Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

Again: "This mystery is a pledge [so the Catholic Church calls it, a pledge of eternal life] and a figure: [of Christ really present in it, for] Christ's body is truth itselfe. This pledge we doe keep mystically, until that we be come to the truth itselfe [as the council of Trent expresses it, without any veil], and then is this pledge ended. Truly it is so, as we before have said, Christ's body and his blood: not bodily, but ghostly. And ye should not search how it is done, but hold it in your beleefe that it is so done."

After this, Elfric relates, in proof of his doctrine, two miracles in which the holy eucharist, by the permission of God, appeared to different persons under the form of flesh and blood. These the English editor carefully suppresses, under the honest pretence that they are tales, nay infarced tales. (See note of p. 97.) Whether tales or not, we shall not examine; one thing is certain, that Elfric considered them true and real miracles, and related them as such. Now, it is easy to understand that he did so to prove the change of the eucharistic bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. But that he should have had recourse to the above facts, to show that Christ is not substantially present in the eucharist, and that, instead of any transubstantiation taking place, the bread remains bread, and the wine remains wine, is so ridiculous a

[blocks in formation]

After all it is a matter of no moment for us to find the Catholic doctrine either in Elfric or Ratramn; and though for the sake of truth, we cannot grant, yet, for the sake of argument, we are willing to suppose that their tracts on the eucharist have perhaps a Protestant meaning; what advantage will this hypothesis afford the system of our opponents? None whatever. The Catholic Church has nothing more to fear from her obscure than from her declared enemies. Her doctrine is invariable, like the rock upon which she is built,—like her divine founder himself; "and whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder." (Matt. xxi, 44.)

Far then, from having held, either in the ninth, or in any preceding or subsequent century, a belief different from what she holds at present, we maintain, and shall prove, we hope, to the satisfaction of the reader, that the assertion of our opponents on this head is nothing short of a complete absurdity, and that all their efforts to establish their point are not only unavailing, but serve merely to show more and more the utmost weakness of their cause. will be the subject of another article in the next number.

This

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

pensation. Far from having revoked or changed this order of things, the divine founder of Christianity has on the contrary inculcated its perfection, by teaching a more sublime morality, and establishing more intimate relations between man and his Creator.

His religion is eminently symbolical. The sacraments, which he has made the channels of his grace, are symbols; and the Church itself instituted by him, is but an outward symbol of the inward and divine influence which is directed to the sanctification of souls. The primitive Christians, imbued with a deep spirituality, only developed this tendency of the religion. which they had learned, when almost at every moment they expressed themselves in some exterior symbol of the divine mercy and goodness; and among the practices which prevailed in those ages of pure and fervent faith, was the use of the sign of the cross. "When we walk," says Tertullian, "when we come in, when we go out, when we warm ourselves, go to bathe, sit at table, light candles, go to bed, in short, in all our actions and deportments, we mark ourselves with the sign of the cross. If you are obstinate in demanding Scripture for every discipline and usage of this kind, you will find none. But they are supported by tradition which authorizes them, by custom which confirms them, and faith which observes them." What more beautiful and more eloquent memorial of the Saviour's incomprehensible love for man, and of the example which he traced for the imitation of his followers, than the sign of the cross? The Church, his earthly spouse, has always cherished it with peculiar veneration, and every where exhibited it to her children as the symbol of their faith and of their hopes. What is the cross but the whole science of Jesus Christ crucified? Cold and cheerless indeed must be that philosophy or religion which does not find in that sacred emblem a nutriment of true devotion. Among a certain class of persons, the use of ceremonies and symbols for secular purposes is acknowledged to possess its advantages. They admire it in the military cos

tume and banner, as well as in the miniature that preserves the memory of friendship or affection. Why then, should symbolism have no religious application? Why should that instinctive disposition of the human heart, to foster the best sentiments of nature by the aid of external things, be checked in the elevation of the soul to the highest ob ject that can possibly claim its consideration? To oppose this innate propensity would be acting against every dictate of reason, and every law of experience; for while the former teaches us that any agency tending to the moral culture of man, may be safely directed to the honor of God, we learn from the latter, as a distinguished modern writer has observed, that "for the mass of mankind, busily occupied from morning till night with the things of the world, the things of sense must be raised up to heaven by the spirit, or they will drag the spirit down to hell." This principle was well understood by our forefathers, and hence it was that by various monuments and customs they brought the exterior and spiritual world into a beautiful harmony. Among other objects that arrested the attention of the passer-by, was the emblem of our Saviour's passion. "Innumerable crosses of stone or wood were erected by the public ways, in the heart of forests and amidst the wildest scenes of nature, on bridges, which heard amidst the eternal murmur of the streams, the chant of nocturns in the night, and on the craggy summit of islands that lay far in the melancholy sea; that no place might be left without the symbol of human redemption, and the memorial of the passion of Jesus."* This sacred representation sanctified the shades of retirement, while on the high-ways it bade the pilgrim pause and offer up a prayer to the throne of mercy. By these or similar demonstrations has the veneration of the cross of Christ displayed itself in every age of the Christian era, and it points with irresistible evidence to the Church that still cherishes the spirit and the practice of primitive times. ED.

*Ages of Faith, vol. ii.

THE WAYSIDE CROSS.

It is a custom, familiar to all who have travelled in the Catholic countries of Europe, to mark the spot, where a murder has been committed, by the erection of a cross. The following stanzas were suggested by the picture of a wooden cross overgrown by a vine.

Ir stands, as ages past it stood,

Beside the road, that cross of wood,

By living vines o'ergrown ;
And from their tendrils as they twine,
As from all nature's vast design,
A lesson may be shown.

"Tis said that in the olden time,
Upon that spot some fearful crime

Of blood and wrong was wrought;
And that in after years there came
A grey haired man, bowed low with shame,
Its faded trace who sought.

Here 'mid repentance deep and prayers
He raised this cross bedewed with tears
And sighs in anguish given;
And pious pilgrims bend the knee,
Whene'er the sacred sign they see,
In prayer for him to heaven.

But be the legend false or true,

Who feel not as this cross they view

Emotions strong arise?

And filled with hope, or bowed in fear,

Who lifts not in devotion here,

The heart beyond the skies?

On life's highway who hath not known,
Some cross all unexpected shown
His heedless course to stay?
And as the chastened spirit knelt,
Like a peace messenger hath felt,
The hallowed sign to pray.

Sustaining grace who hath not found,
When, like the vine, the cross around,
Each bitter grief was flung?

Its apex pointing to the sky,
Hath raised the drooping soul on high,
Which firmly to it clung.

Symbol of shame! whereon once died
THE LORD OF LIFE, with thieves beside
And scoffing crowds below,
How changed thy destiny since he,
To whom all nations bow the knee,
Was doomed thy pangs to know!

[blocks in formation]

* St. Paul to the Galatians (vi, 14) says, "God forbid that I should glory but in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ."

THE EDICT OF NANTES.

BY ROBERT HARE.

THE Edict of Nantes is one of those sub

T

jects which form the staple of a great deal of writing and declamation, often without any precise ideas as to its character, or as to the traits of the times when it was adopted, or when it was revoked. It is the object of this lecture to attempt to describe its circumstances and results; and that without assuming to decide what was right or what was wrong, either in comparison with our own ideas, or those of the times which it immediately concerned.

Toleration in all matters, is said to be a principle of this age. It is professed to be, and for the most part is felt in all public transactions and affairs. It is fortunate it is so far adopted and realized, since it cannot be said that opinion has lost much of its intenseness or exclusiveness, whether it be Opinion in matters of religion, of conduct, of politics, or of one's own wisdom. Toleration is the avowed rule of the age, and it has been agreed upon because it is found better for the community, that all opinions should be tolerated, than that any man should suffer, as for a crime, punishment, which in truth might be inflicted upon his greater weakness or his greater sagacity, and perhaps, also, because it is more charitable that we should exert ourselves to bear with the opinions of another, than visit upon him the bitterness of our own self-love.

Mankind were, for a long time, endeavoring to find out, embody, enforce, and practise this doctrine of toleration, and it is now only in the weakness of immaturity. It has grown to be recognized as a public principle, and it is to be hoped it may from being a public principle, in the course of time, become a private pleasure. Whatever it may be now, or may be destined to become, toleration was neither a principle, nor a duty, nor a pleasure, of any part of mankind in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and the discomfort or desolation which then flowed from intolerance is as chargeable

upon one set of opinions and of men as another. The pleasures and advantages which spring from toleration are as much due to the spirit of one faith as anotherare attributable to no one creed or doctrine, nor to any one band of men or writers.

The brief and imperfect sketch of the history of the Edict of Nantes, which it is the purpose of this lecture to present, may show the course of the passions which beget intolerance, and which for so long time affected mankind, as it may show, also, the sincerity and risk with which in those days opinions were held and furthered.

The Reformation, as it is commonly called, broke out in Germany about the year 1520. Soon after Luther's first demonstration of opposition to Rome, the excitement of its discussions was extended into France where, however, it was for some time dissipated rather than strengthened, by the variety of opinions which this new religion had produced among those who were not unwilling to take part in the movement. His own particular doctrines (which varied with his temper or his friends), were not at first adopted there by any set of men, and the greatest effect which he engendered, was rather in diverting the attention with what he called the abuses of Rome, (and it never was denied that there were many among the lower clergy) than in rendering men dissatisfied with the tenets of the Catholic faith.

He was soon, however, followed by Zuingle whose doctrines of faith being for the most part afterwards embodied in the Institutes of Calvin, attracted large numbers of followers since known as Calvinists, the Lutherans having been always a very small party in point of numbers or influence among the French seceders generally called Huguenots.

The then monarch of France, Francis I, whose memory is always to be cherished for his gallant and chivalrous disposition,

« PredošláPokračovať »