« PreviousContinue »
Christians, but of honest men, to confess an error, regardless of consequences to reputation for accuracy or veracity; but the parties who slandered the Propagation Society have hitherto maintained a perfect silence, though, had their assertions been verified, they would have trumpeted abroad their own sagacity in discovering and pointing out what was going on in India. The truth is, the Propagation Society is well managed, both at home and abroad; it is conducted on Church principles—a circumstance not much calculated to recommend it to certain parties, though they call themselves Churchmen; and its usefulness is so great, that the crippling of its efforts would be a calamity of no ordinary kind. We rejoice in its prosperity; and sure we are that, notwithstanding the recommendations from certain quarters to support the Colonial Church Society, as it is most improperly designated, all sound Churchmen will continue, as far as their means will permit, to render it their most efficient and continual assistance. " It appears strange that even success is complained of by some persons, unless it arises in their own way. They would venture almost to dictate to the Providence of Almighty God the mode in which its great works should be accomplished.
The Worship of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the Church of
Rome contrary to Holy Scripture, and to the Faith and Practice of the Church of Christ through the First Five Centuries. By J. E. TYLER, B.D., Rector of St. Giles. London: Bentley. 1844. This treatise, dedicated to the Archbishop of Canterbury, at whose desire it has been published, has two objects in viewfirst, whether that which is alleged against Rome, concerning the worship of the Virgin Mary, does in very deed exist in her and belong to her; and in the next place, whether that, whatsoever it be, is so contrary to the doctrine of our Saviour and his apostles, and so inconsistent with the teaching and practice of the Church in her earliest and purest ages, as to require a separation from communion with her.
“ These two points it is the main object of the present treatise to ascertain and establish.” (Introduction, xiii.)
“ With humble confidence the author would invite all who call themselves Christians to examine and sift the evidence, and to try the momentous question for themselves; the issue joined between the two Churches (of England and Rome) being this, whether the worship of the blessed Virgin Mary in the Church of Rome be not contrary to the teachirg of holy Seripture, and to the faith and practice of the Church of Christ for five hundred years and more.” (xv.)
“Our Church, in her liturgy, her homilies, her articles, and in the works of her standard divines and most approved teachers, ever speaks of St. Mary, the blessed Virgin, in the language of reverence, affection, and gratitude. She was a holy virgin and a holy mother, highly favoured, blessed among women. The Lord was with her, and she was the earthly parent of the only Saviour of mankind. She was herself blessed, and blessed was the fruit of her womb. Should entertain a wish to interrupt the testimony of every succeeding age, and to check the continuous fulfilment of her own prophecy, “all generations shall call me blessed,' the Church of England would not acknowledge that wish to be the legitimate and genuine desire of one of her own members.”
“ But when we are required either to address our supplications to the Virgin Mary and to offer prayers to God through her mediation and intercession, or else to protest against the errors of our fellow Christians who adhere to the faith and practice of Rome in this respect, we have no ground for hesitation-the case offers no alternative: our love of unity must yield to our love of truth. We cannot join in that worship which in our conscience we believe to give to a mortal a share, at least, of the honour due to God alone, and to exalt the Virgin Mary into that office of mediation, advocacy, and intercession between God and man, which the written word of inspiration and the primitive Church have taught us to ascribe exclusively to that divine Saviour who was God of the substance of his Father, begotten before the worlds ; and Man of the substance of his mother, born in the world." (xxii.)
The plan pursued by Mr. Tyler is, first, to show what the present authorized and enjoined worship of the Virgin is, as deduced from the Roman Missals and Breviary. And this is ample testimony to establish the first point contended for, in the minds of all who consider what public prayer ever has been, and that there can be only one being capable of receiving such homage—GOD ALONE. But Mr. Tyler proceeds, in his second chapter, to show the extraordinary excess to which the idolatry of the Virgin has been carried by various individuals of high name in the Roman Church-many of them afterwards canonized —and this not only unchecked, but applauded and sanctioned by the Papal authorities; which authorities, therefore, have committed their Church to the adoption of these excesses, and Rome must be held responsible for the doctrines of Bonaventura and these other individuals, in having given her express sanction to these very writings. Bonaventura's parodies on the Psalms, the Te Deum, and the Athanasian creed, are among the most blasphemous things that have ever been written; the phrase "our Lady" being substituted for Jehovah throughout the Psalms, as
-"In thee, O Lady, have I trusted ; let me not be confounded” -"Into thy hands, O Lady, I commend my spirit”—“Let Mary arise, and let her enemies be scattered," &c.
“ The Te Deum is thus miserably distorted—We praise thee, mother of God; we acknowledge thee, Mary the Virgin,'” &c. (32).
“ The Athanasian creed is employed in the same manner-Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold firm the faith concerning the Virgin Mary,'" &c. (33).
All of which mockeries of worship and insults to common sense have been continued by sundry canonized saints enumerated by Mr. Tyler, closing with Theophilus Raynaud, the Jesuit, 1665, who, in extravagance, carries these monstrous parodies to the most disgusting length. Mr. Tyler justly observes, that a man must have lost als reverence even for the word of God, as well as for God himself, before he could think of applying to Mary the very words consecrated by the Holy Spirit to the worship of the supreme and only God; and that the practical effect likewise is, to make God an object of aversion, rather than love, when he is thought upon at all.
“ The fact is, that the direct tendeney of the worship of the Virgin, as practically illustrated in the Church of Rome, is to make the Almighty himself an object of fear, and the Virgin an object of love...... as the moderator of Jehovah's justice and the appeaser of his wrathsuch as, Compel thy Son to liave pity. Calm the rage of thy heavenly husband; let his heart be softened towards us. If any one feels himself aggrieved by the justice of God, he may appeal to Mary. “God is a God of vengeance; but thou, Mary, dost incline to be merciful.' Surely these are expressions conveying sentiments and associations shocking to our feelings, and from which our reason turns away, as we think of God's perfections, and the full atonement and all-powerful intercession of his Son, Christ our Redeemer.” (37).
These things are enough to satisfy the generality of readers, and to render a further enquiry unnecessary. But Mr. Tyler pursues the subject, like a theologian and a scholar, through the holy Scriptures and the history of the early Church; and he shows that as long, as purity of faith and doctrine continued, no traces of such worship can be found, as no words which can possibly justify it exist in Scripture or any confessions of the Church. And many theologians and scholars will be glad to accompany Mr. Tyler in these investigations, which are conducted throughout with much candour, as well as learning and orthodoxy. And not the least interesting part will be the Appendis, in which notice is taken of the “reckless manner in which supposititious works have been ascribed to the saints and most esteemed writers of the primitive Church.” And Mr. Tyler might also have added, the reckless manner in which their genuine works are set aside to serve a particular purpose. Some good observations are accordingly made on the writings of most of those who have been referred to in the body of the book, distinguishing the genuine from the spurious. Reppendune : a Moral Rhyme. By the Rev. J. JONES, M.A.
Derby. 1844. This is a small, unpretending volume-one of the many that have been summoned forth by an awakened interest in the noble works and pious munificence of our forefathers. “ Reppendune” is the ancient name of Repton, a place celebrated for its ecclesiastical antiquities, and is a sort of connecting link among the poems. Some of them illustrate the old legends yet current about the hermit Guthlac, and the deposed Burrhed, the Boabdil of the Mercian dynasty. Hence, as we may suppose, the poems are all more or less steeped in the thoughtfulness that arises necessarily from a love of ecclesiastical antiquity. Mr. Jones states, in his preface, that his productions are to be looked upon as the employment of hours of relaxation, and are not intended as poems, so much as rhymes. This is a sensible preface, and misleads nobody; we know what to expect, and we read the book, or pass it by, according to our individual tastes. It is upon those books which pretend to contain poetry, and do not even exhibit connected prose, that we make, and will continue to make, our perpetual warfare. Mr. Jones only attempts a simple, unaffected style, and, in consequence, is very intelligible, and, to us, very agreeable.
The poem on Anchor Church is as good as any in the volume. Anchor Church, we are informed, is an excavated rock, whose base was in former times washed by the Trent, and was supposed to have been the seat of an anchorite, whence it derives its somewhat curious appellation. The apostrophe to the anchorite, and the speculations upon his destiny, are somewhat tedious, as they occupy fourteen or fifteen pages; otherwise we should have very little fault to find with the poem. The sentiments are just, definite, and seem entirely free from all that clap-trap hankering after outworn usages which mars the usefulness of many a learned and instructive work upon ecclesiastical antiquity. Mr. Jones is a good man and true, and shall speak for himself
“Ah, lady! I have kept thee long
But think not thou, that I desire
Each may be better if he will." “ Askew Hill” and “ The Trent" next succeed. They are both of the same character-simple outpourings of thoughts suggested by the scenery. The verses are fully and entirely of the character they profess to be; they are of no high æsthetic order; they do not attempt to startle or surprise us, but run onwards smoothly and silently, bearing many a sound lesson and many a thoughtful sentiment. Mr. Jones has quite won our heart by the loving way he speaks of the remains of bygone days; he has no cold sneer for the simple piety of our forefathers, but seems, throughout these poems, to desire to recall to his mind the thoughts and deeds of those whose names yet live among the traditions of “ Reppendune.”
“And now I see the holy well-
The calm, the lonely, and the blest.” “ The Church” is of the same character; it contains musings upon the ancient fabric before the writer's eyes, and thence diverges into some few reflections upon the vicissitudes of the Catholic Church of Christ. We shall not dwell
the “ Miscellaneous Rhymes," as it would not be just to dissect or criticize what the author himself has stated belong rather to a monitory, than a poetic style. Some are, however, not only eflective, but of simple and graceful structure. 66 The Elm of