be the ancient Church communicating with the Pope or Bishop of Rome.' And thence he proceeds to the other Articles appended by Pope Pius IV., in 1564, to the ancient Creed of the Christian Church. So that the whole book, after the first page, is taken up with the statement and exposition and enforcement of Antichristian error. Of course, whenever he can, he avails himself of propositions and arguments which (taken by themselves, or in a right view and connexion) are very true; but, entwining them (as he does) with his whole train of argument, he makes them to subserve the purposes of falsehood and delusion; and the sum of all is Antichristian and soul-destroying error. I found, then, that the book contained one page of truth, and fifty-nine of error! And this I take to be about the proportion of truth and error in the system of Romanism.

"I have a copy of the same book, the fifteenth edition, London, 1844, which is extended to seventy-two pages by the addition of an appendix, which is peculiarly false and abominable; so that the proportion of error and falsehood is increased. And if I were to turn to popular books of devotion, it would be easy to point out many (such as the Glories of Mary' and 'the Devotion of the Sacred Heart') which are full of nothing else but falsehood and superstition and idolatry. And it would be easy to show, in regard to various other books, that, while truth is often stated and admitted, it is falsehood and error which is stoutly maintained and insisted on. This may be illustrated, by just noting the terms which are used in the first two Articles of the Creed of Pius IV.

"I most stedfastly admit and embrace (FIRMISSIME admitto et amplector) apostolical and ecclesiastical traditions and all other observances and constitutions of the same Church.

"I also admit the holy Scriptures according to that sense which our holy mother, the Church, has held, and does hold, to whom it belongs, to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Scriptures; neither will I ever take and interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.'

"Thus the traditions, observances, and constitutions of the Church are MOST STEDFASTLY' admitted and EMBRACED; the holy Scriptures are merely admitted! and this, too, with the addition of a promise, which effectually binds the Romanist never to take or interpret them at all; for this unanimous consent of the Fathers is nowhere to be found, and has, in fact, no existence.

"The proportion between truth and error in the Church of Rome, and the stedfastness and obstinacy with which Romanists hold the

latter, and the loose unsteady hand with which they hold the former, might be illustrated at great length. But on this head I will only add that, if the question were really and truly, Will you teach' the Romanists their own religion or none?' I should say, deliberately and without hesitation, it were far better to teach them none at all. It is far better to teach nothing than to teach lies and abominations. "But I must proceed, and I will endeavour to be brief. Mr. Maddock further says, that the Roman Catholics are preparing to overthrow either the Church or State of England, though it has been asserted, has not yet been proved.'

"Now this is mere assertion on Mr. Maddock's part; and it only proves that he knows very little about it. I will at this time only refer to the testimony of Dr. Achilli, (who must know something about the facts, who is a competent witness,) as contained in the tract which I enclose.* I entreat your special attention to the passages which I have marked. And I entreat you to take this testimony in connexion with the principle so plainly and unequivocally laid down in the bull Unam Sanctam,† and referred to as authoritative by the Fifth Council of Lateran in the year 1516, Session 11, For every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff, we declare, affirm, define, and pronounce to be altogether necessary to salvation!' And this is the same bull in which it is affirmed that It is right that one sword should be under the other, and that the temporal authority be subject to the spiritual power.'

6

"I must pass over a great deal of the wretched nonsense which Mr. Maddock talks, (as when he compares the spirit of the Record newspaper,' and the No Popery demonstrations in Exeter-hall' with the inhuman persecutions and murders which disgraced the reign of Queen Mary;-as if a faithful protest against wicked principles was anything akin to torturing humble Christians, and burning them alive!) and confine my observations to one point more in his speech. He says, 'that the increased intercourse with the Continent . . . has led to the discovery that Rome is not so black as she has been painted.' And much of his speech proceeds upon the assumption that the Church of Rome has been most unreasonably maligned by Protestants.

"Now, I have taken some pains to ascertain the facts. I have carefully examined some of the books and authentic documents of the Church of Rome for myself. My judgment of her is not founded upon the statements of her adversaries, but upon her own. I do not pretend to know yet one-half or one-tenth of her iniquities and abominations. But the result of my inquiries and examination of Romish documents is, that neither Dr. M'Neile, nor Mr. M'Ghee, nor Dr. O'Sullivan, with all the fervour and splendour of their eloquence, nor any Protestant writer that ever I met with, has painted Rome anything like so black and foul as she really is. We must take her upon her own showing, in order to have any just notion of the extent and foulness of her iniquity. And then we shall be forced to the conclusion, that there is only one pen which has ever set forth, in faithful and adequate terms, the nature and the depth of the sins and

See this speech, pp. 381-384, of the "Protestant Magazine," for December. † See also the bull of Pius V. against Queen Elizabeth, Anno 1570.

crimes of this dark and dreadful apostasy, and that is the pen of inspiration, which describes her as MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS, AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH; DRUNKEN WITH THE BLOOD OF THE SAINTS, AND WITH THE BLOOD OF THE MARTYRS OF JESUS. (See Rev. xvii., and 2 Thess. ii. 3-12, and 1 Tim. iv. 1-3.)

"Does this seem strong? I should have thought so too, if I had never examined Romish books for myself; but now I must maintain, that it is only a sober deliberate statement of the simple truth. And here allow me to refer to one statement, which is given by Bishop Burnet, respecting that eminently meek and holy man, Archbishop Leighton. 'He was,' says Burnet,' in his last years turned to a greater severity against Popery than I had imagined a man of his temper, and of his largeness in point of opinion, was capable. He spoke of the corruptions, of the secular spirit, and of the cruelty, that appeared in the Romish Church, with an extraordinary concern, and lamented the shameful advances which we seemed to be making towards Popery. He did this with a tenderness and an edge, which I did not expect from so recluse and mortified a man.' This passage, I confess, I could never rightly understand, till I had examined for myself some of the Romish books of instruction and devotion, and taken some pains to search into authentic documents. But I well understand it now; and I see that, as a really godly man is ripening for glory, and drawing near to heaven, he must hold Popery in deeper and deeper detestation: -yea, and look upon every attempt and every disposition to palliate enormities and atrocities with alarm.

"I will conclude these remarks upon the speech of Mr. Maddock, with saying, first of all, in reference to the English Churchman,' that, while it gives us the speech of that gentleman at full length, it does not tell us one word of what Dr. M'Neile said in reply. I have, however, been credibly informed, that that reply was triumphant; and I can well believe it. And, finally, in regard to Mr. Maddock himself, I do not know whether he is a Jesuit, or a blind and ignorant tool in the hands of the Jesuits. He is more probably the latter, and it is more charitable to suppose it. But, certainly, his speech is just such a speech as the Jesuits would have desired him to make.

"I am very sorry that, in a moment of haste and inadvertence (as I trust it was), you should have been led to speak of it as 'an admirable speech.' I can assure you, and must frankly tell you, that, if I had imagined you were capable of forming and giving any such judgment of such a speech as this, I should never have voted in your favour; and I think I know many of those who supported you, and some of the most active and laborious members of your Committee, who would say the same.

(To be concluded in our next.)

PETITIONS.

THE following Petition has been adopted by the Committee of the Protestant Association, against the admission of Jews to Parliament. Forms may be had at No. 11, Exeter-hall, Strand:

PETITION AGAINST THE ADMISSION OF JEWS TO PARLIAMENT.

To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament assembled.

HUMBLY SHEWETH

The Petition of

That Christianity being universally recognised as part and parcel of the law of this land, your petitioners cannot but view with apprehension and alarm, the proposal to admit professed Jews into the Legislature of this country, as involving a distinct renunciation of its Christian character.

They, therefore, humbly pray your Honourable House, not to listen to any such proposition, but on the contrary to adopt all means for preserving and restoring the Christian and Protestant character of the British Constitution.

And your petitioners will ever pray, &c.

PETITION AGAINST FURTHER CONCESSIONS TO POPERY.

To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in Parliament assembled.

HUMBLY SHEWETH

The Petition of

That your petitioners have heard, with deep regret and alarm, of a Bill now before your Honourable House, having for its object to repeal, amongst others, certain provisions which were enacted by their ancestors, not for the purpose of religious persecution, but to protect the Crown, the judicature, and the people of this country from the influence and dominion of the Court, or Church of Rome.

Your petitioners would venture to remind your Honourable House of the distractions and divisions which were created in this country in former times, by the political principles and treasonable practices of the Papacy, and that in the present day, the spiritual power of the Court, or Church of Rome, unaltered in its tenets and principles, is exercised for temporal objects, and has been arrayed in more than one instance, against the power of the State.

Your petitioners would further desire to draw attention to the fact, that various laws against the interference of the Church or Court of Rome, were enacted at a time when the Sovereign, the Church, and the people of this country were Roman Catholic, and that some such laws are still more requisite to protect the Institutions of a Protestant country.

Your petitioners earnestly entreat your Honourable House, that before any alterations are made affecting the Oath of Supremacy,— and other protective provisions, especially those of an Act, passed in the 10th of George IV., entitled, "An Act for the Relief of His Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects,"-prohibiting the appearance of Romish ecclesiastics in public processions-in the dress of their order -and the institution of Jesuit and other monastic orders bound by

religious vows-Your Honourable House will be pleased to appoint a Committee of Inquiry, directed to ascertain what are the real principles, tenets, and doctrines of the Church of Rome, and how far they are compatible with the principles of the British Constitution, and the peace, safety, and prosperity of this great empire. And your Petitioners will ever pray, &c.

In Petitions to the House of Lords, the words "the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal" must be substituted for "the Honourable the House of Commons," and "your Right Honourable House " for "your Honourable House."

A REVIEW OF MARTIN LUTHER'S VIEWS COMPARED WITH
THE ROMANISTS', ON CLOISTER VOWS, CELIBACY, POVERTY,
AND OBEDIENCE TO THE RULE OF THEIR ORDER, AND
DISPENSATIONS.
ARRANGED BY REV. C. SMYTH, B.A., OXON., FROM HIS GERMAN TREATISES,"
1847.

(Continued from page 381.)

LUTHER then exposes the error of Monachism by comparing it with the absurdity of taking measure for every individual's shoes upon the same last, that is, in governing the brotherhood by a single rule. "Their language to me," he adds, "was this, when I entered the monastery, that I must submit to the same regimen to which the whole fraternity was obedient." Luther now quotes a sentiment of St. Augustine, in which he declared that all men cannot be measured by the same measure, and he expresses his entire concurrence with it, admitting it to be very possible that both Anthony and other hermits were in their day a very religious kind of people; but, said he, "you or I would commit a great sin in relinquishing our proper profession to creep into the corner of our cell. But the world allows itself to be caught by outward appearances, and I, when I was but a monk in the cloisters, was far more holy than I am now, as far as relates to external show and appearance. I prayed more; I watched, fasted, chastened my body, and altogether my whole life attracted much notice in the eyes of other people, even when it had no such glory in my own view of it; for I had nearly a broken heart, and was in a constant anxiety. But now I eat and dress like other people, and the world sees nothing superior or particular in my living when compared with my neighbours; and yet during my monastic career I did nothing but spend my time to ill account; I ruined my health; yes, and what is still worse, I wounded and oppressed my conscience too by dwelling on my works and worthiness; whilst now one single prayer, one passage read in Scripture, better please my Maker than all those orisons which I muttered for fifteen years without ceasing. The friars observe the same allowance in their rule; they make one do as another; thus, as much as one works, eats, drinks, and sleeps, so much does another work, eat, and sleep. In this way many monks have met their death, because they were unable to sustain the same burden of the order with the more robust; because one brother can feel himself satisfied with seven hours' sleep; a second finds three hours enough; but a third VOL. X.-January, 1848. C New Series, No. 25.