Prayers for the dead were founded on the notion that torments might be mitigated, or glories increased by them; but by no means that they could exchange torment for glory.

Invocation of the saints is another consequence of departure from the same Scripture principle. That departed believers pray for those on earth may be the case: and could we have any assurance that they could hear our invocations, there would be certainly no impropriety in asking their prayers. But such assurance has been withholden.

The Christian religion is intended for all men; the vulgar as well as the learned and we need not be told the danger of any doctrine to the latter which allows of any address to an invisible being except to the Supreme God. The Romish liturgy is filled with invocations of the saints; and the vulgar Papists, to say nothing of the more educated, scarcely ever think of offering their prayers to Him who has commanded them to do so. The blasphemous character of the prayers to the Virgin is too notorious to be here insisted on. The Irish Gentleman himself has a Cisalpine shame of it; but something must be said, and here that something is

There appears no doubt that this worship, within the due bounds to which all rational Catholics would confine it, formed a part of the devotions of Christians, from the very first ages of the Church. In the Second Century we find Irenæus, the great light of that age, attributing such power to the intercession of the Virgin with God, as to suppose her the advocate, in heaven, for the fallen mother of mankind, Eve. The Gospel of the Infancy of Jesus,—a work referred to the same period, and which, though manifestly an imposture,* may not the less be depended upon as, at least, an echo of the tone prevalent among the orthodox of its times,—in relating the circumstances which occurred previously to our Lord's nativity, gives to the Virgin simply the name of "Mary," but immediately after that event, styles her the "Divine Mary," and adds that Churches were, in those times, dedicated to her honour.-Travels, Vol. I. pp. 65, 66.

We simply subjoin the comment of Philalethes.

The mention of the invocation of saints reminds our Traveller that, in his rapid journey through the first four centuries, he has overlooked one most conspicuous object of Romish worship. We know how large a share the Virgin possesses of the devotions, public and private, of Roman Catholics. If she is not raised above the Father and the Son, she is, in this respect, placed at least on an equality with them; yet our Traveller reaches his eighth chapter before he even notices her. He now, however, informs us, that the worship of the Virgin, within the due bounds to which all rational Catholics would confine it, formed a part of the devotions of Christians from the very first ages of the Church. His proofs of this assertion are, it is true, not only scanty, but of a suspicious character: two references to apocryphal Gospels-those of the Infancy of Jesus and of the Birth of Mary-and a passage from Irenæus. Of the

* With this Gospel another apocryphal work, of the same high antiquity, is usually joined, to wit, the Gospel of the Birth of Mary, in which it is declared that the object of her espousals with Joseph was, not that he might make her his wife, but that he might be the guardian of her perpetual Virginity; the High Priest having said to him, "Thou art the person chosen to take the Virgin of the Lord, to keep her for him."

former two authorities, I shall leave him in undisturbed possession. The Romish Church may appeal to them: the Catholic Church has rejected them. But on the passage of Irenæus I shall offer a remark. In the second century, says our Traveller, we find Irenæus, the great light of that age, attributing such power to the intercession of the Virgin with God, as to suppose her the advocate in heaven for the fallen mother of mankind, Eve. The following is the passage, as the Latin translator has rendered it, on which our Traveller grounds his assertion :-"et sicut illa (Eva) seducta est, ut effugeret Deum, sic hæc suasa est obedire Deo, uti Virginis Evæ Virgo Maria fieret advocata." In my last Letter, I observed, that the heretics, against whom Irenæus was writing, denied that the Creator of this world, who gave the law, was the supreme God who gave the gospel. In order to confute this absurd notion, Irenæus refers to the solicitude which the writers of the New Testament have displayed to keep its close connexion with the Old constantly in view. Why did St. Luke trace back our Saviour's genealogy to Adam, if the Demiurge, who placed Adam in Paradise, was not the same God who sent Christ on earth? Why did St. Paul call Adam the type of Christ? In order to render the connexion perfect, it was appointed that, as the disobedience of one virgin † (according to Irenæus, Eve was a virgin when she ate the forbidden fruit) was the cause of death, so the obedience of another virgin (when Mary replied to the angel, "Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word,") should be the cause of salvation to the human race. As Eve was seduced by the speech of the (evil) angel, so that she fled from the face of God after she had disobeyed His word; so Mary received the glad tidings through the speech of the angel, that she should bear God (in her womb), being obedient to his word. We now see in what sense Irenæus called Mary the advocate of Eve, viz. because the Saviour of mankind was born of her. Our Traveller, in order to make us suppose that Irenæus used the word advocate in the sense of intercessor, has dexterously inserted two words (in heaven), of which there is no trace in the Latin.-Reply, pp. 50–58.

So much for the testimony of antiquity to the worship of the Virgin. The Irish Traveller, by way of helping his cause, adds the following from Epiphanius :

"Her body (he says) was, I own, holy, but she was no God. She continued a Virgin, but she is not proposed for our adoration; she herself adoring him who, having descended from heaven and the bosom of his Father, was born of her flesh. Though, therefore, she was a chosen vessel, and endowed with eminent sanctity, still she is a woman, partaking of our common nature, but deserving of the highest honours shown to the Saints of God.-She stands before them all on account of the heavenly mystery accomplished in her. But we adore no saint: and as this worship is not given to angels, much less can it be allowed to the daughter of Ann:-Let Mary, therefore, be honoured; but the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost alone be adored: let no one adore Mary.”—Adv. Collyridianos Hær. 59.-Travels, Vol. I. pp. 69, 70.

66

If these be "the bounds to which all rational Catholics would confine" the worship of the Virgin, verily a rational Catholic" differs little from a Protestant. But we fear, on this rule, the Irish Gentleman must pronounce the great body of his sect (and his countrymen most

* L. v. c. 19.

ተ Et quemadmodum astrictum est morti genus humanum per Virginem, salvatur per Virginem."

66

Quemadmodum enim illa (Eva) pec angelicum sermonem seducta est, ut effugeret Deum, prævaricata verbum ejus ita et hæc (Maria) per angelicum sermonem evangelizata est, ut portaret Deum, obediens ejus verbo."

especially) irrational. Nay, Popes and Councils would receive no better name. The present Pope, in his last encyclical letter, talks very differently about the Virgin Mary from Epiphanius and "the rational Catholics." Indeed, what a " Catholic" can have to do with rationality, on the Irish Gentleman's scheme, we cannot understand, Reason," he says, "which, even in this world's affairs, proves but a sorry conductress, is, in all heavenly things, a rash and ruinous guide."† And, to do him justice, we must admit that he has entrusted himself to such perilous guidance.

We are here compelled by stress of matter to defer our further remarks to another opportunity.

ART. II.-History of the Reformed Religion in France. By the Rev. EDWARD SMEDLEY, M. A. late Fellow of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge. Vol. II. London: J. G. and F. Rivington. 1834. Pp. 366.

-AMONG the atrocities which have swelled the blood-stained annals of religious persecutions, there is none, perhaps, which exceeds in heartless treachery and in malignant cruelty the massacre of the Huguenots in Paris, on the memorable feast of St. Bartholomew, in the year 1572. The former volume of Mr. Smedley's work, of which we gave a hasty analysis in the CHRISTIAN REMEMBRANCER for January, 1833 (Vol. XV. p.13), concluded with an account of the fatal repose into which Coligny and his friends had been betrayed on the eve of that eventful festival. Day had not yet broken, when the clang of the tocsin was heard, and the wounded Admiral was one of the first victims to the murderous assault. Of the various records of the brutal outrage and the sanguinary proceedings which followed, the most candid and faithful is that with which the present volume commences; and we shall not hesitate to pass a somewhat cursory glance over the succeeding history, in order to draw more largely from the detail of occurrences which occupy the opening chapter. Indeed, the subject is so important itself, and so interesting is the view which the writer has taken of it, that our space will be amply filled by the extracts which we are about to make.

"Let us raise our eyes to the most blessed Virgin Mary, who ALONE destroys beresies, who is OUR GREATEST HOPE, yea, THE ENTIRE GRound of our HOPE." Encyclical Letter of Gregory XVI. dated August 15, 1832.-We may observe here, by the way, how much the Apostolic See has increased in enlightenment since the days of its founder. St. Peter told the Church that her faith and hope should be in God (1 Pet. i. 21) his infallible successor, however, has discovered a higher "ground of hope," which has completely abolished the antiquated maxim of the Apostle, and become the greatest, the entire ground.

† Vol. II. p. 338...

A German, named Besme, who had been from his childhood a dependant upon the Duke of Guise, unmoved by the venerable mien and dauntless bearing of Coligny, drove his sword through his body, and, inflicting a deep gash across his face, left him in the hands of his associates, who despatched him with repeated blows. His only complaint was a regret that he should perish by the arm of a menial. To satisfy the impatient anxiety of the Duke and D'Angouleme, the bleeding corpse was thrust through a window into the court-yard, where it was spurned by the foot of his malignant foe. Meantime, the general havoc had begun; whispers were spread of a conspiracy among the reformed; the Louvre itself was one of the earliest scenes of carnage; and many of the attendants upon the King of Navarre and the Prince of Condé were put to death one by one, in cold blood, under the very eye of the King. In the tumult, which gradually extended to every part of the city, several persons of distinction fell an early sacrifice; and in one instance only, that of La Rochefoucault, did the infatuated King appear to relent.

In the gay and brilliant society of La Rochefoucault, the King professed to find extraordinary attraction; and he granted him, although a Huguenot, unreserved access to his privacy. It was near midnight, on the eve of the Massacre, that this seeming favourite prepared to retire from the Palace, after many hours spent in careless hilarity. More than once did the King urge his stay, that they might trifle, as he said, through the remainder of the night; or to obviate all difficulty, the Count, if he so pleased, might be lodged, even in the Royal Chamber. But La Rochefoucault pleaded weariness and want of sleep; and, in spite of all opposition, took leave of his perfidious friend and Sovereign in sportive words, which implied the freedom and familiarity of their intercourse. Even when he was afterwards roused from sleep by the morning tumult at his door, no misgiving crossed his mind: he imagined that the King had followed him to inflict one of those practical jokes which suited the boisterous taste both of the times and of the individual; and hastily throwing on his clothes, he assured the masked band, which he did not scruple to admit, and among whom he supposed Charles to be included, that he was not taken at advantage, that they could not now feel privileged to flog him, for he was already up and dressed. The reply was a thrust of the sword by one of the disguised company, which prostrated the unsuspicious victim at the feet of his murderers.-Pp. 12, 13.

About 2,000 Huguenots are believed to have perished on the first day of the massacre; and surely nothing could have afforded a more disgusting spectacle than the evening promenade of the King and his court, including Catherine and the ladies of her suite, to view the naked bodies of the stripped and mangled victims. Charles at first declared that the slaughter had been projected by the Guises without his knowledge; but he was subsequently flattered into a public announcement that it had been perpetrated by his command, in consequence of a discovered plot, which was to end in the usurpation of the crown by the Admiral Coligny. Even the historians, Davila and Montluc, who were closely attached to the interest of the court, give but little credit to

this pretended conspiracy, for the suppression of which the court, in the mockery of devotion, attended a solemn thanksgiving. Orders were also issued, enjoining the Huguenots to abstain from all public and private assemblies, in failure whereof, the provincial governors were instructed to "fall upon them and cut them in pieces, as enemies of the crown." From the day on which the messenger arrived the streets of Lyons ran with blood; and the most barbarous enormities were committed in many other parts of France. At Orleans 1000, at Rouen 500, Huguenots were put to the sword. During two months the carnage raged, in which space of time the number of victims fell little short of 30,000, whereof one third may be allotted to Paris.

When intelligence of the Massacre was first announced at Rome, the Vatican gave loose to unbounded joy. The Pope and Cardinals proceeded at once, from the Conclave in which the King's despatches had been read, to offer thanks, before the Altar, for the great blessing which Heaven had vouchsafed to the Romish See and to all Christendom. Salvoes of artillery thundered at nightfall from the ramparts of St. Angelo; the streets were illuminated; and no victory ever achieved by the arms of the Pontificate elicited more tokens of festivity. The Pope also, as if resolved that an indestructible evidence of the perversion of moral feeling which Fanaticism necessarily generates should be transmitted to posterity, gave orders for the execution of a commemorative medal. He had already been anticipated in Paris; and the effigies of Gregory XIII. and of Charles IX. may still be seen, in Numismatic Cabinets, connected with triumphant legends and symbolical devices, illustrative of the Massacre.

The Cardinal of Lorraine presented the messenger with a thousand pieces of gold; and unable to restrain the extravagance of his delight, exclaimed that he believed the King's heart to have been filled by a sudden inspiration from God, when he gave orders for the slaughter of the Heretics. Two days afterwards, he celebrated a solemn service in the Church of St. Louis, with extraordinary magnificence; on which occasion, the Pope, the whole Ecclesiastical Body, and many resident Ambassadors assisted. An elaborate Inscription was then affixed to the portals of the Church, congratulating God, the Pope, the College of Cardinals, and the Senate and People of Rome, on the stupendous results and the almost incredible effects of the advice, the aid, and the prayers which had been offered during a period of twelve years. Pp. 34-37.4

"

On the first day of the massacre the young King of Navarre and the Prince of Condé were arrested, and threats were employed to force from them a recantation of the reformed religion. The former was easily tempted into compliance; but even the threat of the Bastile and of death failed to shake the constancy of Condé. At length, however, he was rather cheated than forced into compliance; and the appearance of the youthful Princes at mass, backed by the letters which they had been prevailed upon to address to the Pope, imploring his forgiveness, removed all doubt as to their change.

The last ferocious act of Charles, which grew immediately out of the St. Bartholomew, was a mock trial, instituted against the deceased Admiral and his adherents in the pretended conspiracy. The sentence passed against Coligny, as a traitor, involved confiscation of all his property, perpetual infamy, and the suppression of his name. His body, if it could be found, (and if