The Bible!-yes, let us be proud Its doctrine to defend, And, as in infancy we vow'd, Fight boldly to life's end! Though few 'gainst hosts we cannot fail, May 14th, 1839. (For the Protestant Magazine.) PROTESTANT DUTY. NO. II. Oh! let us not vainly lament the past, Cringing when weak, and despotic when strong, If she come in sleek sectarian guise* Or loudly condemning, in keen debate, The "hateful union" of church and state, G. H. G. H. There have been Jesuits in dissenting pulpits ere this-and we know that a part of the system of such persons, if there still be any, is to divide protestants by raising new sects, &c. A ROMISH GEM OF THEOLOGY AND HISTORY. (Continued from page 78.) THE work is embellished with a rude wood-cut of the Mount, by way of frontispiece; and at the top of the first page, among sundry stars and nondescript ornaments, is a little hideous head, with its hair on end; but whether it be the portrait of the archangel himself, or only of his historian Dr. Ardent, we are not informed. The history commences thus: "This rock was anciently a mountain, all environed with "woods and forests, nearly six leagues long and four broad, joining the dry land on one side, and on the other the ocean sea, "and here dwelt certain good and devout hermits, serving God "in all piety." Dr. Ardent's topographical notions seem somewhat odd: this title of "ocean sea is not very suitable to the confined bay in which the Mount stands, nor yet to the British Channel beyond it. It is also a singular description of a sea-side hill, to say that it joins the sea on one side and the land on the other. However, to leave the Doctor's geography and turn to his hermits. "Their nourishments and victuals were sent them by "the curate of a parish formerly called Austeriac." May we ask, en passant, what "nourishments" the holy hermits took besides their "victuals?" Surely they did not use those deceitful nourishments now called cordials? He proceeds: "When in their "necessity, God caused a visible and manifest sign to appear 'upon the house of these good people. The porter was an ass," (a worthy servant of such patient and devout masters,) " accus"tomed to do this service, which was one day met by a wolf "who devoured him." Can my readers here refrain from dropping a tear to the memory of this well-educated but unfortunate servant of the holy hermits? The wolf evidently did not know the sanctity or the utility of his victim; but he soon became wiser, for now, mark the miracle! (the ass was not the miracle, nor yet his being eaten by the wolf -that was a common-place, though lamentable event,) but the wolf" by the same power and Divine providence was constrained "to do the same office which the ravens formerly did, who fed Elijah in the desert, the bears who FED TO THE FULL ELISHA "near the Bethel (!!!) and the two lions who helped the great "St. Anthony to make the grave and burial of St. Paul, the 'first hermit: all creature obediences to the will of the Creator who has made them for the service of man." And this is the Scripture history of Father F. Ardent, doctor of theology! What bears were they who fed Elisha? It seems more probable that they fed themselves upon the "seventy-and-two children" whom they "tare" for mocking the prophet. Does Dr. Ardent mean to insinuate that Elisha ate the children? Observe also, how the traditiorary miracle of St. Anthony's lions is united with those intended to be scriptural, as though they all stood on equal authority. Certainly we may have as much faith in this lion-burial of St. Paul as in the bear-feasting of Elisha; but in a way rather different from what Dr. Ardent intended. Observe also, the prophets of old are simply styled "Elijah," "Elisha," but Anthony is "the great St. Anthony." Farther, who ever knew before that St. Paul was "the first hermit?" I am sure my readers will be very grateful to Dr. Ardent for giving such a mass of original matter to the world. After all, (for revenons à notre loup, not nos moutons,) what did the wolf do for the holy men? Did he fly in the air, like Elijah's ravens? Did he tear up seventy-two children for them to eat, as it is hinted that the bears did for Elisha? Or did he help to bury the hermits at once, as "the great St. Anthony's" lions did for St. Paul? We are not told I rather conjecture that he did none of these things, but after eating up the ass, he spared the "nourishments and victuals," and carried the valuable burden to the mountain, for the hungry and expectant fathers; at least I think our learned D.D. means that such should be our opinion on this mysterious and unexplained matter. 66 To proceed: "About the year 708 or 709 after the incarnation "of the Saviour of the world, it pleased God that the Prince of "his angels and celestial gendarmerie" (I cannot venture to translate this title,) "the ancient protector of the Hebrew synagogue, as now of the catholic church, the conqueror of the dragon and of the old serpent," (when and where ?) "the conductor "of holy souls, St. Michael, should be honoured in this place and "part of the west, as at Mount Gargan, towards the east; wherefore we have seen that the patriarchs and prophets, Abraham, "Lot, Jacob, Joshua, Daniel, Daniel, Zacharias, the one and "the other Toby, have holily adored angels, prostrating themselves "before them"!! Was ever so ignorant and impudent a string of misrepresentations and falsehoods strung together as this? Two Daniels, a pair of Tobies, Jacob, Lot, &c., all heaped in one mass of would-be inspired authority! What has a second Daniel or either of the Tobies to do in the scriptural list? I presume that Tobit and Tobias are here intended; but who this second Daniel is I know not, unless he be "the young youth" who saved Susanna. Do we not see all Rome's chicanery in this attempt to confound names and actions? The prostrations of the Old Testament saints were sometimes the usual eastern salutation to distinguished persons, and at others humble worship rendered to a visible manifestation of God himself; the Apocrypha is no authority, and we do not find that Zacharias prostrated himself to Gabriel at all. The miraculous appearances of St Michael to the bishop of Avranches, who, disbelieving the vision, was punished by the archangel's poking a hole in his head with his celestial finger, must be left for a future exhibition of wonders. We now come to a passage which not only professes to be history, but to relate an event supported by the testimony of several trust-worthy historians. Dr. Ardent proceeds,—" In the "above-mentioned year," (708 or 709,)" even as it is borne out by "Bede, Sigisbertus, Verseius, and Ganguimus, brave and faithful "authors, the said archangel St. Michael appeared to St. Aubert, "then bishop of Avranches; told him who he was, manifested "that God willed a church to be built on the said Mount, conse"crated to his name and to his memory." I am sorry that I do not possess, and therefore cannot refer to the works of the above historians, so "brave and faithful," who bear out this marvellous fact; though, saving the venerable Bede, I do not know whether they be so very trust-worthy as Dr. Ardent imagines them. I should rather guess that they and the Breviary were much upon a par, in point of veracity. Let us now see how Bishop Aubert received this intimation. "The holy bishop not lightly believing every spirit, wisely defer"red this affair; wherefore the angel a second time appeared to "him, and said to him as before." Ar the late anniversary meeting of the Protestant Association, the Rev. Hugh McNeile advanced and enforced a principle that it is marvellous to find so little recognized among us. He called it nationalism in religion, and placed it in striking contrast with that erroneous view too generally taken by Christians of their position and its attendant duties. The man who finds himself renewed in the spirit of his mind, and translated from the power of Satan to the kingdom of God, feels his best affections ready to go forth throughout all the world, claiming brotherhood with every one who loves the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity, and greeting as a fellow pilgrim, a traveller towards their common country, the heavenly Canaan, alike the snow-cradled inhabitant of polar regions, and the swarthy dweller beneath the burning tropic. He becomes a cosmopolitan; he is a citizen of no mean city; and every child of Adam who has obtained, by the charter of his incorporation, the like privilege, is his compatriot. To this we do not object; the children of God and joint heirs with Christ must needs be brethren; and woe to him who bears not a brother's love to every member of that family! But in following up this privilege of universal oneness with the redeemed people of God, we are apt to lose our hold of another, for neglecting of which, scriptures afford us neither precept nor example; they rather furnish so much of both in favor of cherishing it, as to leave us under a grave rebuke. The love of country is a natural emotion in the breast of man, and forms an ameliorating feature even in the savage character; to divorce the Christian from this legitimate object of his attachment, is as unjustifiable a requisition as that which condemns to celibacy the devotees of Rome: and in no instance has the fervor of genuine patriotism more beautifully displayed itself than among those who cast off the fetters of the papal Antichrist. To them we will seek for an "Illustration" less open to objection than what we might draw from the inspired writings. Moses would, indeed, furnish a splendid one; but here we sometimes meet the cavil, that as the nation of Israel was also the church of God, the nationality of the prophets was only another word for their church membership. This does not hold good with regard to Paul, “the Apostle of the Gentiles," whose yearnings after Israel when the glory had departed from them, and they, judging themselves unworthy of eternal life, had compelled him to turn to another people, were purely, exquisitely those of a genuine patriot. However, we will appeal to English history for confirmation of what we maintain. When the popish persecution raged in all its horrors under Henry and Mary; when a way of escape was open, and a refuge offered in Protestant Germany to those who had their Lord's permission, if persecuted in one city to flee to another, what withheld so many of our blessed reformers from availing themselves of it, impelling some to remain in a sure prospect of the stake, and others to return from a foreign asylum to share the same fate? If these men did not regard nationalism as a governing principle, it is difficult to prove them other than suicides. But they did so regard it; they had received the saving knowledge of Christ, as opposed to the damning ignorance of popery, and holding themselves under a sacred obligation to provide first for their own, constrained to declare to their own people what great things God had done for them, zealous that among the kingdoms |