magne confirmed the grant of the principal cities of the exarchate of Ravenna, which had been made to the Pope by his father Pepin, the keys of which had been formally delivered before the altar of Saint Peter. The ill-treatment of the pilgrims visiting the holy sepulchre at length led to the wars of the crusades, the declared object of which was to take the city of Jerusalem, and recover to the Western Church the sepulchre in which the body of the Redeemer had lain. Jerusalem and the sepulchre were taken by storm in July, 1099, and Godfrey de Bouillon, the conqueror, too modest to accept the title of king of Jerusalem, contented himself with that of Defender and Baron of the Holy Sepulchre.* The holy city was held by the Christians ninety-eight years, when it was surrendered to Saladin, who, in his mercy, justice, and disinterestedness to the garrison and their followers, set an example to his Christian enemies. Convulsive efforts were made by the peoples of Europe, under the excitements of the Romish bishops, for about one hundred years to gain back the holy city and its sacred spots, but down to the present time those spots have continued in the hands and under the dominion of the infidels, to the deep disgrace of the Christian nations of Europe. The possession by the Turks of the Holy Land, with its ruined towns and sepulchres and consecrated spots of earth, has always been considered dishonourable by every person who ever gave a thought on the subject; and the recovery of them has been one of the dreams of the ardent spirits of Europe since the age of the crusades. The most celebrated of the enthusiastic men who conceived the plan of the recovery of the holy places was Christopher Columbus. Bouillon, Cyclop. Society for the Diffusion of Useful Know

*

ledge.

That great and pious man, on looking across the great ocean which led him to a new world, never lost sight of the vision of the sepulchre of his Redeemer; and his lofty mind was sustained, amidst the difficulties, dangers, and anxieties of his unparalleled adventure, with the hope of devoting his treasures to that holy enterprise, and of following as a soldier of the cross the march to Jerusalem. Amidst the disappointed hopes which embittered the soul and crushed the spirit of that heroic man, perhaps the most pungent of his regrets arose from the failure of realizing his long-cherished undertaking.*

Mr. Layard, in his account of the ruins of Nineveh, and the present state of the neighbouring countries, gives a letter of the celebrated Prester John, or Presbyter John, who was a Tartar chief or king, converted by the Chaldean patriarch in the thirteenth century. The letter is addressed to Alexius Comnenus, the emperor of Constantinople, and is curious as illustrative of this subject of the keys of the holy sepulchre. "Prester John, by the grace of God, and of our Lord Jesus Christ, the king of kings, to Alexius Comnenus, the governor of Constantinople, health and a happy end .. Seventy kings are our tributaries. We are a devout Christian, and we everywhere protect and nourish with alms such poor Christians as are within the empire of our clemency . . . We have made a vow to visit the sepulchre of our Lord with a great army, as it becometh the glory of our Majesty to wage war against, and humiliate the enemies of, the cross of Christ, and to exalt his holy name." †

It is more than 340 years since Columbus died, and the holy sepulchre still remains in possession of the * "Life of Columbus," by Washington Irving.

+ Layard's "Nineveh," vol. i. p. 250.

infidels " THE KEY OF THE CHURCH IS KEPT BY THE GOVERNOR OF THE CITY, AND THE DOOR IS GUARDED BY A TURK;”* and the papal banner, with its symbolical keys, yet flouts the sky, and unfurls a lie to the world.

Among the various pretensions put forth by potentates in the world, the most audacious is the title assumed by the King of Sardinia, of "King of Jerusalem." Mankind, with all their credulity, regard such assumptions with silent contempt, as imposing on nobody, and it is therefore scarcely worth while to say anything more about it; but as we are treating of the assumption of the title to the keys of the holy sepulchre at Jerusalem by the bishop of Rome, we may add that there is a curious history of the title of the "King of Cyprus and Jerusalem." Godfrey de Bouillon, who captured the holy city from the Mahometans, refused the title of king, as he considered it impious to assume it. His successors were less modest and less scrupulous; and one of the name of Guy de Lusignan was expelled from Jerusalem towards the end of the twelfth century, and received from Richard I. of England the island of Cyprus. The Lusignans retained that island for three centuries, and assumed the title of King of Cyprus and Jerusalem. In the fifteenth century the title went to the female line, and the lady married one of the family of the Duke of Savoy, and from this origin the kings of the States of Sardinia conceive that it adds to their dignity to pretend to the crown of Jerusalem. So late as the 23rd of March, 1848, Charles Albert, in a declaration of war against the Emperor of Austria, entitled himself, "By the grace of God, King of Sardinia, Cyprus, and Jerusalem.”

* "Incidents of Travel in the Holy Land," by J. L. Stephens, ch. xxviii.

CHAPTER IV.

The difference between the two great sections of the Christian World, respectively represented by the Bible and the Breviary. The distinction of the two described for the information of intelligent Sceptics and of Mahometans and Heathen. The distinction also shown by the idolatrous regard to the material Cross by the Christians of the Breviary. -The Cross was regarded by the Reformers in the Sixteenth century as an instrument of priestly despotism; hence it was cast down. The blasphemies of John Tetzel, the agent of the Bishop of Rome in the sale of Indulgences under the Sign of the Cross.

THE material sign and figure of the cross, in its use in religion and war, and as an article of merchandise, has produced the most remarkable effects on mankind. It appears so much on the surface of society, having been displayed for so many hundred years to the eyes of the world, that men have become universally familiarised with it, and now regard it as an object which has lost its meaning and its value.

All the people on the earth, who make a public profession of the Christian religion, may be divided into two great sections. First: The class that submits to an order of bishops and priests who have kept to themselves, or have destroyed, the original books upon which the religion, in its history and its doctrines, depends; and these priests insisting on the possession of an absolute spiritual power to prescribe to the members of their church what they shall believe, prac

tise, and pay for the salvation of their souls. Second: The class, and its numerous subdivisions, who retain in their own possession, and read, the original books. of the history, precepts, and doctrines of their religion; and although there is considerable diversity of interpretation by those subdivisions, still each sect presses upon the other the reading of the books in support of the view of the particular form of worship and discipline adopted. We shall, for the sake of distinction, denominate them—

The Christians of the Breviary-without the Bible. The Christians of the Bible-with the Bible.

In the discussion of any subject, and in the prosecution of any argument, it is of great importance to lay down definitions in order to mark out the lines of separation between the two objects of dispute, and to afford precise ideas of the real difference between them.

At this time, when the great spiritual struggle between those two classes has revived, and now will be continued to the end, it is necessary to keep in view the real principles for which the Christians of the Bible have to contend, which in its simplicity is to struggle to place the Bible in the room of the breviary. This definition of the actual difference between the two great classes will enable infidels and enlightened men of the world, who " care for none of those things,"* to perceive at once the true nature of the question at issue between the parties, and it will rouse their attention to this matter, and engage their sympathies in favour of a party who desires to diffuse truth, freedom, and knowledge. The intelligent, but carefor-nothing classes of society, regard generally the disputes between the Roman church and all other *Acts xviii. 17.