...

the bishops and others, who left unreproved and uncorrected a people guilty of such enormous offences as were chargeable upon the Irish. He asserts that there was not an individual who would " lift up his voice like a trumpet-none who would contend to banishment and death in behalf of that church which Christ had purchased with his precious blood. "Mirum itaque," he adds, "quod ubi gens crudelissima et sanguinis sitibunda, fides ab antiquo fundata et semper tepidissima, pro Christi ecclesia corona martyri nulla, &c. . . . Sunt enim pastores, qui non pascere quærunt, sed pauci sunt prælati, qui non prodesse cupiunt, sed præesse. Sunt episcopi, qui non omen, sed nomen; non onus, sed honorem amplectuntur." It may, therefore, be now demanded, What other conclusion could the most liberal and quickwitted person deduce from such premises, other than that arrived at by Giraldus? And what "stupidity or bigotry" is there in bringing the "bloodless triumph of" such "Christianity" as that described by Giraldus, in the form of a "charge," not "against the people" generally, as Mr. M. would lead his readers to suppose, but against their superior clergy-that class of persons among whom martyrs were, in other nations, plentifully found? One can conceive many reasons why a writer, attached to a party which professes to entertain a righteous horror of a "sinecure church," should have no pleasure in the contemplation of such a priesthood as that which Giraldus reproves, or why "that sort of retrospective imagination which for ever yearns after the past," (p. 203,) should be disappointed to find that "the finest peasantry in the world" has not been rendered "exceedingly cruel and blood-thirsty" by any modern device; but it is scarcely to be credited that even Mr. M. would in this instance have hazarded his reproof of Giraldus Cambrensis if he had happened to have read that author for himself. Nor can Mr. M. be considered more fortunate in fixing on the "Feast of Samhin," (which occurred on the first of November,) as "opportunely coinciding with the celebration of Easter;" and it may be added, in passing, that few advocates for the Romish original of the church in Ireland would care to number among their proofs in favour of such an opinion, the lighting up of fires "in honour of the eve of St. John." C. E. G.

DISSENTERS' FUNERALS.

MY DEAR SIR,-Through the pages of your Magazine I asked the following questions:

(1.) Whether or not a clergyman ought to refuse to permit dissenters to sing a hymn in the churchyard after a funeral? Since that, the opinion of Dr. Lushington, as I find by the papers, has been taken on the subject. This, I suppose, will be considered as setting the matter at rest, as to the right of the dissenters' claim, but does it follow that we ought to refuse to permit such a performance to take place after we have finished the service and left the grave ?* And if

The only answer to this question must be, that the clergyman who gives such permission to sectaries as this question contemplates, voluntarily encourages irregular

so, does this responsibility fall on the officiating minister, whether incumbent or curate, or on the person (whether clerical or lay) in whom the freehold of the churchyard is vested?

(2.) My second question remains altogether unanswered, as to whether a clergyman may permit a psalm to be sung in the church on such an occasion. Yours, faithfully, D. I. E.

POPERY IN ENGLAND.

POPERY IN ENGLAND. We feel pleasure in announcing to our readers, that a new catholic chapel was opened for Divine service at Weobly, in Herefordshire, on Thursday, the 15th instant. The Rev. Richard Boyle delivered a strong and impressive discourse from Matt. xxi. 13, to a respectable assembly, the greater proportion of whom were Protestants, who had come from a considerable distance to witness the imposing ceremony. The mass was celebrated by the Rev. Leonard Calderbank, the much-respected pastor of the congregation. This is the first catholic chapel which has been solemnly opened in this country since the days of the Reformation."-Andrews' Orthodox Journal.

To the sincere friends of Protestant Christianity, it must ever be a subject of the deepest regret to behold their Protestant brethren countenancing and encouraging, by word or deed, the extension of a religion, to which every rightly-informed Christian must feel such insuperable objections. They who, by their conduct, render themselves amenable to the above imputation, either are sincere Protestants, or they are not; either they are the adversaries of popery, or they are its advocates. If the latter character be theirs, what avails it to wear the flimsy mantle of hypocrisy? Why, outwardly, and to the eye of the world, be Protestants, when, in their inmost hearts, and in the eye of God, they are, to all intents and purposes, papists ? "How long will such as they halt between two opinions?" E'en let them adopt the advice of the prophet-" If the Lord be God, to follow him, but if Baal, then to follow him." If, on the other hand, they, to whom I refer, include themselves among the number of sincere Protestants, let them reflect calmly and dispassionately on the unavoidable result of this seeming approbation, on their part, of a system, to which, if Protestants, they must necessarily be adverse and opposed; let them consider, that the outward countenance given to an unscriptural and idolatrous faith will be construed, by the world, as an inward approval of it; with the world, the wish will be assigned as "father to the deed." Let them consider, that each recurrence of such conduct gives a fresh stimulus to the instruments of Rome, who are even now "compassing sea and land to make proselytes;" the incessant object of whose exertion is again to establish in these realms the tyrannical sway which was destroyed at the Reformation. Let them read, reflect upon, and act according to the reply given by God's chosen people by their heavenly-commissioned leader, Joshua, when exhorting them to religious obedience :-" If it seem evil unto you to

practices, whieh the law does not sanction. The consequence can hardly be doubtful. Doubtless, on the occasion of a funeral, one would wish to gratify all reasonable wishes. But if there are persons dissatisfied with our services, and wishing to add to them, why do they not bury in their own grounds?-ED.

serve the Lord, choose you, this day, whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served, which were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell. And the people answered, and said, God forbid that we should forsake the Lord, to serve other gods: we will serve the Lord."

R. S.

CHANGE OF LESSONS.

SIR,-Can you, or any of your numerous correspondents, point out to me an authority for the following deviation from the directions laid down in our Book of Common Prayer?

Some time since I attended the church of a fashionable and populous parish, situate at no great distance from the place where I reside, during evening service on the Sunday, and was much surprised to find that instead of the first Lesson appointed for the service of that evening, the clergyman read a chapter from the book of Daniel. An extemporary exposition of the chapter (evidently not the first of a course,) was afterwards delivered from the pulpit. My desire is, to know upon what authority (if any) the minister took upon himself to alter the usual arrangement.* Requesting you to give mention to this, I am, Sir, with all consideration, your obedient servant,

A GLOUCESTERSHIRE SUBSCRIBER.

ORDINATION SERVICE.

SIR,-May I beg the favour of your inserting the following question in your Magazine. Perhaps some of your correspondents will notice it, and be kind enough to send you an answer to it.

Why does the Church of England appoint Acts, vi. 2-7, to be read at the ordination of deacons ?

You are aware, no doubt, that in the controversy which is carried on between dissenters and churchmen in the present day, this passage is referred to by dissenters as proving the right of the people to elect their own spiritual ministers, and the propriety of the reference is denied by churchmen, inasmuch as this passage records the election, not of spiritual ministers, but of persons to be appointed over ai "business" which was, strictly speaking, secular. The word deacons does not occur in the text; but our church, by appointing this passage to be read at the ordination of deacons, considers, of course, that the "seven" were ordained to this office. Hooker is of the same opinion, (see book v., sect. 78.) If the church and her ablest defender are right in the application which they make of this passage of scripture

Similar questions to this have been repeatedly answered. Such practice is extremely irregular, and it is a sad pity that wherever it occurs it is not stopped in the only way in which such wilful irregularities ever are stopped-by a complaint to the ordinary, with the names of the parties who will authenticate the complaint.—ED.

to the establishment of the order of deacons, how is the argument drawn from it by the dissenters, in support of their system, to be refuted? I am, Sir, your obedient servant, B.

ST. PATRICK.

SIR,-I do not know whether the shape in which the essay on St. Patrick is presented in your Magazine leaves me at liberty to comment on it. But, whatever may be the origin of the tracts ascribed to him, they do not suffice to persuade me there was such a person, and that he is not a creature of mythology and fable.

The confession of Patrick certainly confesses rather more than I am disposed to believe, viz., that a dream warned him to go to Ireland, and promised that he should find a ship ready to take him there, and that he accordingly found the vessel ready to sail. Ships to Ireland were not common in those days, when its inhabitants were cannibals, as we know from St. Jerome's positive testimony. Besides his own dreams, we have the inspired visions of his friends. To inquire, why this document is less loaded with miracle and fable than others relating to him, is like asking why Jove's satellites are less than Jove? Nothing cited from the epistle to Coroticus has any tendency (in my opinion) to shew that it was of earlier date than 430. What is meant by the last Roman legion leaving Britain in 404, I do not well know. Honorius renounced the management of this island, by solemn letters of renunciation, addressed to its cities, and directing them, puλarreσbai, i.e., res suas curare, in 410 or early in 411. And subsequently, on two occasions, he sent a legion to their assistance; one was commanded by Gallio of Ravenna, and the year is known, but I have not opportunity of referring to Prosper and the other chronicles. I cannot discern what the legions have to do with it; though the renunciation of Honorius might. But it may well be questioned whether the provincials of Britain thereby lost their rank of "Roman citizens," even in the courts of law; and assuredly they did not in mere common parlence. Perhaps the author is not aware that the descendants of those citizens, retaining the Roman language and manners, were distinguished from the tribes of the British and Gaelic tongues by the name of y Romani, and spoken of as a belligerent power in the disturbances of the island, until after the middle of the sixth century. The words which I remember Prosper uses, "Pharamundus regnat in Franciâ," do not imply that he was in possession of Gaul, or any part thereof. The country there styled Francia, is the modern circle of Franconia; and the head-quarters of Pharamond were at Wurtzburg or Herbipolis. Clodion, his son, made good his footing in the Northern Gallia, Belgica, or low countries. This paragraph should have been better considered before the article was converted into a penny tract.

*

A sovereign may renounce his own privileges, and resume those of his subjects, if forfeited by misconduct. But no man can renounce the rights of another; and, least of all, can it be done by implication.

The mission of Saint Pallady is an undoubted event. The ministration of Patrick is attested by no document or historical proof; and the accounts of it are not merely fabulous, as all the Legenda Sanctorum from Sulpicius Severus downwards are, but they bear peculiar marks of fiction. His best friend, Father Colgan, divides or multiplies him into four Irish saints, independent of sundry foreign ones. He was born in Gaul, in Ireland, and in this island. He was buried at Down, at Kirkpatrick, and in Glastonbury church. His father's name was Calphurnius, it was Mawon, and it was Aloryt. His own name was Patricius, it was Nannus, it was Succath, it was Cothirlagh, it was Magonius, and it was Tailghean. Iris herself could scarcely boast of more appellations than this obscure character. The Welsh catalogue of the saints, called Bonead y Saint, asserts that he was great grandson to Gwydion ap Don. Now, if anything be clear in these obscure Celtic tales, I believe it is clear that Gwydion ap Don is nobody at all, but a mere god or dæmon of the Celtic paganism, generally deemed to be identical with Mercury.

I know it may be answered, that all these incongruities were added, as miracles and old-wive's tales were added, to his legend in later times. And I will reply by asking, whether the corrupted church, in her lying moods, was wont so to deal with her saints? Certainly not. It was never her fancy to give to her champions as many fathers, cradles, and tombs as there are leaves in a shamrock, and more names than there are eyes in a potato. St. Gregory Thaumaturgas and St. Anthony had no such pluralities, neither had that most notorious and detestable personage (St. Patrick's reputed uncle) Martin of Tours. It may be rejoined, that the saints connected with Celtic countries stand in a different predicament, owing to the different style and humour of those countries. But that again will prove false. No such thing appears in St. Alban, in Germanus (Patrick's reputed tutor), or Lupus Trecassentis, who divided their time between Gaul and Britain, in St. Iltud, St. Samson, St. Paul de Leon, or any other authentic and historical saint of Celtica.

Some few there may be who, although they have not these peculiarities, are scarcely more authentic than himself; and their fables, I believe, grew out of the fusion of heathenism with what its corrupted and compromising teachers called Christianity. The calendar honours St. Bacchus, St. Nereus, and St. Mercury. We may guess how they got there. At any rate we must admit, that if there ever were such men, they had no namesakes beneath Olympus. That disgraceful system was not limited to classical heathenism, but extended itself to Celts and Teutons.

That Ireland, in the apostolic age and afterwards, heard the gospel; and that, in the fifth century, her doctrine (so far as she had any) was widely different from the superstition which now prevails, cannot be doubted. That it was such in the fifth century as to merit praise, even in comparison with popery, is more doubtful. In arguing with the deceived and ignorant of that country, it is a just argument that, if there ever was such a being as Patrick, the most ancient and only plausible evidences of him shew that he was no papist or envoy from VOL. VIII.-Dec. 1835.

4 P