Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

speak of the Legend of Loretto, from which we draw the following brief account from matter as impious as it is puerile. After the blasphemous account of the preceding inhabitants of this chamber, of which the Apostles afterwards made (a chapel, where they sung mass, St. Luke, we are informed, drew the Virgin's picture (still shown, or was shown a few years ago, as the original), which hung quietly up, and the chapel itself stood contentedly still at Nazareth until a. D. 1291. But, in that year, Palestine being taken by the Mohammedans, off flew the chapel to Dalmatia, accompanied by some angels. After a journey of so many thousand miles, it balted, and continued at Tersanctum, until the devotional tributes of the pilgrims became less frequent. It then again set off for Recanati, the seat of a lady of the name of Loretto :

the chapel alighted in a wood-pilgrims again approached with their offerings; but a band of marauders taking advant tage of their zeal, contrived to sally from the wood, and plunder them. The chapel was twice removed by Angels after this; but we think it will for the time to come remain stationary Protestantism is not favourable to Miracles*; and its influence is powerful. But perhaps Protestants may imagine that, as the wonders we have alluded to above are said to have occurred ages ago, they are long since forgotten.

to the great admiration of the favoured Sicilians. Such was the Jesuit's own account of the transaction, when relating it to his particulars, and at which he would smile at the folly of those whom he assisted in deceiving. The writer of this note, when Commenting upon the above to his Roman Catholic friends, has frequently received, by The translator of Bede, Stapleton the Jesuit, says, of reply, the following question-" Well! and what harm did it do?" "No Protestant, while he lived, nor yet his bones or bodie when he was dead, ever wrought any miracle. No Protestant's bodie hath this hundred years been preserved from corruption." This is very true; nor Papist's neither, if truth only were adhered to; but wherever it has been deemed criminal to dispute Monkish miracles, the natural consequence was, that such impieties should increase, and be recorded by all Ecclesiastical writers even those of, otherwise, the highest credit. In such cases the impartial reader has only to make an allowance for the prejudices of the age in which his author wrotepassing over the fables as the concomitant excrescences of superstition grafted upon genius. It will never be difficult to distinguish the writings of Bede from those of Geoffrey of Monmouth, although the former tells of Saints whose bones, by their illumination, saved their convents oil, and of their bodies remaining incorruptible for centuries. It cannot be denied that Protestantism has caused so great a bank ruptcy in the firm of Popish miracle-mongers, that they will never be able to obtain an accredited certificate, so as to enable them to carry on their trade upon an extens sive scale.

[ocr errors]

Father Crasset lived in the beginning of the last century, and speaks of them thus:-" The third objection that they make against this doctrine is, that it hath almost no other foundation besides relations and histories, which men are not obliged to believe, and which are reported by simple, overcredulous persons, who take the dreams and imaginations of women for Divine Revelations. It is an intolerable rashness to give the name of Tales and Fables to those Histories related by authors eminent for learning and Holiness; and to reckon, as the mistakes of a weak understanding, such Revelations as have merited the approbation of the Council of Basil, of the Popes Gregory II., Urban VI., and Martin V For my part, I shall not think that I wrong the historians of the age, if I give as much credit to Saint Antonin, who relates 'that Vincent Ferrier raised eight-and-thirty men from the dead, as I do to all the stories in Gazettes out of which they make their histories *." Why, indeed, should not Papists believe in one of their accredited miracles as well as another? by what right do they presume to make their own selection from this mass of absurdity and falsehood?-must not their "Church" which professed, and still (quietly, to be sure) professes her belief in their genuineness, know better than they?—Are such miracles as we have noticed-(by no means the most wonderful, although some of the least gross of their Legends) are these more astonishing than those declared by Fathers Murphy, Roche, &c. to have been performed in our own times by themselves? We have an authenticated document at this instant before us-sworn to before a bench of magistrates-wherein it is proved that the above-named gentlemen preached their power of preserving all those of the true Romish religion from heretical bullets, which they themselves caught in their hands, &c. This was believed by their

1

*Dr. Milner says (End of Con. p. 110,) "In those processes which are constantly going on, at the Apostolical See, for the canonization of new saints, fresh miracles [the old ones have become stale ?] of a recent date continue to be proved with the highest degree of evidence," &c. Yet, after this, we are assured, (p. 113,) so strict is the examination of their truth, that "it is next to a miracle to get a miracle proved at Rome!" Oh! Dr. Milner!

[ocr errors]

flocks. Why should it not have been, when their Bishops. publicly declare their own belief in their own miraculous power ?-And why, we ask, are Papists told they ought to believe in them-"Because nothing is impossible to God."FALSEHOOD is impossible to HIM who is, indeed, the fountain of all TRUTH-nor can His sacred name be more deeply dishonoured than by those by whom it is associated with such fulsome, hypocritical, and insidious frauds as those contained in the Popish annals we have just spoken of.

We have been somewhat more than ordinarily copious in our remarks upon the present subject, from a knowledge that many of our most sensible countrymen and country women, although they call themselves Romanists, cannot believe all the Popish doctrines, however well-inclined to do so, because Reason will not permit it. They would reluctantly give up their miracles, since the power of their Church to work them was deeply impressed upon their minds in youth:-these are, in England, generally, too rational to be intrusted with a perusal of the Legends of Monks-and whenever a miracle can be slily slipped out, it is still persisted in by those Priests whose great interest, in this world, is to deceive. Even the superstition of the most illiterate Protestants, who, in opposition to the Scriptures and their Clergy, would believe (for superstition is the child of ignorance) anything ridiculously supernatural-these would be encouraged by the Romish. Clergy to imbibe the miraculous; and the miracle of Holywell*, attested by the late Dr. Milner, is a convincing proof (to Papists) that the fooleries sanctioned by their men of learning ought not to be rejected by themselves. The Romanist who would persuade himself that he need not believe in the mass of absurdities and impieties of his Church,

Among the innumerable miracles said to have been performed by the water of this well, none exceeds the one gravely related by Dr. Milner of Winnifred White, who was cured of an incurable disorder (her medical Doctor having given it up) by a bit of moss ("from the Saint's well") tied round her arm, and repeating Popish prayers for nine days together.

should recollect that this Church is (in England) afraids so openly to command it as formerly. Let him apply to his God for instruction through the medium of his own word; and ere he treat with contempt the most contemptible Legend of his Church, let him assure himself that his every day worship is derived from a purer source. Are not the devotions to the Virgin Mary-the festivals of her nativity, assumption, &c. &c. &c.-are not these all founded on the fabulous Legends we have already noticed? If they be not, where are they to be found in the Scriptures? We have Legends of the birth, parentage, &c. &c. of the Virgin Mary, among scores of others, now lying before us, as quoted by Jurieu, from Bartholomew of Pisa, Bernardin de Bustis, Pelbart de Temeswar, &c. &c. &c. What would Christians think of the impious Fable of Salome (we appeal to those who have read it), when she would satisfy herself of the Resurrection of the Virgin Mary, as related in the Protoevangelium (asserted to be written by St. James!!), were it to be. published in their vulgar tongue?-Papists who are curious on this point we must refer to their priests-the tale is too gross for any persons but the clergy of that Church to repeat which could approve of their writing such Legends.

We close the subject of miracles by asking our Roman Catholic brethren, if their Church has not ever been most fruitful in her performance of them, when she had the least cause to be so; we mean, when in the height of her own power, in the very darkest ages of Christianity; and when a cruel death awaited the wretch who disputed it?-But when humbled to the earth-when her Infallible Pontiff obsequiously bowed his neck to his "dearest son in Christ," as he called Bonaparte, who had invaded his territory-by whom he was immured in a prison—then, when this "Church sunk at the feet of him who thus had spurned her, not one miracle could she accomplish to save herself from despair! Is not this an evidence worth the consideration even of an

[ocr errors]

"implicit," whose stake on the infallibility of his doctrine is his own immortal soul? Let Papists also recollect, that the miracles wrought by our Lord and his Apostles were to effect great objects; not one of which was performed for the mere purpose of astonishing or gratifying the vulgar.

CHAP. IX.-OF IMAGES.

What is your doctrine as to images ?

We hold that the images or pictures of Christ, of his blessed Mother ever a Virgin, and of other saints, are to be had and retained; and that due honour and veneration is to be given them.

Do you not worship images?

No, by no means, if by worship you mean divine honour; for this we don't give to the highest angel or saint, nor even to the Virgin Mary, much less to images.

Do you not pray to images?

No, we don't: because, as both our catechism and common sense teach us, They can neither see, nor hear nor help us.-Doway Catechism.

Why then do you pray before an image or crucifix ? :

Because the sight of a good picture or image, for example, of Christ upon the cross, helps to enkindle devotion in our hearts towards him that has loved us to that excess, as to lay down his life for the love of us.

Are you taught to put your trust and confidence in images, as the heathens did in their idols; as if there were a certain virtue, power, or divinity residing in them?

No, we are expressly taught the contrary by the council of Trent, Session 25.

How do you prove that it is lawful to make or keep the images of Christ and his saints?

Because God himself commanded Moses, Exod. xxv. 18, 19, 20, 21, to make two cherubims of beaten gold, and place them at the two ends of the mercy-seat over the ark of the covenant in the very sanctuary. "And there," says he, ver. 22," will I meet thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy-seat from between the two cherubims which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel." God also commanded, Numb. xxi. 8, 9, a serpent of brass to be made, for the healing of those who were bit by the fiery serpents; which serpent was an emblem of Christ, John iii. 14, 15.

But is it not forbidden, Exod. xx. 4, " to make the likeness of any thing in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth ?"

« ForrigeFortsæt »