« PredošláPokračovať »
THE SOUL'S REST.
Oh! that I might enjoy a lot like this.-
God of my heart, and very wealth of love,
unfit Thy Holy Spirit's virtue to receive; Yet, by the emanation of Thy love, Vouchsafe to cleanse me, and enlarge the air, So that my soul, unworthy all, may taste The honey of thy inward love, and share Those holy joys, which doubtless willing souls, That give their hearts to meditate on Thee, Thereby made worthy, frequently acquire; That heavenly spice, and gum of life's fair tree, Which even I, unworthy, from afar, At times have felt in mine imaginings, Of what a holy soul in Thee enjoys ! Alas! Thou knowest, Lord, how rare and light Are thoughts with me, of such eternal things! How oft my words are dry! How gross and dull Mine intellect; my conscience unappeased; How shapeless and confused mine inward thoughts ! How unilluminate, and indevout, Not through another's fault, but all mine own!
And yet at times I grope my way, and seek
The path that inward leads; taking as guides,
Alas! even now when dwelling on these thoughts,
Then in my heart, again I said, Woe's me, Woe to the heavy laden soul that sins, The burthened conscience, and the lukewarm spirit : Woe to the soul that lacks the light of grace, The sweets of spiritual joy, and seeking tears, Wrings a dry heart, and turning findeth none.
But peace upon the soul that loveth Christ.
peace to her, that never turns aside
Far off removed from all external noise,
See, O my soul, how God in souls elect,
From Him who erst the thirsty soul supplied,
may receive thyself in essence unalloyed!
0, Father! good, and clement! by thy love
Thou only canst console me to the end!
A LETTER ON THE ALLEGED SUPPRESSION BY CA
THOLICS OF THE SECOND COMMANDMENT, FROM
At a late meeting at Bath of the “ London Hibernian Society," Mr. Tottenham renewed the charge against Catholics of suppressing a commandment. The subjoined statement is addressed by the Rev.
Dr. Lingard to Philip H. Howard, Esq. M.P., to whom we are indebted for permission to publish his letter, which will be read with interest. We agree with Dr. Lingard, that such objections as those of Mr. Tottenham, have been so fully and so often exposed that it is hardly worth while to notice them, but as the misstatement is here concisely met and refuted, and the truth set forth clearly and in a narrow conpass, we are persuaded it will be acceptable to most of our readers.
“ Dear Sir,—Mr. Tottenham's objection has been so often and so fully exposed, that it is hardly worth while to notice it. As the Scripture is silent with respect to the manner in which the seventeen first verses of the twentieth chapter of Exodus were divided, so as to form the ten words or commandments, every Christian Church is at liberty to adopt that manner of division which seems to it the most probable. Formerly, St. Augustine, and many others, condensed the three first probibitions, regarding the worship of God, into one commandment, dividing the two prohibitions of concupiscence into two commandments, and thus made up the number of ten. On the other hand, Origen and St. Jerome divided the three first prohibitions into two commandments, joining the two last into one, and thus, though by a different arrangement, also made up the number of ten. At the time of the Reformation, the division approved by St. Augustine was generally followed on the Continent : and Luther, finding it adopted by the Catholics of Germany, followed it also, as appears from his ‘Catechism for parsons, schoolmasters, masters of families, young persons, and children at school,' in which the first commandment forbids the worship of false gods, the second, the taking of God's name in vain, (See Luther's German Bible, App. p. 23. Luneburg, 1640). In England, the other manner of division approved by St. Jerome, was followed, and the English Reformers, finding it in use among the English Catholics, adopted it also in their communion service and catechism, and so it remains to the present day.
“But if the English Catholics followed that mode of division formerly, how comes it that they follow another now? Because, during two centuries of persecution, their clergy being educated abroad, brought with them to their own country that form to which they had been accustomed : but neither they nor Luther ever supposed that, by such division, they were encouraging idolatry, as has been discovered by bigoted polemics of later days.
“Mr. Tottenham's first assertion, that what he calls the second commandment is always omitted in Roman Catholic churches on the Continent, is most certainly untrue; his second, that they know not which is their ninth or tenth commandment, because these are placed in different positions in Exodus and Deuteronomy, is sheer nonsense. The Catholics abroad follow the order in Deuteronomy,—the Protestants in England, that in Exodus. Is not the first as good as the last? Both books are parts of the inspired writings. When he says, that the creatures of the Romish system are reduced to such shifts;
that even in their larger catechisms, such as that of the council of Trent, they are compelled to put the ninth and tenth commandments together, and say which is the ninth and tenth commandments,—he appears to have forgotten that there are no questions asked in the catechism of the council of Trent. That catechism, indeed, explains both commandments in the same chapter, but remarks, that though both treat of concupiscence, yet they should be considered as distinct commandments, because they forbid two different kinds of concupiscence, of one of which the object is the acquisition of property, of the other, the gratification of lust. “I have the honour to be, dear sir,
most truly yours,
PREFACE TO THE LIFE OF GERARDUS MAGNUS,
VULGARLY, GERARD GROOT.
WHILE our hopes are great of seeing the noble order of Carthusians, and haply others, with the completeness of a monastery, cloister, and conventual church, settled once more in the heart of England, we think it is well to draw the attention of Catholics to the example that good monks of old have given us of those heroic virtues which flourish in perfection there, but which are yet equally necessary, though in a less degree, to those who live in the world, how lightly soever they may be held in estimation by many in these degenerate days. To this neglect many causes have operated; though doubtless the greatest scandal lies against those who, for filthy lucre's sake, originally swept away the patrimony, and God's almoners of the poor: yet to the great majority of Catholics a conventual establishment is a novelty—the few that we have are so wide apart, and generally so unlike their purpose, that they are known but to a small section ; and except for the cypher, which is occasionally attached to the name of the individual, the good monk may appear in society as a secular priest, and we never dream the while that he is, as it chances to be, a son of St. Benedict, St. Dominic, or St. Francis.
Bearing this in view, it may perhaps be considered as well-timed to introduce our readers at once into the cloister, and let them judge by its fruits, how goodly they are. We have here for our guide an Augustinian canon-regular, giving a detailed and minute account of a brother he had known long and well, who from a gay and worldly life