« 이전계속 »
dered the cardinal de Tournon, who was sent out."
It is not less important to state the too-often successful attempts of Jesuits, upon the lives of those sovereigns who were not propitious to their interests and designs.The reign of Queen Elizabeth displays a rapid succession of plots against her life, either designed or executed by Jesuits, and from which nothing but the peculiar protection of Providence could have delivered the Queen and the country. In 1585, the Parliament passed an act, forbidding all persons to harbour Jesuits.
"Elizabeth wrote with her own hand to Henry III. of France, after the conspiracy against her life, informing him, that the Jesuits had contrived it, who, says she, hold it meritorious to kill a sovereign whom the pope has deposed; and she then warns him against them; and he would have done well if he had observed her caution. In 1591, the Queen published a declaration against the society, in which, after describing at length the designs of Spain and Rome, she says, that she has the most undoubted information, that the Jesuits form the nests and lurking places of those who are in rebellion against her person and government; that their General had himself been to Spain, and armed its king against her; that Parsons, who taught among them, and was the General of the English seminary at Rome, had done the same, and that the Jesuits, as a society, had been the life and soul of the armies which had been raised against England." p. 22.
"Lucius enumerates five conspiracies of the Jesuits against James I. before he had reigned a year;" and the king, in his own proclamation, does the same. In the state trials sufficient proof is adduced to fix the atrocious "gunpowder plot," upon this Order.Indeed the doctrine of dethroning hostile monarchs was inculcated by the Jesuits at all periods of their existence--and was deemed so essential a part of the institution, as to be called "the original sin of
the society." In the Parliament of Brittany in 1717, it was stated, that "this doctrine had been invariably maintained by the Jesuits, and that nothing could induce them to change it."
Henry III. of France, was assassiin the eyes of the Jesuits, had been nated by Clement a Jesuit. His crime, he had only determined on with the adtheir expulsion from Bourdeaux, which vice of his parliament. The Jesuits not only provoked this act, but praised it highly both in their public assemblies and writings. When Henry IV. was Protestant), and who had previously had proclaimed, who was then a Heretic (or
a narrow escape from the Jesuits and the Inquisition, (see de Thou), the Jesuits excited the general rebellion against him, which has already been noticed; nor was Paris itself in a situation to acknowledge its greatest and best of kings for five years. The Jesuit Matthieu
induced the council of sixteen in this interval, to sign an absolute cession of the kingdom of France to Philip II. of Spain." p. 28.
the University of Paris, "In this pestilent school," says " the three. assassins who attempted the life of Henry IV.; viz. Barriere, Chastel, and Ravaillac, were trained, all of whom had been previously instructret, Guignard, and d'Aubigny."ed by the Jesuits, Varade, GueSuch is the brief summary which before our readers, of the crimes the author has enabled us to lay of the Jesuits, and of the principles in which they originated. Scanty as it is, it will enable us to make, vations upon the subject. in conclusion, a few general obser
The first observation that we would offer is this, that the sentence upon Jesuitism has been passed, not merely by individuals, either inimical or neutral to Popery-not even or by nations hesitating between Po by Protestant nations and writers, pery and Protestantism-but by the senates, and monarchs, and statesmen, and divines of all religions, and of almost every civilized country in the world. It is not too
much to say, that as there are few countries whose histories are not stained with the crimes of the Jesuits, so there are few upon whose archives are not to be found solemn protests against the society; protests not forced out by the mere violence of popular feelings, but springing from the bosoms of grave assemblies, from disinterested statesmen, from bishops, and legislators, who loved Popery, but feared the atrocities and ambition of these her too-long-accredited agents. Now surely even Papists themselves should listen to such counsellors-should not appeal from such a sentence-should remember that it is not only the living pope, who is infallible, that the infalli bility of Clement XIV. who condemned it, is just as unquestionable as that of his successor, and that he condemned it in the face of its most powerful advocates, and after a full and solemn hearing. What reason, we would ask, for its maintenance, can the present pope discern, which did not then exist? From what unsearched den of Jesuitism, has he been able to dig up some musty record of the unknown virtues of the Order? In what quarter of the globe has a witness started up-to shew grounds for the resuscitation of that extinct monster, whose obsequies all Europe had sung with such heartfelt satisfaction and harmony?
And this brings us to a second observation, viz. that no adequate cause has been shewn for the restoration of the society. The only cause assigned by the court of Rome, has been already stated in this paper, viz. that the pope feel ing himself called to pilot "the bark of St. Peter, at a time when it is tossed by continual storms, would deem himself guilty of a crime if he should refuse to employ the vigor ous and experienced rowers, who have now once more volunteered their services." "Vigorous and experienced rowers," they certain ly are, if the bark of St. Peter is to
be conducted through a sea of blood, if the pope really designs to follow the track of a Gregory, or a Hildebrand," and wade through slaughter to the throne" of bigotry and mental despotism. But, setting aside the interests and happiness of Protestant Europe, of the millions to whom the present pope in part owes his tiara, can he believe that the cause of Popery, that is, of such a Popery as either God or man may be expected to endure, can be promoted by the Jesuits? Will they, for instance, promote its temporal interests, who, on a variety of occasions, resisted the papal and episcopal authority? Can that alliance accredit Popery in the eyes: of surrounding nations, which hitherto has been its foulest disgrace? And, finally, has not the spirit of Jesuitism, a tendency to dissolve any religious body into which it is infused? Will it not, like a noxious weed, insinuate itself among the loose stones of that decayed edifice, and bring it to the ground? Can the pope and his adherents have learned so little from the history of past ages, as to be still ignorant that a religious institution is strong or weak according to the measure of its holiness and virtue, and that these qualities rarely fail to retreat and disappear as Jesuitism advances? It appears to us, therefore, we will avow, little short of infatuation to expect any real benefit even to Popery, from the revival of this Order. What is its first principle? That Jesuitism is to be maintained at the expense of society at large. And what its second? That the end sanctifies the means. Now does the pope really think that such principles will aid Popery, that they are likely to conciliate and convert Protestants? The Jesuits upon their revival may indeed, and from the constitution of their order, probably will, continue to plot, intrigue, and assassinate. They will aid the cause of morals by a new digest hammered out on the anvil of their
ancient casuists. They may possibly construct a new instrument or two for, the quiet extinction of heretic monarchs. A few lusty Protestant squires will, now and then, suddenly miss their eldest sons, or unexpectedly find a few combustibles in their cellars. Perhaps the old crazy houses of Parliament, very much to the benefit of the nation, and very much to the joy of certain liberal, open-hearted, independent electors and representatives of the popular boroughs, will soar, the next fifth of November, upon gun-powder wings, to the regions of the moon. It may be, also, that a cowl will, now and then, make its appearance in the quadrangles of the Universities a little saint steal from a professor's pocket, or a crucifix lurk in the silken folds of his gown.-Dr. Marsh, "horresco referens," may very possibly be beheaded, and Dr. Gandolphy occupy his seat. These, and such like divertissements, the history of Jesuitism certainly entitles us to expect; but, as for any other advantages, either to Protestantism or to Popery, it is for the pope, or any other infallible reasoner to shew us what we cannot possibly discover without their assistance. Till some such superior being shall stoop down to instruct us upon this point, and to establish a fact which the Jesuits themselves, for two centuries, and by a whole regiment of folios, endeavoured to establish in vain, we must venture to conclude with our forefathers, with the kings and queens, and parliaments, and judges, and churches of Europe, and with the infallible Pope Clement XIV., that Jesuitism is a public nuisance; and that he who endeavours to let it loose upon society, is chargeable with high treason against the common interests and happiness of his species.
But there is another view to be taken of the society of Jesuits, which, in our own judgment, is not less decisive of the question be
tween the pope and ourselves. It is a curious fact, that, at one period, almost every celebrated divine in Europe was more or less occupied with plans for the union of the various churches of Christ: whereas, now, all ideas of confederation appear to be extinct; the world seems calmly to have settled down to the conclusion that harmony and alliance are impracticable; that the seamless coat of Christ, having been once rent, is to be rent for ever; that the religion of love is to be a religion of permanent discord. Now we will freely own, that, when our eye is jaded by the almost ceaseless contemplation of the discordancies and jealousies of this pugnacious world, we are apt not seldom to turn aside and to refresh ourselves with the contemplation of that happier state of things to which we trust we are advancing. We seem to discover, in the pages of prophecy, in the improving liberality of the age, in the gigantic operations of the Bible Society, in the universal distribution of the oracles of truth, that spirit at work by which the universal alliance of the churches of Christ is to be accomplished. The key note appears to us to be struck, and we expect sweet notes of universal concord to follow. The foundation-stone seems to us to be laid, and we expect to see the temple of union arise. In this state of things, we are exceedingly jealous of any institution which lags very far behind the spirit of the age; which preserves, as a sort of relic, the temper and bigotry of older days; which threatens to retard the march of mind, and to drag us back into those regions of prejudice and intolerance from which we imagined ourselves to have escaped.
And such an insti
tution, in our humble opinion, is Jesuitism. If an instrument is wanted which may at once quench the flame of charity-throw us back in the career of ages-sow the seeds of everlasting division-lay
a train which is to explode in the citadel of Truth, and overturn her sacred towers-we venture confidently to affirm, that Jesuitism is that instrument.
But to conclude-it has sometimes occurred to us, in the course of noting down these observations, that an enemy of the only institution, viz. the Bible Society, that has the slightest pretensions to rival the order of Jesuits, in the extent of its income and the numbers of its adherents, might be tempted to ask, "Why, if there is so much to be apprehended from the one society, is there nothing to be apprehended from the other? Why, if one combination has deluged Europe with calamities, may no evil be anticipated from the operations of the other?" We answer, that no one objection to Jesuitism applies to the case of the Bible Society. This Society has no "universal head," except, indeed, its noble president, who certainly neither is a pope nor wishes to be one; who, though he has evinced his power to sway with dignity and honour the sceptre of a mighty empire, is in his new empire but the shadow of a kinga king without a sceptre, who wishes, and is permitted, to reign no where but in the hearts of his subjects. The Bible Society, moreover, has no mysterious objects, nor, indeed, any object but onethe diffusion of the word of God. It affords no secular advantage to its members. It is not the conspiracy of parts of the body politic against the interests of the whole, but a combination of one half the world to instruct and to save the other. It has no hidden meetings; no reserved articles; no "Secreta Monita;" but so provokes attention, and so courts publicity, as to incur, in the mouths of some of its assailants, the charge of ostentation. And, finally, it has this guarantee for its character and consequences, that it presents to the world, in stead of those corrupt volumes of
CHRIST ODERRY No 150
Jesuitism, which were designed to justify bad conduct by worse principles a single volume, in which are treasured up the loud and deep curses of God on him who does "evil that good may come." In fact, Jesuitism has always presented to us a striking instance of the fatal results often attendant upon the exertion of societies whose objects are not defined, specific, and unchangeable. Loyola, we doubt not, designed his society for the benefit of the world: and, perhaps, could he have foreseen its fatal influence on the world, would have burnt the hand which framed its resolutions. It is the peculiarity of the Bible Society, on the contrary, that it defies the possible apostacy or profligacy of its agents; and that, should the next president be the great Mogul, whom, however, we have no very anxious desire to see in the chair, the Society must still be as true as ever to its fundamental principlemust continue to distribute the Bible-all the Bible-and nothing but the Bible.
A Charge, delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Chester, at the Primary Visitation of that Diocese, in July, August, and September, 1814. By GEORGE HENRY LAW, D. D. F. R. S. Lord Bishop of Chester. Chester. 1814. pp. 35.
NOTHING can be more august and interesting in theory, than the triennial visitations of the Episcopacy of a Christian Church. Every man of common judgment, sitting down to construct an Episcopal Establishment, would consider it as of primary importance, that the Bishop should often meet his Clergy. He would desire, that on the one hand, he should profit from the communications which they, mingling more with the mass of society and the domestic concerns of life, might be able to convey to
him; and, on the other, that they should be edified by the collected wisdom of his probably maturer years-by the superior talents and piety to which he may be supposed to owe his high situation-and by the larger, and more expansive liberality which he, living among the most enlightened classes, and viewing the world from the eminence on which he is placed, may be expected to possess. . And we have no hesitation in saying, that, on many occasions, as far as the Church of England is concerned, facts have kept pace with theory; and the Visitations of the bishops have been highly useful to both parties. In some instances, the oil which fell upon the head of the high priest has descended even to the skirts of his clothing-to those subordinate ranks of whom he is the natural instructor and guardian. There are, however, other instances in which episcopal influence has been less beneficially exercised. And, in these cases, so powerful an instrument, applied in a wrong direction, has naturally done mischief in proportion to its intrinsic force, and to the vantage ground on which it is worked,
Such being the results of these occasional addresses of the higher to the lower orders of clergy, it is almost impossible for any wellwisher to religion to approach them without something of awe. Calculating upon their powerful influence, we unfold them with something of the solicitude with which we should unroll a prophetic volume, in which the conduct of a certain part of the clergy, for three years to come, should be developed. With such feelings we took up the present Charge. And we shall now proceed to state to our readers, somewhat in detail, the sentiments with which we lay it
His lordship begins by expressing the sense which he has of the importance of visitations, both to himself and to the clergy; and
states, that three years can scarcely pass away, without supplying to all parties important topics of consideration. He then adds, that the three years preceding the year 1814, have been unusally fertile of such topics. "In it," he says, have witnessed the formation of diocesan and district committees. In it, we have seen a national society for the religious education of the poor, projected, established and matured. I know not, therefore, how I can better discharge the solemn office now imposed upon me, than by directing your atten- tion to the objects and designs of these invaluable institutions."
The Bishop enters upon this undertaking, by giving some account of, and bestowing much well deserved applause upon, the "Society for promoting Christian Knowledge" Upon that Society our own sentiments are so well known, that we do not feel it necessary to re-state them here. But we shall proceed to lay before our readers, a passage in which his lordship lays aside his office of simple panygerist upon this institution, to institute a comparison between it and another society.
"It is a circumstance much to be re
gretted, that comparisons have been drawn, and an opposition excited, between the members of this, and of that more recent Institution, which is denominated 'The Bible Society. Such, however, and most unfortunately, is the
Far be it from us to impute improper motives, unless proved, to any description of persons; still less to that numerous and respectable Society, which includes so many of the good and great, and whose professed object it is -to dispense the word of God. From my heart I believe, that as a body, they are actuated by no other incitement, than a wish to promote the present and eternal happiness of their fellow-crea
tures. But still, the friends of the Church are, as we think, justified, in giving a decided preference, and even an exclusive support, to the more ancient Society, and that-for the following reasons. The Bible Society, by the very