That this truth is demonstrated by the collection of the laws of Moses and several particular texts, such as the following, among others: "For thou shalt eat the labour of thy hands; happy shalt thou be and it shall be well with thee." -Psalm cxxviii.

"He who tilleth his land shall have plenty of bread, but he who followeth after vain persons shall have poverty enough." Proverbs xxviii. 19.

"Čultivate thy fields diligently, and thou shalt afterwards build thy house." -Proverbs xxiv. 27.

"Love labour and shun idleness."Misna, Traité d'Abot, chap. i.

That it appears undeniable, from these passages, not only that no honest calling is interdicted to the Israelites, but that religion attaches merit to the exercise of their callings; and that it is agreeable to the eyes of the Most High that every one should follow some calling, and make it, as far as depends upon himself, the object of his occupations:

That this doctrine is confirmed by the Talmud; which, regarding idleness as the source of vice, positively declares, "That the father who does not teach a profession to his child educates him for the life of a robber."-Kedushim, chap. i.

Therefore the Grand Sanhedrin, in virtue of the powers with which it is invested,

Orders all Israelites, and particularly those of France and Italy, who nevertheless, enjoy civil and political rights, to ascertain and adopt the most proper means to inspire a love of industry in youth, and to direct it to the exercise of arts and callings as well as liberal professions; considering, that this praiseworthy exercise is conformable to our holy religion, favourable to good morals, and essentially useful to the country, which can only regard idle men as dangerous citizens.

Moreover, the Grand Sanhedrin invites the Israelites of the two States of France and Italy to acquire landed property, as a means of attaching themselves more to their country; of enabling them to renounce such occupations as render men odious and despicable in the eyes of their fellow-citizens, and to do all which depends upon us to acquire their esteem and good-will.

Article VIII.-Of Loans among Israelites.

The Grand Sanhedrin, convinced of

the inconveniences attending the erroneous interpretations given to Deut. xix. 28, and other parts of the Holy Scripture upon the same subject, and wishing to dissipate the doubts these interpretations have produced, and which have been but too easily believed, respecting the purity of our religious morals relative to loans, declares, That the Hebrew word Nechech, which has been translated usury, has been falsely interpreted: it is a word which, in the Hebrew language, means nothing more than interest in general, and by no means the interest of usury. By the French term Usure we can only understand an interest beyond what has been fixed by the law wherever it has been promulgated upon this subject. Now, it cannot be said that the Hebrew word Nechech signifies an unlawful interest, unless we could believe there was another word in existence, which, on the contrary, signified a lawful interest; but, as no such word does exist, it follows of course, that by the Hebrew word Nechech usury is not to be understood: but the object of the Divine Law in prohibiting one Hebrew from taking interest of another was, to draw the bands of fraternity closer between them; to prescribe reciprocal benevolence, and to engage them to assist each other without interested views. Thus we cannot consider the prohibition of the Divine Legislator but as a precept of benevolence and fraternal love, in which the Divine Law and its interpreters have admitted or prohibited interest according to the various uses which have been made of money. Is money borrowed to support a family, interest must not be taken: is it borrowed on account of some commercial speculation, by which the property of the lender may be exposed to risk-then interest may be taken, so far as it may be deemed legal, or as a just indemnification. Moses says, "Lend to the poor:" hence the tribute of gratitude, and the idea of rendering ourselves acceptable in the eyes of God, is the only interest; the recompense of the service given is the satisfaction arising from the consciousness of a good action. But it is quite a different thing with him who employs his capital in the extension of commerce; there it is permitted to the lender to share in the profits with him that borrows.

Consequently, the Grand Sanhedrin declares, enacts, and ordains it as a religious duty, binding every Israelite, and

particularly those of France and the kingdom of Italy, not to require any interest of their co-religionists whenever they may assist the father of a family by a loan of kindness. It is further enacted, That the legal interest of a loan between co-religionists, in cases of commercial speculations, at the risk of the lender, is only permitted by religion according to the interest fixed by the laws of the state.

Article IX.-Loans between Israelites and

those who are not Israelites.

The Grand Sanhedrin wishing to dissipate the error, which ascribes to the Israelites the faculty of taking Usury from those who are not of their religion, as being permitted to them by that very religion and also by the Doctors of the Talmud: considering that this imputation has, in different times and places, been one cause of those prejudices which have been excited against them; and wishing, in future, to put an end to all false judgment on that head, by fixing the sense of Sacred Writ upon this subject; it declares, That the text which authorizes a loan at interest with the stranger, does not, and cannot be applied but to those strangers with whom the Israelites are engaged in commerce, and who also lend to the Israelites: this faculty is founded upon the natural right of reciprocity. The word Nochri only applies to the individuals of foreign nations, and not to the fellow citizens of the Jews, whom we regard as our brothers: and, even with respect to foreign nations, the Holy Scripture, in permitting us to take interest from them, does not by any means understand an interest ruinous and excessive to him that pays it; since it declares, in other places, that all iniquity is abominable in the eyes of the Lord.

Consistently with these principles, the Grand Sanhedrin, by virtue of the powers with which it is invested, and in order that no Hebrew may, in future, plead ignorance of his religious duties respecting loans to his compatriots, without any distinction in religion; declares to every Israelite, and particularly to those of France and the Kingdom of Italy, That the dispositions prescribed by the preceding decision upon the friendly loans or interest between Hebrew and Hebrew, as well as the principles and precepts expressed by the texts of Holy Scripture upon this matter, equally extend to all our compatriots, without distinction of

religion, as well as to our co-religionists : It is, therefore, ordained to all, to be observed as a religious precept, and especially to those of France and Italy, in future, to make no distinction, in matters of loan, between their fellow citizens and co-religionists, in every thing conformable to the preceding Statute. It is further declared, That whoever shall transgress the present Ordinance will violate a religious duty, and sin notoriously against the law of God. It is also declared, That usury of every kind is prohibited indiscrimi nately; not only between Hebrew and Hebrew, between a Hebrew and his fellow citizen of another religion, but even between strangers of all nations: this practice being looked upon as an abominable iniquity in the eyes of the Lord.

The Grand Sanhedrin ordains, That all the Rabbins, in their sermons and instructions, shall neglect no opportunity of persuading their co-religionists to receive and give credit to the maxims contained in the present decision.

We, the undersigned, certify the present as conformable to the Register of the Grand Sanhedrin's Procés Verbal: (Signed)

DAVID SINTZHEIM, President of the

Grand Sanhedrin.

RABBIN SEGRE, First Assessor. RABBIN COLOGNA, Second Assessor. MICHEL BERR, Acting Secretary. Paris, March 2, 1807."

EXTRACT FROM THE REPORT OF THE BELGIAN EVANGELICAL SOCIETY.

To give a clear idea of the work in this district, it is necessary first to speak of Dour and Paturages. The Church of Dour is the oldest, and in a manner the mother of the Evangelical Churches and Congregations in the neighbourhood.

According to the information we have received from persons who have every means of being well informed on the subject, it seems beyond a doubt that the origin of this Church can be traced up to a period not far distant from the times of the Reformation. It may be recollected, that about the middle of the 16th Century, in a time of great persecution, many families of Dour took refuge in Prussia, Holland, and England. But notwithstanding their violence, these persecutions could not entirely quench the spirit of the Reformation in that

country. At a much later period (in 1700), several families at Dour refused to take an oath to support the rites of the Church of Rome; and here we must be allowed to recount a most interesting anecdote. A woman, named Margaret Henaut, who could not read, and only knew the Bible from what she had gathered in hearing it read by her husband, was one of those persons who refused to take the oath. The Archbishop of Cambray, the famous Fenelon, who was visiting his Diocese at the time, happened to be at Dour, and desired to speak to this woman. She answered all the Archbishop's questions by quotations from the Bible; and among others, cited these words from St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, viii. 1: "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus," &c. Touched by her replies, the Archbishop gave her a writing under his own hand, to protect her from all further persecution; and sent her away, saying: “My good woman, pray for me."

About 50 years after this time, the few Protestants who still remained at Dour, attempted to meet at the house of one of their number, named Gilles Laurent; in order to celebrate their worship, as true Disciples of Christ, in spirit and in truth. The Priests being informed of it, resolved on the destruction of this man; and in order to have an accusation to bring against him, they contrived to injure the image of a Saint, which was in a chapel in a retired situation near the village. Gilles Laurent was thrown into a dungeon and afterwards dragged at the tail of a horse, and sentenced to be banished from the country. After this unjust condemnation, and while he was on his road to Holland, he died about nine miles from Dour, overcome by weariness and exhaustion.

During his imprisonment, a Capuchin Friar and a Jesuit came every day to visit and to console him, under pretence of trying to convert him; but dreading discovery they fled into Holland. The Capuchin became a Minister of the Gospel; and some years after re-appeared at Mons as Chaplain to a regiment.

The protestants of these parts possessed a Bible, though they were far from being permitted to enjoy it in security. One of the gentlest means used by the enemies of the truth for destroying heresy (such was their name for Evangelical Truth), was, what they called, a search

VOL. III.

for bad books: and these bad books were the Holy Scriptures. Wherever a Bible could be discovered, it was immediately seized and committed to the flames.

The possessor of this inestimable treasure was obliged to be continually on the watch and often to hide it in a hole in the wall, which was carefully covered by suspending before it the image of some Saint. Sometimes they hid it in the thatched roofs of their cottages. Thus in demolishing old houses, Bibles have been frequently found almost entirely decayed. The friends of the Bible used often to meet in the woods in the middle of the night, taking with them a lantern and the Holy Scriptures. At other times they would secretly meet in the neighbouring towns, such as Tournay, Condé, Mons, to hear the Dutch and Swiss Ministers preach. In the different places through which they passed, if the populace recognized them, they were pelted with stones, and called Vagabonds, Black heels, Heretics of Dour.

We will here give an extract from a tract called "Celestine, or the blind woman of Paturages."

"In my youth, said the old Estrebeck (about 150 years ago), there was but one Bible in our neighbourhood, which was in the possession of a few Christians, who met secretly during the night to peruse its sacred contents, and to instruct and strengthen their souls. This sacred book was a source of terror to the Romish priests, and to the faithful adherents of the Catholic church. They sought after the sacred volume with avidity, and searched every place where they thought it might be secreted. The village constable had received orders to go with some of his emissaries, and carefully search every house where there were any hopes of finding it. This Bible was the property of four individuals, fathers of families, who were coal miners. One day their wives being from home, some at market, others in the fields, &c. they were obliged, when going to their work, to leave their precious treasure in charge of a young girl about eight or nine years of age, who remained at home to take care of her little brother. These worthy people thought it advisable to hide their Bible in the bottom of the cradle, charging the little girl at the same time, if any one should come during their absence, to continually rock the child, even if it should be asleep. The

H H

poor little girl, taught from her infancy to prize this inestimable treasure, strictly observed the orders she received, when the terrible persecutors entered. They began immediately to search in every corner of the house from top to bottom; no part escaped their eager eyes, but the object of their researches was not to be found. Disappointed and discouraged, they were about to retire, when one of them observed, that they had forgotten to look into the cradle. What was the poor little girl's distress on hearing these words, and the anguish of her mind, when she saw the holy volume torn from her! But still it was nothing in comparison to that of the parents when they returned from their labours in the evening, and learned their irreparable loss. Their grief was beyond expression; they wept aloud, crying out, O dear Bible, precious book, what will become of us without thee! better had it been for us, that our cottages had been torn down, or devoured by the flames."

Thus there have been for many years at Dour, attentive readers of the Word of God; but never until the end of the last century had they either chapels or ministers of the gospel. They could never constitute themselves into a church, nor even hold regular worship at their own houses, although attempts to do so had been made several times, owing to their small number, and the persecutions which they had to endure.

It was not until the year 1784, in virtue of the toleration act of Joseph II., that they began to meet regularly for worship in a private house. But this so much excited the anger of the clergy, that in concert with the lord of Dour, they caused the magistrates to bring accusations against the Christians; and to attain their object, they summoned a great many of the inhabitants of the village. But by the goodness of God, the depositions of these persons changed the expected evil into blessings, and the judges dared not go any farther with the

case.

FRATERNIZATION OF POPERY AND ANGLICANISM AT OXFORD.

(From the Catholic Magazine.) Extract from a letter of the Hon. G. Spencer.

“I have had, during the last week, a striking proof of this [i.e. the fraternization of Popery and Anglicanism]. I spent the greater part of that week at Oxford,

on a visit to a young Anglican clergyman, whom I am happy now to call my friend, and to whom I introduced myself by letter a few months ago, on hearing that he had expressed a wish to make my acquaintance, being so much pleased with my project of obtaining prayers for my country, of which he had been informed. In his answer, he repeated this sentiment, declaring that he had conceived a sincere affection for me, for what I had undertaken, and that he was assured we should soon see an end of our disgraceful divisions, if all would adopt this mode of controversy. He invited me to go and see him; and during the Christmas vacation I spent three or four days in his company. Those who know the character of the body of young clergymen who have lately appeared at Oxford, whose learning and zeal are so much admired, and who, at the same time, know me, who perhaps have some zeal but very little learning, will reckon me to have committed an act of imprudence in venturing by myself into the midst of such adversaries. Perhaps I was imprudent: as far as a happy result depended on a conflict of learned argument, I know full well I was ill prepared to meet them; yet I will hope that, great as my defects are in this respect, I may have succeeded in some degree in the principal object I had in view, which was to increase in them the desire of seeing this kingdom re-united in one faith, which, if all desired earnestly, it would soon be accomplished. What the cause of the Church may have lost by my defective defence of it, I entreat my Catholic brethren to repair by their more abundant prayers; but especially let them pray for my kind Oxford friends, for whom I must go on to say, that I admired their conduct and their spirit more than I did their learning. The gentleman first alluded to, whose visitor I was, and with whom I had so much conversation, agreed with me most warmly, at every pause in our animated discussions, that prayer alone could conclude the controversy. The last thing that I said to him, as about to step into the coach that brought me home, was to this effect, 'Lose no occasion to engage people to pray for the conversion of England to one and the true faith.' To which he answered with great earnestness, I have never failed doing so for many years.' May Almighty God inspire all persons on both sides with this disposition, and how long do

I was

you think we shall remain disunited? I urged some of those whom I met at Oxford, to put forth some public propositions to their brethren to this effect. They entirely approved of the suggestion, but objected to putting themselves forward. I trust, however, something of this kind will soon be done by them, or by others. Happy they who first set the example. I wish Catholics to take every opportunity to recommend it to them. "I am, Sir,

"Your obedient servant,

"GEORGE SPENCER." "St. Mary's College, Jan. 15, 1840."

"MY DEAR SIR,-Among the valuable books with which you kindly presented me during your late visit to Edinburgh, I turned with interest to the work you have published, under the title of A Voice from the Alps.' I rejoice to find, that in the midst of your other useful labours in the missionary cause, you have not been unmindful of Continental Europe, and that you are desirous of stimulating the zeal which has of late years been kindled in the breasts of British Christians, in behalf of those countries where the candle of the Lord had been well nigh extinguished.

"In the 'Voice from the Alps,' I found an address to a clerical meeting by the Rev. R. Burgess, of Chelsea, which contains an account of my own proceedings at Geneva altogether erroneous. Mr. Burgess has doubtless been misinformed on the subject; but his mistakes have been shared or adopted by Mr. Meston, in his recent Observations on the Present State of Religion in France.' To prevent the further currency of these misstatements, which, if uncontradicted, will be repeated by others, I shall first notice the errors into which these gentle

men have fallen, and then briefly relate the leading circumstances connected with my residence on the Continent, in which the hand of the Lord may be clearly seen, to the praise of the glory of his grace.

"The narratives of Mr. Burgess and Mr. Meston alike confound dates and circumstances. It was not in 1818, as stated by both of these gentlemen, but in 1816, that I went to Geneva. Mr. Drummond and I did not labour there together, as it would appear by their accounts. Mr. Drummond did not arrive at Geneva till two days before I left the place. I was not armed with religious tracts and addresses,' as Mr. Burgess affirms, but with the word of God. The distribution of tracts is in general highly to be commended; but in the circumstances in which I was placed at that period in Geneva, I should have considered such weapons but ill-fitted to assault the strongholds of Satan. Far from finding 'but few voices to respond to my appeal,' as Mr. Burgess and Mr. Meston both intimate, by the blessing of God, I found many. And instead of not appearing to have met with success,' during my stay, according to Mr. Meston, the success with which the Lord was graciously pleased to accompany the testimony borne to his truth was very remarkable; and, perhaps, the more so, because it was, so far as I know, the first, after the termination of the war, systematically and publicly borne on the Continent, by any one from Britain, to the grand distinctive doctrines of the Gospel. Dr. Malan ‘raised his voice in behalf of the truth,' not, as they assert, after,' but before I left Geneva. The following brief narrative of my proceedings on the Continent may illustrate the gracious providence of God, and prove an encouragement to others to speak out boldly and fully, as they may have opportunity of declaring the whole counsel of God:

6

"For many years I had cherished the idea of going to France, with the view of doing something to promote the knowledge of the Gospel in a country in which I had been three times before as a traveller. Accordingly, when the return of peace rendered my design practicable, I went to the Continent. Being, however, unacquainted with a single individual there, and therefore unable to arrange any particular plan of action, I feared that my object might prove abortive