vestigation. The very act of thinking differently from the Church of Rome restored an individual to the full exercise of his faculties. He who burst asunder the fetters of habit and education would not rest contented with the devotion of his talents to theological questions: he would employ the powers of which he had recovered the exercise, in making incursions into the regions of science and philosophy.'

Much is expected by this writer from the influence of the Reformation in promoting the cause of pure religious truth; and, in this view of the subject, he predicts the triumph of his own creed, though at present it is that of no national church:

The Reformation has been of incalculable benefit to the Christian world, inasmuch as it has established a principle, the operation of which will one day destroy every doctrine and practice that has not the plainest injunctions of revelation and the most obvious reason for its support, and exhibit the pure and undefiled faith of Jesus, free from every corruption and every entanglement with which its offi cious nursing-fathers have so long clogged and embarrassed it."

If Protestants have not yet availed themselves of the full extent of their principles, it is because they do not yet see the entire victory which, under God, they have achieved over spiritual wickedness in high places. We are still in the morning of a gospel day but the glorious luminary of truth advances rapidly to its meridian splendour. Already the fogs disperse the noxious mists begin to evaporate, and soon will the Christian world be illuminated by the invigorating rays of the Divine effulgence; and the fair and lovely form of truth appear freed from the shackles of human establishments, obnoxious tests, persecuting laws, unmeaning mysteries, priestly and courtly frauds, contradictory and ridiculous creeds, and impositions and anathemas, as pointless as they are absurd, and as useless as they are false.'

We come now to the professed object of this work, intitled A brief Summary of the Catholic Doctrines,' which are discussed in several sections, containing many curious particulars. Mr. N. allows that some difficulty attends this part of his subject: but he thinks that it is the fairest way to let Catholics explain their own religion; and we think so too, provided that they offer such explanations as tally with facts and the decisions of the Church. We must not lose sight of this provision; because, though individuals may undertake to pourtray the doctrines of the Catholic church, we cannot admit their account in opposition to breviaries, creeds, councils, and papal ordinances. In the first document here given, called "Roman Catholic Principles in reference to God and the King," the anonymous writer tells us that

"The guilt of sin, or pain eternal due to it, is never remitted by indulgences; but only such temporal punishments as remain due

6

after

after the guilt is remitted; these indulgences being nothing else than a mitigation or relaxation upon just causes, of canonical penances, enjoined by the pastors of the Church on penitent sinners, according to their several degrees of demerit. And if any abuses or mistakes be sometimes committed, in point either of granting or gaining indulgences, through the remissness or ignorance of particular persons, contrary to the ancient custom and discipline of the Church; such abuses or mistakes cannot rationally be charged on the Church, nor rendered matter of derision, in prejudice to her faith and doctrine."

Let us compare this statement with the words of the Indulgence granted by Leo X., and dispersed in Germany by Tetzel. The Indulgence runs thus:

"I, by the authority of the blessed apostles, Peter and Paul, and of the most holy Pope, granted and committed to me in these parts, do absolve thee, first, from all ecclesiastical censures, in whatever manner they may have been incurred, and then from all thy sins, transgressions, and excesses, how enormous soever they be, even from such as are reserved for the cognizance of the holy see; and, as far as the keys of the holy church extend, I remit to thee all punishment. which thou dost deserve in purgatory on their account; and I restore, thee to the holy sacraments of the church, to the unity of the faithful, and to that innocence and purity which thou didst possess at baptism; so that when thou dost die, the gates of punishment shall be shut, and the gates of the paradise of delight shall be opened."

It is impossible to reconcile the account of the limited application of Indulgences with this copy of that which is said to have

* Mr. Nightingale observes that this specimen of one of Tetzel's pardons has been copied from Dr. Robertson into almost every account of popery which has hitherto issued from the Protestant press; and yet it is notorious that, the genuineness of this instrument is extremely doubtful.' He even calls it roundly a nonsensical imposition,' and a blasphemous and ridiculous fraud.' He has not, however, stated any grounds for assigning this character to it; and, till its spuriousness be proved, we are warranted in arguing from it as genuine. Robertson quotes it from Seckendorf as a fact; and, though he remarks that the terms of it are so extravagant as to appear almost incredible, he adds that Chemnitius "has published several of Tetzel's discourses, which prove that these expressions were neither singular nor exaggerated." (History of Charles V. Vol. ii. 4to. p. 81. note.) Roscoe, in his life of Leo, does not specifically advert to the document in question: but he quotes Fabroni as saying of Tetzel, (Leonis X. Vita, p. 132.) "Pudet referre qua ipse et dixit et fecit, quasi Legatus e cælo missus fuisset ad quod libet piaculum expiandum atque purgandum :" (Roscoe's life of Leo, Vol. iii. 4to. p. 151. note.) a description which well accords with the terms of the suspected indulgence, and authorizes a belief in its fidelity.

been

been distributed by Tetzel. Did Leo X. deny the commission given to Tetzel, or restrict his power of the keys in the manner here represented by the Catholic apologist? At p. 320. the Bubject is thus represented: By indulgences granted by the popes and prelates of the church, persons are discharged from temporal punishment, here and in purgatory;' and Mr. N. adds,

This is the real state of the case, with respect to indulgences. If some Catholics in former times have (as it must be confessed has been the case) abused this branch of church-discipline, no blame ought to attach to their successors of the present times. It is in the greatest degree illiberal and unjust, to charge any body of Christians with all the abuses to which wicked men will ever profane even the best of doctrines. I am no advocate for indulgences, according to any form yet prescribed by the Church of Rome; but I must confess it will afford me the most sincere satisfaction, if any thing I can say to elucidate this point shall remove prejudice and mistake from the minds of any of my Protestant brethren; and, with this view, I will extract the reasoning and statement which a learned and pious "Minister of the Church of England" has published relative to the practice of granting indulgences.

It is asked "Whether indulgences are not abominable, which either give leave to sin, or grant the pardon of past sins, and these obtained for a sum of money?

"This was the opinion I formerly had of indulgences; but since I began to follow other measures, besides taking upon trust, upon diligent examination I have found, that indulgences in the Church of Rome are neither pardons for sin nor leave to commit sin, but the same which has been practised in the purest ages of the Church; and that is, a remission of some part of those canonical penances, which were wont to be inflicted for some greater crimes. This power of binding and loosing we own in the Church, and retain it in our canons; and 'tis yet in force in respect of some crimes."'

This example is adduced to shew that we may not implicitly rely on apologists; and that, in exhibiting the doctrines of the Roman Catholic church, the shortest and fairest way is to copy (as Mr. N. has partly done) from writings issued by authority, and which are universally admitted to be the standard of Catholic faith, worship, ceremonies, and discipline. It is pleasing to find that, in the most essential articles of religion, Catholics and Protestants are agreed; (see p. 294.) and, as the points in which they differ are of no importance in a civil view, (if we except the appeal to the Pope, which we trust will be obviated,) no objection can fairly be urged against Catholic Emancipation. By making tradition paramount to Scripture, an obstacle is placed against an union of the two churches: but, if they cannot form one spiritual communion, they may constitute one political body. At all events, Catholics and Protestants should

be

be careful not to mistake and particularly not to misrepresent each other. *

A section, at the end of the work, is expressly devoted to the discussion of the subjects of persecution and the violation of faith with heretics and the Catholics could not have found in their own body a more ingenious and able councellor than in this their Protestant defender. Knowing that it was in vain to deny that the court of Rome has formerly been a sanguinary court, and that thousands have fallen sacrifices to its persecuting spirit, Mr. Nightingale first tries to abate our resentment by reminding us that more has been said and written than is true, and then desires us to recollect (as we have before observed) that the part of the charge which remains uncontroverted does not attach to Catholics of the present day; who are no more concerned with it than to abhor and lament the cruelties which their ancestors, urged by a blind zeal, were induced to commit, Farther to lower the high tone of invective which we are apt to adopt on this occasion, we are reminded that 'Protestants have themselves been guilty of persecution; and that not only of Roman Catholics, but also of one another.' It is liberal to translate la souffrance of Bossuet (p. 442.) by the English word suffering: but we doubt this version. As to the cruel accusation against Catholics, of not keeping faith with heretics,' Mr. N. strenuously denies that any such opinion either is or ever was an article of their church: but he surely carries his liberality too far, when he admits Mr. O'Leary's statement of the trial and execution of John Huss to prove that he suffered not for heresy but for dangerous political opinions. If the Emperor Sigismond thought that Huss was a rebel, he would not have given him a safe conduct. Besides, if we turn to Lenfant's History of the Council of Constance, (Whitley's translation, Vol. i. p. 431.) we find these words: "The sentence of the Council is express, that John Huss is a notorious, scandalous, obstinate, and incorrigible heretic."

In his Portraiture, Mr. Nightingale has endeavoured, with a commendable spirit, to detect mistakes, and to expose misrepresentations, thus doing justice to Catholicism; and, while he openly proclaims his own opinions and his zeal as a Protestant,

<* The chief points on which we have been in the habit of mistak ing, and, consequently, of misrepresenting, Roman Catholics, appear to be the following. The opinions held by some Catholics concern. ing the infallibility and power of the Pope, the notions concerning works of supererogation, the use of images,-the practice of persecution, the opinions relative to the salvation of heretics, of the Scriptures, and, the belief in miracles."

the use

he

he labours to remove every aspersion from the Catholic body, and to convince his readers that they are intitled to respect as good Christians and to all the privileges of British subjects. "He allows, indeed, that he has softened the darker shades of the picture, and he is romantic in the anticipation of a flood of light and knowlege which is overspreading the whole Christian world. Like those prophets who view the future only through the lens of imagination, he probably sees more than others will find realized. Had he even waited till the moment at which we are writing, how different would have been his finale! Then he could not have complimented Italy and Spain as beginning to be emancipated from superstition and despotism; nor have promised a speedy amelioration of the whole frame and structure of the Christian world. By the rapid vicissitudes of human affairs, brilliant visions are dissipated almost as soon as they arise; and though philosophers, when their hopes are disappointed, still console themselves with the common adage, Magna est veritas et pravalebit, its accomplishment seems too likely to remain in the future tense. While the virtuous and well-informed are greatly outnumbered by the ignorant, worldlyminded, and vicious, truth will be oppressed rather than encouraged, and error will continue to be decorated with all the badges of fashion and popularity.

ART. IV. Madame de Staël on Germany.

[Article concluded from the Review for April.]

IN closing our last article concerning Mad. de Staël's work, it might have been observed that the German poets of the English school have in general fallen short of their models; as Klopstock, of Milton,-Goëthe, of Shakspeare, -Haller, of Pope, and Kleist, of Thomson, whom they severally imitated:-but the German poets of the French school have as frequently surpassed their models. Wieland's Tales are superior to the joint efforts in this line of Lafontaine and Voltaire; Ramler's Odes are more Horatian than the lyric poems of Jean-Baptiste Rousseau; and Gleim is more Anacreontic than Panard; while Lessing's dramas and dramatic criticisms counterpoise those of Diderot. Be it, however, acknowleged that Buirger excels any of our British ballad-makers; and that, in "Tales of Wonder," German literature is richer than our own. We are now called to survey the Drama; a department of art which Madame de Staël is peculiarly adapted to criticize. Women are naturally quick of hearing, and aware of what they may be seen to hear; superfluity and indelicacy vanish alike

before