6 claimed, How is it possible for men who behold that glorious orb, to worship any being but Him who created it!' My blood runs cold when I pass that accursed building; and though they do not exercise their power, it is a reproach to human nature that the building should exist. "The climate here is delightful, and the air so clear, that when the moon is young I can often distinguish the whole circle, thus: O. You and Robert may look for this some fine night, but I do not remember ever to have observed it in England. The stars appear more brilliant here, but I often look up at the Pleiades, and remember how much happier I was when I saw them in Bristol. Fare you well. Let me know that my friends remember me. "ROBERT SOUTHEY." The above notices of such a man as Southey may be found interesting; nor will they be without practical value if they shall lead young persons of ardent imagination to beware of romantic projects and vagrant habits of life, and early to betake themselves to a settled calling. What were Mr. Southey's religious opinions in his younger days we cannot ascertain. We shall rejoice, if, when an authentic memoir of his life is published, it shall appear that in after years he both clearly understood and felt practically the infinite value of the Gospel, as "the power of God unto salvation." The cloud that shaded his latter days precluded all intercourse with him on this or any other subject. Though a prosperous man, and as much loved as lauded, he had not found the world to be a home or rest. In a letter which we received from him in 1835, adverting to his "Pilgrimage to Waterloo," written twenty years before, he mentions the loss of two of his chil dren, whose names will be familiar to those who recollect that affecting effusion of a father's heart. He also lost his beloved wife; though his latter years were supported by a second partner, a daughter of the venerable Canon Bowles, the poet, who devoted herself to his comfort, and watched over him with affectionate anxiety when his mind had sunk beneath its long-sustained labours. We will copy, with a slight omission, the letter to which we have alluded: "Keswick, 2nd Sept. 1835. "Dear Sir, I am much obliged to you for your [naming a little volume of verses, chiefly of a domestic character]. They have only been long enough in my possession for me to glance at their contents in cutting open the leaves; but I see enough to perceive that the book will be often in my hands. "That family picture which pleased you in 1815-which it was hoped would please such as you-is to me the most mournful of all my poems. The studious boy,' who welcomed his father's return so joyfully, was laid in his grave before the book was published; and my 'sweet Isabel' was laid beside him in the fourteenth year of her age. It pleased God to give me another son after all likelihood of such an event had ceased. He is now sixteen; and by God's mercy promises to be all that I could wish him. But I know too feelingly the instability of human life and human happiness, not to possess the blessings which are still left me, in fear. "If any opportunity offers in which I can give your little volume that sort of shove which poetry, however light its bulk, requires in these days to set it in motion, I will not let it pass. "Farewell, Dear Sir, and believe me your's very truly, SIR T. BROWNE'S DESIGNATION OF AMERICA AS THE FIFTH EMPIRE. To the Editor of the Christian Observer. I REMEMBER once reading, I forget where, that the celebrated Sir Thomas Browne, the author of "Religio Medici," and "Vulgar Errors," in a paper or treatise upon "Prophecy concerning future nations," expressed his conviction that America would be the seat of the Fifth Empire. There are many extraordinary things in the writings of that highly gifted, though paradoxical, writer, whom Dr. Johnson has ably defended against the charge of infidelity, concluding, from an examination of his life and writings, that "Browne was a zealous adherent to the faith of Christ he lived in obedience to his laws, and died in confidence in his mercy.' He was born in 1605, and died in 1682. In my nook I have not access to this writer's miscellaneous publications; but perhaps some of your correspondents who have that advantage would transcribe what he says of America. I see no reason to come to his conclusion; but such a conjecture, penned two centuries ago, when European colonization in America extended only to a few rude settlements, is rather remarkable. Some American writers strenuously vindicate their share in the prophetic writings; especially as being, they allege, the "land overshadowing with wings," addressed in the eighteenth chapter of Isaiah. The parallel (see the passage) is not unapt; but it is far short of the weight of evidence which refers the prophecy to Great Britain. There is, however, no room for unholy jealousy; for doubtless both are enjoined to carry the Gospel to "the people scattered and peeled" of the seed of Abraham. C. C. C. ON THE INTERCESSION OF ARCHBISHOP LAUD. For the Christian Observer. THE REV. Mr. Morris having preached a sermon before the University of Oxford, in which he broached the notion that Archbishop Laud (sympathising with his disciples, the Tractarians) may be interceding before the throne of God for the Church of England, (of course that it may be unprotestantised,) the Vice-Chancellor, it seems, sent for the discourse, but dropped further proceeding upon Mr. Morris's subscribing the Twenty-second of the Anglican Articles in its plain grammatical sense. This he might well do, seeing that the notion that Laud is a tutelary intercessor for England, does not necessarily imply that he ought to be adored or invoked in that capacity. Not, however, that even if invocation or adoration had been vindicated, there would have been much difficulty, with such hair-splittings of words, and perversions of meaning, as characterise Tract 90, in getting under or over the Twentysecond Article, or the whole Thirty-nine. The changes might have been rung upon praying for departed saints, that they may be delivered from purgatory and enter heaven; praying to them, that they may pray for us; their interceding for us, either with, or without, our praying to them; with the threefold subtle Romish distinction of Invocation: first, latria, due only to God; secondly, hyperdulia, due to the Virgin Mary; and thirdly, dulia, due to all whom the Pope has canonized-or his rivals the Tractarians, who have devised a service for St. Ken, and have invested St. Laud with the office of tutelary intercessor for England. Aided by these and similar quibblings, a No. 90 Tractarian may glide through the meshes of a hundred Articles, though known to have been drawn up to oppose his opinions. But Mr. Morris, in signing the 39 Articles, has also attested his belief that the Books of Homilies contain "a godly and wholesome doctrine;" and what their godly and wholesome averments are upon the matter of Archbishop Laud's interceding in heaven for England may be read at large in the Homily upon the " Peril of Idolatry;" which is the more to the purpose, as it was written long before Laud was born. And let not Tractarians affect to elude the force of that Homily by distinctions between invocation and adoration, or mediation and intercession; for the Homily expressly uses once and again the word "intercession," and connects the alleged tutelary intercession of saints in heaven with image worship and other "perils of idolatry." It anticipates, and replies to, the very argument which the Tractarians are using, that "They make saints but intercessors with God." Mr. Morris ought to listen to what the Homily says on this very point. For instance: "It is evident that our image-maintainers have the same opinion of saints which the Gentiles had of their false gods. If answer be made [by Mr. Morris or Dr. Pusey] that they make saints but intercessors with God, and means for such things as they would obtain of God; that is even after the Gentiles' idolatrous usage, to make them of saints, gods, called Dii Medioximi, to be mean intercessors and helpers to God, as though he did not hear, or should be weary if he did all alone." ... "What, I pray you, be such saints with us, to whom we attribute the defence of certain countries [as Laud interceding' in heaven for England, as though God did not hear'], spoiling God of his due honour herein, but Dii Tutelares of the Gentiles Idolaters ?.. I think we had no fewer than thirty thousand saints, to whom we gave the honour due to God. They have not only spoiled the true living God of his due honour in temples, cities, countries, and lands, by such devices as the Gentiles Idolaters have done before them; but the sea and waters have as well special saints with them, as they had gods with the Gentiles; Neptune, Triton, Nereus, Castor and Pollux, Venus, and such other in whose places be come St. Christopher, St. Clement, and divers other, and specially our Lady, to whom shipmen sing, ' Ave maris stella.' . . . Every artificer and profession hath his special saint, as a peculiar God. As for example, scholars have St. Nicholas and St. Gregory; painters, St. Luke, &c. &c. All diseases have their special saints, as gods, the curers of them, &c. &c. Neither do beasts, or cattle lack their gods with us, &c. &c. Where is God's providence and due honour in the mean season; who saith, The heavens be mine, and the earth is mine, &c. &c. And if we remember God sometimes, yet, because we doubt of his ability or will to help, we join with him another helper; as if he were a noun adjective, using these sayings :-such as learn, God and St. Nicholas by my speed;' such as neese, 'God help and St. John,' &c. &c." "These things are not written to any reproach of the saints themselves; who were the true servants of God, and did give all honour to him, taking none unto themselves, and are blessed souls with God; but against our foolishness and wickedness, making of the true servants of God false gods, by attributing to them the power and honour which is God's, and due to him only. And for that we have such opinions of the power and ready help of saints, all our legends [as to wit that in the Oxford Tracts for St. Ken's day, hymns, sequences, and masses, did contain stories, lauds, and praises of them" [as in the Breviary service in the Oxford Tracts.] Blessed be God for these Scriptural truths. We have in heaven one who upon earth "made intercession for the transgressors," and who now in heaven "ever liveth to make intercession;" one "Mediator between God and man ;" and we need not Archbishop Laud's merits or intercessions, as though God did not hear," or "had not the will to help;" or the intercession of Christ were not availing. Well said Bishop Hall, "The saints have great love for their militant brethren, great desire of their salvation; and so doubtless have the angels; but must we therefore single out any one of those blessed spirits to aid us; to sue to have bee Ting the alies con wholeso terceding the "He written ku de the f Horatie S coct elary e "pers which the lig for us in the court of heaven? God forbid." The good Bishop also, with the Homily, uses the identical word "intercessors, so that there is no room for quibbling, as if such passages did not include in their censures the remark in Mr. Morris's sermon. "Neither," says Hall, on the leaf before that just quoted in his "No Peace with Rome," -"Neither hath the number of intercessors more increased in this age of the world than the impiety of imploring them. For the modester judgment of the former schools so framed to itself a distinction of mediation, that it challenged one kind thereof as proper only to Christ; thinking the other might be imparted to saints; but our late Doctors, wilfully breaking the bars both of logic and divinity, have rashly encroached upon all the offices of a Mediator; and whatsoever might by any right belong to an agent for peace, all that, if not more, have they attributed to the saints." At present the Tractarians may hold with "the modester judgment;" but once admit this, and the way is open for the Romanist encroachment of investing the saints with "all the offices of a Mediator." Between intercession and invocation there is but a step, either practically or theoretically. The practice is too notorious in history to need to be proved; and as to the theory, if Archbishop Laud thoroughly knows our condition, and is invested with the high office of interceding before the throne of God on our behalf, it is not unlikely that we should feel inclined to implore his prayers, as we might those of a friend upon earth. The Homily is therefore right in relegating all these matters to one category; and the Church of Rome, as the Tractarians well know, does the same. Thus the Council of Trent "Commands all bishops and others holding the office and care of teaching........ diligently to instruct the faithful, concerning the intercession of the saints, the invocation of them, the honour of relics, and the lawful use of images; teaching them that the saints reigning together with Christ offer up their prayers to God for men; that it is a good and useful thing suppliantly to invoke them, and to have recourse to their prayers, aid, and assistance, to be obtained from God, through his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, who is our only Redeemer and Saviour." There is not a shadow of a text to support any one of these notions; as may be readily inferred from the fact that the strongest which the Romanists can adduce are the two following. First one in St. Luke, "Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that when ye fail they may receive you into everlasting habitations;" upon which the Rheimish annotators remark : By this we see that the poor servants of God, whom we have relieved by our alms, may hereafter, by their intercession, bring our souls to heaven." Popish commentators must have wondrous optics to see this meaning in these words. The other passage is that in the Revelation, in which the Elders "fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of the saints." To attempt to ground. such a doctrine on this symbolical passage, shews that the arguments for it must be weak indeed. It teaches that the prayers of the faithful ascend as a grateful odour before God, but there is nothing in it that implies intercession. If Mr. Morris inclines to the Rheimish argument, he must maintain that not only does Archbishop Laud "intercede," but that he receives our prayers, and presents them before God. The Vice-Chancellor of Oxford did not then, after all, act so absurdly as is represented in propounding the Twenty-second Article to Mr. Morris; for the Tridentine Fathers, and the compilers of our Homilies, as well as theory and experience, concur in shewing that "invocation" and "intercession" easily glide into each other; and he at least took security from Mr. Morris, that he has not yet carried out his system to what Dr. Wiseman and Mr. Sibthorp will truly tell him are its proper results. Taking up Bishop Burnet upon this Article, we could not but notice how he, though neither of the school of Trent nor of the Homilies, falls upon the same natural connexion. He says that the Romanists, in proof that departed saints ought to be invoked, argue that they must be so full of love to the church, that they doubtless plead for it, and that "their intercessions will be both more earnest and more prevalent," if we invocate them to discharge this office for us. He shews further, how the papistical arguments on this subject might be used by the heathen in defence of their worship of departed spirits; adding: "But to take this (reasoning) to pieces; we have no reason to believe that the saints see all the concerns of the church. God can make them perfectly happy without this; and if we think the seeing them is a necessary ingredient of perfect happiness, we must from thence conclude, that they do also see the whole chain of providence; otherwise they may seem to be in some suspense, which, according to our notions, is not consistent with perfect happiness. For if they see the persecutions of the church and the misery of the Christians, without seeing on to the end, in what all that will issue, this seems to be a stop to their entire joy. And if they see the final issue, and know what God is to do, then we cannot imagine that they can intercede against it, or indeed for it. To us who know not the hidden counsels of God, prayer [in submission to his will and designs] is necessary and commanded; but it seems inconsistent with a state in which all these events are known. That which they lay for the foundation of prayers for saints, [namely that they intercede for us] a thing concerning which God has revealed nothing to us, and in which we can have no certainty. God has commanded us to pray for one another, to join our prayers together; and we have clear warrants for desiring the intercession of others. It is a strange thing therefore to argue from what God has commanded, and which may have many good effects, and can have no bad one, to that which he has not commanded; on the contrary against which there are many plain intimations of Scripture, and which may have many bad effects, and we are not sure that it can have any one that is good." "The excusing this from the addresses made to princes by those that are in favour with them, is as bad as the thing itself; it gives us a low idea of God and of Christ, and of that goodness and mercy that is so often declared to be infinite; as if he were to be addressed to by those about him, and might not be come to without an interposition. ... This is a corrupting of the main design of the Gospel, which is to draw our affections wholly to God, to free us from all low notions of him, and from everything that may incline us to idolatry and superstition." A portion of Bishop Burnet's argument may be too metaphysical; but it is clear that Scripture does not warrant, or our own Church allow, praying to the dead, or for them, or expecting their prayers or intercessions. The Non-juring divines, following the Laudean, wrote very unsoundly and popishly upon these matters; and they led many into error; among whom was Dr. Johnson, who, Sir J. Hawkins says, derived his opinion of the lawfulness of praying for the dead from the publications issued by the Non-jurors, in the controversy which occurred on the subject in the year 1715; particularly from the writings of Dr. Brett, a voluminous author, whose many books contain the whole marrow of modern Tractarianism, from "Tradition necessary to explain and interpret the Holy Scriptures," to consubstantiation in the Lord's Supper; and "the necessity of priestly absolution," which he pressed, says Bishop Burnet, (Hist. of his Own Times) "in a strain beyond what was pretended to even in the church of Rome; for he said that no repentance could serve without it, and affirmed that the priest was vested with the same power of pardoning that our Saviour himself had." We write thus excursively, because the whole system hangs together. |