XIV. I observe in conclusion that a reprint of the article has been issued, which I presume you must have seen, accompanied by an Appendix, in which it is said, p. 5, third paragraph:

"The distinct charge against all these versions is, that they are so much adulterated that it is impossible, with any degree of truth or consistency, to circulate them as the Word of God. The number of Popish perversions and errors in them, forms but one count in that indictment though sufficiently important in itself."

In answer to this, I reply, that I am as much entitled, as the bringer of the charge, to say with confidence, that no evidence as yet adduced sustains so grave a charge. I am content to leave the matter to be judged by others. I merely give my own deliberate conviction upon the subject, while at the same time I feel it a duty to enter my protest against such criticisms as are brought forward to sustain this grave charge. Take as an example of them what is said concerning the phrase," works of mercy," in 2 Chron. xxxii. 32. Let the English reader turn to the margin, and he will see that for "goodness," he may read "kindnesses," unquestionably a much closer rendering of the Hebrew, perhaps the closest of all would have been "His mercies," and if so, where is the wickedness of using instead of goodness," or "kindnesses," "works of mercy." I protest, Sir, against such criticisms as most injurious to a cause as dear to myself as to the critic, the cause of genuine Protestantism, a cause, Sir, which I further believe the Bible Society is most directly serving.

XV. But the writer proceeds, p. 8, about the middle:

"To that charge the replies are, that the circulation of these versions is expedient, because they only, are acceptable to the Romanists; and that the expense of revising the existing Protestant versions would be very considerable;—both of which assertions, however, we totally deny. Strange! that the Bible Society does not see in the former reply an

acceptable to the Romanists, but rather are strenuously opposed,—which however we contend is not the case where Popery must have some sort of Bible in circulation. On his own showing, therefore, the use of these Popish versions instead of the more faithful ones, is an unnecessary and unreasonable proceeding, as well as wrong in principle.

XIV. The "criticism," or rather quotation, on which Mr. Brandram comments, appears to us very significant of the character of the version. But it is one of many, and like each of them is a specimen only. It is well known that the phrase," works of mercy," conveys a peculiar meaning to Popish ears; they form an important part of the anti-christian system.

XV. The passage we referred to was as follows, (page 120, Report for 1839 of the Bible Society): "They are aware of their many and serious defects: but they are not ashamed to confess, that the magnitude

avowal that it is right to do evil that good may come:'-stranger still! that a Society which without scruple publishes unrevised Popish versions of the Vulgate, should refuse, under the other plea, to use far more faithful Protestant translations of the original!"

I must content myself with referring again to the conclusion of the Report for 1839, merely adding that in that document there is not one word about the expense of revising the existing versions being considerable. The difficulties and responsibilities are of another and more serious kind. To say nothing further, it would involve us in determining the sense of many difficult passages of Scripture, and woe unto us, if in attempting this, we were left to the tender mercies of such critics as the one on whom I have felt called to make the preceding remarks.

I am, Sir,

Your obedient Servant,
A. BRANDRAM,
Secretary.

of the attempt to form new versions, or to revise existing ones is such, that they are compelled to shrink from it." We are sorry to find that by this, "expense" is not meant, for the want of means to print other versions is the only plausible excuse we can imagine, for continuing to use even the present stock of Popish versions. What "the magnitude of the attempt" then means we cannot understand; because the Bible Society is not asked to make "new versions"; they would quite content most or all Protestants by using Diodati's Italian version, and Martin's French version, both of which are already on their list, instead of Martini's and De Sacy's; by adopting Valera's Spanish version, which in fact requires no revision, being remarkably faithful; and by using, as they would doubtless be heartily welcome to do, Almeida's Portuguese version, of which the Trinitarian Bible Society has nearly completed the careful revision. What then is the meaning of "the magnitude of the attempt to form new versions or to revise existing ones?"

Finally, we must state that we do not think this a question for "critics," but for plain Bible Christians. Are not the French, Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese Bibles circulated by the British and Foreign Bible Society, Popish versions of the vulgate? Are they not thus circulated, although there exist in these respective languages, faithful Protestant translations of the original Scriptures? Does then Mr. Brandram's letter make out a defence for continuing to circulate the former and to neglect the latter? This is the simple question at issue. What the verdict of British Christians will be, when the facts are generally known, we cannot reasonably doubt; but we do hope that that verdict will be frankly anticipated by the Bible Society, and that these versions will be given up and repudiated, and purer versions at once adopted and used, if not from the apprehension of the loss of public confidence, at least for the sake of unity and peace.

QUEEN ELIZABETH'S OPINION OF SACRED PICTURES. (From Strype's Annals, quoted in the Quarterly Review.)

THE Dean (Dean Nowell) having gotten from a foreigner several fine cuts and pictures, representing the stories and passions of the saints and martyrs, had placed them against the epistles and gospels of their festivals in the Common Prayer Book. And this book he had caused to be richly bound, and laid on the cushion for the Queen's use, in the place where she commonly sat, intending it for a new year's gift to her majesty, and thinking to have pleased her fancy therewith; but it had not that effect, but the contrary: for she considered how this varied from her late open injunctions and proclamations against the superstitious use of images in churches, and for the taking away all such reliques of Popery. When she came to her place she opened the book and perused it, and saw the pictures; but frowned and blushed; and then shut it (of which several took notice), and calling the verger, bad him bring her the old book, wherein she was formerly wont to read. After sermon, whereas she was wont to get immediately on horseback, or into her chariot, she went straight to the vestry, and applying herself to the dean, thus she spoke to him :

Queen. Mr. Dean, how came it to pass that a new service book was placed on my cushion? To which the dean answered: Dean-May it please your majesty, I caused it to be placed there. Then said the queen:

Q. Wherefore did you so?

D. To present your Majesty with a new year's gift.
Q.-You could never present me with a worse.

D.-Why so, madam?

Q.-You know I have an aversion to idolatry; to images and pictures of this kind.

D. Wherein is the idolatry, may it please your majesty ? Q. In the cuts resembling angels and saints; nay, grosser absurdities, pictures resembling the Blessed Trinity.

D.-I meant no harm; nor did I think it would offend your majesty, when I intended it for a new year's gift.

Q.-You needs must be ignorant then. Have you forgot our proclamation against images, pictures, and Romish reliques in the churches? Was it not read in your deanery?

D. It was read. But, be your majesty assured, I meant no harm when I caused the cuts to be bound with the service book. Q.-You must needs be very ignorant to do this after our prohibition of them.

D.-It being my ignorance, your majesty may the better pardon me.

Q.-I am sorry for it, yet glad to hear it was your ignorance, rather than your opinion.

D.-Be your majesty assured it was my ignorance.

Q.-If so, Mr. Dean, God grant you his Spirit, and more wisdom for the future.

D.-Amen, I pray God.

Q.-I pray, Mr. Dean, how came you by these pictures? Who engraved them?

D.—I know not who engraved them. I bought them.
Q.-From whom bought you them?

D. From a German.

Q. It is well it was from a stranger. Had it been any of our subjects, we should have questioned the matter. Pray let no more of these mistakes, or of this kind, be committed within the churches of our realm for the future.

D.-There shall not.

CORRESPONDENCE WITH ROME.

In a former number of the Magazine we noticed the illegal character of the correspondence between the Pope and the Earl of Shrewsbury relative to the Catholic Institute. Since that was written, we have found the following legal opinion of Lords Lyndhurst and Gifford, when solicitor and attorney-general. It appears that the Pope addressed a letter to George IV. announcing his accession to the Papal Chair, and the Pope's secretary wrote to Mr. Canning; whereupon (we believe, upon the question of the propriety of sending replies,) the law officers of the crown were consulted, and gave their opinion as follows:

"We have carefully perused and considered the letters referred to, and beg leave to state, that by the 5th Elizabeth, cap. 1, sec. 2, advisedly and wittingly to attribute, by any speech, open deed, or act, any manner of jurisdiction, authority, or pre-eminence to the see of Rome, or to any Bishop of the same see, within this realm, subjects a party, for the first offence to the penalties of præmunire; and as the Pope, by virtue of his office, claims, as we conceive, authority, jurisdiction, and pre-eminence over the whole christian church, and certainly over the Catholick (Romish) church in this realm, and as, by the letters, his elevation to the supreme pontificate is in terms announced which we apprehend would be construed as making such a claim, we are of opinion that any answer to these letters, which might be interpreted into an implied recognition of such a claim, might be considered as bringing the party, being a subject, writing or advising it, within the operation of the said statute. It is, we think, worthy of remark, that the legislature, by carefully adopting the title of Bishop of Rome instead of that of POPE, in the various acts passed since the Reformation, seems to have avoided any such implied recognition."

ON IDOLATRY.

THOUGH all sin is offensive to God and incurs his displeasure, yet there is one which in an especial manner excites his jealousy and provokes his anger. With the Bible in our hands we need be at no loss to discern what this sin is.

The Church of England, in her admirable homily against the peril of idolatry, emphatically observes :

"The scriptures of the Old Testament, condemning and abhorring as well all idolatry or worshipping of images, as also the very idols or images themselves, especially in temples, are so many and plentiful, that it were almost an infinite work, and to be contained in no small volume, to record all the places concerning the same.* For when God had chosen to himself a peculiar and special people from amongst all other nations that knew not God, but worshipped idols and false gods, he gave unto them certain ordinances and laws to be kept and observed of his said people. But concerning none other matter did he give more, or more earnest or express laws to his said people, than those that concerned the true worshipping of him, and the avoiding and fleeing of idols, and images, and idolatries; for that both the said idolatry is most repugnant to the right worshipping of him and his true glory, above all other vices, and that he knew the proneness and inclination of man's corrupt kind and nature to that most odious and abominable vice. What penalty and horrible destruction he solemnly, with invocation of heaven and earth for record, denounceth and threateneth to them, their children, and posterity, if they, contrary to this commandment, do make or worship any image or similitude which he so strictly hath forbidden."

Many passages are cited from the Old Testament, exhibiting the folly and wickedness of idolatry, as well as God's intense hatred of it. The homily then refers to the New Testament "in confirmation of the said doctrine against idols or images, and of our duty concerning the same."

"First the scriptures of the New Testament do in sundry places make mention with rejoicing, as for a most excellent benefit and gift of God, that they which received the faith of Christ were turned from their dumb and dead images, unto the true and living God, who is to be blessed for ever; namely, in these places-Acts xiv. and xvii.; Rom. xi.; 1 Cor. xii.; Gal. iv.; and 1 Thess. i."

"In 1 Cor. v. we are forbidden once to keep company, or to eat and drink, with such as be called brethren or christians, that do worship images. In Gal. v. the worshipping of images is numbered amongst the works of the flesh and in 1 Cor. x. it is called the service of devils, and that such as use it shall be destroyed. And in sun

dry other places is threatened, that the wrath of God shall come upon

• Bishop Burnet remarks:-"It seems to be the chief end of revealed religion to deliver the world from idolatry."