spected the Rhemish notes? You shall hear."

This Committee was appointed, and Mr. O'Connell was made Chairman. From day to day, from week to week, a report denouncing the Roman edition of the Bible was promised through the journal which was the organ of the Roman Catholic party. It did not notice its appearance; and at length, when expectation begin to weary, information was given that the board, with its committee, was extinct-dissolved!" The question was at that time of the greatest importance to Mr. O'Connell, who doubtless had and has the welfare of his country at his heart; and he was probably anxious for the disavowal of the obnoxious notes, as much for the credit of his religion as for the political interests of his constituents. Why were not the notes denounced? Why were the Roman board and committee dissolved? Why did the statesman do nothing? Hear Mr. M'Ghee:

66

"I answer, the reason was, BECAUSE HIS BISHOPS WOULD NOT PERMIT HIM. At the very time when Dr. Troy was publishing his disclaimer, in October, 1817, and when Mr. O'Connell was denouncing the Rhemish notes in the Catholic board, the Bible was, with these very notes, actually in the press, under sanction of Drs. O'Reilly, Troy, Murray, and nine other Roman Catholic bishops, in the city of Cork. Here is the advertisement; and who would have imagined that this was the same Bible :

"A new and superb and elegant edition of the Catholic Bible, now publishing in numbers and parts, by J. A. Macnamara, Cork, under the patronage of his Grace the Most Rev. Dr. O'Reilly, Roman Catholic Lord Primate of all Ireland; his Grace the Most Rev. Dr. Troy, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin; his Grace the Most Rev. Dr. Murray, Coadjutor Archbishop of Dublin, and President of the Royal College of Maynooth; the Roman Catholic Bishops of Cork, Waterford, Ferns, &c. &c., containing the whole of the books in the Sacred Scriptures, explained or illustrated with notes or annotations according to the interpretation of the Roman Catholic Church, which is our infallible and unerring guide in studying the Holy Scriptures, and bringing men to salvation.'

"Under this title, as an infallible interpretation of Scripture, is a Bible published

in Cork, which, when examined, proves to be a reprint of the identical Bible published in 1816 in Dublin; and here are the names of the bishops. Patronized by his Grace the Most Rev. Dr. O'Reilly, the Most Rev. Dr. Troy, the Most Rev. Dr. Murray.' Here they are, with all their titles, with their associates in the work: the same list as before. This Bible was actually in the press, in the month of October, 1817, under his own patronage, while Dr. Troy was abjuring it in the public prints, and Mr. O'Connell was going through this mock denunciation at the board! This is the cover of the Bible of 1818; here are the same names upon the cover of that of 1816. But this advertisement, on this cover of 1818, is dated 1813. How are we to prove that the names of those who patronized the first Bible in the list on this cover are not copied from the old advertisement, and put down as patrons on this cover? The proof is here on the covers themselves. Dr. Murphy, who was one of the patrons, was Archdeacon of Cork, and is so put down in this list of 1813. The writ of bankruptcy issued against Macnamara in December, 1814; so he had no more to do with this edition. But this same Dr. Murphy became Bishop of Cork in 1815, and we have his name put down as Bishop put down as Bishop of Cork in this list; and the Bible was printed in his own diocese, his own city. Now, an answer has been attempted to this. It has been said that the Bible of 1818 was a mere trick of the booksellers: that Mr. Cumming, after Macnamara's bankruptcy, had completed some copies of them to cover his own loss: that it was printed or edited by Macnamara without the bishops' consent, and is not a new but the old edition. -What is the reply to that? The best reply to all argument-the matter of fact, that these are not the same editions, but different editions. And as I know that any statement of mine would be received on this subject, and justly so, with doubt, I have taken the liberty of requesting, since I returned to London, some professional gentlemen to inspect the copies, and pronounce whether they are of the same or different editions; and when this certificate shall have been read, no person

in this hall will entertain any doubt upon the subject:

"We whose names are hereunto subscribed, having been requested to examine copies of a quarto Bible-one stated in the title-page to be printed and published by Richard Coyne, Dublin, A. D. 1816-the other stated in the title-page to be by James Macnamara, printed for the proprietor, Cork, A. D. 1818, and to give it as our opinion whether those copies are the same edition-do give it as our decided opinion that they are different editions. Without any other proofs it is only necessary to state, that in the edition of 1816, the number of pages in the Old Testament is 927, while in that of 1818 it is 928. In the edition of 1816, the number of pages in the New Testament is 424; while in that of 1818 it is 436.

'London, July 12, 1836.'"

We cannot follow Mr. M'Ghee through all his demonstration that this Bible was

approved by the Romanists of Ireland, and printed and reprinted with the sanction of the Romish prelates, until the attention of Protestants was directed to it, and it became necessary to disavow it to secure a political end in the Parliament. The more important portion of the subject is the actual nature of the notes themselves, which the Roman Church authorizes to be appended to such editions of the Scriptures in the vulgar tongues as it permits to be read by the common people. After establishing the authenticity of the copy which he held. in his hands, Mr. M'Ghee proceeded to read from it as follows:

"The first text I shall read is a note on Matt. xiii. 29, 30:

"[Lest, perhaps.] The good must tolerate the evil, when it is so strong that it cannot be redressed without danger and disturbance of the whole Church, and commit the matter to God's judgment in the latter day; otherwise, where ill men, be they heretics or other malefactors, may be punished or suppressed without disturbance and hazard of the good, they may and ought by public authority, either spiritual or temporal, to be chastised or executed.

"The next comment is on Luke ix. 55. That is the passage in which, when our Saviour had been refused assistance by the Samaritans, and James and John

asked whether they should call down fire from heaven upon them, he turned and said, 'Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of." And here is the note on our Lord's rebuke:

"Ver. 55. [He rebuked them.] Not justice, nor all rigorous punishment of sinners, is here forbidden, nor Elias's act repreblamed for putting heretics to death, but that hended, nor the Church or Christian princes

none of these should be done for desire of our particular revenge, or without discretion, and regard of their amendment, and example to others. Therefore St. Peter used his power upon Ananias and Sapphira, when he struck them both down to death for defrauding the Church.'

23.

"The next is a note upon Luke xiv.

"Ver. 23. [Compel them.] The vehement persuasion that God useth, both externally by force of his word and miracles, and internally by his grace, to bring us unto him, is called compelling; not that he forceth any to come to him against their own wills, but that he can alter and mollify a hard heart, and make him willing that before would not. St. Augustin also referreth this compelling to the penal laws which Catholic princes do justly use against heretics and schismatics, proving that they who are by their former profession in baptism subject to the Catholic Church, and are departed from the same after sects, may and ought to be compelled into the unity and society of the Universal Church again. And therefore in this sense, by the two former parts of the parable, the Jews first, and secondly the Gentiles, that never believed before in Christ, were invited by fair sweet means only; but by the third, such are invited as the Church of God hath power over, because they promised in baptism, and therefore are to be revoked not only by gentle means, but by just punishment also.'

"The next passage to which I would call your attention, is a note on Acts xxv. 11, in which St. Paul appeals to Cæsar :

"Chap. xxv. 11. If St. Paul, both to save himself from whipping and from death sought by the Jews, doubted not to claim succour from the Roman laws, and to appeal to Cæsar the Prince of the Romans, not yet christened, how much more may we call for aid of Christian princes and their laws, for the punishment of heretics, and for the Church's defence against them? (St. Aug. 50.)'

"The next is a note on Timothy iii. 9.

"All heretics, in the beginning, seem to have some show of truth; God, for just punishment of men's lives, permitting them for some time in some persons and places to prevail;

but in a short time God detecteth them, and openeth the eyes of men to see their deceits; insomuch that after the first brunt, they are maintained only by force, all wise men in a manner seeing their falsehood, though for fear of troubling the state of such commonwealths, where unluckily they have been received, they cannot be so suddenly extirpated.'

“There are two more texts to which I wish to refer; the first is Rev. ii. 20. I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman, Jezebel,' &c. The note is

"Rev. ii. 20. He warneth bishops to be zealous and stout against false prophets and heretics of what sort soever, by alluding covertly to the example of holy Elias, that in zeal killed four hundred and fifty false prophets of Jezebel, and spared not Ahab nor Jezebel themselves, but told them to their faces that they troubled Israel, that is, the faithful people of God.'

"The remaining passage is Rev. xii. 6, on which the note is

“Rev. xvii. 6. [Drunk with the blood.]-It is plain that this woman signifieth the whole body of all the persecutors that have, and shall, shed so much blood of the just, of the prophets, apostles, and other martyrs, from the beginning of the world to the end. The Protestants foolishly expound it of Rome, for that there they put heretics to death, and allow of their punishment in other countries; but their blood is not called the blood of saints, no more than the blood of thieves, man-killers, and other male factors, for the shedding of which, by order of justice, no commonwealth shall answer."

999

After reading these passages, Mr. M'Ghee stated that he did so because in many copies the leaves, containing them originally, had been canceled, and others, which did not embrace them, inserted so carefully as to seem a portion of the actual edition. But the notes which were retained, were of a similar character. Does Dens tell us that the Protestant worship is not to be tolerated? What says the Roman Catholic Church in its authorized notes to the Bible? Mr. M'Ghee proceeded to read the following additional notes, found in all copies:

"2 Cor. vii. 14. [What fellowship?] Generally here is forbidden conversation and dealings with all infidels, and consequently with heretics; but especially in prayers, or meeting at their schismatical service, preaching, and other divine office whatsoever, which the apostle here uttereth in more particular terms, that Christian folks may take the better heed of it. No society, saith he, or fellowship-no

participation or agreement-no consent be tween light and darkness, Christ and Belialthe temple of God, and the temple of idolsall service, as pretended worship of God set up by heretics or schismatics, being nothing else but service of Belial, and plain idolatry, and their conventicles nothing but conspirations against Christ. From such, therefore, especially we mind, and touching any act of religion, in body must separate ourselves always in heart and also; according as the children of Israel were commanded by God to separate themselves from the schismatics, Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, and their tabernacles by these words, "Depart from the tabernacles of the impious men, and touch ye not those things which appertain to them, lest ye be entrapped in their sins."

"Does Dens say that heretics are to be excommunicated? What says this Bible?

"Cor. 1st Epistle, 5th chap. and 5th verse. [To Satan.] To assure us that all excommunicated persons are in the power and possession of the devil, and quite out of Christ's protection, as soon as they are separated by the Church's sentence from her body, and the sacrament and fellowship of Christian Catho lic men, it pleases God to give power to the Apostles and prelates of the primitive Church, to cause the devil straight upon their sentence of excommunication to invade the body of the excom municated, and to torment him corporeally. So Christ excommunicated Judas, and the devil entered into him, and he went forth from the happy fellowship of the apostles. (John xiii. 27.) So this apostle excommunicated Alexander and Hymenæus, and Satan straight took them. (1 Timothy i.) Yea, it is thought that St. Peter excommunicated Ananias and Sapphira, and for sign of his power and terror of the sentence, struck them both dead. (De Mirabil. S. Scripturæ, li. 3, c. 16; Apud. S. Augustin.) Which miraculous power, though it be not joined now to that sentence, yet, as far as concerneth the spiritual punishment which it especially appertaineth to, it is as before, and is, by the judgment of the holy doctors (St. Cyprian, ep. 26, nu. 3. St. Chrysostom, in 1 Tim. i. ho. 5. St. Ambrose, in 1 Tim. i. St. Hierom, ep. ad Heliod., c. 7. St. Augustin De Cor. and Gra. c. 15), the terriblest and greatest punishment in the world, even far passing all earthly pain and torment of this life, and being a very resemblance of damnation, and so often called by the fathers, namely, by St. Augustin,-"And by this spiritual sword," saith St. Cyprian, "all must die in their souls that obey not the priests of Christ in the new law, as they that were disobedient to the judges in the old law, were slain with a corporeal sword. Would to God, the world knew of the marvellous punishment Christ hath appointed the priests to exe cute upon the offenders of his laws, and especially upon the disobedient, as heretics, namely.”

"Does Dens assert that we are not to be left with liberty of conscience? What say the Rhemish notes?

"St. James, i. 25. [The law of liberty.] The law of the Gospel, and grace of Christ, is called the law of liberty in respect of the yoke and burden of the old carnal ceremonies, and because Christ hath, by his blood of the New Testament, delivered all that obey him from the servitude of sins and the devil. But not

as the libertines and other heretics of this time would have it-that in the New Testament every man may follow his own liking and conscience, and choose whether he will be under the laws may and obedience of spiritual or temporal rulers or not.'

"Does Dens assert that heretics are to be punished with death when 'convenient?' You have heard some notes upon this subject. There is another, on Cor. x. 26.

"2 Cor. x. 6. [To revenge.] You may see hereby, that the spiritual power of bishops is not only preaching the Gospel, and so by persuasion and exhortation only (as some heretics hold) to remit or retain sins, but that it hath authority to punish, judge, and condemn heretics and other like rebels, which power one of the principal rebels (Calvin) of this time, being convicted by the evidence of the place, acknowledgeth to be grounded upon Christ's word. Whosoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven." (Matt. xviii. 18.) Apply also the words spoken to Jer. i. 10

Behold, I appoint thee over nations and kingdoms, that thou plant, pluck up, build, and destroy" to confirm and explain the power Apostolic here alleged by St. Paul. Nay, they would gladly draw this power from the lawful successors of the apostles to themselves-their ministers and consistories-which are nothing else but the shops and councils of sedition, and all the conspirations of this time against the lawful princes of the world.

"It is unnecessary for me to take up your time by reading any further notes. But I beg to observe, that through the Bibles of the Roman Catholic Church, the same power of life and death is asserted to be lodged in the bishops over heretics. You have heard the statement of Dr. Troy. You have heard him state that he only authorized the Bible printed in 1791. Here is that Bible-the Bible, recollect, which Dr. Troy acknowledges he authorized. What are the notes of this upon the subject? They are not like the obnoxious notes contained in

the other Bibles, it is true; but there is a note in this book, retained in all Roman Catholic Bibles (on Deut. xvii. 8), which I will read :

"Deuteronomy xvii. 8. [If thou perceive, &c.] Here we see what authority God was pleased to give to the Church-guides of the Old Testament, in deciding without appeal ull controversies relating to the law, promising that they should not err therein, and punishing with death such as proudly refused to obey their decisions, and surely he has not done less for the Church-guides of the New Testament.'

"This, I repeat, is the Bible which Dr. Troy himself acknowledges he authorized. But it may be there is only this one verse in it (i. e. the Douay). What more do I want? I want not a tyrant to write a volume to tell me that my liberty and life are in his power-a single sentence, a hint is quite enough. One note, that lays it down that he has a right to put me to death, is as bad as a thousand volumes. I have brought here another Bible, edited at Manchester, to show that the Roman Catholic Church in England, in Ireland, and all over the world, is the same-that it preserves every where this unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.' And here is the same note exactly. [Here Mr. M. read the same note on Deut. from the Manchester edition.] This is an edition published in Manchester, 1813, by Oswald Syers, of Market-street.' Now Dr. Murray was examined before the House of Commons upon the note, and he said that really these notes to the Rhemish Bible had been gradually softened down. But I never understood what he meant by gradually softened down,' until I inspected his Rhemish Bible. The word gradually,' I think, implies a succession of different things. You can hardly say that the notes of one Bible are 'gradually softened down' into another. Yet this is the Bible of 1816, or 1818, published in Ireland, about which he was examined; and here is the Bible of 1825, stereotyped by the Romish prelates themselves in Dublin; and Dr. Murray, when examined upon the subject, says, that in the last edition of the Bible there is no such note to be found, meaning the stereotyped edition of 1825.