« PreviousContinue »
had sunk all minor questions in this great and important one, of pledging their representatives to the repeal of the Maynooth Endowment Act, he believed we should have had a very different House of Commons; though, perhaps, in the present Parliament, there had been, touching Protestant-questions, some slight improvement. (Hear, hear.) Not only, then, should we assent to the Resolution, but determine to act upon it on the first opportunity. Let us say to our candidates, “ We will not vote for you unless you pledge yourselves to vote against the maintenance of Maynooth.” That was the point against which we should at present direct all our efforts, and the time of an election was the season when we could deal most effectually with it. What we wanted was men who would oppose Maynooth because it was an endowment of error, and not simply because it came within the category of religious endowments. (Hear, hear.)
The Rev. W. W. ROBINSON then moved that the cordial thanks of the Meeting be given to Robert Baxter, Esq., for his kindness in presiding on this occasion. For the last thirty years Mr. Baxter had been a tried and active friend of the principles on which this Society is based. Long before he came to reside in the Metropolis, he was occupied in the cause of Protestantism in the northern parts of the country, of which he was a most devoted champion ; and he (Mr. Robinson) trusted his friend would long be spared, not only to come forward in the cause politically, but with the deep feelings of a Christian; so that, while hating and abominating the system of Popery, he might love and pity its victims. Mr. Robinson then said, that he had just received publicly into the communion of the Church of England, after nine months' probation, a most interesting convert from the Church of Rome.
The Rev. J. CARVER having seconded the Resolution, it was put to the Meeting by Mr. Lord, and carried by acclamation.
Mr. Baxter, speaking in acknowledgment of the vote of thanks, alluded to the recent death of Sir Robert Inglis, a noble-minded Christian gentleman, whose labours had been most abundant in the cause of all Christian Societies, whom he had had the pleasure for a considerable period of meeting almost week by week in the performance of those duties, and whose loss we must deeply deplore. Sir Robert Inglis would ever be remembered by those who had known him as one whose whole life and demeanour bespoke the Christian ; whilst his labours in the Senate, and the part he took in public affairs, proved him to be equally a patriot and an able statesman. (Applause.)
The Doxology was then sung; and, after the Rev. A. S. Thelwall bad pronounced a benediction, the Meeting separated.
THE ROMISH PRIEST AND THE MURDERER BURANELLI. Being a Roman Catholic, Mr. Davis, the ordinary of the gaol, of course did not press his spiritual attentions upon him. Mr. Sheriff Muggeridge and his colleague, Mr. Sheriff Crossley, however, immediately after the trial, made the prisoner aware that he would be permitted to see any clergyman of his own religious persuasion ; and, at his request, Dr. Farr, a Roman Catholic priest, was requested to visit the culprit, and he did so, and had several interviews with him. After
a time, however, he discontinued his visits; and it appears that the cause of his doing so was, that he and Buranelli had a disagreement with regard to his daughter, Rosa, and that the culprit refused to have her brought up in the Roman Catholic faith. It appears that, upon his marriage with his first wife, who was an English woman, Buranelli pledged himself to bring this child up in the Protestant religion, and he faithfully redeemed the pledge he had given. Dr. Farr, however, insisted upon the child being handed over to some Roman Catholic institution ; and upon Buranelli refusing to break the promise he had made to his deceased wife, to whom there is no doubt he was most sincerely attached, Dr. Farr refused him absolution, and told him that his soul would certainly go to purgatory; and he then altogether ceased his visits. The wretched man was consequently left without any spiritual adviser; but the sheriffs, feeling that, although in such a matter they were possibly not justified in interfering, still were unwilling that the unfortunate man, who appeared to feel deep misery at his position, should leave the world without in some way receiving the consolations of religion, applied to him to know whether he wished to any other clergyman; and Buranelli then expressed a desire to be attended by Father Gavazzi, Mr. Sheriff Muggeridge observed to him that this gentleman was not a Roman Catholic; and he said he was aware of that, but he still desired to see him. Father Gavazzi was at once informed of the wish of the prisoner, and he immediately responded to it; and during the last few days of the existence of the wretched criminal Father Gavazzi has been in constant attendance upon him. Mr. Sheriff Muggeridge and Mr. Sheriff Crosley, accompanied by Mr. Under-Sheriff Farrer and Mr. UnderSheriff A. Crosley, arrived at the gaol yesterday morning soon after seven o'clock, and upon proceeding to the cell occupied by the culprit they found him engaged in devotional exercises with Father Gavazzi, who had been with him since half-past five o'clock. The first observation made by the prisoner was an expression of earnest and deep sorrow for the crime he had committed, and a hope that he would be pardoned by God.' Upon Mr. Sheriff Crosley asking him how he felt, he thanked him, and said he felt much better than he had for some time, and that he was more composed. He then expressed his satisfaction that Father Gavazzi had been permitted to be with him, and said that he felt much obliged to the sheriffs for the interest they had taken in this matter, and that he was deeply grateful to Father Gavazzi for the religious consolation he had afforded him. He then pointed to the Bible that was lying upon the table, and said with great earnestness, “ How I wish that you would get that book circulated in my Italy."— Morning Herald, May 1, 1855.
MADRID. Within the last three days a report was spread in Madrid that a figure of the Saviour, in the Church of St. Francisco the Great, sweated blood and water out of grief for the sale of the Church property! Forthwith the people thronged to the place to behold the miracle, and there was much excitement. It is stated, but for the truth of this I will not vouch, that there were shouts of “Death to heretics and Jews !” “Death to the Deputies who decreed the sale of God's property !”—From the Times, May 24, 1855.
JULY 2, 1855.
DIGEST OF THE MAYNOOTH COMMISSION REPORT: *
WITH REFERENCE TO SUCH PORTIONS OF THE EVIDENCE AS RELATE TO
TEACHING AT MAY NOOTH.
BY JAMES LORD, Of the Inner Temple, Esq., Barrister-at-Law; Author of “The Maynooth
College Grant, and the Law with reference thereto,” &c., &c. 8vo., pp. 296. The work before us is on a subject of great importance-we had almost said, a subject of vital importance; for if it be true that this nation has prospered in proportion to its departure from Popery,—in proportion to its reception and profession of the truth, it would seem to follow that national prosperity must wane and decrease in proportion as we depart from an open profession,-from a national recognition, of the truth—from our national repudiation of error—and consent to give national funds, national sanction, national influence, to propagate the errors of the Papacy.
Let us not be misunderstood. It is not to the amount alone of the grant that we raise objections. It is to the principle involved; it is to there being any grant at all from the public funds. If the grant be sinful, the smallest as well as the greatest amount is sinful. Just as theft is theft, whether a penny or a pound be stolen, and implies a disregard of the moral principle as to right and wrong; so any national endowment of error is sinful ipso facto, and quite irrespective of the amount of the endowment given. In like manner it may be observed, that as the smallest wire will transmit the electric fluid throughout the whole extent of its line, as well as a medium of greater dimensions,- so the endowment of Maynooth, whether for a little or a great sum, serves as a connecting-link between Great Britain and the Papacy,—and, uniting it to Rome and
London: Protestant Association Office, 6, Serjeants'-inn, Fleet-street. Seeley, Jackson, and Halliday, Fleet-street, and Seeley, Hanover-street, 1855.
Vol. XVII.—July, 1855. P. New Series, No. 55.
making it to be a participator in the propagation of its sins, will most assuredly also involve the nation in its punishment, unless it be disconnected from Popery-unless its people and governors acknowledge the error into which they have been entrapped, and retrace their steps.
With a view of keeping a few points in mind, before entering upon the Digest and Evidence, Mr. Lord has prefixed the following short preface to the work now before us :
“The origin of Maynooth College is to be traced to the close of the last century It arose from the doctrine of expediency. An Act of the Irish Parliament sanctioned the establishinent of one College in Ireland for the education of Roman Catholics. This enabling Act, rendering lawful what was before unlawful, passed in the year 1795. Prior enactments had made such establishments illegal.
“ An annual grant from that date was given, varying, however, in amount from time to time.
“ The Commissioners of Irish Education Inquiry made a Report with reference to Maynooth in 1827. Soon after this, strong objections were taken to the nature of the education, and to the continuance of the grant. These increased as the matter became more known. They formed the subject of general discussion, tending greatly to elucidate the truth, and to open the eyes of Protestants to the arrogant pretensions of the Papacy. So much was this the case, that the late Sir Robert Peel was induced, in order to cut the Gordian knot, to make a Motion in favour of Maynooth, by taking the grant out of the annual estimates, and conferring a permanent endowment on that College. An Act for that purpose was passed in the year 1845.
Objectors, however, on principle still objected, and that, too, more strongly than ever.
“ To satisfy these, a Royal Commission was granted in 1853. That Report, with the evidence, was not presented to Parliament till March, 1855. The contents of it form the subject of this Digest.
“ Into what has taken place since the meeting of Parliament, it is not my province here to enter. It is to be hoped that no cessation will take place in the efforts made, in or out of Parliament, to get rid of this national sin and inconsistency.
“ Though strong protests have been entered against the Grant, it has stood its ground to this day. The argument, however, for its continuance as matter of compact at the time of the Union, has lost its weight by lapse of time. The stipulations at the Union only extended to twenty years after the Union: so that, for more than thirty years, whatever force may at any time have attached to it, that plea bas lost
The Grant is irreconcilable with principle, and neither compact nor expediency require its continuance."
After some introductory remarks, the Digest, in Chapter I., contains extracts bearing upon Papal power and influence. And if no other charge were made against Popery than what the Roman Catholic witnesses themselves admit in the evidence quoted, there would be amply sufficient ground for this Protest
ant nation being upon its guard against the increased influence of the Papacy.
Chapter II. refers to the alleged discontinuance of Bailly as a class-book at Maynooth. We advisedly make use of the word alleged, because we gather from the evidence that no book has been permanently substituted for it; and that of the workthat of Scavini, mentioned as a temporary substitute—the students actually had no supply at the time of the Commission making its inquiries. One of the professors said he had one copy, and had ordered one for the library ;-an ample supply indeed for a College of about 500 students !
In Chapter III. extracts are given from those portions of the evidence which tend to make out that the class-books are of no authority; and Mr. Lord thus treats the question, p. 37:
“ Next to the attempt which seems to have been made to get rid of some of the charges against the College, by discontinuing Bailly as a class-book, is the attempt to deprive Protestants of all knowledge as to what is taught in Maynooth by declaring that the class-books, to which reference has so often been made, are of no authority, but that the nature of the teaching is to be collected from the various opinions of different professors from time to time. Upon this branch of the subject, viz., the teaching in divinity classes upon questions in which the interests of the State and of general morality are concerned, the Commissioners report that,
“ The evidence is mainly that of the heads and professors of the College, and of those who either were, at the time of our inquiry, or bad been formerly, students of the College. No other evidence, indeed, could be of much value, the question being, what was actually taught, and not what was contained in the text-books, which, as already stated (p. 58), cannot be appealed to as a proof of the teaching.'Report, p. 64.
"It had been supposed that the class-books used in Maynooth College might be appealed to as sources of authoritative information; but this the Roman Catholics have found to be very unpleasant. Bailly's works, as we have already seen, have been recently placed in the Index of prohibited books at Rome. But to get rid of any information to be derived from other class-books, the Commissioners report that 'the professors state, that they do not by any means consider themselves bound by the opinions, as such, contained in the class-books from which they teach. Upon matters of doctrine, considered in the Roman Catholic Church to be defined as of faith, the teaching must be uniform; but with respect to all questions upon which opinion in the Roman Catholic Church is free, under which head a large proportion of the questions of moral, and some of the questions of dogmatic, theology may be ranked, the professor is not bound by the opinions of the author used in class, nor does he bind the students, either by the opinions of the class-book or by his own. The class-book serves as a guide to the subjects to be treated of, and the student is required to be prepared to state in class the several views entertained upon the