to form an army, and would become the worst and most dangerous of mobs. Nor would it be safe, in our time, to tolerate in any regiment religious meetings, at which a corporal versed in Scripture should lead the devotions of his lessgifted colonel, and admonish a backsliding major. But such was the intelligence, the gravity, and the self-command of the warriors whom Cromwell had trained, that in their camp a political organization and a religious organization could exist without destroying military organization. The same men who, off duty, were noted as demagogues and field preachers, were distinguished by steadiness, by the spirit of order, and by prompt obedience on watch, on drill, and on the field of battle.

"In war this strange force was irresistible. The stubborn courage characteristic of the English people was, by the system of Cromwell, at once regulated and stimulated. Other leaders have maintained order as strict; other leaders have inspired their followers with a zeal as ardent; but in his camp alone the most rigid discipline was found in company with the fiercest enthusiasm. From the time when the army was remodelled to the time when it was disbanded, it never found, either in the British Islands or on the Continent, an enemy who could stand its onset. In England, Scotland, Ireland, Flanders, the Puritan warriors, often surrounded by difficulties, sometimes contending against threefold odds, not only never failed to conquer, but never failed to destroy and break in pieces whatever force was opposed to them. They at length came to regard the day of battle as a day of certain triumph.

"But that which chiefly distinguished the army of Cromwell from other armies, was the austere morality and the fear of God which pervaded all ranks. It is acknowledged by the most zealous Royalists, that in that singular camp no oath was heard, no drunkenness or gambling was seen, and that during the long dominion of the soldiery, the property of the peaceable citizen and the honour of woman were held sacred. If outrages were committed, they were outrages of a very different kind from those of which a victorious army is generally guilty. No servant-girl complained of the rough gallantry of the red-coats; not an ounce of plate was taken from shops of the goldsmiths; but a Pelagian sermon, or a window on which the Virgin and child were

VOL. VIII.

painted, produced in the Puritan ranks an excitement which it required the utmost exertions of the officers to quell. One of Cromwell's chief difficulties was to restrain his pikemen and dragoons from invading by main force the pulpit of ministers whose discourses, to use the language of that time, were not savoury; and too many of our cathedrals still bear the marks of the hatred with which those stern spirits regarded every vestige of Popery."

PORTRAIT OF THOMAS PAINE, BY A MASTER.

THERE is a great deal of stern, manly truth told by the secular press. Whether it be through deference to a general public sentiment favourable to morality and religion, or from an increasing conviction of the vital importance of biblical principles, it is certain that the popular press is assuming a higher tone in the discussion of great moral questions, and is lending its influence to the diffusion of Christian knowledge, as never before. It thus contributes powerfully to the removal of danger from scepticism among the cultivated, reading classes. Infidelity is in a good degree made to slink into the narrow channels of its own creation, instead of flaunting its blasphemies in the face of the community, as in its palmy days. Even journals of loosest morality, and farthest from the support of evangelical views, deal with infidelity and its champions with just and unsparing severity.

The recent anniversary of the birthday of Paine having been seized upon as the occasion for rallying the discomfited adherents of the drunken blasphemer, one of the most widelycirculated of the secular journals thus draws the portrait of the "unhonoured and unwept " champion of unbelief:

"Paine sat down in the French prison to which his brother infidels had most causelessly consigned him, to overthrow the religion of the Bible, without a copy of that book at handwithout having ever carefully or dispassionately considered its claims to credence, or the evidences which sustain them- assuming that such and such were the doctrines of Christ, because somebody said so; and that Christ was an impostor, because those doctrines did not square with his notions of reason and divinity. The tone of his work is presumptuous, scoffing, ribald, dogmatic, insolent. It is as much as to say, I, Tom Paine, know every thing, and whoever dissents from my doctrines must be a knave or fool-there is no third choice.' Such a work could have but these effects-to encourage lewd, reprobate boys in pursuing the course dictated to them by their fierce, unregulated passions, on which the religion of the Bible was the only practical check; and to impel devout, reverent, exemplary Christians to a deeper dislike of infidelity in all its forms, judging its intrinsic character by this God-defying manifestation."

C

CONVERSATION OF MR. NETTLETON.

THE late Mr. Nettleton, widely known as an instrument in many revivals of religion, owed part of his success to his private labours, and to the remarkable talent which he possessed of interesting people by his conversation. His remarks were generally founded on some passage of Scripture. I was once coming up the Delaware in a steam-boat with Mr. Nettleton ; he sat in the cabin, and talked about the pa. rable of the sower, having his New Testament in his hand, At first the remarks were addressed to a few of us, belonging to his particular company, and were uttered in a low voice. One after another was added to the group; even persons who had been pacing up and down the saloon listened, stopped, and finally remained. As the circle widened, his voice became louder, and his language assumed the character of a regular discourse. At length quite a little congregation surrounded him.

To this day, after fifteen years, I cannot explain the process by which these persons were gained and held, or what was the secret attraction which, in so many other instances, made him the centre of interested companies. It was often so where he was least known. His ap

pearance was nowise striking. It was not eloquence, in the common acceptation of the word; for his voice was unmusical, and his manner ungraceful; while he consulted no grace of language, and used a good deal of repetition. Yet such is the fact, and thousands probably are living who could give testimony of the same kind.

Frequently he would send for the family Bible, when he entered a house, and, after causing a number of the nearest neighbours to be called in, would discourse for half an hour on some striking passage. Many learned from his practice to set a higher value on the Word of God, and to employ it more in exhortations, pastoral visits, and conversations by the way. These lines may meet the eye of a clergyman in Virginia, in whose house I once heard Mr. Nettleton expound two entire chapters of Jeremiah. In all cases this was done without either affectation or formality; you only wondered that you had never done so yourself, and that you had never seen any one do so before. It has often occurred to me since, that we should avoid the sameness and the barrenness which often prevails in exhortations at prayer meetings, if we were to found them always on the Word of God.

PRESENT STATE OF POPERY No. III. of the "Manchester Tracts for the Times" has just come to hand, having for a Thesis, "That without placing implicit confidence in the exaggerated statements of popish pretensions, there is too much reason to fear that Popery is, to say the least, not declining." Declining! who says it is? When the Papal scribes boast it, Protestants do not deny it. However, the publication is more advanced, and more ad rem, than might be supposed from the proposition to be discussed. The writer quotes a Protestant advocate in 1836, as saying in Exeter Hall, that when he (the speaker) was a boy, there were four Roman Catholic places of worship in this country, and twenty-four years ago they did not much exceed fifty; whereas at that time (1836) they amounted to 580. And again, he cites the Rev. Mr. Tweedie, of the Free Church, as saying, "No one can compare the present state of Popery in this kingdom with what it was a century ago, without alarm and dismay. Then there were only 30 popish chapels in Great Britain; now there are 600 public chapels, besides many private ones, 40 convents, 10 colleges, and nearly 800 priests." The Catholic Directory for 1848, gives 620 chapels, 22 stations, 11 colleges, 38 convents, 11 monasteries, and

THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.

Its

806 missionary priests. The writer afterwards extends his view, severely animadverting on the conduct of our Government in "petting it both at home and abroad." The writer considers that matters are becoming worse and worse in Ireland, from the fact that numbers of the very worst of the continental Catholics, whose intrigues and profligacy have rendered them intolerable at home, repair to Ireland as to a city of refuge. His view of the foreign operations of Popery is alike luminous and distressing. exertions are great in the East. In China alone they have no fewer than ten bishops, with four coadjutors, and 1,411 priests,an enumeration, however, which conveys but a faint idea of multitudes employed in the East, unless we collect the host of fathers, monks, nuns, and other accompaniments of missionary agency. next turns to the Western Hemisphere, which seems to present a still more appalling picture of the progress of Antichrist. The Church of Rome is making gigantic efforts to complete her ascendency in all parts of America. The continent of Mexico is hers without dispute, while the constant influx of German and Irish Catholics into the United States, most of whom swarm about the cities, and all of whom become

He

votaries, is fast changing the constituency of those centres of influence; and the day is probably not very distant, when the elections in America will be decided, as the unseen influence of Rome shall direct.

The classes above-named are also, in many places, the only persons of the community regularly armed, and travel as a voluntary corps, officered, and abide only by themselves; so that Rome will soon not only have the civil magistrate, but the sword entirely at her disposal, in many of the most important parts of the United States. Lower Canada, long the stronghold of Popery in the North, is pouring her well-trained missionaries into the Hudson's Bay territories. She has revenues already secured to her greater than those of some sovereign states of Europe-revenues which have been bestowed and augmented by Protestant industry and enterprise. The valley of the Mississippi has become particularly the sphere of Jesuit operations. That terrible body of ecclesiastics have partially relaxed their efforts there, to fortify themselves in other places. A year ago it was calculated, that in states where forty years back Popery had scarcely an existence, the number of popish churches and preaching-stations, of bishops and priests, together with Jesuits, had increased at least to three times their number ten years back. There are no fewer than 24 theological seminaries for training young men for the priesthood, there are 12 Roman Catholic colleges, and from one to two thousand inmates of religious houses. There are now in Oregon about 30 missionaries, under the direction of 10 fathers of the Jesuits, and others are soon to join them; 1,500 Romanists have gone from Lower Canada to co-operate with them. Colleges, academies, literary institutions, and churches, are rising in rapid succession. Fourteen churches have already been furnished and dedicated according to the principles and forms of the popish ritual; 6,000 Indians have been baptized as members of the popish church, and have sworn allegiance to the Pope; 15,000 Indians have passed the proper course of training for the same rite. Immense sums of money have been sent from France during the past year, both to the archbishop of Oregon, and the Jesuits in the Rocky Mountains. diocese subject to the Pope of Rome has been created in Texas, and ten thousand dollars were sent there by the same French society.

A

This mighty system of spiritual agency, while instinct with life, is thoroughly organized. At this moment, every prelate and priest in Europe takes an oath of direct allegiance to the Pope; no prelate can be consecrated, or be regarded as the lawful possessor of a mitre, without the authority of the Pope. Hence the formidable nature of its influence, since the popish bishops are spread through every country of the earth, and their number is upwards of 400, besides 112 archbishops, with vicars apostolic and bishops; the whole constituting an immense system, every part held in constant connection with Rome, the whole of the minor priesthood looking up for rank, reputation, and advancement to Rome; and this vast column of active force flanked by a multitude of fierce Jesuit missionaries, nuns, and nondescript allies, all operating against the progress of Protestantism, and sustained by the implicit obedience and inveterate ignorance of nearly 120 millions of mankind!

The pamphlet before us has rendered essential service, and well deserves circulation. One of the lessons which it reads to Protestants is, the necessity of union, and the extraordinary evils of disorganization among the friends of truth. The writer has endeavoured to convince his readers that Popery is essentially immutable, that though the external ornaments of the edifice might be ruined, and the whole service, cleansed, beautified, and adapted to the taste of the body, yet not a single pillar or stone can be taken out of it, without bringing down the whole structure. Between true Popery and true Protestantism the war is to the death; the one must fall before the other; reconciliation is impossible. He considers that the present ascendancy of Popery is but the beginning of the end. At present, Rome speaks with a friend's voice, and uses the gentle language of persuasion; but let the time come when she shall have the power to compel, and then shall men be driven by violence and torture towards that path which she proclaims to be the only way of salvation! The fires of Smithfield still but smoulder, and want only a breath to kindle them. The experience of the past, even without prophetic intimation, points to the result; and when the evil day shall come, as come it must, will it then be our duty to stand still to be stricken down like paled deer, without resistance? Will the enemy regard us as neutrals,

who may be suffered to go anywhere unmolested? Soon shall we have to lift up our eyes and hands to heaven, protesting against the prevailing errors, and invoking their destruction; but shall we be permitted to do so with the impunity of neutrals? Will not the language of its dominators be that of the Saxon monarch, when he saw the British priests upon the hill-top upon their knees, imploring victory `to`their cause ?—“ If these men pray against us, they also fight against us. Slay them all?"

The projectors of these "Tracts for the Times" deserve well of the British public. Their policy is, to test everything by Scripture, and to apply their prophecies aright, and not to weaken the strength of prophetic declarations, from a conviction that they must refrain from refining upon Scripture, and softening it down to adapt it to ideal intellectualism, if they would make it fall, as it was intended to do, with its due weight upon the human mind.

THE PAPAL SUPREMACY EXAMINED. Being the Substance of a Discourse delivered in Market-street Chapel, St. Andrew's, on Sabbath Evening, the 8th of December, 1850.

"And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."MATT. xvi. 18, 19.

In the preceding context we have an account of the noble confession which Peter made of his faith in the Lord Jesus as the promised Messiah. When the question was put to the twelve, Whom say ye that I am? Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." We have also the commendation of Peter's faith by his Divine Master. "Blessed art thou Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven." Then follows the memorable declaration contained in the text. And we now proceed to examine the import of the promises made to him by our Saviour, and the peculiar privileges and prerogatives thereby conveyed.

It may perhaps be known to most of my hearers that this passage is regarded by the Church of Rome as the main pillar of the Papacy, and as affording a scriptural warrant for the supremacy which the Bishop of Rome claims over all other pastors and churches, and which he has been enabled to maintain, during many ages, with singular arrogance and confidence, over a great part of the so-called Christian world. We, indeed, as Protestants, profess to consider all such presumptuous claims as an impious invasion of the Divine prerogative of the Lord Jesus Christ, the sole Head of

the Church, and as a flagrant usurpation of the privileges of the Christian people; and we therefore refuse to acknowledge any such right, on the part of a foreign prelate, to lord it over our consciences; but yet it may be interesting to know by what arguments the adherents of the Papacy justify these pretensions, in appealing to this Scripture, and how they contrive to find in our Lord's words to Peter the key stone of the lofty arch of their hierarchical system. And I trust it will not be considered as an unprofitable waste of time, if we devote a single hour to the investigation of this subject; especially when we reflect how many millions of souls are held in spiritual bondage by these very arguments, and what strenuous efforts are now making, both in our own country and on the Continent, to strengthen and consolidate the vast fabric of Papal tyranny and superstition; and how many individuals, who seemed to have been emancipated from this yoke of bondage, are from time to time drawn into the snare. We shall thus see cause, also, to bless God for the benefits which the glorious Reformation has conferred upon us, and be induced to "stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free." We shall, at the same time, be the more able to " give a reason of the hope that is in us," against the insinuations of those who would stigmatize us as heretics and schismatics; and will learn to feel for those who are still groaning under the yoke of Antichrist, and to pray with more earnestness for the speedy arrival of that time, when "the Lord shall consume that Man of Sin with the spirit of his mouth, and destroy him with the brightness of his coming."

In treating this subject we shall consider,

1. The view which the Popish writers give of the passage. By these words they suppose that our Lord constituted Peter the foundation of the Christian Church-the supreme visible head of the spiritual community-his representative and vicegerent on earth-the centre of unity to the whole Catholic church-the supreme judge in all matters of controversy, and the infallible interpreter of the revealed will of God; and with this view they maintain that the Saviour invested him with the supremacy over the other apostles, and subjected them, as well as the church at large, to his authority and decisions. In proof of these extravagant claims, they maintain that by "this rock," on which Christ says he would build his church, Peter himself is meant, the name Peter signifying a Rock; and that he was thus constituted the basis on which the church rests; and that the church so founded on Peter is indestructible, as is intimated in the words "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it," for as courts of justice were anciently held at the city gates, the phrase denotes the power and subtlety of Satan and his emissaries. They further assert that our Saviour gave to Peter supreme power and authority over the church as its visible head, and that this is implied in his receiving the keys of the kingdom of heaven;" and finally, they undertake to prove, that he was constituted supreme judge in all matters of controversy, and empowered infallible to interpret the will of God; yea, that he was invested with power to retain or absolve from sins, and consequently to open and shut the kingdom of heaven unto men, or to admit and exclude therefrom;

and that this is implied in the words, "Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."*

The Romish writers further assert, that Peter being invested with these extraordinary powers, in the course of his ministry repaired to Rome, and laid the foundations of the church there, where he presided as bishop, and finally sealed his testimony with his blood; and that the whole of the privileges and prerogatives thus conferred upon him were transmitted to the Bishops of Rome, as his successors in that church; and by virtue of this right, they are to be acknowledged as the supreme rulers of the church, universal pastors and vicars of Jesus Christ. Consequently, it is the duty of all Christian pastors and churches to honour and submit to them as such; and those who refuse to do so cut themselves off from the body of Christ, are ipso facto excluded from the communion of the faithful, are to be regarded as heretical and schismatical, and virtually endanger the salvation of their souls. In this predicament all Protestants are supposed to be placed, and being out of the pale of the church, are abandoned to the uncovenanted mercies of God -for out of their church they pretend "there is no salvation."

2. We shall now endeavour to expose the fallacy of this reasoning.—These are no doubt hign pretensions, and the inferences drawn from them are of a very grave and solemn character: but if we examine them with a little attention we shall see sufficient reason to reject them, as in the highest degree arrogant and unfounded. For in the first place, it cannot be conclusively shown that our Lord refers to Peter personally as "the rock" on which the Church is built. Long before the rise of the Papacy, some of the most enlightened Fathers of the church, "including (as Mr. Horne observes) some of the early Bishops of Rome, particularly Gregory the Great," and also the famous Augustine Bishop of Hippo, maintained that it was the faith which Peter professed, and not the apostle personally, that our Lord meant by "this rock." Peter had just declared his belief in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the living God, and on this profession had been pronounced blessed; and this confession of faith is indeed the true rock or basis on which the church rests, including the divinity of the Saviour, as the Son of the living God, his humanity as the Son of Man, and his Messiahship, as the anointed Prophet, Priest, and King of the Church.

Take away

any of these truths, and you undermine the foundations of the church: it no longer rests upon a rock, but is built on the shifting sand: or separate the offices of Christ from each other, and the same result will follow. It is the belief and open confession of these truths, jointly and harmoniously, that constitutes what Luther said of justification by faith, "the article of a standing or a falling church." No doubt, the Apostle Peter possessed naturally great boldness and firmness of character, which entitled him to the

* Thus, the Rhemish translators, in their note on the passage, speaking of the Church as a building, observe, "In which building he (Peter) should be, next to Christ himself, the chief foundation-stone, in quality of chief pastor, ruler, and governor; and should have, accordingly, all fulness of ecclesiastical power, signified by the keys of the kingdom of heaven."

honourable appellation given to him by our Lord, when he surnamed him Cephas, which signifies in Syriac, what Peter does in Greek, a rock or stone, and to which allusion is obviously made by a sort of paranomasia ("Thou art Petros, and upon this Petra.") And it must be admitted that this apostle occupied a prominent place, or, if you will, a degree of precedency among his brethren, and is first mentioned in all the catalogues of their names, (Comp. chap. x. 2) He was generally the chief speaker; our Lord directed much of his attention to him, and he was eminently distinguished for his attachment and devotedness to his Master. He also occupied a conspicuous place in the subsequent history of the Church, and is mentioned as one of those "who seemed to be pillars," Gal. ii. 9; and was, in every point of view, an illustrious servant of Christ. But as to his being personally the rock on which the church is built, we cannot admit this claim, without contradicting other express testimonies of the word of God. Christ himself is therein exhibited as the sole foundation of the church. See Isa. xxviii. 26; and it is observable that Peter himself appeals to this very passage in proof of this doctrine, in the first Epistle, chap. ii. 4, 6: "Wherefore also it is contained in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner-stone, elect, precious and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded." And that no other can share in this honour is evident from what Paul says, 1 Cor. iii. 11, "For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." What a poor basis would Peter himself have been on which to rest the church! In this same chapter we find our Lord addressing him as an adversary, and reproving him for his aversion to the mention of his sufferings, ver. 22, 23, "Get thee behind me Satan," &c. On another occasion, when we find him rashly requesting that Jesus would suffer him to come to him on the water, on seeing the wind boisterous, overcome with fear, he cried out, as he felt himself sinking, "Lord save me," chap. xiv. 29, 30; at another time, we find him, under the influence of false shame, repeatedly and solemnly denying all personal knowledge of that Saviour whom he now so nobly confessed, chap xxvi. 69, 75. And long after the effusion of the Holy Spirit, he was openly rebuked by Paul for his dissimulation in the matter of eating with the Gentile converts, Gal. chap. ii. 11. Peter himself claimed no such supremacy over his brethren, as has been demanded for him. Though he proposed the election of a new apostle in room of Judas, he left the choice of the individual to the church, or the 120 disciples, Acts i. 26; though he spoke at the assembly held at Jerusalem respecting the circumcision of the Gentiles, he does not seem to have presided at the meeting; that honour appears to have been conferred on James, who speaks of him, with true primitive simplicity, by his original name, "Simon," and proposed the law which was afterwards agreed to, Acts XV. 13, 21. And in addressing the elders or pastors of the churches in his first Epistle, he simply designates himself as a "fellow-elder," or co-presbyter, chap v. 1., his chief distinction was his being specially sent to the Jews, as Paul was to the Gentiles.

And as Peter himself claimed no such prerogative, so neither was it yielded to him by his brethren or by the churches: thus he was com