Page images
PDF
EPUB

the fier Mage such those coin have of their fampled K

The director of the police having maintained his decision, M. Erhard has addressed a complaint to the French Ambassador at Berne." Morning Herald, Feb. 5, 1846.

We see, then, sufficient in each of the three Bills to cause apprehension in the minds of Protestants. The practical operations of Popery, in ancient and modern times, call upon us to be wise and careful, nor rashly to remove what the Church of Rome may call penalties, but which we must ever regard as securities essential to protect ourselves from the full development of her system in our country. :

On the various important points in this article we are prevented from now saying more. Enough has been said to call attention to the subjects. We have adduced facts in support of our assertions-facts collected from a variety of quarters. ,

We must here leave our readers to make their own comments. With reference to the Bills before Parliament, we would call upon all, to make themselves well acquainted with their nature, and to petition against their being passed into law.

It may be that Her Majesty's Government will not give their entire support to these measures. But will they, or those who may succeed them, present a strenuous opposition? Will they, as the Ministers of the Crown, as the confidential advisers of Her Majesty, point out the impolicy, the danger, the ruinous tendency of such measures ?

Will they, as those to whom, by long-established practice, the people of Great Britain have been accustomed to look up, as the guardians and protectors of their rights and liberties, see that these invaluable blessings are not trampled in the dust?

Yes, they will, if the electors of the United Kingdom, and all right-minded men, resolve at once to shake off the incubus of Popery, which has been so long depressing the energies of our country.

They have the power, if they have the will to do it. · What forced on Catholic Emancipation, as it was erroneously termed? What the Reform Bill? What the Emancipation of Slaves? What the present efforts to repeal the Corn-laws and protective duties?

What but opinion abused, erroneous, misled, in some instances, and despised in all; till, like smouldering fire, gathering strength from being neglected, it melted, and consumed by its intensity, every element of opposition.

Each evil principle seems now rapidly in motion for the accomplishment of its evil purpose, and every antagonistic power in the cause of virtue, good order, and religion, evoked from their long slumber, should be wisely, rapidly, resolutely marshalled in defence of all that we hold dear for timeprecious for eternity.

HISTORICAL MEMORANDA OF POPERY. No. V.-CASE OF PROTESTANT MARTYRS UNDER HENRY VIII.

“May there be any hope that these two Churches shall at any time agree, enter friendship one with another, and shake hands together? Sooner shall hell be heaven, darkness light, Christ Belial, than this thing shall come to pass. Therefore, as there hath been always from the beginning, so is there now and ever shall be, perpetual contention between the Church of Christ and the synagogue of Satan, neither shall it have any end till that time come when there shall be one Shepherd and one sheepfold; again, when the Lord with His glorious appearance at the great day of judgment shall destroy that son of perdition, which is the head of the synagogue of Satan, and sitteth in the temple of God, boasting himself to be. God.”—Thomas Becon.

“As the conflict grows in its earnestness, let us apply more earnestly to that Divine Armoury, where the weapons are provided for the overthrow of the Christian Babylon; and above all, to that throne of grace, where we may obtain strength for our own duty in the battle-field, and pardon and deliverance for those who are led astray."--Rev. T. R. Bırks.

The state of affairs in the reign of Henry VIII. was naturally unsettled and vacillating, since the monarch was opposed both to the Papacy as such, and to the Reformed Faith. Protestants have no occasion to lay any claim to this godless king; he was no more one of themselves than Pope Leo X. himself: and the historical cajolings and literary glosses about “ bluff Harry," serve a miserable end, if they lead any to suppose that he was a lion-hearted crusader against Rome. He was as malign and dark-minded a persecutor as the cowled inquisitor that had the “ bad eminence” of chief craft among his Antichristian fellows; he was as fierce an opposer of Evangelical truth as the ravening herds of ultramontane Popery. Assuredly he had no part or lot in the matter of defending God's resurrection truths of the 16th century; but, on the contrary, fulfilled his part as an enemy to their holy theme by loving darkness rather than light, because his deeds and doctrine were alike evil. He was one of those unruly vain talkers and deceivers that gave heed to the commandments of men which turn from the truth; and bitterly did he calumniate by his pen, and crush by his regal power, the peculiar people that were zealous of good works.

In what then did this prince acquire the celebrity of speeding, and materially speeding, the Reformation in England ? Simply by his personal opposition to the Papal supremacy. And this not, we undoubtedly believe, from any patriotic and soundjudging opinion that the Bishop of Rome is a self-constituted lord over God's heritage, and that, according alike to scriptural doctrine and primitive usage, he hath not nor ought to have any

n five years, to implem of this

jurisdiction in this realm of England; but from a private pique concerning the Papal decision (or rather want of decision) in the case of his marriage with Catherine, seconded, if not originated, by an over-weening egotism and self-conceit that could endure no rival, and brook no opposition. This view of his character at once gives a key to his coincident Antipapal and Antiprotestant principles.

An instance or two of the latter, exemplified in the cases of martyrs for the true faith, will form the subject of our present number. We may introduce them, however, by citing from “Burnet's History” an illustration of the spiritual habits of the clergy, superior and inferior, at the time.

The prelates had received orders to raise among themselves 100,0001., which they were to pay in five years.* They desired, in a considerate regard for their own pockets, to implicate the lower orders of the genus ecclesiasticum in the burden of this disagreeable tax. Accordingly, the Bishop of London called a meeting of some priests of his diocese at the chapter-house in St. Paul's, and took care to summon as few as possible, hoping to gain over a small number, and so use them as his clerical cats-paw with regard to the rest. But, unhappily for his Lordship, all the clergy heard of it; and all the clergy, with due indignation of spirit, marched forthwith to the chapter-house, encouraged by the cheers of not a few of the obstreperous laity. The bishop's servants, seeing the formidable array, waxed wroth and refused admittance to any except the elect company of presumed sycophants; whereupon the refractory clerks took the liberty of well pummelling the official hirelings, and forced their way by dint of obstinate physical resistance, and the all successful art of cudgel. The bishop, warned by the mutilated noses and vari-coloured eyes of his faithful vergers, that he had a sharp set of sons to deal withal, drew in his horns at the approach of the pugilistic regiment, and blandly stated the case, desiring them to be patient shareholders in the burden of the 100,0007. But they answered that the cause of that burden, to wit, the penalty of præmunire incurred by Wolsey's faculties, was no business of theirs, and one with which they had never meddled; and forasmuch as by their standing aloof from the misdemeanour they needed not the king's pardon, so neither would they pay for it; let the bishops and abbots who were implicated, and who were “ well to do” in the good things of this life, be made to solve the pecuniary problem they had sketched out for themselves, and not they (the clergy) be ensnared to drain out of their small livings fines for the offences of others. Upon this

* Some idea, by analogy, may be raised of the property of the superior clergy, by the fact that after Wolsey's ruin, in his journey to Cawood, in Yorkshire, he was followed by one hundred and sixty horses, and seventy-two carts with his household stuff!

the bishop's officers threatened them with pains and penalties for their unfilial behaviour, and words grew to blows, till the said officers were glad to hobble off the arena with no scant of bruises, and the clergy adjourned with a congratulatory Io triumphe. The bishop, to prevent further uproar, had promised that all should end peacefully, and had dismissed the meeting with his blessing; but he failed in his word, for by his subsequent efforts fifteen priests and five laymen were sent to gaol. This will serve as a picture of the relative dispositions and doings of the London clergy at the time in question. Their part in the instances annexed is quite in keeping with it: “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?"

Thomas BILNEY had, with other Cambridge men, been prosecuted in 1523 for propagating Luther's opinions, and having recanted, he was enjoined penance by Tonstall, Bishop of London, and dismissed. He was, however, on his return to Cambridge, much troubled in mind on account of his abjuration, and great anxiety was felt by his friends lest his deepening melancholy should incite him to some violent act upon himself. For about a year this despondent spirit continued; but after that space he became more tranquil, and determined on doing all in his power to cancel the ill example of his recent abjuration, by a full and unequivocal profession of the true Reformed Faith. He therefore left the University, and travelled hither and thither protesting against the chief Papal errors, and preaching repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ. He was shortly seized, and imprisoned at Norwich, and strenuous exertions were made by the friars to persuade a man of his influence to again recant. But he was firm for the truth; nevertheless, perjured statements as to his having recanted were, by authority from high places, promulgated abroad. Men who knew to the contrary were afraid at that time to speak out; but when things were changed, Archbishop Parker and others vouched for his constancy in the faith, and gave an affecting · recital of his last hours. He was cheerful and composed to the last, often repeating the sweet promise, “ When thou walkest through the fire thou shalt not be burnt, neither shall the flame kindle upon thee;" and, in the words of Burnet, “putting his finger in the flame of the candle, he told those about him that he well knew what a pain burning was, but that it should only consume the stubble of his body, and that his soul should be purged by it." After taking an affectionate leave of his friend Dr. Warner, whom he exhorted to be diligent in his pastoral labours, he suffered meekly, and so entered into his rest. The high estimation in which this faithful martyr was held by the people will appear from the fact, that many of the begging friars entreated him to declare to the populace that it was not by their instrumentality that he was brought to this pass, fearful lest Vol. VIII.–March, 1846.

New Series, No. 3.

, perjured high places, polo at that time to her and othing

Popish erable hersequently ped in thrines.

they might get no more alms from an indignant crowd. With this request Bilney complied.

RichARD BYFIELD suffered soon after. He was a monk, and, having been taught the better way by Dr. Barnes, was zealous in promulgating forbidden books. He was burnt in Smithfield.

James BAINHAM, a Templar, was taken to the house of Sir T. More, and there examined, in order to discover who among his fraternity held Protestant doctrines. He declined to incul pate them, and was whipped in the presence of his celebrated inquisitor. Subsequently he was adjudged a contumacious and irrecoverable heretic, for uttering sentiments derogatory to the Popish views of Thomas à Becket and transubstantiation. He was burnt in Smithfield, in 1532.

In the same year was an example of the wretched vindictiveness of the Papal clergy against the true servants of the Lord. One WILLIAM TRACY, of Worcestershire, in dying, left a will worded differently to the approved fashion,* for in it he bequeathed his soul“ only to God, through Jesus Christ, to whose intercession alone he trusted, without the help of any other saint,” &c. This being known, the Chancellor of Winchester ordered his body to be raised as that of a heretic (which process was according to law), and to be burnt. This latter order was going beyond his privilege: so, two years after Tracy's heirs sued him for it, and he was dismissed from his chancellorship and fined in 4001.

Another instance of Antichristian cruelty on the part of the clergy occurred about the same time. They proclaimed an indulgence of forty days' pardon to all who carried a faggot to the burning of a heretic. One THOMAS HARDING was observed often retiring for meditation to the woods adjoining his house, and seen reading; curiosity was on tip-toe to know the subject; some parcels of New Testaments in English were found at his house. Stupendous crime! He had read of and desired to imitate the Bible-loving Bereans. Unpardonable heresy! He had thought, presumptuously thought, that there might be some weight in a Saviour's command to “ Search the Scriptures." And therefore the Papacy set her fangs upon the rash rebel against her authority, and because he loved light more than darkness, and the Man of Sorrows rather than the Man of Sin, he was committed to the flames. Right faithfully did a spectator act up to the above clerical proclamation, when he hurled the faggot which he carried at Harding's head, and dashed out his brains.

* The customary wording of wills at that period was, first, “I bequeath my soul to Almighty God, and to our Lady Saint Mary, and to all the saints in heaven."

« PreviousContinue »