as God shall help us, we will do our best, to wield that divine and mighty instrument, in the true spirit of the Christian warrior, against the entire host of the heresies and schisms of the age.

POPERY against THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN ENGLAND.-No. II.

HAVING shown, in a former paper, entitled "Popery and the Church at Leeds," that, according to Mr. Walker, the popish priest at Scarborough, Pope Pius the Fourth acted "impiously" in "making new articles of faith," and quite as "impiously" in adding them to the ancient Catholic faith," we now proceed to the further consideration of the sermon preached by Mr. Walker, at the opening of the Romish meeting-house at Leeds. And because the arguments of the preacher are not of a local character, and their refutation will consequently be of as much value in one part of the country as in any other, we have made the title of this article more general than that of our last.

Passing over much that carries broadly upon the face of it the craft and fraud for which the Jesuits of Rome have ever been distinguished, while agreeing with the preacher most fully, that "it is manifest that all sacred authority which is not derived from Christ and his Apostles is spurious; may be disputed without irreverence, and resisted without crime," we make the following quotation; wherein the preacher, after proving that Christ did certainly leave authority with his Church for the government thereof, observes:-"The authority which I have hitherto been claiming, I have been claiming for the Catholic, that is, the universal Church-it is now claimed by the Church of England. The authority which I claim, I claim not for any bishop, nor for any primate, nor for any pope;-I do not claim it collectively, even for the bishops of any island, nor of any kingdom, nor of any continent, nor of any hemisphere; I claim it collectively for the successors of the Apostles throughout the universal world, wheresoever they may be; and we are now going to glance at the claims of the Protestant Bishops of England. If these claims be good; if they can trace back for themselves a lineal descent from the Apostles, they will have some claim to be considered a portion of the Apostolic Church; but if not, there is an end to all that high and sacred authority to which she (the Church of England) aspires. Oh! my brethren, with what confidence do Catholics go to such a battle as this! For whatever dismay it may carry to the bosoms of others; however others may be involved in these bold and intrepid proceedings, Catholics well know what the fortune of the day must be when any other Church dares to dispute dominion with the Catholic Church, on the ground of authority. Then let the rival banners be unfurled, and let us see what image and inscription they shall respectively bear. Alas! alas! on the banner of Catholicity you behold Christ and his Apostles, and their successors for eighteen hundred years!-on that of Protestantism you have Archbishop Cranmer and the Reformation, just three hundred years ago.'

Our intelligent readers will immediately perceive, that the importance of this quotation amply justifies its length; they will discover also the wiliness of the Jesuit in assuming that the Catholic Church and his own sect are synonymous, and that the Church in England and "Protestantism" are so too-and in then arguing upon those assumptions as though they were as true as the Gospel; whereas, all the time, they have no foundation in truth. Mr. Walker is extremely ignorant, if he did not know this, and much worse

66

than ignorant if he did know it, and knowing it, state what must have produced a most erroneous impression upon that portion of his auditory who were not aware of the cheat he was playing them. To his claiming authority" for the Catholic, that is, the universal Church," we have no objection whatever to make, because we contend for that authority as earnestly as himself. The difference between us is not about the authority of "the Catholic, that is, the universal Church," but about that which constitutes or composes that Church. Mr. Walker and his popish brethren contend, that their own communion is itself "the Catholic, that is, the universal Church;" but this is an absurdity which they would never dare to assert, if they were not well aware that Englishmen generally are too ignorant to be able to give them an effectual contradiction. The Church of Rome never was Catholic, that is, universal." The pretensions of the Bishop of Rome to supremacy over the whole Christian Church have ever been resisted by large portions of the Church, which would never submit to his haughty and arrogant claims. And, like many other Churches, the Church of England long existed in her rightful state of independence of that great spiritual impostor; and when he did for a time exercise his usurpation over the Church in England, he did so merely by sufferance, and in opposition to positive and stringent laws of the kingdom, which had been enacted against his ungodly encroachments. In the year 1354, the twenty-seventh of the reign of King Edward III., the "Statute of Provisors" was passed, expressly to prevent appeals from the laws of England to the pope; and eleven years afterwards, another statute, more stringent still, was made as follows (38 Ed. III., stat. 2):-"To cease the perils that shall happen because of citations out of the court of Rome upon causes whose cognizance pertaineth to the king's court, it is ordained that all persons obtaining such citations shall be punished according to the statute of the 25th of Ed. III., st. 6; and they who cannot be attached, if they appear not in two months, shall be punished according to the aforesaid "Statute of Provisors." And the king, clergy, and laity, do mutually engage to stand by one another in defence of this act."

Here are the king, clergy, and laity mutually uniting to oppose the encroachments and usurpations of the Bishop of Rome. And in the 13th of Richard II., st. 2, c. iii., additional strength was given to the above laws; and three years afterwards, namely, 16th Rich. II., the famous statute of præmunire was made, which says that," If any shall purchase or pursue in the Court of Rome, or elsewhere, any processes, sentences of excommunication, bulls, or instruments, against any person executing judgments in the king's courts, or shall bring within the realm, or receive the same, he shall be put out of the king's protection, his lands and goods forfeited to the king, and shall be attached by his body, if he may be found, and brought before the king and his council, there to answer; or else process to be made against him by præmunire facias, as in other statutes of provisors."

"Persons put out of the king's protection," are unable to have any action or remedy by the king's law, or the king's writs, and this, together with the forfeiture of all lands and goods, made this statute a terrible instrument, and would have rendered it an effectual one against every interference of the pope, had it been, as it ought to have been, regularly enforced. And let it be now, and ever hereafter, most particularly observed, as of great importance in our controversy with Rome our deadly enemy, and never be forgotten, that this very statute of pramunire has never been repealed from the day it was passed, four hundred and forty-six years ago, to the present moment. It may be thought strange that, with this statute in existence,

the pope should, notwithstanding, have usurped so much power and influence in this realm of England; but we can, unhappily, illustrate the anomaly by what is taking place in our own days. By the popish Emancipation Bill, popish archbishops and bishops are forbidden to use the style and title of the real Archbishops and Bishops in the British dominions; and popish sheriffs and other officials are also forbidden, under heavy penalties, to go to their meeting houses with the insignia of their offices; and yet popish bishops in Ireland, and popish sheriffs and others in England, impudently violate that law, and laugh at its penalties. So it was with the pope and his satellites before the Glorious Reformation: laws, and strong laws too, were in existence against his proceedings, but, by subtlety and craft, he obtained influence over those whose duty it was to execute those laws, and they thus became for a time a dead-letter. But the nation became tired of his tyranny and plunder, and, on stretching a point with his beloved son, Henry the Eighth, on whom he had conferred the high-sounding title of " Defensor fidei"-Defender of the Faith-his usurpations and encouragements were put an end to, and the Church and kingdom set at liberty from his oppressive yoke. To accomplish this, it was only necessary to enforce the statute of præmunire, which had long lain dormant. This statute was enforced, and the pope and his bulls were set at defiance, and the Church and nation returned to their former state of freedom and independence. We can scarcely understand how it can be said that popery, in the full and proper sense of the word, was ever established in England at all. The pope obtained power and influence in the country, and the corruptions and superstitions of his religion became prevalent here, as a matter of consequence; but his power and influence was exercised, as we have already seen, in direct opposition to the law of the land. Certain it is, that popery never was established by law in these realms," in the way in which the Church of England has ever been. We say has ever been, because not only did the Church of England exist hundreds of years before popery was known in this country, or on the face of the earth, but the laws regarding tithe and Church property secure that property to the Church of England, and not to the Church of Rome at all, as many seem to suppose. The Church of England has existed here above seventeen hundred years—a small portion of that time in slavery to the domination of the Church of Rome; but still she has always existed in one state or another. The Church of England, with every other branch of the catholic or universal Church of Christ, is, of her own right, and essentially, independent of the Church of Rome, and has equally as much right to demand and enforce obedience from the Church of Rome, as the Church of Rome has of her. And for the Church of Rome to set herself up as "the Catholic, that is, the universal Church," to the exclusion of every other portion of the Christian Church, is an intolerable piece of anti-Christian pride and imposture. And it appears to us that, by making as necessary to salvation conditions of communion, such as were never demanded by the Catholic Church in any age, the Church of Rome has excluded the Catholic Church from communion with her, and herself from communion with the Catholic Church. And if this, which deserves the gravest consideration of both papists and Catholics, be the case, the Romish Church, so far from being the Catholic Church, to the exclusion of all others, has in reality excommunicated herself from the Catholic Church, and reduced herself to a mere sect of schismatics, or more properly, in consequence of her false doctrines, a sect of heretics.

66

These few remarks may serve to throw some little light upon the subject, and to show with what reason Mr. Walker assumes that the popish commu

nion and the Catholic Church are identical. The Church of England, rejecting as she does the new articles of faith, which Pope Pius " impiously" added to the Catholic faith, and holding the Catholic faith entire, and demanding, as terms of communion, confession of no more, has a much better claim to be considered "the Catholic Church," than the Church of Rome. But the Church of England is not guilty of such any and prearrogance sumption, considering herself to be only what she really is, a branch, a part of "the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church" of Christ. And she justly claims as such all that authority and power which was at first conferred on the Catholic Church, and still belongs to it, and never to the Romish Church exclusively; if at all, since the schismatical council of Trent. Mr. Walker, however, denies that the Church of England possesses that authority which he claims for "the successors of the Apostles throughout the universal world, wheresoever they may be." He says, "if these claims-the claims of the Protestant Bishops of England-be good, if they can trace back for themselves a lineal descent from the Apostles, they will have some claim to be considered a portion of the Apostolic Church; but if not, there is an end to all that high and sacred authority to which she aspires." Perfectly correct; for, as Mr. Walker has before said, "all sacred authority which is not derived from Christ and his Apostles is spurious; may be disputed without irreverence, and resisted without crime." And if the Clergy of the Church in England cannot "trace back for themselves a lineal descent from the Apostles," the authority which they claim" is spurious, may be disputed without irreverence, and resisted without crime." But, as we will not insult Mr. Walker for a moment, by supposing him to be ignorant of the real state of the case, we must say, notwithstanding all his denials, that he knows, as well as he knows that he lives and breathes, that the English Clergy can trace back for themselves a lineal descent from the Apostles." We repeat, that in spite of his pretended knowledge of the contrary, and of his assumptions and assertions, he knows that they can do so. He knows that the fact is not now seriously disputed by any respectable controvertist of his own party. It was once acrimoniously disputed, as it regards the "lineal descent" of Archbishop Parker, who, the papists said, was never consecrated at all, and that the Church in consequence was destitute of that "lineal descent" commonly called the Apostolical succession. The papists have never breathed a doubt about the "lineal descent" of any other Archbishop or Bishop of the English branch of the Catholic Church. And as for the consecration of Archbishop Parker, so long and so stoutly denied by the papists in what was termed the "Nag's Head controversy," Dr. Lingard, an eminent popish historian, says expressly, in his Hist. of England, 2, ed., 1823, vol. 7. p. 359, that "Barlow, Scorey, Coverdale, and Hodgskins suffragan of Bedford, confirmed the election on the 9th [of December, 1559], and consecrated Parker on the 17th. The ceremony was performed, though with a little variation, according to the ordinal of Edward VI. Two of the consecrators, Barlow and Hodgskins, had been ordained bishops, according to the Roman pontifical, the other two according to the reformed ordinal. (Wilk. Con. IV., 198.) Of this consecration, on the 17th of December, there can be no doubt; perhaps, in the interval between the refusal of the Catholic prelates and the performance of the ceremony, some meeting may have taken place at the Nag's Head, which gave rise to the story."

66

Thus deliberately writes Dr. Lingard on this subject, saying, that of the fact of Archbishop Parker's consecration "there can be no doubt." And the legitimate and inevitable consequence of this fact is, that of the "lineal descent from the Apostles," of the English Clergy, "there can be no doubt." And that which as legitimately and unavoidably follows is this, that Mr.

Walker must acknowledge that the Clergy of the Church here in England "have some claim to be considered a portion of the Apostolic Church." For he says, "if they [the English Clergy] can trace back for themselves a lineal descent from the Apostles, they will have some claim to be considered a portion of the Apostolic Church."

Mr. Walker may, of course, set up his opinion or assertion in opposition to Dr. Lingard, but that we will leave him and the Doctor to settle between them. Dr. Lingard was attacked in 1834, in The Catholic Magazine, by two or three Jesuit priests, for having stated so much in his History; and the Doctor replied at length, in the same periodical, and not only proved, to the satisfaction of every reasonable man, that Parker was actually consecrated, but designates the Nag's Head fabrication, as "that foolery"-" the Nag's Head foolery." If Mr. Walker will still believe "the Nag's Head foolery," we will leave him in the enjoyment of such foolish belief.

The truth is, the papists have ever felt the Apostolic Succession of the Clergy of the Church of England to be such a powerful weapon against them, that they have always been most feverishly anxious to wrest it from our hands. Some of their reasons for this, will appear in our future papers on this subject. We have shown, from the united testimony of Dr. Lingard, a popish priest, an able writer, and we believe a Jesuit, and of Mr. Walker himself, that as the Clergy of the Church of England, in Mr. Walker's own words, can trace back for themselves a lineal descent from the Apostles, they have some claim to be considered a portion of the Apostolic Church." We are consequently right on this point-the papists, our inveterate enemies, themselves being judges.

66

VILLAGE CONVERSATIONS.

NO. I.-ON SCHISM AND SEPARATION.

"The mischief which the Church receives by it (schism) is greater than it receives from open enemies, when it is set upon by its own children. This I speak to those who make no great matter of schism, and indifferently go to those who divide the Church."

CHRYSOSTOM.

Meanwell.-Good evening, Mr. Smith; I see you still keep to the old place where we have so often sat down together, and listened to yonder bells ringing so charmingly.

Schoolmaster.-Yes, neighbour; I feel a great partiality for this seat. This fine oak, whose branches extend so far on every side around us, was planted by my great grandfather. Here he used to sit and admire the rich prospect before him, and listen to those very bells which are now filling the air with their sweet harmony. But at that time there was no shelter from the noon-day heat. This knoll was entirely destitute of trees; and though the good old man rejoiced to come here whenever he had leisure, on account of the extensive and beautiful prospect that it affords, he was often incommoded by the oppressive heat of the sun. It was to remedy this inconvenience that he planted those chestnuts. Their rapid growth enabled him, contrary to his expectations, to enjoy many a happy hour with his book and pipe, under their sheltering branches. But this point, which commands so delightful a view on all sides, he reserved for a young oak that he had himself raised from an acorn. "I shall not, indeed," he said, on transplanting it to this place," live to enjoy its refreshing shade, but my children may. And so they did. Here, I well remember, my father used frequently to bring his family on fine evenings, and to make them a rustic feast; here we