Forth on a hill, that was both steep and high,

On top whereof a sacred chapel was, And eke a little hermitage thereby, Wherein an aged holy man did lie, That day and night said his devotionNo other worldly business did apply: His name was Heavenly Contemplation, Of God and goodness was his meditation."

Having, therefore, led the "good men" of Oxford into the hermitage, we will there leave them, to notice, in conclusion, two or three other curiosities of the Tract. The great mass of the clergy are, just now, not a little occupied in their endeavours to extend the system of national schools, and are even making the national (i. e. clerical) education a great question in politics but this does not suit the authors of the Oxford Tracts; they are decidedly against national schools. "Church discipline," they think, should take the place of schools, and that, generally, "a principle of reserve should be applied to prevailing opinions on promoting religion." This reserve the author would carry out, even to the building of churches; for, though he considers the sacrifice (of money) which the building of new churches requires from the subscribers eminently salutary, so that, viewed as an individual sacrifice, "there can be no higher or better means of promoting the cause of religion," nor is it possible to devise a more acceptable “oblation;” “for it were painful to think we should bestow ornaments on our own houses, and leave the house of God without" (90), Yet, nevertheless, inasmuch as

new

39

churches tend to bring "all persons" unto them, and so to "cast pearls to swine," and to invent "more means for winning souls than God has authorised," and to feed people with "eloquence and pleasing delivery, and to "make liturgies suitable to the taste of the generality," and to relinquish canonical hours for those that are more popular, and to "bring sacred things out of a chaste reserve' - for these, and divers other reasons, the author is decidedly against the building of new churches! (see p. 68-74): and, in one word, “selfdiscipline," which is the only way of coming to the knowledge of God, is that which is to be recommended and cultivated. Here, as might be expected, there is a sneer against preaching and pulpits, as nothing seems to stir up the bile of an Oxford Tractator so much as a pulpit. Mr. Froude would have pulpits banished altogether from churches, of which the proper use, he thinks, is to perform ceremonies in the canonical hours. "It is worthy of notice," says the Tract, "that in the Parisian Breviary. in its long services for the feast of dedication, composed of passages from Scripture, hymns, and homilies, there appears no allusion to this end, as the object of building churches, viz. the converting of persons by preaching. It abounds with allusions to building up the spiritual temple, and to the awful presence of God in his sacraments. Whatever objections may be made to this testimony, it serves, at all events, to prove what the religion of a former age was" (69). This last remark is characteristic; for truly may we say of the Oxford party, that all their religion resolves itself into the ascertaining the " usages" of former

is apt to veil from the world holy sentiments: and thus the end is observed, of keeping that which is holy from dogs:' and such reserve is apt to give vent to its own feelings, especially in such similitudes and dark sayings, as partake of the nature of that which is infinite, and, therefore, to the world, mysterious" (59).

But if these holy things are to be kept from the dogs, why publish them in tracts? Why send the wolf to roam abroad in open day-light, even though dressed up in sheep's clothing? for depend upon it, the dogs will be keen-sighted, and keen-scented enough to discover the wolf, and proclaim his visits with a loud clamour. This "sacred reserve" should be more strictly attended to; and if tracts are printed "ad clerum," they should not be published. The Tract on Reserve should be given, under a promise of secrecy, to the "good men" who are likely to comprehend its meaning, and accept its doctrine.

A SHORT ACCOUNT OF THE CONVERSION OF THE HON. AND REV. GEORGE SPENCER TO THE ROMAN CATHOLIC FAITH.

FROM the Catholic Magazine for April, we have made extracts from the following narrative of his conversion to Popery, which Mr. Spencer drew up at the English College at Rome in the year 1831. He wrote it at the request of the Bishop of Oppido, a small town in the lowest extremity of Italy.

"I took orders in the Protestant Episcopal Church of England, December 22, 1822; and for seven years I had the care of a parish, containing about eight hundred inhabitants, in which is situated my father's (Earl Spencer's) principal residence. never was very bigotted in my attachment to the doctrines and discipline of the Church of England; but seeing no cause to doubt of their being truly in agreement with the word of God,

I

I was, from the beginning of my ministry, desirous of bringing back into communion with her those Protestant sectaries, who, under various denominations, had separated from her; and I used to have frequent discussions with such as were to be met with in my neighbourhood, and particularly in my own parish. The more I spoke with them, the more persuaded I was, that the principles on which they defended their separation from the church were unsound; but when I begun to attend with candour to what they had to say, I hardly had a conversation with any of them, which did not shew me more clearly than before, that the Church of England herself yet needed improvement and correction." He then states, that he, as a churchman, was compelled to make assertions which could not be defended by Scripture. Some of the propositions of the 39 Articles so staggered him, that he determined “ never to sign them again.' "I found myself called upon by the eighth article to affirm, that the three creeds, i. e. the apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian, might be clearly proved by Scripture.

I observed, that the arguments by which I defended the doctrine of the Trinity itself were founded, indeed, on Scripture, but that, in attempting to prove to my hearers that a belief of this doctrine was absolutely necessary for man's salvation, I had recourse to arguments independent of Scripture, and that no passage in Scripture could be found which declares, that whosoever will be saved, must hold the orthodox faith in the Trinity. I had this difficulty on my mind for eight or nine months; after which, finding that I could not satisfy myself upon it, I gave notice to my superiors, that I could not conscientiously declare my full assent to the 39 articles. . . . . Of course the bishop might have taken measures to oblige me to resign my benefice; but he thought it more prudent to take no notice of my letter, and the

remained in possession of my place, till I embraced the Catholic faith." .... "I must here notice a conversation which I had with a Protestant minister about a year before I was a Catholic, by which my views of the use of the Scriptures were much enlightened, and by which, as it will be clearly seen, I was yet further prepared to come to a right understanding of the true rule of Christian faith, proposed by the Catholic Church. This gentleman was a zealous defender of the authority of the Church of England against the various sects of Protestant Dissenters, who of late years gained so much advantage against her. He per

ceived, that while men were allowed to claim a right of interpreting the Scriptures according to their own judgment, there never could be an end of schisms; and therefore he zealously insisted on the duty of our submitting to ecclesiastical authority in controversies of faith, maintaining that the Spirit of God spoke to us through the church, as well as the written word. Had I been convinced by this part of his argument, it would have led me to submit to the Catholic Church, and not to the Church of England; and, indeed, I am acquainted with one young man, who actually became a Catholic through the preaching of this gentleman-following these true principles, as he was bound to do, to their legitimate consequences. But I did not at this time perceive the truth of the position: I yet had no idea of the existence of divine unwritten tradition in the church."

"I knew not that it was in the Catholic Church that I was at length to find what I was in search of; but every Catholic will see, if I have sufficiently explained my case, how well I was prepared to accept with joy the direction of the Catholic Church, when once I should be convinced that she still preserved unchanged and inviolate, the very form of faith taught by the apostles, the knowledge of which is, as it were,

the key to the right and sure interpretation of the written word."

66

The first circumstance by which it pleased God, in some degree, to open my eyes, was a correspondence into which I entered with a person who withheld his name, but who professed to be a young man of the Protestant religion, who had been some time in a Catholic town abroad, where conversations he had with some Catholics, and his observation of their worship and character, had led him to doubt the truth of what he had been taught in his childhood about Popery and the Reformation. He professed to be under great suspense and misery, and intreated me, as a well-informed Protestant, to satisfy him on a few questions which he proposed. I discovered, by means of this correspondence, that I had never duly considered the principles of the Reformation; that my objections to the Catholic Church were prejudices adopted from the sayings of others, not the result of my own observations. Instead of gaining the advantage in the controversy, I saw, and I owned to my correspondent, that a great change had been produced in myself. I heard no more of him till after my conversion and arrival at Rome, when I discovered that my correspondent was a lady, who had herself been converted a short time before she wrote to me. I never had heard her name before, nor am I aware that she had ever seen my person: but God moved her to desire and pray for my salvation, which she also undertook to bring about in the way I have related." 'She

66

died at Paris a year before my conversion, when about to take the veil as a nun of the Sacred Heart; and I trust I have in her an intercessor in heaven, as she prayed for me so fervently on earth." 'Near the end of the year 1829, I was introduced to young Mr. Philipps, eldest son of a rich gentleman of Leicestershire, whom I had often heard spoken of as a convert to the Catholic reli

gion. We spent five hours together in the house of the Rev. Mr. Foley, Catholic missionary in my neighbourhood, with whom I had already had much intercourse. I was interested

by the ardent zeal of this young man in the cause of his faith. I was much delighted with what I could observe of his character. I was more than ever inflamed with a desire to be united in communion with persons in whom I saw such clear signs of the Spirit of God; but yet my time was not fully come." "He was, in the meanwhile, much interested in my case. He recommended me to the prayers of some religious communities, and soon after invited me to his father's house, that we might continue our discourse. On Sunday the 24th January, 1830, I preached in my church, and in the evening took leave of my family for the week, intending to return the Saturday following to my ordinary duties at home. But our Lord ordered

better for me. During the week I spent on this visit, I passed many hours daily in conversation with Philipps; and was satisfied, beyond all my expectations, with the answers he gave me to the different questions I proposed about the principal tenets and practices of Catholics. I now openly declared myself completely shaken; and though I determined to take no decided step till I was entirely convinced, I determined to give myself no rest till I was satisfied, and had little doubt now of what the result would be." Mr. Philipps then took Mr. Spencer to Leicester, to see Father Caestrich, the Catholic missionary established in that place. "Mr. Caestrich's conversation that afternoon overcame all my opposition. He explained to me, and made me see, that the way to come to the knowledge of the true religion is not to contend, as men are disposed to do, about each individual point, but to submit implicitly to the authority of Christ, and of those to whom he has committed the charge of his

flock. He set before me the undeniable, but wonderful fact of the agreement of the Catholic Church all over the world in one faith, under

one head. He pointed out to me the wonderful unbroken chain of the Roman Pontiffs; he observed to me how in all ages the church, under their guidance, had exercised an authority undisputed by her children, of cutting off from her communion all who opposed her faith, and disobeyed her discipline. I saw that her assumption of this power was consistent with Christ's commission to his apostles to teach all men to the end of the world, and his declaration, that those who would not hear the pastors of his church rejected him. What right, thought I, had Luther and his companions to set themselves against the united voice of the church? I saw that he rebelled against the authority of God, when he set himself up as an independent guide. He was bound to obey the Catholic Church: how should I then not be equally bound to return to it. And need I fear that I should be led into error, by trusting myself to those guides to whom Christ himself thus directed me? No; I thought this impossible. Full of these impressions, I left Mr. Caestrich's house. Philipps accompanied me, and took this last occasion to impress on me the awful importance of the decision I was called upon to make. At length I answered, 'I am overcome. There is no doubt of the truth: one more Sunday I will preach to my congregation, and then put myself into Mr. Foley's hands, and conclude the business.'

next day, at nine o'clock, the church received him as her child;" i. e. he was sprinkled afresh by the Roman Catholic priest. The narrative concludes, with stating that he was at that time in the English College at Rome, studying for holy orders, having already received the order of sub-deacon.

The first point that strikes us in this narrative as worthy of observation, is the origin of Mr. Spencer's doubts; he could not perceive that the three creeds of the Prayer-Book could, according to the eighth article, be clearly proved by Scripture. Who ever was able to prove this point? Who, for instance, has ever yet been able to explain the assertion made in the apostles' and the Athanasian creed, that "Christ descended into hell," a fact which is repeated again separately standing by itself, in the third of the 39 articles*. See the trouble and labour this dogma occasioned Bishop Pearson in his Exposition of the Creed, and hear him at last confessing that it was "dove-tailed into the confession about 400 years after Christ." But why did not Mr. Spencer, instead of taking refuge in tradition as the proper defence of the creeds, first inquire whether the church of the Scriptures had any creeds at all? Where can he find authority for a creed in Scripture? If Mr. Spencer had been but moderately read in

When the articles of the Church of England were published in the reign of King Edward VI., the third article thus appeared:-" As Christ died for us, and was buried, so also is it to be believed that he went down into hell. [For his body lay in the grave till his resurrection, but his soul being separate from his body, remained with the spirits which were detained in prison, that to say, in hell, and there preached unto them, as witnesseth the place of Peter.]" All the words between the brackets were omitted in the 39 articles, published ten years afterwards, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth; but the words so omitted are nevertheless the orthodox interpretation of the article, according to the faith of the Church of England.

ecclesiastical lore, he might soon have ascertained the true history of the three symbols; for that their origin is subsequent by centuries to the apostolical day, is confessed even by Roman Catholic writers of credit. Here, however, was the origin of his aberrations :-he laid it down as a principal duty to examine the foundations of the faith of the Church of England, and not the foundation of the faith once delivered to the saints. The creed of the Bible, in which alone he ought to have been concerned, he laid aside, in order to establish the creed of churchmen, and if he thought that his duty, then certainly he came to a right conclusion, for the creeds cannot be proved by the Scriptures alone, but must be supported by tradition..

The Protestant clergyman who zealously insisted on the duty of our submitting to ecclesiastical authority in controversies of faith," and whose name we could mention, was a forerunner of Puseyism, or, more properly speaking, one of that sect which here and there has always existed in the Church of England, but which has only lately been consolidated into that Propaganda Association, whose doings now fill all England with alarm. Such as he was, however, for he is not now living, his sermons converted one young gentleman to Popery, and was also the means of preparing Mr. Spencer for his adhesion to the Roman Catholic creed. Many such • Protestant clergymen" are now preaching the same doctrine; and it is not to be doubted that they will be the instrument of converting many "young gentlemen" to the Popish persuasion.

The pious fraud by which he was further carried within the reach of the whirlpool, seems to have been based on two falsehoods. Mr. Spencer's anonymous correspondent described herself (1.) as being a young man; and (2.) as inquiring with anxiety into the truths of the Protestant religion, though she had joined the Roman Catholics before she began