said in defence of the Popish cause. Then alluding again, at some length, to the two great fundamental errors of the Romanists, "the supremacy of the Pope," and "the universality of the Roman Church," he concludes by an exhortation to his brethren to be strenuous in resisting the propagation of such fatal tenets, to recollect the importance of their commission, and, uninfluenced by popular applause, to bear the ark of Christ's Church, which they have received from our illustrious Reformers, through the difficulties and trials which beset it, and which are much inferior to what those reformers experienced in handing it down to us in the purity and beauty in which we received it at their hands.

Gospel Truth opposed to Error and Superstition: in an Address to his Protestant Brethren. By a LAYMAN. 8vo. Pp. 60. 1s. 6d. London. Rivingtons. 1824.

BUT for certain reasons mentioned in our last article this pamphlet might well have been noticed in company with the "Protestant's Companion," having been called forth by the same circumstances, and being, in fact, a sort of abridgment and popular version of that valuable work. Yet we are far from insinuating that there is any want of originality in the composition of it; on the contrary, it bears the marks of much exercised thought, and of a clear and active understanding. The references which are made to the Archdeacon's book, are only for purposes of illustration, whilst the mode of dealing with Mr. Baines is generally new; and the arguments brought to bear upon his fallacies are expressed in a correct, forcible, and intelligible style.

In a very modest preface our author observes, that

"The publications of the defenders of the Reformed Church, though perfectly satisfactory to men of education, and who have access to ecclesiastical records, are rather above the capacity of uninformed readers. Those on the opposite side appear to be more particularly directed to that class; and are, moreover, managed with such art and adroitness as can hardly fail to mislead the judgment of the unlearned. The author conceived that a plain and familiar course of argument, drawn from the Holy Scriptures, might be useful to those who have not the means of consulting ancient authorities; and with this view the work has been undertaken."

The circumstances which occasioned the appearance of Mr. Baines's work, are not stated in our notice of the "Protestant's

Companion," because we were desirous of exhibiting the Archdeacon's labours in the point of view in which we felt that they might be most advantageously considered; as directed to the explanation of those several important questions in which the Protestant Church is at variance with that of Rome; and not to the determination of any particular controversy with an individual of the Roman Catholic communion.

The origin of the controversy at Bath may, however, be fitly narrated here. It was this:

"In the summer of 1821, the Rev. Dr. Moysey, Archdeacon of Bath, in a charge delivered to the clergy of his archdeaconry, and published at their desire, made some remarks on the doctrines and principles of the Church of Rome, which were highly resented in a published letter, addressed to the Archdeacon, by the Rev. P. Baines, Minister of the Roman Catholic Chapel at Bath. This letter was ably replied to by a pamphlet, under the signature of Vindex,' which brought forth from Mr. Baines a volume, with the imposing title of A Defence of the Christian Religion during the last thirteen Centuries."" P. 7.

This last publication was the occasion of Dr. Daubeny's "Protestant's Companion," and of the present pamphlet.

The plan of the "Layman's Address" is easily traced out. The first two and twenty pages are occupied with general remarks upon Mr. Baines's work, which regard "the nature of the Catholic Church," its "unity," and "the causes which led to our Reformation," according to that gentleman's view of them; animadversions on the reasoning of the same book, in favour of "image-worship," and the Scriptural arguments against the "invocation of saints," bring us almost to the end of the pamphlet. In the last ten pages, however, are contained a few observations on the doctrine of "purgatory," and some hints which tend to shew the unreasonableness of Mr. Baines's complaints, that the Roman Catholics, as a body, are unfairly aspersed.

On the "nature of the Catholic Church," we have a sensible protest against any exclusive claims on the part of the Church of Rome to be considered the Catholic Church; and a very happy illustration. In the first place it is inquired,

Catholic

"What does he (Mr. Baines) mean by the term Church,' upon which he founds his claims, and our exclusion? If I understand him, he measures it by the number of persons who are, nominally, of his communion, and the number of square miles over which it is spread." P. 14.

The following casc is then put:---

6

"When an immense majority of the people of Israel turned to idolatry, inasmuch that the prophet Elijah feared he was the only true worshipper left, then, according to Mr. Baines's definition, an idolatrous people formed the Catholic Church. To comfort the prophet, the Lord said to him, I have left me seven thousand men in Israel, which have not bowed the knee unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him.' (1 Kings xix. 18.) Were these seven thousand men to be excluded, and the great body of the Jewish nation to be acknowledged as the true Church, because of their universality? If not, Mr. Baines's argument vanishes." P. 14.

It is observed that Mr. Baines boasts of the "unity" which prevails among the members of his communion, and contrasts it with the frequent defections from our Established Church, and the variety of opinions which prevail among the dissenting sects. To this there is a double reply: first, that if a Roman Catholic very seldom change to Protestantism, it is much more seldom that a Mussulman becomes a Christian; and yet we should think that a very bad argument for the superiority of the religion of Mahomet to that of Christ; and, secondly, (which indeed contains the true account of the matter,) that if there be not much dissent from the Church of Rome, there is dissent enough within it.

"There is quite as wide a difference of opinion between the clergy of the Church of Rome and the well-informed part of the laity, to say nothing of the clergy themselves, as there is between the Church of England and the dissenting sects. Indeed Mr. Baines avows his own dissent upon some points. He acknowledges that Bellarmin and other Italian divines, maintain the infallibility of the Pope in articles of faith, yet he boldly says, 'I do not admit the infallibility of Popes in any thing.' And the effectual cause of the appearance of unity in the Church of Rome is exhibited in this sentence of Mr. Baines,There are many things which she (the church) condemns and punishes, whenever she knows of their existence.' Now, observes our author, if our church were to punish upon every appearance of schism, our Dissenters, like those of the Church of Rome, would be nominally churchmen; and thus his boasted unity would be maintained among us.'" P. 16.

Against Mr. Baines's views of "the causes which led to our Reformation," it is very properly objected, that,

"An unlearned reader of his book would be led to believe that King Henry VIII. was the inventor, and sole promoter of that blessed event in England...In his accustomed style of levity and sarcasm, the reverend gentleman states, that in the sixteenth century it pleased God to raise up Henry VIII., king of England, to whom he gave the

keys of the kingdom of heaven, which he had formerly given to St. Peter.'

"Now Mr. Baines cannot but know, that the seed of the Reformation was sown in the hearts of Englishmen above a hundred and fifty years before Henry VIII. was born. This seed was sown in the reign of Edward III.; and all the arts and cruelties that were practised in the following reigns, could not prevent it. The Bible had been translated into the English language by Wickliffe: that was enough, and he boldly maintained that excellent principle, which is held to this day by the Church of England, namely, that the Holy Scriptures contain all things necessary to salvation, and that no man is required to believe, as an article of faith, any thing that may not be proved thereby. No one can be so weak as to give Henry VIII. credit for pious motives, in the share he had in effecting the Reformation; Providence often employs unworthy agents in accomplishing blessed ends." P. 20.

Mr. Baines gives an extract from Paley, with a view of proving the impossibility of a belief in the thirty-nine articles, by every candidate for holy orders:

"He forgot," says the author of this pamphlet, "that the remark applies with infinitely more force to his own church, whose Rituals, Pontificals, and Public Offices,' by his own statement, 'comprises several folio, quarto, and octavo volumes.' I have, myself, seen a large compartment in a library, completely filled with these folio and quarto volumes. The study of astronomy is simple and easy compared with this system of ecclesiastical tactics; whereas the greater part of our Articles and Homilies are employed in clearing away the rubbish foisted in the Church of Rome." P. 21.

The examination of Mr. Baines's arguments on the subject of " Image-Worship," runs much in the same line as that of the Archdeacon; but it is, of course, more concise, and more popularly conducted. The following refinement upon the words of our Saviour is worthy of notice. Quoting from Fleury's Ecclesiastical History, where he treats of the second Council of Nice, he, (Mr. Baines) says, "The Lord thy God shalt thou worship, and him only shalt thou serve." It is argued that the prohibition lies in the last clause. The Scripture says we must serve only God, but it does not say we must worship only him, therefore we may worship images! Mr. Baines's words are, "It does not reserve to God any particular external act whatever, except sacrifice; and it does allow any external act whatever, except sacrifice, to be paid to creatures." We can only say, that if any one has got so far in the art of discrimination as to discover that religious worship forms no part of religious service, there is good reason to wonder why such a person should trouble himself with it at all. Certainly if he expects no

better results from a worship paid to God than he perceives to accrue from worship paid to creatures, the thing had better be got rid of altogether, for mere forms, in such matters as these, quickly degenerate into mockery: and little pleasing to a God who is exceedingly jealous of his own honour, can be that devotion of body and mind, which may be, and is rendered alike to many of his most sinful creatures, to the brute creation, and even to the stocks and stones of the earth.

In allusion to Mr. Baines's assertion, that "he really cannot discover in what the doctrine and practice of his church, (in the matter of image-worship,) disagree with those of the Established Church at this day," our author says,

"The reverend gentleman, however, labours perseveringly, with the view of proving that respect for the pictures of deceased friends, bowing to the throne as an acknowledgment of the royal authority, &c. is much the same kind of thing as the image-worship of the Church of Rome. Can Mr. Baines prove that Protestants have been in the habit of kneeling down before the pictures of departed friends, burning incense, making them offerings, or worshipping them in any manner? Or have our Bishops ever worshipped the throne in this way? Unless he can shew that these things have been done, nearly one half of his book is waste paper." P. 27.

Bellarmin's well-known scale of worship, alluded to in the Archdeacon's fourth chapter, is here also given, followed by this remark,

"Now can any one suppose that he shall be helped forward on his journey towards heaven by this strange vocabulary? he may as well think to work out his salvation by a table of logarithms. A man had need to be a tolerable Greek and Latin scholar, before he could venture to worship his creator with an easy conscience. How readily might a poor simple soul slide out of douleia into hyperdouleia, or even latreia and that Mr. Baines himself acknowledges would be downright idolatry." P. 29.

After all this nicety of distinction, it is shewn by Vindex, that in the authorized form for receiving the emperor, processionally, the most honourable place is appointed for the cross, because latreia, (the very highest degree of worship) is due to it. Instead, however, of being in any way abashed, Mr. Baines replies,

"When Vindex saw it asserted that latreia was due to a little cross, carried at the end of a long pole, might he not have suspected that these words could not be understood in their ordinary sense? could he suppose that the whole Christian world required his sagacity to inform them that such an object was not a god, nor ought to be honoured as such?"