Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

any

:

then here is the difference: you accuse us of these things without reason, often without occasion and therefore do CALUMNIATE; whereas I never (that I know of) return them upon you 'till I have first shewn a just cause for the doing it: and though it be a CALUMNY to call an honest man a knave or a dishonest man, yet I know not what other name we can give to a man that is truly so:"

So says the Archbishop, and so say we! and this may teach Sir John Coxe Hippisley in future, not to be so free in calling up the mighty dead." He may dance about the living as he pleases, if they will let him: but we must protect those who are departed, and not permit them to be misrepresented. We go on, therefore, to protest against the repeated abuse of the venerable name of the late Bishop Law of Elphin: we protest also against ranking Bishop Horsley on the side of the claims. We do not think that there is reasonable ground so to rank the latter and with respect to the former, we are sure that he was decidedly against them. He spoke indeed in their favour in 1792; but a more intimate acquaintance with the doctrines and the character of the Irish Romanists completely changed his opinion:* and this is so perfectly well known, that we do not clearly see how we can wholly acquit Sir John of disingenuousness, to call it by no harsher name, in thus pressing that most respectable prelate into his service. If he goes on, we shall be obliged to use Bishop Law's own expression, and cry stop thief;" as he did when certain persons were "running away with the bags" of a certain charity.

Let then Sir John act fairly. We must not envy him the names which he may fairly display. Let him take Bishop Bathurst, if it must be so; Bishop Watson, if he can make any thing of him; Dr. Parr, Dr. Valpy, Dr. Butler and Dr. Maltby: great and mighty as these heroes may be, what, after all, are they but

"Rari nantes in gurgite vasto ?"

Have we not for us all the rest of the reverend bench, and we may say, all the clergy? Let him then have done with his numbers, and beat us, if he can, by arguments.

We have now done, for the present at least, with Sir John; and we wish to part with him not only in good humour, but with serious and proper feelings. We intreat him to weigh well what he is doing. The subject which we and he are treating, is of the highest importance. Let him not be cajoled out of his faith. Popery is an animal incessantly vigilant, and attacking all men in all ways, wherever it can find a weak side. say it to others as we say it to him; let him be distrustful of the com

We

See h's Lordship's Speech, 13th May 1805, on" Protestant Authorities against Concessions to the Catholics."--Price 6d.

pliments which he may receive from that quarter: let him "timere Danaos." Let him seriously look back upon the history of past times; and what is going on before our eyes; and let him, with a solemn appeal to his conscience, determine whether there be not the greatest reason to believe that to be true, of which we have been long persuaded, and in which we are daily confirmed, as well by our own experience as that of others, hamely, (as the axiom was delivered to us the other day) that “in all matters where the interest of his Church is concerned, there is no trusting to what a Romanist says."

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS IN FAVOUR OF THE REFORMED RELIGION, RECOMMENDED BY THE EDITOR OF THE PROTESTANT ADVOCATE.

(Continued from p. 425.)

13. The Corruptions of the Church of Rome, in relation to Ecclesiastical Government, the rule of Faith, and form of Divine Worship, in an swer to the Bishop of Meaux's Queries. By the Right Rev. Dr. Bull, Lord Bishop of St. David's.-(4th Edition.)-To which is added, a Let ter of Bishop Bull, now first published from a Manuscript in Lambeth Library-Stockdale.

ON reference to p. 389, of our miscellany, our reader's will see that we announced the formation of a new society, followed by a reprint of the prospectus then just offered to the public. The members of that society have begun to act under a new name indeed, but their object is completely the same with that which is set out in the fifth resolution annexed to the prospectus. With every disposition to render essential service to the Protestant religion established in this country, no small difficulties present themselves in the way of the founders of any new society; difficulties, perhaps, the more distressing in proportion to the singleness ef their hearts, and the purity of their intention. A set of men actuated by ambition or a love of popularity, will adopt any name, however equivocal, and will commence active operations without much regarding any sense of propriety; respecting no feelings which may be excited in other societies, and heedless concerning any on whose province they may seem to encroach, or whose pious and patriot labours they may eventually appear to supersede. It seems to have been the wish of the association which takes the denomination of the "Society for Distribution of the Tracts, in Defence of the United Church of England and Ireland, as by Law established," to endeavour to do good and disseminate general information, without raising jealousies in any existing society whatever, or without running the risk of being placed in a predicament of opposition either to the legisla

tive or executive branches of the State. Its founders appear to have been actuated by pure motives, and to have followed apostolical precedents,→→→ « Μηδεμιαν εν μηδενι δίδοντες προσκοπήν.” May Divine Providence crown their labours with success!-The tract now before us was immediately occasioned by a letter written to that great ornament of our Church, Mr. Nelson, who had transmitted to the then Bishop of Meaux (Bossuet) a work of Bishop Ball, defending an anathema pronounced by the Council of Nice against those who maintained doctrines derogatory to the Deity of the Son of God; impeached by Episcopius as harsh and uncharitable. Bishop Bull was the great defender of the Nicene faith, and Bossuet was induced to hope that he might be led to join the Church of Rome; as if the Romish Church professed the Catholic faith whole and undefiled. The Bishop of Meaux was guilty of a mistake in supposing Bishop Bull to hold the infallibility of the Council of Nice; for had this been taken for granted, his Lordship might have saved himself a world of labour in writing his Fidei Nicene Defensio, and might have rested satisfied with asserting the infallibility of the Fathers who assisted at that Council. It happened that Mr. Nelson's letter, and Bishop Bull's book, the Judicium Ecclesia Catholica, &c. were delivered to Bossuet at St. Germaine en Laye, where he was attending a General Assembly of all the Archbishops and Bishops of France. The book was read" with great care and exactness" by the Bishop of Meaux, who thought fit to communicate it to the other dignitaries of the Gallican Church; bence, in his letter to Mr. Nelson, he desires him to offer his Lordship the congratulations of the Clergy of France for the service he had done" the Catholic Church in so well defending the determination of the necessity of believing the divihity of the Son of God." He then goes on to put certain queries to Mr. Nelson, such as what Bishop Bull meant the term Catholic Church? &c. These queries are most satisfactorily answered in the admirable little tract before us, well worthy the perusal of every Protestant at this momentous crisis. The Bishop of Meaux's letter to Mr. Nelson, in the original French, was published in Dr. Hickes's Controversial Letters, where the answer to it is also to be found. Mr. Nelson printed the Letter again in his life of Bishop Bull; a book well deserving the study of every parish Priest, who cannot but derive the greatest benefit from contemplating the bright ex ample set by Bishop Bull in the discharge of all the duties of an English Clergyman; and at the same time his estimation of the learning, the un derstanding, the industry, the devotedness of Nelson to true religion cannot bat be greatly heightened.

We must give a specimen or two of Bishop Bull's mode of arguing."I wonder why Monsieur de Meaux should ask me, whether by the

Catholick Church, I mean the Church of Rome or the Church of Eng. land? He knows full well, I mean neither the one nor the other. For to say either of the Church of Rome, or of the Church of England, or of the Greek Church, or of any other particular Church of whatever denomination soever, that it is the Catholick or Universal Church, would be as absurd as to affirm that a part is the whole. And to be sure I never meant the Church of Rome to be the Catholic Church exclusively to all other Churches. I am so far from any such meaning, that my constant judgment of the Church of Rome hath been, that if she may be allowed still to remain a part or member of the Catholic Church (which hath been questioned by some learned men, upon grounds and reasons not very easy to be answered), yet she is certainly a very unsound and corrupted one, and sadly degenerated from her primitive purity."

Bishop Bull animadverts upon many of the articles added by the Church of Rome to those containing the faith of the primitive Christian Church, and comprised in the formulary commonly called the creed of Pope Pius IV. This summary of popish novelties has been lying by us for some time, having been transcribed from Dr. Hickes's book for insertion in the Protestant Advocate, with notes. We hope to find an opportunity to fulfil our purpose ere long. It is appended to the tract now before us, and it gives clearness, and a method to whatever might otherwise seem desultory in Bishop Bull's view of the corruptions of the new (certainly not the ancient) religion professed by the Church of Rome.-We conclude with a few extracts, which will shew clearly how the good Bishop conducts the argument.

"The Church of Rome hath changed the Primitive Canon, or Rule of Faith, by adding new articles to it, as necessary to be believed in order to salvation: look to the Confession of Faith, according to the Council of Trent. It begins indeed, with the primitive Rule of Faith, as is explain'd by the Council of Nice and Constantinople; and happy had it been for the Church of Christ if it had ended there. But there are added afterwards a many new articles, and with reference to them, as well as to the articles of the old Creed, it concludes thus: "This true Catholick faith, with "out which none can be saved, which I now willingly profess and un"feignedly hold; the same I premise, vow, and swear, by the help of "God, most constantly to keep and confess, entire and inviolate, even to 66 my last breath; and to endeavour moreover, to the utmost of my pow"er, that it may be kept, taught, and professed by all my subjects, or by "those that are any way under my care. So help me God, and these biş "holy gospels."

[ocr errors]

Now, if you examine hose articles that follow after the Constantino

politan Creed, you will find they are not merely explicatory of any article or articles of the old canon of faith (such as that of quos or same substance in the Nicene Confession, which was virtually contained in the ancient canon, and by good consequence deducible from it, and was apparently also the sense of the Catholick Church before the Nicene Council); but they are plain additions to the Rule of Faith. Now, if these articles were true, yet they ought not presently to be made a part of our creed; for every truth is not fundamental, nor every error damnable. We deny not but that general or provincial Councils may make constitutions concerning extra-fondamental verities, and oblige all such as are under their jurisdiction to receive them, at least passively, so as not openly and contumaciously to oppose them. But to make any of these a part of the creed, and to oblige all Christians under pain of damnation to receive and believe them, this is really to add to the Creed, and to change the ancient Canon or Rule of Faith. But, alts ! these superadded articles of the Frent Creed, are so far from being certain truths, that they are most of them manifest untruths, yea, gross and dangerous errors."

Concerning Transubstantiation, Bishop Bull thus expresses himself, (p. 25.) in answer to the latter part of the 17th article of the Trent creed. "The other branch of the article is concerning Transubstantiation, wherein the Ecclesiastick professeth upon his solemn oath his belief, that in the Eucharist there is made a conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood of Christ. A proposition that bids defiance to all the reason and sense of mankind. Nor (God be praised!) hath it any ground or foundation in Divine Revelation. Nay, the text of Scripture on which the Church of Rome builds this article, duly considered, utterly subverts and overthrows it. She grounds it upon the words of the institution of the holy sacrament by our Saviour, the same night wherein he was betrayed; when he took bread, and brake it, and gave to his disciples, saying, This is my body, tò didoμevov, saith St. Luke, rò xλwμevov, saith St. Paul, which is given and broken for you. After the same manner he took the cup, and gave thanks and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of this, for this is my blood of the New Testament, tò ixxvouevov, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Now whatsoever our Saviour said, was undoubtedly true: but these words could not be true in a proper sense; for our Saviour's body was not then given, or broken, but whole and inviolate; nor was there one drop of his blood yet shed. The words therefore must necessarily be understood in a figurative sense; and then, what becomes of the doctrine of Transubstantiation? The meaning of our Saviour is plainly this: What I now do, is a representation of my death and passion near ap

« ForrigeFortsæt »