similar process be drawn up or issued, by ourselves, or by the Roman Pontiff for the time being."-See Bull, § 21.

And in another clause of the Bull it is provided, that no act, though it were the act of the Pope himself,-no, nor even his express absolution, granted to the parties concerned,-shall be of any avail contrary to its provisions, until the parties excommunicated and anathematized by it shall desist from doing any of the things therein prohibited, and make satisfaction to the Church in those matters in regard to which they have contravened it.

"We declare and protest.......that such absolution, or whatever contrary acts, tacit or express, and likewise the patience and toleration of us, or our successors, however long continued, in all and singular, and whatsoever things aforesaid, can or shall in no way operate to the prejudice of the rights of the Apostolic See and the holy Roman Church, whencesoever and whensoever those rights may be derived, or to be derived."-See Bull, § 23. The whole argument is thus wound up by Reiffenstuel :

"Hence it manifestly appears, that all practices and customs [contrary to the Bull] which may exist as a matter of fact either in Germany, or in any other provinces, are by no means legitimate, lawful, and valid customs, but mere abuses and corruptions, which have not the least effect in excusing from sin and from censure; notwithstanding that the Ordinaries of the places do not for the most part proceed against the transgressors, nor declare them excommunicate; seeing that although they may, as a matter of necessity, wink at such violations of the Bull, even when they are open violations, with a view to avert greater evils, or for other just causes, yet they do not on that account approve them, but leave them to be avenged by God; in whose sight, as no one is free from guilt, on account of the empty pretext that the Bull has not been received, or has been abrogated by custom, or on account of any similar futile reasons, so will no one escape punishment, both here and hereafter."-Reiffenstuel, 1. c., n. 92.

*

** "Reiffenstuel's Digest of the Canon Law" was originally published with the express sanction of the authorities of the Roman Church; and the recent edition of it, from which the above quotations are taken, bears their reimprimatur, under the date of November the 7th, 1831.

II. THE RECOGNITION OF THE BULL COENÆ BY THE ROMAN CATHOLIC HIERARCHY IN IRELAND, AS PART OF THE ROMAN LAW NOW IN FORCE. From the foregoing exposition of the principles of the canon law bearing upon the validity of the Bull Conce, and of the provisions for its perpetual obligation, contained in the Bull itself, it is evident that no abandonment of the custom of publishing, and no refusal to receive, the Bull Cœnæ, can possibly affect the validity of that Bull, in any country where there is a hierarchy owning ecclesiastical allegiance to the Papacy. The practical question affecting the British empire does not, however, depend upon so extreme a case: there is abundant proof that the Bull is recognised by the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Ireland, and that its principles are incorporated with their system of doctrine and of diocesan government.

This fact is placed beyond doubt or controversy by reference to the standard works adopted by the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Ireland, both in their ecclesiastical seminaries and in their clerical conferences.

In the "List of the works recommended by the Professors of the Roman Catholic College of Maynooth for the perusal of the students, or referred to by them in the course of their lectures," appears under the head of "Canon

Law" the very digest of Reiffenstuel, whose unanswerable demonstration of the universal and perpetual validity of the Bull Cone has been given in the preceding section. See Eighth Report of the Commissioners of Irish Education Inquiry. Appendix No. 67, p. 450.

That the principles set forth by Reiffenstuel, in reference to the validity of the Bull Cœnæ, are practically adopted by the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Ireland, appears further from the compendium of "Moral Theology," by Peter Dens, which is proved by successive announcements in the Roman Catholic Directories for Ireland, to be the standard work and text-book in use at the diocesan Conferences of the Irish Roman Catholic priesthood. The first adoption of this work took place at a meeting of the Roman Catholic Bishops of Ireland at Dublin, on the 14th of September, 1808, when three thousand copies of it were ordered to be printed. In the year 1832, another edition was printed, with a supplementary volume, containing an "Epitome of the Moral and Canonical Doctrine of Benedict XIV."

The sixth volume of Dens's "Moral Theology" contains in the "Treatise on Reserved Cases," pp. 262-324, numerous references to the different provisions of the Bull Coene, which is there quoted, along with other documents of the Roman canon law, as the authority for the various propositions of law, and directions to Confessors, laid down by Dens.

See pages 264, 271, 275, 297, 298, 299, 300, 302, 303, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 319, 320, 321, 323.

The eighth volume of Dens,—that is, the Epitome of the Moral and Canonical Doctrine of Benedict XIV.,-in like manner contains references to the Bull Cœnæ, as a document of Roman law now in force, under the following heads :-Excommunication, pp. 73, 74; Heretics, pp. 82–84; Jubilee, pp. 95-101; Penitentiary, pp. 164, 165.

One of these references, bearing as it does upon the question, in what light Princes and other public authorities excommunicated by the Bull, are regarded by the Roman law now in force, recognised and inculcated in Ireland, it will not be inappropriate to give at full length. It occurs under the head "Heretics :

"Princes or State-governors, under the name of Lieutenants, dominions, and republics, and their rulers, or those who usually rule them, Bishops, and superior Prelates, can, in the cases of excommunication on public grounds contained in the Bull Coena Domini, on no account be absolved by the Major Poenitentiarius;" that is, the Cardinal intrusted with the highest power of absolution, next to the Pope himself, to whom all such cases are reserved by the Bull Cona.-Dens's Theol. Mor., vol. viii., p. 82.

The foregoing quotations leave no room for doubt that the Bull Cœnæ Domini is not only valid on general grounds, but expressly recognised by the hierarchy in Ireland. But the reader may be told, that these documents and facts are contradicted by the assertions of the Roman Catholics, and especially by the evidence upon oath given before Parliamentary Committees, by two Roman Catholic Bishops.

In the examination of Dr. Doyle, before the Select Committee of the House of Lords, appointed to inquire into the state of Ireland, in the year 1825, the following questions and answers occur:—

"Is the Bull In Coena Domini now in force?

"There are portions of that Bull that were in force from the time of Christ; but the Bull, as a Bull, is not in force, nor ever was in force, in Ireland, and has been rejected from nearly all the Christian countries of Europe: if that were in force, there is scarcely anything would be at rest

among the Catholic states of Europe; and they have been as solemn and as earnest in protesting against it as we have been at any period in England or in Ireland.

"Was not the same Bull, namely, the Bull In Cœnâ Domini, declared to be in force in the year 1793?

"Not only that, but it may, for aught I know, have been declared during the last year to have been in force; but their declaring it to be so in force does not make it to be in force with us: we have never received it, and surely never will."-Minutes of Evidence, April 21st, 1825, pp. 311, 312.

And Dr. M'Hale, in his examination before the Commissioners of Education, in the year 1826, made the following statements, in answer to the questions put to him :

“You will observe that, so late as the year 1741, there is a Bull excommunicating all persons, without exception, or without any limitation of time or place, who bring Roman Catholic Ecclesiastics before lay tribunals: can you explain how it is, that that does not apply to the case that is put ? "With regard to Bulls of this sort, they are never binding upon us, unless we receive and publish them: that Bull was probably never published in this country, and therefore we have nothing to do with its contents.

"Is there anything to prevent this Bull of 1741 being now received in Ireland, or at any future time, supposing it has not been received here already?

"There is the collision that would be supposed to result from the reception of that Bull with the established authorities of the country. This is an insurmountable objection."-Appendix to Eighth Report, Nov. 4th, 1826, pp. 290, 291.

In order to reconcile evidence so positive with the undeniable facts proved from the acknowledged standards and text-books of the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Ireland, it is necessary to ascertain the precise value of the oaths upon the faith of which the evidence was given. The "Moral Theology" of Bailly, one of the class-books of Maynooth College, contains the following statements on the obligation of oaths :"There are many causes which prevent, or take away, the obligation of an oath."-Bailly, Theol. Mor., Ed. Lugd., 1818, tom. vii., p. 346. Ed. Dublin, 1829, tom. ii., p. 119.

"No obligation attaches to an oath touching a matter which is prejudicial to a third party, or against the public weal, or the divine, the ecclesiastic, or the civil law.”—Ibid., Ed. Lugd, 1818, tom. vii., p. 347. Ed. Dublin, 1829, tom ii., p. 119.

"The third cause [which prevents the obligation of an oath] is the hinderance of a greater good, inconsistent with the thing promised by the oath.........For God wills not that to be observed which stands in the way of a greater obedience to God. Nor can it be said in such a case that God is made the witness of a falsehood; for he who has sworn, tacitly had this meaning underneath,-if it were more agreeable to God, or, unless another course should appear to be expedient.”—Ibid.

This is the principle: now for its application to the case in hand. A Roman Catholic Bishop is called as a witness before a Committee appointed by a "heretical" Legislature, which has under its consideration the question whether or not it would be safe to admit Roman Catholics to political power. The Roman Catholic Bishop knows the admission of Roman Catholics to political power to be the direct means of effecting what he considers to be a

great public good, and conducive to the glory of God; for, according to his faith, the very existence of a heretical Church and a heretical Legislature is a great evil, and is directly contrary to the ecclesiastical law. The Roman Catholic Bishop is aware that the admission of certain facts would stand in the way of the admission of the Roman Catholics to power. The Roman Catholic Bishop, when called as a witness, is sworn to speak "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth," and is thereupon interrogated as to the facts.

The question arises, Is the Roman Catholic Bishop bound by the obligation of that oath? or is that obligation "prevented and taken away" by the consideration that it is evidently more "expedient" to deny, than to admit, facts likely to stand in the way of an object, the attainment of which is, according to his (the Bishop's) belief, directly conducive to the public weal, to the interest of the only true and saving Church, and therefore to the salvation of men and the glory of God?

It is not necessary to impute to the Roman Catholic Bishop wilful perjury according to the principles before stated, he may feel it his conscientious duty to deny facts which he knows to be true, and to do so upon oath.

If, therefore, it be urged that the documents and facts contained in the foregoing pages are inconsistent with the statements upon oath of the Roman Catholic Bishops, it ought to be borne in mind, that, however inconsistent those statements may be with the facts of the case, the making those statements-and that in their own view of the matter conscientiously-is not inconsistent with the principles of their Church.*

METHODISM IN FORMER DAYS.

No. XXXI. THE REVS. WILLIAM ROMAINE AND JOHN

NEWTON.

(FROM THE NORTH BRITISH REVIEW.)

WILLIAM ROMAINE began his course as Gresham Professor of Astronomy, and editor of the four folios of Calasio's Hebrew Concordance. But after he caught the evangelic fire, he burned and shone for nearly fifty years,so far as the Establishment is concerned,-the light of London. It needed all his strength of character to hold his ground and conquer opposition. He was appointed Assistant Morning Lecturer at St. George's, Hanover-square; but his fervent preaching brought a mob of people to that fashionable place of worship, and, on the charge of having vulgarized the congregation, and overcrowded the church, the Rector removed him. He was popularly elected to the Evening Lectureship of St. Dunstan's; but the Rector there took possession of the pulpit in the time of prayer, so as to exclude the fanatic. Lord Mansfield decided, that after seven in the evening Mr. Romaine was entitled to the use of the church; so, till the clock struck seven, the Churchwardens kept the doors firm shut, and by drenching them in rain, and freezing them in frost, hoped to weary out the crowd. Failing in this, they refused to light the church; and Mr. Romaine often preached to his vast auditory with no light except the solitary candle which he held in his hand. But "like another Cocles,"-a comparison already fairly applied to him," he was resolved to keep the pass, and, if the bridge fell,

* We shall give the Bull in a future Number. + Born, 1714. Died, 1795.

to leap into the Tiber." Though for years his stipend was only eighteen pounds, he wore home-spun cloth, and lived so plainly, that they could not starve him out. And though they repeatedly dragged him to the courts of law, they could not force him out. And though they sought occasion against him, in regard to the canons, they could not get the Bishop to turn him out. He held his post till, with much ado, he gained the pulpit of Blackfriars, and preached with unquenched fire, till past fourscore, the life, the walk, the triumph of faith. For a great while he was one of the sights of London, and people who came from Ireland and elsewhere to see Garrick act, went to hear Romaine discourse; and many blessed the day which first drew their thoughtless steps to St. Dunstan's or St. Ann's. And in his more tranquil evening, there was a cluster of pious citizens about Ludgatehill and St. Paul's-churchyard, who exceedingly revered the abrupt old man. Of all the churches in the capital, his was the one towards which most home-feeling flowed. It shed a sabbatic air through its environs; and the dingy lanes around it seemed to brighten in its religion of life and hope. Full of sober hearers and joyful worshippers, it was a source of substantial service to the neighbourhood in times of need; and whilst the warm focus to which provincial piety and travelled worth most readily repaired, it was the spot endeared to many a thankful memory, as the Peniel where first they beheld that great sight, Christ crucified.

Beside the London Mansion-house, there is a church with two truncated square towers, the stumps of amputated steeples, suggesting St. Mary Woolnoth, and St. Mary Wool-Church-Haw. What is transacted in it now, we cannot tell; but, could the reader have visited it fifty years ago, he would have seen in the heavy pulpit a somewhat heavy old man. With little warmth he muttered through a pious sermon,-texts and trite remarks, till now and then some bright fancy or earnest feeling made a stiff animation overrun his seamy countenance, and rush out at his kind and beaming eyes. From the Lombard-street bankers, and powdered merchants, who lolled serenely at the end of various pews, it was evident that he was not deemed a Methodist. From the thin north-country visage, which peered at him through catechetic spectacles, and waited for something wonderful which would not come, it was likely that he was a Calvinist, and that his fame had crossed the Tweed. And, from the fond, uplooking affection with which many of his hearers eyed him, you would have inferred that himself must be more interesting than his sermon. Go next Friday evening to No. 8, Coleman-street-buildings; and there, in a dusky parlour, with some twenty people at tea, will you meet again the Preacher. He has doffed the cassock, and in a sailor's blue jacket, on a three-legged stool, sits in solitary state at his own little table. The tea is done, and the pipe is smoked, and the Bible is placed where the tea-cup was. The guests draw nearer the oracular tripod, and the feast of wisdom and the flow of soul begin. He inquires if any one has got a question to ask; for these re-unions are meetings for business as well as for friendship. And two or three have come with their questions cut and dry. A retired old lady asks, how far a Christian may lawfully conform to the world. And the old sailor says many good things to guide her scrupulous conscience, unless, indeed, she asked it for the sake of the young gentleman with the blue coat and frilled wrist-bands, across the table. "When a Christian goes into the world, because he sees it is his call, yet, while he feels it also his cross, it will not hurt him." Then guiding his discourse towards some of his city friends: "A Christian in the world is like a man transacting business