associates, much less the followers, of those so forcibly referred to by Cowper,

"Point to the cure, describe a Saviour's cross
As God's expedient to retrieve his loss,
The bold apostate sickens at the view,
And hates it with the malice of a Jew."

We pity Sir Robert Peel. Opposed by some of his best friends, he has gained, thus far, the victory by the help of a number of the adversaries of what we, and our readers with us, believe to be all-important truth. Does he think that he cannot be injured in his standing by such a mode of proceeding, because,

as his political opponents have made common cause with him in this measure, they who may feel themselves aggrieved by the Bill have as much reason to complain of Lord John Russell as of himself? A wise Statesman, especially in days like the present, ought never to calculate on such feelings as these. Besides, there are some who are often influenced by the sentiment pressed in Gay's couplet, even though they may never have read the couplet itself,

"An open foe may prove a curse,
But a pretended friend is worse."

ex

CIRCUMSTANCES are now evidently calling for a revived study of the whole Popish controversy. It was once hoped that the battle had been fought, and the victory so far won, that it would not be necessary to do more than tread in the steps of the old sturdy polemics who had so well performed their duty to God and his church, and employ the ample materials which they had provided. But the "signs of the times," which we are always bound to observe, and by which the Christian is always required to regulate his conduct, are not to be mistaken. Great as are the blessings of peace, they are never to be purchased by the sacrifice of truth. It is not only a mistaken, but a spurious, charity which would place truth below peace, and seek to secure the latter by repudiating the claims of the former. The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable; and where truth is disregarded, purity can no longer be found. The church is the abode of

love, for God dwells there, and God is love but the church is likewise the pillar and ground of the truth; and whenever the truth is assailed, especially that by obedience to which through the Spirit the heart is purified, and the great work of regeneration effected, it must, at all hazards, and regardless of all consequences, be defended; and no dread of opprobrium must hinder those open and strenuous exertions which the defence may require. The profession of Christianity is very widely spread; but amongst those who call themselves Christians, there many who attach no value whatever to those doctrines which give to Christianity all its worth and all its power. With them, attachment to truth is bigotry; and because the nervous and significant combinations of the Greek language enabled those whose vernacular tongue it was to express by two words only differing by a single vowel, (homoousian and homoigusian, as the con

are

troversy is sometimes termed,) the two opposed facts, on one of which, to the total exclusion of the other, the entire religion of the Bible must rest, the whole dispute has been ridiculed as though the question whether the Lord Christ were very God, or a mere man, were only a trifling contention about a single letter. No wonder that such persons are altogether opposed to the Popish controversy. The efforts of Luther they represent as being designed for the establishment of liberty, rather than for the assertion of truth; and for a liberty endangered only by the spirit of the age, not for truths contradicted by an abiding and unchangeable system. We would direct the very earnest attention of the reader to this portentous aversion to the revival of the controversy with Rome. They who are thus adverse to it will not, or cannot, see, that the points in debate are most intimately connected with the question as to the true nature of personal religion,-a question, the answer to which, on the assumption that one party is right, will be almost as far as possible distinct from that which a different assumption suggests. Religion, subjectively considered, is one thing on the principles of Luther, another on those of the Council of Trent. But those very doctrines which, to the genuine Protestant, possess such vast importance, constituting, as he believes them to do, that element which gives efficiency to the Gospel, and makes it "the power of God unto salvation," are precisely those which the unregenerate heart most deeply dislikes, as tending directly, powerfully, and manifestly, to the abasement of human pride. And thence results another reason for this aversion to controversy with Rome. By whatsoever the fact is occasioned, fact it is, that what was said of our Lord in reference to his ministry, "And the common people heard him gladly," has been equally true of every one who has faithfully preached"Christ crucified, the wisdom of God, and the power of God." In all ages, whenever the Gospel has been preached, it has been true that

"the poor have the Gospel preached unto them," and that by such preaching the poor are evangelized. But in the human heart, there is not only the pride of self-righteousness, but the pride of social rank; and by the clear and efficient ministrations of evangelical truth, both are offended. Something of the kind was exhibited in the days of our Lord. On one occasion there" drew near to him the publicans and sinners for to hear him;" and it is added, "And the Scribes and Pharisees," constituting, in modern language, the gentility of the day, "murmured." And, foolish as it may appear to those who have just notions on the subject of respectability, yet the fact is too important to be disregarded, that at the present day this disposition operates powerfully in favour of Popery, and therefore powerfully against the revival of the Popish controversy. The expres sion attributed to Charles II., that Popery was a religion for gentlemen, may have been thrown off carelessly; but it was a true splinter from the mass, and involves a deeplyrooted principle. Popery has always sought to invest itself with earthly grandeur; and there are minds which, of any other kind of grandeur, seem incapable of forming even a conception. Laud is reported to have said, that, in the public worship of the Presbyterians, he could perceive no beauty of holiness. This, indeed, is only one form of the fact, that man walks by sight, that he is sensual, or, if the phrase be preferred, that he is sensuous; but still, the results are both extensive and mischievous. Dazzled by the visible magnificence of Popery, multitudes of the great ones of the world, even if they do not fall down and worship the golden image, will look with complacency on the whole service, and even attribute to devotion the excitement occasioned by psaltery, dulcimer, and sackbut, and all kinds of music. But the believers in that Gospel wherein "is revealed the righteousness of God," furnish no such visible means of attraction. The glory of genuine Protestantism is spiritual glory, the glory of justi

fication and sanctification, received by a faith which requires a broken and a contrite heart, not ministered by sacraments and rites, (however important in their true character,) which may be connected with such imposing splendour, that the pride of the heart being stirred up by nothing offensive, its dormancy may even be mistaken for humility. We wish the fact were less obvious, or that it comprehended a narrower range; but fact it is, that, by many who move in the higher walks of life, evangelical religion is regarded as distasteful and vulgar, and the profession of it associated in their minds with the idea of a barbarous and low-lived fanaticism. To Popery belong the pomp and the adornings of the crucifix; but to Methodism, (as evangelical Protestantism is often nick named,) there is given the reproach of the cross.

Popery is reviving, and the most singular combinations of circumstances are contributing to strengthen its position, and aid its efforts for the recovery of lost dominion. Some would oppose Papists, but their opposition is weakened, sometimes neutralized, by their religious respect for essential Popery. Others would oppose Popery, but political considerations induce them to support Papists, overlooking the important fact, that whoever may play fast and loose with religion, the Papist never does. That credit is undeniably due to him; and therefore, whatever power he obtains, it is sure to be employed on behalf of what he believes to be the only true religion. Popery is increasing in strength and influence; and because it ought to be opposed, the study of the controversy ought to be revived, that the opposition may be conducted with a vigour and efficiency bearing some proportion to the importance of the questions at issue.

It is true, that many works of great value have already been written on this subject. And time does not diminish their value. The writings of Jewel, Abbott, Downham, as well as of the men of a later age, as collected, for instance, in Bishop Gibson's "Preservative," are to be

studied as well as respected. And well will the study be repaid, both by the copious information which it will supply, and the increase of mental vigour and acuteness which it will occasion. But Popery, though always the same, skilfully adapts itself to times and circumstances. It studies, particularly, existing prejudices, and is always found carefully to avail itself of them. Literally, and to an extent of which he from whom the words are quoted never dreamed, it becomes "all things to all men." In the cabinet of the despot there is the Priest aiding the plans of despotism, and employing religion to forge or te strengthen the fetters whereby a nation is to be held in bondage. And in the meetings of revolutionary anarchists there are Priests, advocating the wildest claims of popular right, and exciting the passions of the multitude to madness. With the high-born, Popery is polite and dignified; while over the rude and ignorant, the semi-civilized, but fanatically superstitious, the Priest, its representative, comes with his horsewhip, and with his anathemas, flogging some, cursing others, that so he may rule all. At one time the liberty of the press is to be restrained by "Indexes" and "Censors;" at another, it is to be used for the dissemination of whatever principles the present exigency may appear to require. With the Pope, liberty of conscience is all a pretence, which must not for a moment be even listened to. At Madeira, liberty of conscience is a crime calling for imprisonment and death. By Romanist speakers in the British Parliament, liberty of conscience is represented as one of the dearest rights of men; and they are never so eloquent as when descanting on its excellencies. In Spain, all who belong not to the Roman Church are heretics; in England, they are friends and brethren. senting such a variety of aspects, thus changing them at will, as may be deemed requisite, the true character of the system can only be ascertained by that close and resolute study which shall refuse to be di

Thus pre

verted from its object by changeable and shifting circumstances, and, overlooking the actor, only and steadily regard the man. We are, therefore, most decidedly of opinion, that, considering the spiritual danger to which Popery at all times exposes, and the peculiar circumstances with which it is connected in this country at the present day, the revived study of the whole Popish controversy is a duty most solemnly obligatory on all whom it may concern. All professors of religion, who have seasons of fitting leisure for study, ought, to some extent at least, to engage in this. They should be prepared for some of the subtle assaults which may be made upon them; and not only to repel them, but to carry the attack into the camp of the enemy. But it is on Christian Ministers that this obligation chiefly devolves. They are set for the defence of the Gospel. In times when particular evils are afloat in the moral atmosphere, they are to be prepared with means of prevention and remedy, that they may preserve in full spiritual health the souls committed to their care. This is one reason of the establishment of a separate ministry, whose members may be exclusively devoted to their great work in all its various branches, and in all the circumstances and exigencies of the church. They are not only shepherds, who have to feed the flock, but watchmen, who have vigilantly to look out for the approach of danger, and, when they discern it, to give the necessary warning. It may be more pleasant to conduct the flock into pleasant pastures, and to the still waters. Such exercises of the ministry are indeed most delightful which, while they feed and comfort the people, likewise feed and comfort themselves. But while there are those that "make war upon the Lamb," his "called, and chosen, and faithful" servants must not seek to shun the field of battle. As, therefore, Popery reviving and advancing is one of the great evils of the day, so against Popery ought ministerial vigilance and care to be directed. It is not, in

deed, the only evil; and we wish we might indulge the inclination we feel to point out others which are associated with it, and call for especial attention. But this we must not do. We will only say, on the general subject, that no Minister who desires to finish his course with joy, and the ministry which he has received, to testify the Gospel of the grace of God," will ever be satisfied with the mere routine of ordinary and often-repeated duties. "What are the signs of the present times? What are the actual circumstances of the church? Are there any peculiar dangers by which it is threatened now, any peculiar wants to which it is exposed now, any peculiar duties to which its attention is now, more than at other times, called?"-a -are questions which the wakeful Minister, humbly, but most earnestly, desiring to be found faithful before God, will frequently propose; and according to the answers which they receive, will be his own methods of procedure. He must not only not desert his post; he must not sleep upon it, nor be inattentive as though he were asleep. Great is the labour, great the care, of the faithful Minister of Christ; but the grace of Christ is sufficient, and great shall be his reward.

The Popish controversy appears to us to have two leading divisions. In the one, its essential principles, from which, according to the ordinary processes of developement, all the details proceed, may be considered. In the second, those details themselves. Each has its separate advantages; and there may be times and circumstances when one of them may require to be considered more attentively than the other. The first, indeed, ought never to be entirely overlooked. Whatever may be the subordinate errors of Popery, its great mischief is, that it is another gospel. Popery does not give the same answer to the question, "What must I do to be saved?" that is given by genuine -we mean spiritual-Protestantism. And let that Protestant answer be once established as the truth, the very truth, of the Gospel,―its essen

tial, characterizing, influencing truth, -and Popery falls at once; and, as to those who from their hearts embrace that truth, so as to experience its power, it falls completely and for ever. He who has spiritual access to the mercy-seat, by the blood of sprinkling, and realizes the sacred intercourse to which the great Apostle and High-Priest of our profession calls him; he who can say from the heart, from actual experience, "I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin;" he who knows what it is to come to Christ, and to believe in Christ, and to find rest in peace through Christ's atoning sacrifice, and thus inwardly to feed upon the very body and blood of the divine Redeemer; he, in a word, who possesses the inward and spiritual religion which results from faith which worketh by love, and implies that he proves, that is, experiences, not only knows that it is described in the word, but finds it in his own soul, even, the good, and accept able, and perfect will of God; he who by the word and Spirit of God is brought into this state, while he lives by faith, and walks in the light, is perfectly safe from Popery. Popery only promises him the shadowy form of that, the substance of which he actually enjoys. Whatever, therefore, sets up spiritual religion, lays the axe to the root of Popery; and, consequently, this must never be overlooked by the Christian Minister. Let him preach Christ, and a present, free, full salvation by Christ; and let him preach this earnestly; not as though he were only lecturing on some subject to be perceived by the intellect, but as feeling the love of Christ, and borne onwards by its power, beseeching sinners to be reconciled to God; let him thus preach, mightily praying that every ministration of the word may be also a ministration of the living Spirit; and Popery will not be able to stand before him.

But Popery, like all other departures from the great principles of evangelical truth, and to an extent

greater than can be seen in connexion with any other such departure, has its errors in detail,-its particular doctrines. These, indeed, constitute the visible form of the system. And this it is sometimes necessary to attack. But, that it may be attacked efficiently, and with any prospect of success, it must be understood. And here it is that the student meets with difficulty at the very outset. In nothing is the subtlety of Popery more completely shown, with all its boasts about the advantages of infallible guidance, than in the care which is taken to have it represented by guides who, though with the ignorant and superstitious among their own people they speak and act as if they were infallible, may yet be at any time disowned, as only private interpreters, when it is thought advisable to do so. Hence the amazing and bewildering variety of opinions among Papists, on subjects connected with Popery. You are talking with a Papist, and quote some statement of another Papist,-of a Council, perhaps, or a Pope: you are instantly met with,-"O, I am not bound by what any individual says, or any body of men: I must only answer for what the Church says.' "Well," you ask, "and what does the Church say?" He tells you. By and by you meet another, and you argue against that which you have been told is the doctrine of the Church. You are as far off "the end of controversy" as ever. Your second opponent repudiates what the first said, and gives you his version of what the Church teaches. And so you go on, till at last you conclude, that, practically, the uniform belief of the members of this Church (always, everywhere, and with all, the same) just comes to this, that every one holds the doctrines of the Church in his own way, and claims to be the infallible interpreter of them. It is a mass of confused and confusing discrepancies, glossed over with a seeming uniformity of colour, by a general profession of respect to an abstraction called the Church, which is said to be infallible; though what the