We must remark, that we observe with regret that the short Preface, which is prefixed to the first six editions, is not given in the seventh. There is one recommendation in that Preface we are particularly anxious to enforce,-that "one copy at least of the Manual be given to the servants in every family where it is used; that they may have an opportunity of considering the meaning of each petition." For we are convinced that petitions which are not previously considered, cannot be the genuine offspring of the heart; and that nothing is so likely to distract our devotions, and render them unprofitable, as an unpremeditated repetition of words and phrases, for which our minds are not prepared. If this caution be necessary with respect to all forms of prayer, it is more especially required by the one before us; for in it there is a greater number of ideas in a small compass, a greater condensation of matter, than in any similar publication we are acquainted with. Be it ever remembered, that if the prayers which we offer up at the throne of grace are not reflected upon beforehand by our families and our servants, they are to them extempore prayers, and subject to all their manifold inconveniences. And be it also remembered, that if, notwithstanding all our care, our forms be attended with coldness and barrenness, it is not the words but our hearts which are to blame.

But we must now conclude. With great satisfaction have we obs served the constant demand for this useful and unpretending little' work; and gladly have we taken up our pen to record the fact. Honourable, indeed, it is to our hierarchy, that we see one of its members, signally distinguished for his talents and his learning, not disdaining the humbler duties of a minister of Christ's flock, but anxiously endeavouring to guide the footsteps of those committed to his charge into the ways of peace and salvation*. If the student and the man of learning will ever be grateful for the labours of Bishop Blomfield, how great will be their gratitude, who shall be indebted to his faithful ministry for the blessings of the life that now is, and the glories of eternity!

MISCELLANEOUS.

ROMANISM CONTRADICTORY TO SCRIPTURE.

(Continued from page 671.)

III. CLAIMS OF THE ROMISH CHURCH TO SUPREMACY.

Jesus Christ prohibited all disputes concerning rank and preeminency in his kingdom. Ye know, he said, that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them; and they that are great,

*The Manual was originally compiled for the use of the Parishioners of St. Botolph's, Bishopsgate, London.

exercise, authority upon them. But IT SHALL NOT BE SO AMONG YOU: but, whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: even as the Son of Man came, not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. (Matt. xx.) St. Paul, addressing the Ephesians, says, Ye are built upon the foundation of the APOSTLES AND PROPHETS, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone. (Eph. ii. 20.) It will be observed that the apostles and prophets are here put in the same rank, and are ALL equally called foundations. To Jesus Christ alone belongs the pre

eminence.

But the CHURCH OF ROME claims to be the supreme mistress of all churches, and arrogates to the popes a primacy of dominion. “I acknowledge the Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church to be the mother and mistress of all churches; and I promise to swear true obedience to the Pope of Rome, who is the successor of St. Peter, the prince of the Apostles, and vicar of Jesus Christ." (Creed of Pius IV. Art. 23. See also Catechism. Roman. Part I. de Symb. Art. 9, § 15, or p. 92 of English Translation, London, 1687.) The Romish Church is NOT the mother and mistress of all churches: the mother church was the Church at Jerusalem, which was formed immediately after the ascension of Christ; next, was formed the Church at Samaria (Acts viii. A. D. 34); and then, the Churches in Cyprus and Phoenice, and at Antioch, by those Christians who were dispersed in consequence of the persecution that arose about Stephen. (Acts xi. 19-21.) There is no evidence whatever that the Church at Rome was founded by Peter, as the Romanists affirm, or by the joint labours of Peter and Paul. In the first council held at Nice, all other Christian Churches were on an equality with that at Rome: and in the fourth general council (that convened at Chalcedon), it was declared, that the church at Constantinople should have equal honours with that at Rome, because the seat of imperial government was there. Catholic or universal, the Romish Church NEVER WAS, NOR IS: for ecclesiastical history attests that both the Asiatic and African Churches formerly rejected her authority; and also that the Eastern Churches to this day despise her pride and affectation of supremacy: and a simple inspection of the map of the globe will prove, that the Romish Church is by no means universal. Över the united Church of England and Ireland, Rome can have no authority; for the Churches of England and of Ireland were MORE ANCIENT than the Pope's supremacy; they were free Churches from the first planting of Christianity among the ancient Britons and Irish; and whatever oppressions those Churches suffered from papal intrusions, fraud, and violence, their natural freedom remained unaltered, and that freedom is justly maintained. The fiction of papal supremacy is unsupported by Scripture, and is a novelty of the seventh century. (See Bishop Burgess's Protestant's Catechism, where all these topics are unanswerably proved.) IV. OBJECTS AND MANNER OF WORSHIP.

1. The Scripture says that JESUS CHRIST is our ONLY Mediator and Advocate with God, and the only foundation of our salvation. There is ONE GOD and ONE MEDIATOR between God and man, the

man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all. (1 Tim. ii. 5,6.) If any man sin, we have an ADVOCATE WITH THE FATHER, JESUS CHRIST the righteous, and he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 John ii. 1, 2.) Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is NONE OTHER NAME under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. (Acts iv. 12.) Other FOUNDATION can NO MAN lay, than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. (1 Cor. iii. 11.) The Romish Church, on the contrary, admits the merits and intercession of the Virgin Mary and of the Saints. "I also believe that the Saints, who reign with Christ, are to be WORSHIPPED and PRAYED TO; and that their relics are to be venerated." (Creed of Pius IV. Art. 20. See also Com. Trid. Sess. 25, de Invocat. Roman. Catechism. Part III. Ch. 2, pp. 344, &c. edit. 1687.) The Saints in the Romish Church are almost numberless: the lives of the Saints, published by the Bollandists, fill only fifty-four massive folio volumes, which do not come lower than the month of October; and the little hagiography of Mr. Alban Butler extends through twelve closely printed octavo volumes.

Among these reputed Saints, some few there are whose praise is, and ever will be, deservedly in the Christian Church: such, for instance, as were distinguished instruments of diffusing the knowledge of the gospel, while here on earth; and these, we doubt not, are now shining with a glory like the sun, in the kingdom of our Father in heaven. But others there are, enrolled in the catalogue of Saints, who never had any existence, but that which is assigned to them in the legends of the Romish Church, which legends have no foundation whatever in authentic history, civil or ecclesiastical: and these accounts are so romantic, that one would imagine that no sensible Romanist could ever believe there were such persons. Witness, the gigantic Saint Christopher, who is fabled to have carried Christ across an arm of the sea; Saint Amphibolius, who was only the cloke of Alban, the reputed proto-martyr of England; Saint Longinus, the Roman soldier who thrust the spear into Christ's body upon the cross; Saint George; Saint Ursula, with her eleven thousand virgin martyrs, of whom no traces are to be found in history. Others again, who are exalted to the character of Saints by the Romish Church, (one would think) could be thus promoted for nothing but their folly. The great Saint Francis, according to their own accounts, may justly be suspected of wanting common sense as well as common decency. His throwing away his clothes and running about stark naked, were such a freak, that he ought either to have been publicly chastised for his impudence, or confined for lunacy: and his preaching to birds and beasts, and talking to them as fellow-creatures, was an act equally stupid and ridiculous.

Others, however, of these reputed Saints were NOTORIOUS SINNERS, who have left only such remembrances of them as must raise the just indignation of every pious and virtuous mind. Such (to specify a few only of the most notorious) were Saint GREGORY VII., better known by the name of Hildebrand, whose whole life was one unceasing and unprincipled effort to realize the universal dominion of the world, which he claimed as an appendage to the see of Rome, and against whose canonization every government in communion with

VOL. VIII. NO. XII.

5 B

Rome reclaimed, so that he is worshipped only in Ireland and in Italy; Saint THOMAS A BECKET, a rebel to his king and a traitor to his country, who, having solemnly sworn to obey the laws of England, deliberately violated his oath and his allegiance, for which saintly virtues he was canonized, and became in a manner the idol of this part of the world for nearly two hundred years, so that in one year (A. D. 1420) not fewer than fifty thousand foreigners came in pilgrimage to visit the tomb of this PERJURED MAN, (Rapin's Hist. of Engl. Vol. III. p. 48.) "for whose martyrdom," the Roman Missal for the use of the Laity, (p. 85, London Edit. 1815,) says, "the angels rejoice!"-and Saint PIUS V., who, besides burning more heretics than almost any of his ungodly predecessors, not only issued a bull of excommunication against Queen Elizabeth, depriving her of her crown, but also excited her Romanist subjects to rebellion, and supplied some of them with money to carry on their traitorous designs!

The invocation of Saints and of the Virgin Mary is contrary to the practice of antiquity: it was first introduced by Petrus Gnapheus, a presbyter of Bithynia, afterwards Bishop of Antioch, about A. D. 470, and it was first received into the public litanies about 150 years after. In the sixth century only were temples first erected in honour of the Saints; and it was not until the latter end of the ninth century that the Roman pontiffs impiously arrogated to themselves the power of raising dead sinful mortals to the dignity of saints, and constituted them objects of worship, whose prayers and merits procure heavenly blessings, and by whose hands they are conveyed!

"The invocation of Saints is contrary to reason; for how can they hear prayers? God alone is the object of all the worship and veneration, which are due to an invisible being." It is equally contrary to Scripture for the dead KNOW NOT any thing. Their love and their envy and their hatred is perished: neither have they any more a portion for ever, in any thing that is done under the sun. (Eccl. ix. 5, 6.)

2. Image-worship is absolutely and universally prohibited in Scripture. Thou shalt NOT make unto thee any graven image or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them. (Exod. xx. 4, 5. See also Deut. iv. 15, 16. Acts xvii. 29. 1 John v. 21.) But the Romish Church declares that "it is LAWFUL to represent God and the Holy Trinity by images; and that the images and relics of Christ and the saints ARE TO BE DULY HONOURED, VENERATED, or WORSHIPPED; and that in this veneration and worship, those are venerated which are represented by them." (Conc. Trid. Sess. 25, de Invocat. Catech. Part III. Ch. 2.) Pius IVth's Creed runs thus: "I most firmly assert, that the images of Christ and of the Mother of God, who was always a Virgin, are to be had and retained; and that due HONOUR AND WORSHIP is to be given to them." The worship thus enjoined consists in kissing images, uncovering the head to them, offering incense, bowing, and making prayers to them. The adoration of the host is another instance of idolatrous worship.

3. Manner of Worship.- Under the Jewish dispensation, Jerusalem was the place, and the temple was the house, in which were the

symbols of the Divine Presence, and thither all Jews were bound to resort three times in the year, to offer their prayers and sacrifices to God: but the Gospel teaches us that there is, now, no such symbolical presence of the Almighty, in one place more than in another: for the Divine Presence is no longer confined to any one place, but he equally accepts the worship which is devoutly offered to him throughout the world. The hour cometh, said Jesus Christ to the woman of Samaria, when ye shall neither in this place, NOR yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. . . . . The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. (John iv. 21, 23.) On another occasion, he said, WHERE two or three are gathered together in my name, THERE am I in the midst of them. (Matt. xviii. 20.) I will, therefore, says St. Paul, (1 Tim. ii. 8,) that men pray EVERY WHERE, without wrath and doubting of God's acceptance of our supplications. But in the Church of Rome it is reputed a great act of devotion to go in pilgrimages, to visit the shrines of particular saints and relics. Cardinal Bellarmine expressly affirms that "there are some places more holy than others, and that it is a work of piety to go on pilgrimages to them." (De Cult. Sacr. lib. iii. c. 8.) Among the inducements held out in the Bull for the Jubilee in 1825, to persuade persons to go to Rome, was that of beholding the cradle of Christ! (p. 38 of the Paris edition.) 'Can any man of reflection,' it has been truly asked, 'admit that the Pope himself believes that the cradle of Christ is to be seen at Rome? and if not, what is the Pope?'

4. The SCRIPTURES teach us that divine service ought to be performed in a language that is intelligible to the people. He that speaketh in an unknown tongue, speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for NO MAN understandeth him. If I come unto you, says St. Paul, speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation or by knowledge, or by prophesying or by doctrine? For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned, say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he UNDERSTAND ETH NOT what thou sayest?... In the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue. (1 Cor. xiv. 3, 6, 14, 16, 19.) But in the ROMISH CHURCH, mass is celebrated, and many other acts of religious worship are performed in Latin, a language which is unintelligible to the people, and with numberless ceremonies (some of heathen origin), for which there is no foundation whatever in Scripture; and the Council of Trent, acting, as it repeatedly affirmed, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, denounces an anathema against any one who presumes to say any thing to the contrary. (See particularly Con. Trid. Sess. 22, de Sacrificio Missæ, cap. 8.)

V. The COMPLETE ATONEMENT OF CHRIST, CONTRADICTED BY THE CHURCH OF ROME.

The SCRIPTURE teaches that, by his one oblation of himself upon the Cross, Jesus Christ has made a full, perfect, and sufficient atonement; and that, since he hath expiated our sins by his blood, there is no need of any other sacrifice. If any man sin, we have an advocate with the