II. We will now adduce a few specimens of the immoral conduct of infallible pontiffs, and of the ethical teaching of certain accredited Romish moralists; which will prove that the vaunted holiness of the Church of Rome is utter immorality.

First, let us hear the testimony of Cardinal Baronius to the character of the popes in the ninth and tenth centuries, when fraud, bribery, and the influence of strumpets, were passports to the pontifical throne.

"What then was the face of the holy Roman Church? How exceedingly fine was it, when the most powerful and most sordid STRUMPETS ruled at Rome [cum Romæ dominarentur potentissimæ æque ac sordidissime MERETRICES], by whose will sees were changed, bishops were presented, andwhat is more horrid to hear and unutterable-false pontiffs, their lovers, were intruded into the chair of Peter, who are written in the catalogue of Roman pontiffs only to mark the times. For who can say that those, who were illegally intruded by harlots of this. description, were lawful Roman pontiffs?" [What then becomes of the pretended apostolical succession from St. Peter?] "There was no mention whatever made of the clergy electing or afterwards approving: all the canons were closed in silence: the decrees of the pontiffs were quashed: the ancient traditions [were] proscribed, and the ancient customs in electing a pope, and the sacred cere monies and pristine usages, were wholly extinct. Thus mad lust [libido.........insaniens], relying upon the secular power and stimulated with rage for dominion, claimed every thing for itself. Then, as it seems, Christ was evidently in a deep sleep; when, these winds blowing so strongly, the ship itself was covered with the waves" (Baronii Annales, anno 912).

In the eleventh century Genebrard, Archbishop of Arles, says that "for one hundred and fifty years fifty popes-viz., from John VIII. to Leo" [IX.]........." altogether departed from the virtue of their predecessors, being apostatic rather than apostolical"-apostatici potius quam apostolici " (Chrographia, ann. 904).

At a later period Cardinal Bellarmine made the following overwhelming declaration :-" Some years before the heresies of Luther and Calvin, according to the testimony of contemporary authors, there was neither justice in the ecclesiastical tribunals, nor discipline in the morals of the clergy, nor knowledge of sacred things, nor respect for divine things. In short, there was no longer any religion" (Concio xxviii. Op. tom. 6).

Finally, Pope Adrian VI. expressed himself in the following terms in his instructions to the Nuncio Chieregato, whom he sent to the diet of Nuremberg:-"We know that, for a long time, many abominations have existed near the holy see; abuses of spiritual things; excess in the exercise of authority; everything has been turned to evil. From the head, the corruption has spread to the members, from the pope to the prelates. We have all gone astray: there is not one of us that hath done well-no, not one" (Rainaldus, tom. xi., p. 363, cited in Ranke's "History of the Popes of Rome," vol. i., p. 94).

From these involuntary testimonies it is evident that in the Romish Church the tares had choked the good seed. We know that the Reformation exercised the happiest influence on the papacy. Paul IV., Pius V., and Sixtus V., were distinguished, not only for their own exemplary moral conduct; but also for the morality which they endeavoured to produce and to diffuse around them. But this very amelioration proves how much there was that needed reformation in the Romish Church.

We now come to the proofs adduced by M. Archinard from accredited moralists of the Romish Church; which show that her pretended sanctity is absolute immorality.

A few years after the Reformation, a Spanish soldier (Ignatius Loyola) founded an order which took the name of the Company of Jesus. It was formally authorised in 1540 by a bull of Pope Paul III., and some of its well-schooled members have published the following principles of morality with the sanction of their superiors, to whom they swore absolute obedience.*

1. In doubtful cases we may do a thing which we believe to be permitted by a probable opinion or authority, although

66

* How absolute that blind obedience is, to which every Jesuit is obliged, our readers will easily judge from the thirteenth of the "Spiritual Exercises," published by saint Ignatius Loyola:-"Lastly, that we may be altogether of the same mind, and in conformity with the catholic church herself, if she shall have defined any thing to be BLACK, which to our eyes appears to be WHITE, we ought in like manner to pronounce it to be BLACK.". Denique, ut ipsi ecclesiæ catholicæ omnino unanimes con. formesque simus, si quid, quod nostris oculis apparet ALBUM, NIGRUM illa esse definierit, debermus itidem quod NIGRUM sit pronuntiarce.' (Exercitia Spiritualia B. P. Ignatii Loyola. Roma in Collegio Rom. ejusdem Societatis. M.D.CVI. p. 136, Svo.) Similar to this is the assertion of Cardinal Bellarmine, that." if the pope should err in commanding vices and forbidding virtues, the church would be bound to believe that VICES are GOOD [and] VIRTUES EVIL, unless she wished to sin against conscience.”"Si autem papa erraret præcipiendo vitia, vel prohibendo virtutes, teneretur ecclesia credere VITIA esse BONA, VIRTUTES MALAs, nisi vellet contra conscientiam peccare.”. De Romano Pontifice, Lib. iv. cap. 5.

the opposite is more safe; but the opinion of a grave author is sufficient. Emmanuel Sa, Aphorismi Confessariorum, voce Dubium. In general we always act prudently when we act relying on an intrinsic or extrinsic probability, however slight it may be, provided we do not exceed the bounds of probability. Escobar, Theol. Mor. tom. 1. lib. ii, sect. 2; Filiutius, Tr. XXI. c. iv. n. 128. Sanchez, Op. Mor. L. i. c. ix. no. 6.

2. We dare not condemn him for mortal sin who should produce an act of love to God only once in his whole life. Suarez; Escobar.

*

4. It seems to be so clear that fornication of itself involves. no malice, and is an evil only because it is prohibited, that the contrary appears altogether dissonant to reason.-Decree of Pope Innocent XI. against second proposition of morality, 1679.

6. He who takes an oath only exteriorly, without the intention of taking it, is not bound thereby, except in case of scandal, since he has not sworn, but only disported himself.-. Busembaum, L. III. Tract. II. cap. ii. Dul. iv. no. 8.

7. To call God to witness a petty lie is not so great an irreverence that he should be willing or able to damn a man.-Censure de la Faculté de Théologie de Louvaine. Mars. 30 et 26 Avril, 1653.

*

10. Regularly, we may kill a thief, in order to preserve a golden crown. Molina, Tom. IV. Tract. iii. Disp. 16. D. 6; Escobar, Tr. I. Ex. vii. n. 44, Sec. Pascal's "Provincial Letters," No. 7.

We may defend with a murderous defence not only what we actually possess, but also those things to which we have an inchoate (or incipient) right, and which we expect to possess. Censure de la sacrée Faculté de théologia de Lou-) vaine, Mars 30 et Avril 26, 1653, art. 13.

*

*

12. It is permitted to wish for the death of a father with an absolute desire-not as an evil to the father, but as a› good to the person wishing [such death]-viz., the rich inheritance which will come to him.-See Pascal's "Provincial Letters," No. 7.

14. A Sovereign who is deposed by the Pope is no longer a king or a legitimate prince. If, after such deposition, he persists in refusing to obey the Pope, he becomes a tyrant

in title, and may be killed by the first comer. Suarez, Defensio Fidei Catholicæ et Apostolicæ, Lib. vi. c. 4, No. 13.

Perhaps it may be said that these atrocious maxims (which are but a few out of many) are only those of some individuals and not the act of the whole order of Jesuits; and that even, if they were the act of the whole order, the Romish Church would not be answerable for them, inasmuch as they have been condemned by a great number of bishops, and by Popes Alexander VII. (1665), and Innocent XI. (1679), and the entire order was subsequently suppressed by Clement XIV. But this, M. Archinard remarks, would be to forget that, in the system of absolute authority which the Church of Rome pretends to realise, the superior is responsible for the faults of his inferior; and if it be alleged that, since the revival of the order, the spirit of the present Jesuits is no longer that of their predecessors, this would be to forget that Ricci, the General of the Order, when solicited to make some changes in its organisation replied, "Let them be as they are; or, let them not be;"* and also that Pius VII. re-established the Jesuits without any restriction, and without any allusion to preceding condemnations; and further, that propositions altogether corresponding with those above given are found in quite modern works which have never received any pontifical censure. M. Archinard proceeds to extract from J. P. Moullet's "Compendium Theologiæ Moralis" (published at Fribourg in 1834, which is extracted from various authors, and especially from saint Alphonso Ligouri), various maxims respecting probabilism, intention in making or breaking oaths, suicide, theft, smuggling, and impurity of various kinds, for which we have not room. Some of them, indeed, are too gross to be printed in English. Our readers, however, who may be desirous of going to the fountain head of the immoral teaching of the Romish Church, will find numerous specimens in Mr. Blakeney's extracts from the writings of saint Alphonso Liguori, reviewed in the last number of our journal, and which have received the highest sanction of that Church.

M. Archinard's work, of which we have thus presented an outline to our readers, is not likely to fall into the hands of many; but those who can procure his volumes, and will give them an attentive perusal, will acquire an ample store of authentic information, which fully developes the genius and system of the modern Church of Rome.

"Sint ut sunt, aut non sint." Sismondi, Hist. des Français, tom, 29, p. 368.

A Biblical and Theological Dictionary; Illustrative of the Old and New Testament. By the Rev. JOHN FARRAR, Classical Tutor at the Theolgoical Institution, Richmond. Second Edition. Mason City Road. 1852.

THIS is a small and moderately priced work, intended for Sunday and Day-schools, and for the younger members of Christian families, and is. admirably adapted to its purposes. It contains a brief account of all the persons, places, and things which are mentioned in Scripture; with such account of the manners, dress, and habits of life of the Jews and other oriental nations as is necessary to understand the text. It also describes the principal countries and their several products, being accompanied with maps and good wood-cuts of the plants and animals; and it gives an outline of the general history of each country, city, or people, referred to under their several heads. It treats also on the writers of the several books of Scripture, on the doctrines they meant to maintain, and on the heresies they severally had to combat. The tone of the work is evangelical without being sectarian.

The only thing we have to find fault with in the volume is the miserable woodcuts which profess to be representations of cities or celebrated places, and these are no more like the scenes than Monmouth is like Macedon in Fluellen's comparison. We earnestly recommend Mr. Farrar to cancel these in any future edition, for they are not only a disgrace to his work and give it a character of vulgarity which it does not deserve, but they convey false notions to the young persons for whom it is principally meant, and often stand in contradiction to the descriptions in the letter-press; and they might be advantageously supplied by a few more woodcuts of animals, plants, utensils, or dresses, all of which subjects are executed with sufficient accuracy.

In the historical articles, the common chronology, which is that of Archbishop Usher, has been adopted, not to perplex the youthful mind by questions such as these. But a chronological table of the principal events of Scripture is given at the end of the volume, in which the dates, according to Usher, are given in one column, and those according to Hales in a corresponding column. For our own parts we think that Usher's dates, which are deduced from the Scripture alone, are the true dates; and even if we agreed with Hales we should question the expediency of unsettling the minds of our children on such points; especially as Usher's chronology is incorporated into the authorised version, and carries with it this legal and ecclesiastical sanction,