very title of her existence on being an ancient Church, the other boasts itself modern; the one not founded by man but descended of that founded on the Day of Pentecost; the other dating itself truly from Luther, and claiming to be the parent of all, not in outward communion with the great Eastern and Western branches, and so of our Church by which it was originally converted." -pp. 130-132.

In the foregoing contrast the usual fallacy of high Church Anglicans prevails, viz., that the modern Church of England is a branch of the Catholic Church, than which nothing can be more erroneous; but we forbear entering here upon the question.

It is curious, that while the Archbishop in his official statement, expresses the hope that the bishopric "may lead to an essential unity of discipline as well as doctrine," between the Anglican Establishment "and the less perfectly constituted of the Protestant Churches of Europe;" the Prussian Government, in the State Paper issued by it, takes a view wholly different, looking upon the creation of the bishopric only as an aggrandisement of the Lutheran body, as "securing to the Evangelical Church of the German nation,"-not as "less perfectly constituted now"-but "as the mother of all evangelical confessions, rights commensurate to its greatness, besides the Latin and Greek Churches." The Prussian Government looks upon the affair in question, as an occasion for developing the German evangelised Church, according to "the confession," and with the use of the liturgy of that Church; and not only so, but as Dr. Pusey observes, “ 'they look upon the diversities of Christian worship as immutable, inalienable ; such diversities among Protestant bodies belong to the very principle of unity, and are looked upon as upheld by our blessed Lord himself." See the Prussian State Paper, reprinted and translated by Mr. Hope, p. 76.

The tract before us is a masterly production, in which the able writer takes a more comprehensive view of the question involved in Dr. Alexander's appointment than Dr. Pusey does, and treats thereof not as a mundane question of international law, but as a question involving the very validity of the consecration itself. The author of the tract of course admits "the competency of the British Parliament to erect Protestant episcopal sees in any part of her Majesty's dominions, and the sufficiency of a royal warrant to give the occupants the customary style and title of bishops in such dominions." But he shrewdly observes, that it must be admitted "to be somewhat perplexing, how such power of erection and nomination should be asserted

with respect to a foreign land, wherein Great Britain has not an inch of territory."

"In former times, men have gone forth invested with the episcopal character to places where Christ was neither named nor known.' They went as missionaries; and, in instances without number upon record, received this commission with their episcopal appointment from the see of Rome. To give a few examples. The venerable man, whom Dr. Howley claims to succeed, was sent in the year 596 from Rome, by Pope Gregory, to preach to our Saxon forefathers, then Pagans. This missionary, Augustine, so commissioned by the Bishop of Rome, was empowered by him to receive consecration, on his journey, from the bishops of Gaul. Does the reader suppose that this was after Pope Gregory had first applied for and obtained' the good Emperor Mauritius' 'Licence, by warrant under his royal signet and sign manual?' Let him note the words of our historian, venerable Bede. 'Whereas Gregory bore the pontifical power over all the world, and was placed over the churches already reduced to the faith of truth, he made our nation, till then given up to idols, the Church of Christ, so that we may be allowed thus to attribute to him the character of an apostle; for though he is not an apostle to others, yet he is so to us; for we are the seal of his apostleship in our Lord.' So again, in the year 634, Birinus was commissioned by Pope Honorius, and, after receiving, by his 'mandate,' consecration at the hands of Asterius, Bishop of Genoa, came and preached in the western part of our island. In the following century, our countryman Winfred, more generally known by his adopted name of Boniface, was commissioned by Pope Gregory the Second to preach the faith to all the infidel nations of Germany. After a successful course of missionary labours for five years, he was called to Rome again, and received episcopal consecration at the Pope's own hands. This zealous man is generally styled the Apostle of Germany. The heathen in Pomerania received the light of the Gospel in the twelfth century. Their apostle was Otto, Bishop of Bamberg, who received his missionary commission from Pope Honorius the Second, as a few years before he had received the confirmation of his appointment to his see from Paschal the Second. Illustrations of this kind might be furnished from every century down to the present. But Bishop Alexander does not go out in the character of a missionary; neither does any prerogagative inherent in, or attached to, the see of Canterbury, authorize its occupier to delegate missionary functions to be exercised in foreign lands. The Archbishop of Canterbury has a diocese, has a province. He is Primate of all England within England is his jurisdiction bounded and confined. Even over the sister Protestant establishment of Ireland he has no controul. What then is there in this, and similar proceedings but the assumption of an aλoτρIOεTIOкOTη, which his Grace's brother bishop, Dr. Mant, will inform him, brings him into very bad company ?"

The writer then proceeds to show, that by laws of ancient date,

recognised by the present English Church, on the subject of episcopal consecration, the appointment of Dr. Alexander is null and void, even supposing that Dr. Howley had authority jure divino, which we boldly maintain he has not, to consecrate. But this is a point extraneous to the present question. The Pope alone, the "Primate of Christendom," as the visible head of the Church is termed by the British Critic (Oct. 1841, p. 431), has the power not only of confirming metropolitans, but of enlarging or circumscribing their jurisdiction; of which power the learned writer adduces the instance of the contention of the two sees of York and Canterbury, and that of the Scottish Bishops, over whom, before 1470, the Archbishop of York exercised (in virtue of a commission from Rome), a metropolitan jurisdiction, which after the erection of the Archbishopric of St. Andrew's, by Pope Sixtus IV, was transferred by him to its archbishop, whom he constituted “Metropolitan of all Scotland." Nay, more:

"When a metropolitan had been suspended, when he neglected to provide for a vacant see, when the choice had fallen on an unworthy person; above all, when the men holding the highest ecclesiastical posts in a country, were the declared abettors of heresy; we find the Popes exercising this plenitude of their power' (to use the words of St. Bernard), by filling up the vacancies, or commissioning others to do so, in place of the metropolitan. . . . Thus much regarding the ‘Primate of Christendom;' does the‘Primate of all England' lay claim to similar powers? or does not his very title (a title, by the way, whose origin can be traced back only to a concession on the part of the Apostolic See); does not his very title Primate of all England,' carry with it a clear and preremptory exclusion of jurisdiction beyond England ?”

MR. FRENCH'S TRANSLATIONS AND POEMS.

1. A Selection of Hymns sung in the Catholic Church. Translated by Daniel French, Esq., of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister-at-law.

2. The Wakeful Night, and other Poems, by the same. T. Jones, and C. Dolman.

London :

We believe it unnecessary to inform our readers that Mr. French is not only a highly accomplished classical scholar, but a most warm and sincere lover of those venerable and deeply springing streams of devotion and love left us by the fervent piety of those who, in the glorious

ages of faith, consecrated their poetical talents to the praise of Him who bestowed them for his own glory. How much changed, alas! are our times. English versions of many of these hymns have been published, which seldom render their meaning without being expanded into paraphrases. This is, we believe, the best that can be done with them; and for those who are not sufficiently well acquainted with the language of the originals, as to feel all their force without translation, is indispensable. The piety and zeal of Mr. French have entitled him to the gratitude of a very numerous class, while even the select few will peruse the hymns with pleasure, falling in, we venture to predict, here and there with passages which derive additional clearness from a happy turn of expression.

Of this, we need not select any instances, but rather send our readers to the elegant little volume itself in search of them. We cannot, however, deny ourselves the pleasure of extracting, from the smaller of these two small publications, the following very pious effusion.

"THE WAKEFUL NIGHT.

"Though doomed through many a livelong night,

To pass the slow, unslumbering hours,

What time the Poet wings his flight,
All conscious of celestial powers;

"Yet blame not I Time's lingering pace,
Nor solitude, nor darkness find,
'Tis then I pray for heavenly grace,
While thoughts of Jesus feed my mind!

"Ah, no! I sigh not then for rest,

Nor long for twinkling dawn of day,
The name that nestles in my breast
Charms all the tedious hours away.

""Tis then my craving thirst I slake,

At that blest well, where, far from strife,
Christ bade me living waters take,
Upspringing to eternal life.

"No tongues unhallowed wound my ear;
'Tis midnight silence all around;

Yet listen I with joy and fear

To music of angelic sound.

The Parish Priest and his Parishioners; or, Answers to popular Prejudices against Religion, from the French of M. B. D'Exauvillez, by the Rev. Æneas McD. Dawson, Apostolic Missionary in the Eastern District of Scotland. Glasgow: Hugh Margey, 1842. THIS is a very pleasing little volume. Under an unassuming exterior, it contains much acute and clear reasoning, in combating the chilling unbelief of a selfish, calculating scepticism; while, at the same time, it instils with gentleness and tact, the motives of divine faith, and shows how beautiful is the practice that springs from such a source. The story, to which the doctrinal instruction is appended, is soon told: a retired village, in the North of France, is visited by a Catholic priest, for the first time since the Revolution had swept away all religion, and left the poor to the horrors of infidelity, and its consequent train of demoralization. M. Vincent, the curé, comes amongst a flock who are prepossessed against all the clergy, with nothing but the simplicity of truth and trust in God to aid him in his good cause. He is ever ready to instil a feeling of religion into their minds, and equally pre