Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

was even then beginning to be brought against them.

This very explanation of the neces→ sity, as given by himself, distinctly shews in exact accordance with the passages adduced above, that, what he repudiates, is not merely and exclusively harshness of LANGUAGE as charitably suggested by my friend, but likewise censure of DOCTRINE: for, if his object was "a hope of approving himself to persons he respected and a wish to repel the charge of Romanism;" every object of this kind might have been fully answered by a simple censure of Romish DOCTRINE without any admixture of harshness of LANGUAGE. In short, what my friend would make the whole of Mr. Newman's process, in order to approve himself to persons he respected and to repel the charge of Romanism, is palpably a superfluous work of supererogation.

3. But, whatever Mr. Newman may have deemed the best mode of repelling a charge of Romanism, he now disavows the WHOLE of what is contained in passages cited by himself from his writings between the years 1833 and 1837: declaring, at the same time, that, in those passages, he was not speaking his own words.

Hence, even then, it was NOT his real, though his outwardly professed opinion: that Rome is a lost Church; that Popery is an apostasy from the purity of the Gospel; that this apostasy took place at the time of the Council of Trent; that the Romish Communion is infected with heresy, inasmuch as it has established a lie in the place of God's truth; that it substitutes an external ritual for moral obedience, profession for faith, the lips for the heart: and that the establishment of image-worship by the two Gregories, through the medium of rebellion, was sinful.

Mr. Newman, first, at considerable length, gives us a bill of fare, setting forth what he deemed necessary for the position of himself and his party, in order that the charge of Romanism might be effectually repelled: and then, after a certain interval, when the mask might be dispensed with, and when (as his subsequent conduct

has shown) he was preparing for an open secession to a theological system which had long constituted his secret faith, he repudiates his ENTIRE bill of fare, with the declaration, that he had not been speaking his own words, but had, merely to serve a present turn, been saying what such men as Barrow and Taylor said, throwing himself into their system, and ostensibly adopting their views of Popery.

On the whole, when I consider what has since occurred, I can view the original anonymous publication of the now acknowledged extraordinary document, which (as he expresses it) is designedly preserved in the preface to his work on Development, in no other light than that of a preparatory step toward a public secession to the Church of Rome. With this key, the document is perfectly intelligible. It was necessary for Mr. Newman to let himself down by degrees from the anti-Romish SYSTEM of Barrow and Taylor. As the time approached for his reconciliation with Rome (as, I believe, the phrase runs), he could no longer, with common decency, suffer passages to remain uncontradicted, wherein he had declared her to be a lost and apostate Church which had heretically established a lie in the place of God's truth.

Hence a retractation became necessary: though a complete retractation, including a formal condemna

tion of the Church to which he ostensibly belonged, would then have been premature. Meanwhile, the document was printed anonymously: and, as Mr. Newman now states that he is "desirous of formally acknowledging it and preserving it," we must conclude, I suppose, that he had some good reason for not originally putting his name to it, though, as I recollect, his friends all gave out that the paper was his.

III. According to my correspondent, however, Mr. Newman completely settles his real meaning, by his final statement: that "an admission of this kind involves no retractation of what he had written in defence of Anglican doctrine."

Surely, when the gentleman penned this, he must either have forgotten

the AMOUNT of his repudiation, or must have strangely expected that it would be overlooked by others.

His final statement would doubtless be true, if he had repudiated nothing more than harshness of LANGUAGE: but we must remember, that, according to his own quotations from his own writings as given above, he also repudiates his temperate censures of Romish DOCTRINE. Now, a repudiation of his self-quoted temperate censures of Romish DOCTRINE must assuredly involve a retractation of what he had written in defence of Anglican doctrine, though it might not then be expedient to put forth such a retractation. To continue, without retractation, a defence of Anglican doctrine, while yet his simulated censures of Romish doctrine are expressly repudiated, is an impossibility: for the two are palpably incompatible; and all our controversial articles are constructed upon this very incompatibility. How could he continue to defend Anglican doctrine, nay how could he ever have defended it with sincerity, if, notwithstanding his professions, he was actually DISBELIEVING that Rome was a lost and apostate Church which had established a lie in the place of God's truth? It is impossible to DISBELIEVE these and the like points without simultaneously CENSURING Anglican doctrine. Now Mr. Newman has repudiated ALL these points, with the declaration, that, when he advanced them, he was not speaking his own words. Therefore, if, by such repudiation, Anglican doctrine has been really CENSURED, it plainly cannot continue to be DEFENDED. In good truth, Popery has such a blighting effect upon Christian integrity, of which we have lately had but too many fearful instances, that I cannot help viewing with much distrust whatever is put forth by a member of the Romish Communion. Some may call this feeling illiberal: but, with numerous facts staring me in the face, I cannot divest myself of it. Papal dispensations, inevitably, so far as my own personal experience goes, destroy all Protestant confidence.

IV. I have thought it an act of

justice, and therefore demanded by ́ Christian sincerity, to notice publicly the suggestion of my friend: for most sorry should I be, either wilfully to misrepresent Mr. Newman, or to keep back what has been alleged in his vindication. Let him have all the benefit of it. Meanwhile, he himself has not disputed the correctness of my view, though it has been before the public ever since the beginning of February, 1846: and, even if hereafter he may think fit to dispute it, availing himself of my friend's very ingenious, though (I fear) not very solid, defence, still, I shall stand fully exculpated. When a man writes one thing and afterward professes to have meant quite another thing, he must not complain of the conclusions obviously drawn from what he has written. G. S. FABER. Sherburn House, Nov. 3, 1846.

A HINT TO LORD BROUGHAM DURING HIS RESIDENCE AT CANNES.

To the Editor of the Protestant Magazine.

SIR,-Anything that will reconcile us to the occasional exercise of those extraordinary powers committed to our Secretaries of State and Poor Law Commissioners deserves to find a place in your columns, and I observe that you do not deem it unworthy of your powerful pen sometimes to draw comparisons between the liberties of

our

own and other constitutional Governments. A circumstance has recently occurred at Cannes which may serve as a practical commentary upon the Fifth Article of the French "Charte Constitutionnel," and make the opening of an alien's letters under the sanction of a Secretary of State appear of a very mild and generous nature. A native of Switzerland who has resided eleven years at Cannes, during the greater part of which period he gained his livelihood as a schoolmaster, being regularly licensed (breveté) according to the French laws, has been suddenly ejected out of house and home by the Secretary

of State for the Home Department (Ministre de l'Interieur). The good Swiss could trace his origin to one of those unfortunate Protestant families which were compelled to seek refuge in Switzerland and other countries, in consequence of the revocation of the Edict of Nantes; and previous to the month of July last he had begun to consider himself as again restored to all the privileges of a French citizen, of which his ancestors had been so unjustly deprived. The Sieur C occasionally employed his evenings at Cannes in reading the Scriptures with a company of the inhabitants who chose to attend at his house for that purpose; and he committed the further outrage of making some prayers and singing hymns. These meetings attracted the notice and incurred the displeasure of the bishop and the clergy, and being on the eve of an election of a new Chamber of Deputies, it was important for the Government to secure the good-will of the sacerdotal community; accordingly the Préfet, with much less ceremony than is observed with us in opening a foreigner's letters, issued his edict in the following terms:

66

Seeing that the Sieur C- is a troubler of the public peace at Cannes, we ordain that he be escorted within twenty-four hours out of the French territory."

(Signed)

This decree having been sent to the Minister for the Interior Department for confirmation, was returned without delay with the word confirmé. The result was, that the poor schoolmaster, for the crime of having prayed and read the Scriptures in a private house, was conducted over the frontiers, and turned without a passport into the merciless hands of the Sardinian police.

A memorial was then addressed by the inhabitants of Cannes, signed by fifty of the most substantial householders, in which they ventured to remonstrate against this arbitrary exercise of power, and desired to know upon what grounds and for what crime the penalty of banishment had been inflicted upon their worthy schoolmaster. No answer was given to the respectful re

monstrance of the citizens of Cannes. On the 31st of August last, the Society for the general interests of Protestantism, of which the Comte Gasparin is President, took up the case, and addressed a Memorial to the Minister of State. After recapitulating the facts as already given, it concludes thus:

"It does not belong to us to dispute, nor even to question the right which the Government may have to banish foreigners, but that to which we cannot but call the attention of your Excellency is the motive officially given to the measure in question. This motive seems to us to threaten the liberty of Protestant worship in France. The executive power has declared the holding of religious meetings duly notified, though not authorized, (such authorization being irreconcilable with full liberty,) as an act disturbing the public peace,' and disturbing it to such a degree as to justify measures so unheard of and severe as those which have been taken against several foreigners, whose only crime has been zeal for the Protestant faith. You will understand, Mons. le Ministre, that in learning these facts we have been deeply moved, and have considered it our duty to place before you the expression of our grief and of our fears."

To this letter the Minister sent an answer, dated September 5, 1846, of which the following is the sub

stance :

The

"The complaints that have reached the Society on the subject of this measure, and which are expressed in the letter of the Society, are grounded on a partial view of the case. authorities, in using the power which the law confers upon them, came to their determination upon serious consideration for public order, and upon the formal representations of the local authorities. This is only a solitary case which it is not possible to connect with any system of Government; and those citizens who profess any of the Dissenting religions ought to be well convinced that the King's Government, faithful to the spirit of our Institutions, does not adopt any tendency which would be

of a nature to undervalue their privileges or trouble their consciences."

Signed by the Under Secretary of State, M. A. PASSY. This is all the explanation which Mons. le Ministre deigns to give of the most arbitrary act a Government can commit. The Préfet declares

that the residence in France of the Sieur C is dangerous to public order. The Minister of State declares that the supreme authority only acts on the representations of the local authorities. And upon

these grounds the poor Swiss schoolmaster is banished from the French soil; no reason whatever is assigned, except that his presence was dangerous to public order; and the Protestants of France, although legally constituted into Consistorial Churches, are gently reminded that they are Dissenters; that is from the "established" Church of Rome.

From this statement of facts it appears therefore, that a foreigner who is supposed to trouble l'ordre public by reading the Scriptures or holding a prayer-meeting, even although he may be a licensed teacher, may be summarily expelled from the French territory without any reason being assigned; and if he have acquired property and made France his home, he is allowed just twentyfour hours to dispose of all he has, and to be ready at the end of that time to walk away under an escort of gens d'armes, and yet our French neighbours would make the world believe they are living under a free constitution, and in the enjoyment of civil and religious liberty. This is one of the numerous instances of daily occurrence of the subjection of the secular Government in France to the priesthood; and if the influence of that despotic power continues to gain ground as it has done since the conflict began on the educational question, nothing can prevent the scene of persecution being acted over again which disgraced the reign of the modern Nero, Louis XIV. This remarkable instance of arbitrary power has occurred at the place Lord Brougham has fixed upon for his residence. It may be well for his

Lordship to be on his guard and limit the number of his guests whom he may be disposed to harangue to twenty, the number allowed by the French law. At all events, we wish his Lordship joy of the residence he has chosen, where "les autorités locales" have such a keen sense of preserving l'ordre public.

I am quite prepared to furnish you with the original documents relative to this affair; and it may contribute something to the cause of religious liberty, if we can shame our neighbours into something like respect for the rights of conscience. I am, yours,

VIATOR.

IMPORTANT MOVEMENT AT

EXETER.

To the Editor of the Protestant Magazine.

SIR,-The following is the copy of a letter addressed by the Protestants of Exeter, to each of the representatives of that city:

"Dear Sir,-A number of gentlemen attached to the Protestant religion of our country, believing that its best interests are endangered by the repeated concessions made to the demands of Popery, have (in pursuance of a Resolution passed at a numerous public Meeting) associated themselves under the name of a Protestant Committee, for the purpose of opposing all concessions for the future. Though hitherto belonging to different political parties, they desire henceforth to uphold Protestantism as paramount to any party interest. Feeling that it is on the floor of the House of Commons that the religion which they hold dear will be attacked, and must be defended, they are determined, on all future elections of Members of that House, to vote only for those candidates in whom they can place reliance as defenders of the Protestant faith. At present they have reason to fear that whatever party may be in power, some further concessions to Popery in the endowment of its priesthood, will soon be proposed, and they therefore beg to ask of you, as one of the representatives of this city, whether you are prepared

to give such proposed, or any similar one, your earnest opposition-from whatever source it may be proposed to provide the necessary funds ?

It is to be hoped that the example of Exeter will be followed by other places. For if the different constituencies in the kingdom were to proceed upon the same plan, it would be an excellent method for diffusing Protestant feeling throughout the kingdom, and for resisting the further encroachments of Popery.

AN INHABITANT OF EXETER.
Nov. 16, 1846.

PAPAL ENCROACHMENTS. MR. EDITOR,-It were well that the good people of this country rouse themselves in time, be up, and unite in bodies, to resist, before it is too late, the establishment of Popish priests, and the power of the Pope in this country, unless they are prepared to sit down quietly and be fleeced of their substance, as their ancestors were, in the reign of Henry III., before Wicliffe arose; in proof of this, I send you a short extract from Southey's "Book of the Church," a work of unimpeachable authority, pp. 198, 199.-I am, &c., ALARUM.

"The first discontent in England was provoked by the manner in which the Popes abused their victory in this country. They had acted with consummate policy during the struggle; but rapacity is short-sighted, and a people who gave full credit to all their frauds, and yielded implicit obedience to their pretensions, felt and resented the merciless extortions which were practised upon them, by the Pope's agents, and by the foreigners upon whom the benefices were bestowed. In the reign of Henry III. the Italians who were beneficed here, drew from England more than thrice the amount of the King's revenue, fleecing by means of priests, who were aliens also, the flock whom they never fed. Repeated statutes were made against this evil. A set of Lombards, too, established themselves here in connexion with the Legates, to advance money upon all sums due to the Pope, for which they exacted the

most exorbitant usury, though all usury was prohibited as a sin by the canon law. The Government also began to entertain serious injury from the multiplication of religious houses; apprehensions were entertained that men would be wanting for the service of husbandry and for war, if so many were collected in convents; and a real diminution in the revenue was felt, in the failure of knight-service, and of the rights appertaining to the 'Crown, upon marriages, deaths, and wardships, accidents to which Church lands were not liable. The statute of Mortmain was passed to prevent further foundations; and from the various devices for evading it, the greater number of our fictions in law have arisen." And again, p. 199:-"The Friars who by their assiduity and boldness, forced themselves everywhere, interfered here with the rights of the Universities, as they had done with those of the secular clergy. Their desire was to recruit their numbers with the most hopeful subjects, and as the most promising youth were brought ogether to these schools of learning, there were no places where they collected so many novices. The boys whom they inveigled were taught to disregard filial duty: . . . the more averse indeed their parents were to their taking the vows, the greater the merit was represented of the children who made the sacrifice." —And again, the man who opposed them.-"This man was John Wicliffe, whom the Roman Church has stigmatized, as a heretic of the first class, but whom England, and the Protestant world, while there is any virtue, and while there is any praise, will regard with veneration and gratitude."-From Southey's History of the Church.

O'CONNELL'S INFLUENCE. To the Editor of the Protestant Magazine.

SIR,-It is said that the present Government have consigned the patronage of Ireland into the hands of O'Connell. This has been publicly stated by the Lord Mayor of Dublin, and has not been contradicted. In

« ZurückWeiter »