Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

ment.

*

cable. I believe that, with respect to what some have proposed, viz., the destruction of the Protestant Church in Ireland, there could be no worse or more fatal measure sanctioned by ParliaIt is quite evident from Mr. Pitt's speeches, and the memoranda left by his friends, that he was of opinion that it was possible to endow or to make some provision for the Roman Catholic Church by the State. My belief is, that if Mr. Pitt had carried that measure, he would have carried a measure conducive to the welfare of Ireland, to the maintenance of the union, and to the peace of the united kingdom. In conformity with that opinion I gave my vote in 1825, twenty-one years ago, in favour of a motion made by Lord F. Egerton, now the Earl of Ellesmere, who moved that a provision be made for the maintenance of the Roman Catholic Church."

Such is the disposition, and such the desires of the Noble Lord. Why does he not proceed? Why not carry out his plan? Is it fear of failure in the attempt, or in the result? Let us quote again from the same speech:

"But what do I find at this moment? I see, generally speaking, that the Church of England, that the Dissenters of England, that the Established Church of Scotland, that the Free Church of Scotland, that the Established Church in Ireland, that the Protestant Association in Ireland, and, lastly, that the Roman Catholics of Ireland themselves are all vehement in opposition to such a plan. I received, only this morning, a placard from Edinburgh, in which the Roman Catholics of Edinburgh declared that they would resist, to the utmost of their power, any plan for the payment of the Roman Catholic clergy. I cannot see, then, that that is a measure which I am bound, consistently with my duty, to bring under the consideration of the House, until I see some kind of more favourable disposition towards it on the part of the people."

We cannot but regard this question as one of the most important that has been urged on the public mind since the days of the Reformation, in the sixteenth, and the Revolution, in the seventeenth century. We feel satisfied our readers will concur with us in this view; and, lest they should think we have overrated either the approximation or magnitude of the evil, we give the following extracts from two or three leading London Journals :

The "Standard" of Friday, July 17, 1846, animadverting upon this speech of Lord John's, observes::

* There is much that may be injurious that is not destructive. It should be borne in mind that the suppression of Bishopricks, and the taking away twenty-five per cent. of the incomes of the Irish clergy, was not considered destructive, but beneficial to the Irish Church, by some. How would they like the same system extended to their own revenues?

"He would have no great objection to subvert the Protestant Church in Ireland, and to establish the Romish Church in its place, but he knows that the people would not endure the atrocious sacrilege.

"This is a useful warning to the people; it tells them, as plainly as words can tell anything, that they, under its Divine Head, have the fate of the Protestant Church in their hands. Let them cherish and improve the Protestant spirit, and no divided Cabinet, or united pro-Romanist Cabinet, can prevail against them; but the Protestant spirit must be kept alive, and in full vigour.

"Let the Protestants of the empire remember 1829, and the long and dreary period of seventeen years of divided government that preceded.

"Lord John Russell's announcement of the revival of this system of divided government is a loud summons to a Protestant organisation extending through the length and breadth of the United Kingdom-a Protestant organisation not directed to the displacement of the present Ministers, or of any other Ministers, but to the maintenance of the Protestant religion under whatever Ministers may govern."

[ocr errors]

The "Morning Chronicle," echoing the views of a large section of the Liberal, Romish, and ultra-Radical party, speaks out rather more boldly, in a leading article of Saturday, 18th:

"With respect to the Irish Church, the division in the Cabinet appears to be more serious and irreconcileable than on the factory question. Lord Grey is in favour of a sweeping reduction, if not an abolition of the Irish Establishment. Lord John Russell does not go so far. He would reduce the Church in the south and west, where it is without congregations, and would equalise the two religions by giving the Roman Catholic priests an endowment, either out of Church property or from the national exchequer. A third party in the Cabinet regards the Prime Minister himself as having gone too far. We are not informed of the views of this party, but as all the members of the present Cabinet are committed to the principle of appropriating a portion of the Irish Church revenues to secular purposes, we may presume that those who do not go so far as Lord John Russell are simply in favour of the old appropriation clause.* With these conflicting opinions in his Cabinet, Lord John Russell desires that the Irish Church question should sleep for the present, in order to devote exclusive attention to the social evils of Ireland. Neither Government nor Parliament has time for everything, and the social grievances of Ireland being the worst, require the first attention. We entirely agree with the soundness of this view. If the state of opinion

"Morning Chronicle," July 18, 1846.

and the current of events will permit the Church question to lie by for a year or two, the time may be well spent in the application of vigorous and extensive remedies to the social disorganization of Ireland."

The "Times" of Saturday, July 18, seeming desirous rather to conceal than point out-to diminish than aggravate the magnitude of the departure, avowedly apparent in the policy of the present Government, from a Protestant, to a Pro-Popery policy, remarks as follows:

"There are several questions on which Lord John gives us no absolute guarantee. The appropriation of any part of the revenues of the Irish Church to educational purposes he considers at present inexpedient, offensive, and unnecessary. When it is remembered how much religion and education are conjoined in all ecclesiastical laws and foundations, especially those of the Irish Church, we know not that we can have a better and more available security for that establishment than such an opinion as the above."

The present times are characterized by an unprecedented activity. In politics, science, charitable and religious movements, there is a prodigious amount of energy and activity displayed,— whether rightly or wrongly directed is another question. The advocates of error and those of truth seem to have started in a race, and to be resolved each to outstrip the other. Romish chapels and Protestant churches rise now in rapid succession around

us.

Measures in Parliament are precipitately brought forward, and carried even by those who were avowedly opposed to them.

But we would here turn aside from considering what has been done to contemplate the mode of doing it. We will not assert that the course pursued was an unconstitutional one, though we cannot but regard it as taking rather an unfair advantage, to have gained confidence only to betray it, to have raised expectations never to be realized. The same course may be adopted on other subjects. The Act of 1829, the Act for endowing Maynooth College, the Corn-law Act, have all been brought in unexpectedly, and carried by means of men of generally opposite views, and returned to Parliament on different principles.

A single session may not elapse before some startling project for Church spoliation, or the endowment of the Romish Church in Ireland, shall be brought forward, and passed as a law binding us, as a Protestant nation-too wrapped in security to apprehend danger-too prosperous to fear adversity-too grasping after political power and wealth to stop to inquire whether, in attaining it, they may not be alienating from themselves the favour of Him by whom kings reign, and princes decree justice, and practically forgetting that "righteousness exalts a nation, but that sin is the reproach of any people."

[FROM A CORRESPONDENT.]

THE TEST; OR, WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURE? BY X., A MEMBER OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

(Continued from page 324.)

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC

CHRISTIAN.

(40) OF RELIGIOUS ORDERS

AND CONFRATERNITIES.

Page 176.-Q. What are the motives upon which a Christian should embrace a religious life?

A. To do penance for his sins; to fly from the dangers and corruptions of this wicked world; to consecrate himself wholly to the service of God, and sanctify himself by the exact observance of his vows, and all the exercises of a religious life; and to tend without ceasing to Christian perfection.

THE PROTESTANT CHRISTIAN; OR, "WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURE?"

(40) OF RELIGIOUS ORDERS AND

CONFRATERNITIES.

Here again starts up the dangerous doctrine of man making satisfaction by penance for his sins! Christ alone makes satisfaction; the Christian's part is simply to repent of, and forsake his sins, and pray for the assistance of the Holy Spirit to enable him to resist temptation; this is "working out his salvation with fear and trembling." Man is not sanctified by vows; the Holy Ghost alone sanctifies. If man can redeem and sanctify himself, he may with equal propriety say he can create himself; for the offices of two persons of the blessed Trinity are here entirely superseded! Penance and purgatory

have assumed the office of Christ's atonement, and sanctification by vows has usurped the office of the Holy Ghostsanctification. Do you not perceive, that by this strange doctrine, though you say you acknowledge the Trinity in Unity, you are virtually taking part with the enemies of our Lord, the Socinians; nor let me be deemed too severe in adding, One step more, and you are on the verge of that "dark howling wilderness," Infidelity. We ought certainly "to tend without ceasing to Christian perfection," endeavouring to follow the blessed steps of our Redeemer's "most holy life," though we can never attain it on earth, because the taint of original sin clings to us through life. Christ alone

was

"perfect God and perfect man." What is in itself imperfect, cannot be called whole, entire, complete; but in its best estate must be deemed imperfect still; see Eccl. i. 15. And farther, "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one." We are told, "The

OF RELIGIOUS ORDERS AND CONFRATERNITIES.

OF RELIGIOUS ORDERS AND CON-
FRATERNITIES.

heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked;" see Jer. xvii. 9; we may fly to caves and deserts, but the evil accompanies us in our retreat—it is within us. Our Saviour, "who knew what was in man," says, "Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts," and these sins, unnoted and unknown to man, are perfectly known to that Omniscient Being who "looketh on the heart," and will certainly visit for these things," which are as hateful to the eyes of Infinite Purity and Perfection as the more open and notorious sins.

66

(41) OF MATRIMONY. Sacrament 7th. Page 186.-Q. How do you prove that matrimony is a sacrament?

A. Because it is a conjunction made and sanctified by God himself, and not to be dissolved by any power of man, as being a sacred sign, or mysterious representation of the indissoluble union of Christ and his Church. Hence St. Paul (Eph. v. 31, 32) expressly calls it a great sacrament or mystery with regard to Christ and his Church, and as such it has always been acknowledged in the Catholic Church. See St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, and many others.

(41) OF MATRIMONY.
Sacrament 7th.

"For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh." "This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the Church." (Eph. v. 31, 32.)

What is this " great mystery" of which St. Paul speaks ?" but I speak concerning Christ and the Church." Turn to Eph. v. 22, and from thence to the end of the chapter you will find how perfectly plain and intelligible to the meanest comprehension is the Scripture on this subject; from the close connexion of man and wife, and their respective duties,-one of loving and cherishing, the other of honouring and obeying the apostle takes occasion to show the intimate union between Christ and his Church, that in like manner, as "the man is the head of the woman," and it is therefore unseemly for her to rule, so Christ, being the Head of the Church, it is no other than open rebellion for the Church to exalt herself above her Head, and prescribe laws instead of obeying them. The word sacrament has evidently been foisted into the text to bend the Scriptures to man's decrees and notions. That I do

« ElőzőTovább »