Catechism," which have been circulated pretty extensively through the north of Ireland, were carefully studied by them; and what appeared their strongest points, were adopted in many cases verbatim.

Another writer, to whom they referred with much apparent satisfaction, was Leslie; but such of our readers as are acquainted with that author, will wonder by what process of quotation his strong, and even ultra arguments for the independence of the Church could be converted into admissions of her dependence. The process is indeed a simple one; and it is one with which Romish quoters of the Fathers are very familiar; but we are inclined to think few of our Protestant readers will be disposed to adopt it. It consists in extracting the opinions, which a writer adduces, as those of his opponents, in order that he may refute them; and representing them as the writer's own opinion, omitting all such words and phrases as would expose the artifice. For example, the following passage occurs in Leslie's "Case of the Regale." Mr. M'Auley has quoted it, with the omission of those parts which we have included between brackets; and our readers may judge for themselves how accurately the quotation exhibits the sense of the author::-

"The nation is poisoned with pestilent and blasphemous books, ridiculing our religion, our holy Scriptures, and our Christ; and must the bishops and shepherds of his flock be forced to go to counsel learned in the law, to know how the case of premunire stands, if they should presume to censure such books, without first obtaining the king's license for it? [Now, suppose (which I do not) that the act of submission in construction of law should be found to extend thus far; and suppose the king should not grant his license, or had not a mind to be asked, must then the Bishops let this infernal poison spread without any remedy, or else incur a premunire?] If such be the state of the Regale, it is enough to put any man in doubt of his Christianity."

At least, if such be the state of the Regale, it is enough to put Mr. M'A. in doubt of his Christianity.

"And he has not yet been christened, or has forgot it, who would have the least hesitation or scruple to damn the act [(I mean, if taken in this sense)] to the place from whence it came, [if there were ten thousand other acts of parliament pinned to the back of it,]" p. 78, 79.

Mr. M'Auley had previously quoted (p. 13.) a sentence from Leslie, as absolute, and terminating with a full stop, which in the original was followed by a comma, the particle "if,” and an hypothesis, which Leslie denies! Such is Romish quotation; and it cannot be too often impressed upon our readers, that they should take no quotation on the credit of a Romish author, however respectable he may appear. Deception in such matters he considers laudable, and he will practice it without the smallest scruple.

Let us proceed, however to the gravamen of the charge which was brought against the Established Church at Downpatrick, on the authority of Messrs. Towgood and Palmer, and on the alleged authority of Leslie.

The entire dependence of the Church of England on the state, is boldly urged by Mr. M'Auley. He says,

"She is a traditor-she has given up the rights and privileges of the Church of Christ, supposing she ever possessed them," p. 15.

And again

....

"This power (the power given by Christ to his Church) was betrayed by Bishop Bonner to Henry, and afterwards by the infamous Cranmer to Edward VI., from whom, though but a boy, Cranmer, having cast at his feet the commission he had received from Christ, took out a new one. On this subject, see Burnet's History of the Reformation, by which he shows that the Bishops held, during the king's pleasure, and acknowledges that they derive, their authority from him. Hence we have the second canon of the Church of England, that whoever shall impeach his or her regal supremacy in any part, be excommunicated.' This is confirmed by the Act of Elizabeth, and in the constitutions and canons, by virtue of our prerogative, royal and supreme au. thority, in causes ecclesiastical.' But it is useless to multiply proofs. . . . . I will refer to Dr. Leslie on the Regale," p. 78.

We shall permit Leslie to speak for himself; and when he shall have done, we shall be surprised if our readers do not wonder at the hardihood which could refer to him in proof of the foregoing assertions,

"The statutes 25 Hen. VIII. and 37 Hen. VIII, with the commission that Archbishop Cranmer took out for his Bishopric from Edward VI., which is inserted in Bishop Burnet's History of the Reformation, and the like done by the other Bishops, whereby they held their bishoprics during the pleasure of the king, and owned to derive all their power, even ecclesiastical, from the crownvelut a supremo capite et omnium infrą regnum nostrum magistratuum fonte et scaturigine, as from the fountain and original of it..... All this is to be understood only of the civil power and authority, which by the laws of the land were annexed to the sacred office-as the civil jurisdiction that is granted to the Bishops' Courts-to the Bishops themselves as Lords of Parliament, &c.—to the civil penalties which follow their excommunications, and their legal protection to their ordinations, and other acts of their office; and these are derived only and solely from the king. Nothing of this was granted to the Apostles, or the Bishops, their successors, by Christ. And as the state granted these, they may recal them, if there be sufficient reason for it.

"In that very commission which was given to Cranmer for his bishopric, there is an exception, per et ultra ea quae tibi ex sacris literis divinitus commissa esse dignoscuntur,' (i. e.) over and above these powers and authorities which the holy Scriptures do testify are given to thee of God.' These the king did not take upon him to grant; but only what was over and above these; that is, the protection and civil privileges granted by the state, which were annexed to justify and encourage these. And take notice, that that of which the king is here called the head and fountain is, omnium magistratuum, of all the magistracy within his dominions, as well ecclesiastical as temporal; for there is a civil magistracy annexed by the laws to the ecclesiastical jurisdiction; and of this only ought these expressions to be meant, because we see the other, the spiritual authority, which in holy Scripture is granted to the church, expressly excepted; and that

ecclesiastical authority which in the commission is said to flow from the king is, juris dicendi authoritas et quaecunque ad forum ecclesiasticum pertinent; that is, the episcopal jurisdiction, considered as a forum-a court established by the secular powers, and part of the laws of the land,

"In the said Ecclesiastical History, there is a declaration made of the function and divine institution of Bishops and Priests,' subscribed by the Lord Cromwell, then Vicegerent to Henry VIII., in ecclesiastical matters, by Archbishop Cranmer, with the Archbishop of York, eleven other Bishops, and canonists, declaring that the power of the keys, and other church functions, is formally distinct from the civil power, &c.

"There is also the judgment of eight Bishops concerning the king's supremacy, whereof Cranmer is the first, asserting that the commission which Christ gave to his church, had no respect to kings' or princes' power;'+ but that the church had it by the word of God, to which Christian princes acknowledge themselves subject.' They deny that the commission Christ gave to his church, did extend to civil power over kings and princes; and they own that the civil power was over Bishops and Priests, as well as other subjects, that is, on civil matters, which the Church of Rome did deny; but they assert that' Bishops and Priests have the charge of souls, are the messengers of Christ to teach the truth of his Gospel, and to loose and bind sin, &c. as Christ was the messenger of his Father:' which, sure, was independent of all kings and powers upon earth. "It ought also to be observed, that Bonner took out the same commission for his bishoprick from Henry VIII. as that before mentioned of Cranmer from Edward VI. which is verbatim inserted in the said history of the Reformation : and also that the convocation who made that submission to the clergy, (25 Hen. VIII.) were all Roman Catholics; for it was before the beginning of the Reformation, before the king's supremacy was enacted, which, when enacted afterwards, was grounded upon this submission of the Popish clergy, and the acknowledgment of both convocations before that time, (22 Hen. VIII.) who owned the king as supreme head of the church within his own dominions. This was the first time, and these Popish bishops and clergy were the first who bestowed that title upon the king, with which they have ever since upbraided the Reformation.

"It may be further said, that, as our law stands at present, the church is left wholly independent on the state as to her purely spiritual power and authority. Because our kings claim no other ecclesiastical authority than was granted by God to kings in Holy Scripture; and that we have seen before to have nothing in it but mere civil power, though it might be exercised over ecclesiastical persons (who are subject, as all others, as Christ himself was, to the civil powers in all things) and in ecclesiastical causes too, to punish with temporal pains, as well blasphemers, idolators and heretics, as thieves and robbers-as well the transgressors against the first, as the second table. Thus the godly kings in holy Scripture did thus they were empowered by God: and this, and no more is attributed to our kings, as it is fully expressed in our 37th Art. viz. "That only prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly princes in holy Scripture by God himself: that is, to rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal: and to re

* Burnet, Part 1, Addenda, No. v.

+ Collect. Record, No. x.

strain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil-doers," These are the words of the Article, and hence it may be urged that precedents drawn from any extraordinay acts of Moses, David, or Solomon, are hereby excluded; because it is said such prerogative, and such only, as was always given, and to all godly princes; and that is explained, viz. to restrain with the civil sword.” Therefore by this, all ecclesiastical power whatsoever, is utterly disowned and disclaimed; though the civil power, as said before, may be exercised upon ecclesiastical persons and in ecclesiastical cases. This was made in explanation of the oath of supremacy; and, therefore, does oblige us to understand those words in that oath, where the king is said to be "supreme governor as well in all spiritual or ecclesiastical things or causes, as temporal." This explanation was made necessarily; for as Bishop Burnet tells us, the bishops opposed the Queen's su premacy as set forth in that oath; and many others were offended at it. Therefore Queen Elizabeth laid aside the title of Head of the Church, and instead thereof the word Governour was put into the oath as it stands to this day. The king being now styled therein only "supreme governour," which is a more secular word than head, and as here explained, means only supreme civil gover

nors.

"This article mentions Queen Elizabeth's injunctions, which explain and limit the regal supremacy as it has done; and desire that none should take the oath in any other sense.

"Primate Usher gave the same explanation of it, in a speech at the Council table in Dublin, upon occasion of some magistrates there, who refused the said oath; and king James sent him a letter of thanks and approbation of his speech, both which are in print.

"None of our succeeding kings or Parliaments have given any other explanation of it; or required that it should be taken in any other sense; but all along refer to these.

"The Thirty-Nine Articles are incorporated into our laws, and require to be subscribed by Act of Parliament.

"And, therefore, if any think the former Acts of Parliament (25. and 37. Hen. VIII.) and the commissions for bishoprics taken out by Cranmer and Bonner, &c. cannot be reconciled by the means before mentioned, with that exposi tion in the 37th Article, and with several practises formerly or at this day; yet this they must grant, that not only former customs, but acts of Parliament are superseded and annulled by latter acts of Parliament; and, therefore, if those former acts cannot be so construed as to agree with the latter, the latter must take place, and so on all hands it is plain, that, as our laws stand at present, the church is left wholly independent on the state as to her purely, spiritual power and authority; quod erat demonstrandum. And if there is or had been any prac-. tice contrary to these laws, yet that annuls not the laws."-The case of the Regale, &c. p. 623.

(To be continued.)

447

Letters on the Climate, Inhabitants, Productions, &c. &c. of the Neilgherries, or Blue Mountains of Coimbatoor, South India. By James Hough, of Madras. London: Hatchard. 1829. pp. iv. 172.

Religion in India: a Voice directed to Christian Churches for Millions in the East. By the Rev. J. Laidler, and J. W. Massie, recently from India. London: Churchill. 1827. pp. x. 344.

India, always of importance, is daily encreasing in interest to the British Empire. Whether we consider it as subsidiary to our commercial greatness, by consuming our manufactures, or introducing them into the interior of the Asiatic continent; or regard it as a great and important field for Missionary labour and exertion, committed to the rule of a distant nation, in order that the employment of intellect, and the blessings of religion, might be communicated; in either point of view, as the scene for adventure, whether temporal or spiritual, India presents a most important subject for observation. That much of the wealth and power of our empire is owing to our oriental possessions, few will be found bold enough to deny; and now, while commercial rivalry bids fair to exclude us from much of Europe and America, Hindoostan has acquired additional importance, as a mart for our productions. That we have benefited Hindoostan and its inhabitants cannot be doubted; and, although the Mohammedan dreams over again his former power, and feels the emotion of hatred towards his conquerors, he cannot fail to recognise, in the altered character of the country and its inhabitants, the different results of different systems of government. From these we cannot have any reasonable apprehensions; but there are symptoms arising even in the objects of our care, and the subjects of our bounty, that are sufficient to excite the fears of nervous politicians. We allude to the singular change that has been produced in these few years on our Hindoo population-a change so obvious as to excite the attention and surprise of the most careless observers. Hindoostan must once have been a different country from what it is, and has been for centuries, as to the developement of intellect, and the employment of talent. The remains of science and literature that have attracted the attention of Europeans, and which had birth long antecedent to the Mogul conquest, prove, that inaction and ignorance are not the necessary portion of the Hindoo population, and remind us, even by their ruins, of what that population may again become. Depressed as they have been for centuries, enslaved by their Mohammedan conquerors, and more bitterly subjugated by the power of their Brahmins, the Hindoos have fallen from their intellectual state, and are now only remarkable for the qualities most opposed to energy and action. But a change has passed over them; a feeling has been implanted, rapidly extending itself through the population, male and female; intellectual habits are being acquired, and the energy that they always induce, will soon manifest itself. Already have we seen

;

"So you have come to convert the Hindoos!" said an official resident in Madras, to a Missionary: "Let them alone, Sir; and if I may judge by what I have seen, they will convert themselves!"