페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

daily." Mr. B. remarks, “your is not a genitive, but the objective."-Reply. This is a complete mistake. How can a grammar be the owner of a grammar!!! The plain sense is," Boys, study your grammar." Lowth says in the note, page 38, "The possessive case of the pronominal adjectives (are) our, your, &c." Mr. Fleming, page 22, and Mr. Hazlitt, page 41, allow your to be a possessive pronoun.

Page 210. The quantity of syllables," &c. To talk to a man who certainly has known the gamut of music for more than forty years, of a prosaic syllable, as containing thirty-two demisemiquavers, has some appearance of indecency. The sense affected by Mr. B. is impossible; whereas the plain meaning is obvious, that to one exclamation, we may allow the time of a breve; to another, the time of semibreve; but in the velocity of words, we may allow other syllables only the time or quantity of a demi-semiquaver. The idea is not novel. Pliny names a philosopher who boasted that his oration could be set to music. Page 225. Mr. B. has erroneously copied was for were. The relative is who, both in the Spectator, volume first; and in the key to the exercises. Here he fights his own shadow.

Page 243. The terminative pronouns moi, toi, lui, are all correct, and shew the advantage which the French have over us in closing some phrases by them. Macpherson has oftentimes erroneously used thee for thou. But why does Mr. B. name them, when he conveys no instruction to the reader?

Page 243. "The warriors who proud Athens possessed, the stately city of Erechtheus, whom blue-eyed Pallas reared."-Macpherson's Iliad. Here Mr. B. remarks, "If it be meant that the warriors possessed proud Athens, this is correct; but if the idea be that Athens possessed the warriors, it is palpably false; for the relative ought to be whom."--Reply. Why does Mr. B. here use, it, and this, and it for the same antecedent? Can an example be found so confused in any author? Can such a reviewer be qualified to say that Mr. S.'s style is "inelegant, unclassical, and ungrammatical." But why does he begin this critique with if? Had he read either Homer, or Macpherson's version, he would have found that the Grecian warriors boasted of Athens as their metropolis or

66

66

mother city; and that Erechtheus, whom blue-eyed Pallas reared, was the first king of that celebrated seat of letters. Macpherson has indulged lawfully in the liberty of transposition, viz. The warrior who possessed, &c." Page 245." Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh," "Mallet, another friend of Pope." Dr. Johnson. "We conceive," says Mr. B. there is no genitive at all in any of them."-Reply. Having already refuted Mr. B. on this point, page 36, by Peterhoff, and Hoffmann, and by the testimony of seven grammarians, the point of interest to the reader, here is, that we should never use a double genitive but when there is a double idea of descent, procession, or property, to be expressed. This point is illustrated in the grammar at large. Here all our grammarians seem to be in a labyrinth. The ideas in the examples respecting Potiphar and Mallet, are both single. Therefore Johnson could not say friend of Pope's.' But the ideas are double in the next example. 66 The trees were planted in a corner of my father's field." Here are first property -"father's field;" secondly, procession, "a corner of the field."

A

This simple solution will correct a long standing error in the beginning of Lowth's grammar. "A soldier of the king's ;" that is, "A soldier of the king's soldiers."-This oversight has led the author of etymology and syntax into the same mistake. He says, "A kinsman of the traitor's waited on him yesterday;" that is, he adds, A kinsman of the traitor's kinsmen." A single example, speaking with deference to learned opinion, will remove the cloud. "A son of Tommy Negligent's broke my window:" that is, according to both the above examples, "A son of Tommy Negligent's

66

sons." Now, there is no occasion to tell me twice that he was a soldier of the king; or that the boy was a son of Tommy Negligent. Hence the Saxon genitive 's, is redundant in all the three examples, the ideas being simple.

I close by apologizing to the readers of the Imperial Magazine, for obtruding this defence; and beg leave to add, that they would soon hear from me again by a grammar entirely recomposed, did not the aspect of the times, and the loss sustained by the last edition, make me cautious.

Jan. 3, 1820. JOSEPH SUTCLIFFE.

HISTORICAL FACTS RESPECTING
POPERY.

[Continued from col. 52.]

But not to amuse the reader with a long detail of the divers religious orders which swarm in other countries, I shall confine myself only to give some short account of the original rise and progress of those that were established in this country. And these were the Benedictines, the Cluniacs, the Carthusians, the Cistercians, the regular Canons of St. Austin, the Præmonstratenses, the Gilbertines, the Mathurins, or Trinitarians, the Franciscans, the Dominicans, the Carmelites, and the Hermites of St. Austin.

The Benedictines.-The first of these that prevailed here was the order of the Benedictines, whose rule was introduced into this nation by *Augustin the monk, in the year of our Lord, 596. The founder of this order was St. Bennet, who in his own lifetime erected twelve monasteries. The rules that this great saint left behind him (although the papists affirm that they were dictated to him by the Holy Ghost) are stuffed with the most trifling and supertitious ceremonies; and his whole seventy-three chapters contain but four wholesome precepts, two of which only, that relate to eating and drinking, his followers observe, neglecting the other two, which are the fundamentals of their order, enjoining humility and poverty; for in his seventh chapter, St. Bennet assigns twelve degrees of humility for his monks to practise; which, how well they comply with, you may find by the humble titles of the abbots of Mount Cassin, the head monastery of his order, of which himself was first abbot.

The titles of the abbots of Mount Cassin, Patriarch of the Sacred Religion, Abbot of the Sacred Monastery of Mount Cassin, Duke and Prince of all Abbots and Religious, Vice Chancellor of the kingdom of both the Sicilies, of Jerusalem, and Hungaria, Count and Governor of Campania, and Terra de Lavoro, and of the Maritime Province, Vice Emperor, and Prince of Peace." In his fifty-ninth chapter, the same saint enjoins poverty to all his disciples; and,

Dugdale and J. Bab, his English votaries. + Prosper Stellar, de Mon. Cassin. fol. 404.

in obedience to this rule, the abovementioned monastery of Mount Cassin so renounced the world, as to be possessed but of "four bishoprics, two dukedoms, twenty counties, thirty-six ciies, two hundred castles, three hundred territories, four hundred and forty villages, three hundred and six farms, twenty-three sea-ports, thirtythree islands, two hundred mills, and one thousand six hundred and sixtytwo churches." This was their holy poverty; and thus you may see how religiously these ten rules have been observed, and how spiritually the followers of St. Bennet retreated from the world in Italy; who were soon imitated, in these kind of holy self-denials, by their pious brethren here in England, as you may learn from the vast number of rich abbeys which the Benedictines were possessed of. These were the humble priests from whom our gallant king Henry II. received the discipline of eighty lashes, for having, like an undutiful son of the church, dared to contend in power with their patron Thomas à Becket, whose stirrup he had been obliged twice to hold, whilst that meek prelate mounted.

As these monks began to be notorious to the world for their obscenities and luxury; in the year of our Lord 912, Oden Abbot of Cluny, took upon him to correct their abuses, and gave rise to the Cluniacs; who were the same year translated by Alphreda, Queen of England; for, who more proper to promote superstition, than a zealous ignorant woman! However, to shew how thoroughly these men reformed upon St. Bennet's followers, especially in point of humility, they were not settled one whole century, before the Abbot of Cluny || contested the title of Abbot of Abbots, with those of Mount Cassin.

The next order was that of the Carthusians, first established in the year 1086, in the desert of Chartreuse in Grenoble, by one Bruno, who was thereunto moved by hearing a dead man cry out three times, "That he was condemned by the just judgment of God;" which was a very plain precept for building monasteries! This man professed to follow the rule of St. Bennet, adding thereunto many great

+ Petr. Ab. Clun. lib. 6. ep. 7. || Chron. Cassin. lib. 4. cap. 62,

austerities by way of reformation; | Holy Virgin was unwilling, perhaps, amongst others he ordained,* that they ought to be satisfied with a very little space of ground about their cells, after which let the whole world be offered unto them, they ought not to desire a foot more. This, I suppose, they have construed to signify a foot more than the whole world. For their cells, even in St. Bernard's time, became stately palaces, and their little spaces of ground, stretched themselves into great tracts of land. They first settled themselves in England in the year 1180, and in a very short time had gained as much wealth by their vows of poverty, as any other order.

that her friends should be like him in dress, though they resembled him in every thing else. These locusts swarmed first in England, according to John Bab, about the year 1132, and continued here in the innocent exercise of their sanctity; a remarkable instance of which was their poisoning of good king John,|| at Swineshead, in Lincolnshire, an abbey of the holy Cistercian order.

The Cistercians, so called from Citeaux, where they first assembled, and soon after admitted St. Bernard for their head, (from whence they are styled Bernardines,) were another reformation upon the Benedictines.+

There was another sort of religious order in the church of Rome, who were called Canons. These were to live in common, and to have but one table, one purse, and one dormitory. But as many of them began to abate of the strictness of their first rules, a new sect sprang up, that pretended to reform upon the rest, and these were called Regular, whereas the other by way of reproach, were styled Secular. They all pretended to have received three rules from Saint Augustine, two of which § Erasmus and ¶ Hospinian, prove to be forgeries, and affirm that the third was not written for his clergy, but for the use of some pious women, who lived in common under the conduct of his sister. When Canons began, is notcertain; but the first Regulars we read of, are those whom Pope Alexander the Second sent from Lucca to St. John Lateran.** The Regular Canons were so irregular, and guilty of such abominable crimes, that even Pope Boniface the Eighth was forced to drive them away, and, for the peace of the church, to place Secular Canons in their room. ners, in the year 636, first introduced these Augustinians into England, who strictly followed the example of their brethren of St. John Lateran.

St. Bernard himself founded one hundred and sixty monasteries; who at first would have no possessions, but lived by alms, and the labour of their own hands; which being too apostolic a life for monks, they soon grew as weary of poverty and industry as their neighbours ; and in a little time rivalled those, on whom they pretended to reform, in wealth, luxury, wantonness, and such like monkish virtues. At their first institution, they wore black habits, till the Virgin Mary, out of her great love to these fat friars, came down from heaven on purpose to reform their dress, as being the most essential part of their order. She appeared herself to their second abbot, bringing a white cowl in her hand, which she put upon his head, and at the same instant, the cowls of all the monks then singing in the choir, were miraculously turned to the same co- The ++ Præmonstratenses, who follour. Thus did the Blessed Virgin lowed the same rule with the former, change the habits of the Cistercians were founded by St. Norbert, about the from black to white, as they had be-year 1120, at a place which the Blessed fore altered their lives, from a sad melancholy retirement, to a merry jovial society; black being no more fit for a jolly priest, than white is for a mournful penitent. Besides, the old monk Satan being represented as black, the

*Rule 14. Vid. Hospin. De Omg. Mon. lib. 5. cap. 7.

† Dugdale Monasticon. Vol. I. p. 695, 699, 700.

Ben. Gononus Chron. B. Virginis, p. 154. Vide Fox's Acts and Monuments, and Tarrel's History of England.

Beri

Virgin pointed out to him, and which therefore was Pre-monstre, or foreshewn. These monks, to get a greater esteem in the world, after the death of their founder, published that he had received his rule, curiously bound in

Erasmi Jud. de Sanch. Aug. Mon. et Regulis. Hosp. de Orig. Mon. lib. 6. ad Calcom. 3 reg. **Molinet. Reg. Can. St. Jen. Paris, in his History of Regul.

++ Dugdale Monasticon. Vol. II. page 579, 580, 582, 585.

gold, from the hands of St. Austin him- | self, who appeared to him one night, and said thus; "Here is the rule I have written, and if thy brethren observe it, they, like my children, need to fear nothing at all in the day of judgment." Indeed these pious fathers, for their great security in the last day, have firmly adhered to one of his precepts, that commands them to love one another. What confirms this suspicion, is, their declaration in the year 1273; in which, after having acknowledged that women are worse than the most venomous aspicks and dragons, they resolved never to have any more to do with them.

|

amongst which is that remarkable one
of riding upon an ass, the only thing
in which I can find these godly fathers
imitate Christ. They were instituted
in the year 1207, and settled in this
island in the year 1257.|| The pro-
fessed original design of their esta-
blishment, was for the enlargement of
captives; and whatsoever substance
fell into their hands, was to be divid-
ed into three equal parts, one of
which was to be remitted to Christian
slaves for their redemption, whilst the
other two were to remain in the pos-
session of these charitable bankers,
as a satisfaction for their great pains
in making such a return, which an un-
merciful Jew would have done more
faithfully, and for a tenth part of the
reward. But two parts in three being
too scanty a recompense for the great
toil of a lazy friar, these Mathurines,
(having no other god but money,) to
approve themselves true Trinitarians
to that deity, often cheated the poor
captive of his third part, rather than
they would divide the substance.
(To be continued.)

The next order is that of St. Gilbert, a little crooked schoolmaster, born in Lincolnshire, who, by reason of his deformity, despairing to bring the women to answer his lewd inclinations in a secular manner, was resolved to make religion subservient to his purposes; and to this end he founded thirteen monasteries, containing both sexes together, to the number of seven hundred men, and fifteen hundred women. This order of the Gilbertines, was established at Sempring- On Acquittal, Pardon, &c. ham, in the year 1148, and was thence MR. EDITOR, called the Sempringham order; but SIR,-Should you deem the following the disgusting characteristics exhi- remarks worthy insertion in your Imbit such an outrage on common de- perial Magazine, I may occasionally cency, that delicacy compels us to sup-give you my sentiments on some of the press further particulars. higher doctrines of the Gospel, wherein my brethren appear to me, in some measure, to have missed the mark in their application of them. I am, &c.

The Mathurines, so called from their founder +John Matha, were likewise styled Trinitarians, because they lay under an obligation of dedicating all their churches to the Holy Trinity; they professed the rules of St. Austin, and added to them several others;

* John Bab, in his Acts of English Votaries, Part II. cap. 109. John Cupgrave, in Vita Gilberti Confessoris.

† Prosper. Stell. lib. de Reg. Ord. Rel. 438.

It seems highly probable, that Dr. Robertson, in his history of the emperor Charles the Fifth, alludes to this order, in the following paragraphs, which describe what may be denominated

The Ceremony of the Ass. "In several churches of France, in early ages they celebrated a festival in commemoration of the Virgin Mary's flight into Egypt. It was called the Feast of the Ass. A young girl richly dressed, with a child in her arms, was set upon an ass superbly caparisoned. The ass was led to the altar in solemn procession.. High Mass was said in great pomp. The ass No. 13.-VOL. II.

[blocks in formation]

was taught to kneel at proper places; a hymn, no less childish than impious, was sung in his praise; and when the ceremony was ended, the priest, instead of the usual words with which he dismissed the people, brayed three times like an ass; and the people, instead of their usual response, We bless the Lord, brayed three times in the same manner.

"This ridiculous ceremony was not, like the festival of fools, and some other pageants of those ages, a mere farcical entertainment exhibited in a church, and mingled, as was then the custom, with an imitation of some religious rites. It was an act of devotion performed by the ministers of religion, and by the authority of the Church. However, as this practice did not prevail universally in the Catholic Church its absurdity contributed at last to abolish it." || Dugdale Monast, Vol. II. page 834.

K

66

THE subject which at present engages my attention, is the observation of Alexander, on Justification, inserted in your Magazine for October, 1819, col. 729, wherein he reprehends a minister, who had used that term as importing "An Acquittal from guilt," whilst he himself considers it as precisely synonymous with Pardon.

"It has oftentimes excited my surprise, that, among so well-informed a body as the Methodists, who are not satisfied with receiving any doctrine on trust, but who bring it to the law and the testimony, to prove whether it be sterling, the majority of them should consider the term Justification as exactly equivalent with Pardon.

[ocr errors]

regenerates his nature, giving him a new heart, and renewing a right spirit within him. Thus, by looking continually to God, through Jesus Christ, and faithfully using the grace already received, more and more will be given him, while he goes on from strength to strength, and from one degree of grace to another, till he is enabled to love the Lord with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his strength, and with all his mind, and his neighbour as himself. Being thus sanctified wholly, spirit, and soul, and body, he will, if true to his trust, be preserved blameless unto the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ: "for faithful is he that calleth, who also will do it.'

"The order, and succession of salvation, therefore, seems to be, first, Justification, or the acceptance of the sinner through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Secondly, Pardon of sin. Thirdly, Regeneration, or the communication of a new principle to the soul, enabling it to love and obey the Lord. And, fourthly, a degree of sanctification as the result; which fourfold act, though momentary, seems to have this order and succession. And this initiatory sanctification will be fully and perfectly accomplished in those who perseveringly and faithfully exercise the grace already communicated to them; when the very principle, and being of sin, will be so destroyed in them, that they will be filled with all the fulness of God.'

The word Justification is well known to be a law-term. But could any thing be more absurd, than for one arraigned at the bar, pleading guilty, imploring mercy, and obtaining pardon, to affirm that he was justified? Or, if an individual in society, charged with a crime, should confess it, entreat for Pardon, and obtain it; could he, consistently either with truth or justice, assert that he was justified in the sight of his accuser? In either case he was pardoned, but not justified. Nor does the term Justification, in scripture, appear to me ever to warrant its application as synonymous with Pardon. I consider Justification, in its primary acceptation, to be an emanant act of the Most High, stamping his approbation on something he sees just and right in those who are the objects of it, and giving them a consciousness of that approbation, by his Spirit bearing witness with their spirits that they are the children of God, thus enabling them to cry, Abba, 3. " Regeneration, imports someFather. This therefore can have nothing wrought in us. possible immediate relation to sin, or to the pardon thereof, as sin is abhorrent to the very nature of God; while that which occasions this demonstration of his favour, must be something he highly approves of.

66

The term Justification, therefore, in its primary sense, I apprehend, relates solely to the simple act of the sinner's belief in, acceptance of, and recumbency on, the merits of Jesus Christ, as his only Saviour. And God having justified or approved of this exercise of faith in the believer, as the first token of his favour, pardons all his past iniquities; and, to enable him to render a future obedience, he

1. " Justification, implies some relative change in our situation with God.

2. "Pardon, signifies something forgiven us.

4." Sanctification, is something done by us, through the agency of the Spirit of God."

Again,

1. Justification, is our adoption into the family of God, through faith in Christ Jesus.

2. "Pardon, is cancelling our obnoxiousness to punishment. 3. "Regeneration, is implanting a new principle in us.

66

4. Sanctification, is imparting an altogether new nature to us.

66

But, in a secondary sense, Justification extends to every act of obedience, which the children of God render to his commands. And, finally,

their

« 이전계속 »