"political rights: in consequence of which, one of the articles inserted "in the pacta conventa, which the successors of Sigismund have been obliged to subscribe, imports that the subscriber shall maintain peace among the dissenters: by this word dissenters is understood all who "differ in religious opinions." Here it is stated that the Protestant religion was opposed by persecution, but he does not say how it came to be so opposed; we must therefore leave that part of the question, and come to their subsequent conduct. After the death of Sigismund, Henry of Valois wished to avoid subscribing to this article of toleration, and was threatened with the loss of his crown: the result was, he consented to sign it. Soon after a persecution is said to have been entered into against the Arians, of which sect there were many in that kingdom; which persecution was not confined to the Catholics, but Protestants and Greeks took a part in it. In 1733, the Catholics gained an ascendency, and excluded the Protestants from the diet or parliament. This exclusion, which the Catholics of this country have borne for upwards of two hundred years, with exemplary patience, was resented by the Protestants of Poland with the deepest rancour. They formed confederacies with foreign powers, and particularly with Russia, which in the end, as we have before stated, laid the independence of their country prostrate. This base abandonment of duty is thus recorded by the author of the above-named Review: "The Catholics of "Poland were the original aggressors. One of their fundamental laws "directed that, without paying regard to religious opinions, every citizen, "duly qualified to enter into the diets, should be admitted there, and participate the honours and dignities of the republic: and this law ought to "have remained inviolable. But the dissenters were guilty of a still "greater wrong, by calling foreign troops to their aid, and drawing "the fury of civil war upon their country, because they were excluded "from those situations and honours in which they had a right to share. "In the year 1764, when the Protestants made their last demand, there were only two hundred churches in Poland: but they were every "where permitted the free exercise of the Protestant religion in their "houses; their property was respected; and they held, in common "with the Catholics, not only the starosties, but all military appoint"ments. What more was necessary for them, if they had confined "their views to the single object of rendering, to the Supreme Being, "the adoration which they believed most worthy of him? Could they "not have made the sacrifice of some vain honours to the Power whom they worshipped? If they had not set a higher value on these ho ́ ́nours than on their religion, they would have resigned them, rather "than shed the blood of their unjust brethren, or do an injury to pub"lic liberty, and subject their country to foreign despotism."

66

Fox, in the former part of his book, takes notice of the miserable end of the Roman emperors, who were persecutors of the Christians. It is not a little remarkable that the Protestants of Poland, who were so instrumental in selling their country, because they were excluded, against the fundamental laws of the kingdom, from their seats in the diet, did not gain their wishes. On the dismemberment of their country, they were left unprotected by the power to whom they sold them

મંદ

66

66

selves. "The court of Russia," says M. De la Croix, " appeared satis"fied that they were granted the use of their churches, though on con"dition of their not using bells to assemble the congregations: that they were permitted to perform their religious duties, and have se"minaries; and that they might sit in the inferior courts of justice. They were also allowed to claim the admission of three dissenters, as jurors in the tribunals before which any cause respecting religion "should be brought by appeal. Such were the fruits which the dissenters 65 reaped from the troubles excited by them in Poland. Nor will it be forgotten that they enjoyed, before these troubles, the free exercise of "their religion: that the grand object of their desires was to be admitted "to the diets: and that thus, after having brought foreign troops into the 66 kingdom; after having involved their country in all the horrors of civil war; after having proved the occasion of part of their fellow-citizens being subjected to the dominion of their three powerful enemies, they were themselves disappointed of the advantage they expected to de"rive from their measures. What a lesson does this afford to the people, among whom are found some individuals, so affected by the loss "of certain privileges, as to demand the assistance of foreigners for "reclaiming them!" A lesson, indeed! And here we may leave the events represented to be a religious persecution, but which is evidently the struggle of political faction under the guise of religion. Had Fox, instead of telling his readers that "Lithuania no sooner recovered it"self from one persecution than succeeding enemies again reduced it," stated that Poland no sooner recovered from one faction, than another succeeded in embroiling her again in trouble, till the Protestant faction caused her to be erased from the list of nations, he would have come much nearer the truth. That however is not the end he purposed in penning his Book of Martyrs, nor the "few plain Christians" in republishing it.

દદ

"SECTION VII.

"PERSECUTIONS IN CHINA and Japan."

From Lithuania we are carried by Fox into China and Japan, and it is not a little singular that the pretended persecutors in Europe and the really persecuted in China and Japan, professed the very same faith, that is, Catholicism. Fox carefully abstains from telling his readers what kind of Christianity was established in these Pagan countries; he contents himself with using a general term, leaving the uninformed and prejudiced reader to suppose that the Christianity alluded to must be that system, if such it can be called, falsely represented as "the light of the gospel" spread by a specious set of reformers of religion, who ought rather to be called deformers of Christianity. The time of this attempt on the part of the Catholic missionaries is said to be the commencement of the 16th century, that is soon after Martin Luther commenced his dogmatizing. After the doctrines of Martin and of the other spoilers of the Christian system had made some progress in the different states of Europe and produced rebellions and civil wars, the Catholic sovereigns, as we have before proved, found it necessary to arm themselves in defence of public security, and the punishment inflicted on the rebellious

and seditious delinquents, the violaters of law and justice, was perversely represented to be a religious persecution. While these transactions were going on between the Catholic and Lutheran party, a new religious order was established by a Spaniard of a noble and ancient family named Ignatius of Loyola. He had, in the early part of his life followed the military service, but serious reflection induced him to change his habits, and devote himself to the service of God and religion. Far different from Martin Luther, who, on claiming an evangelical mission, threw off his monastic habits and restraints, to follow a life of voluptuousness and intemperance, Ignatius laid aside that disorderly conduct almost inseparable to a military life, and became a pattern of abstemiousness and piety. Beholding the dreadful havock which heresy and schism were making in the Catholic church, he cast his eyes on the immense countries in America and Asia, and glowed with the desire of carrying the true light of the gospel into those infidel and distant regions. Nor did he neglect the state of religion in Europe; but the plans he had in contemplation were too extended to be carried into effect by one man. He therefore communicated his ideas to a few others, and in the year 1534, Ignatius and nine of his disciples consecrated themselves to the cause of God, and the salvation of souls. In 1537 they repaired to Rome, and made an offer of service to the pope, Paul III, who made a trial of their virtue in the hospitals of the capitol, before he formally accepted their tender. In the year 1540, however, his holiness felt himself so satisfied of the utility of these disinterested men, that he erected them into a religious order under the title of the Society of Jesus. The end of this society was not confined to the sanctification of its own members, by following the evangelical counsels, but they bound themselves, each in his respective sphere, to preach the word of God, to combat vice in all its hideous forms, and to teach the principles and practices of true religion. This was the origin of the Jesuits, who are known only in this country, among the generality of Protestants, as a body of men influenced by the most artful cunning and chicanery, and devoid of all moral rectitude. The progress this society of men made on the continent, by the force of their eloquence and the unspotted purity of their lives, alarmed the blind followers of error; the establishment of a college abroad for the English students to become missionaries here, struck terror into the adherents of the new church, and it was made high treason for any Englishman to become a Jesuit. To make a cloak for so cruel an enactment, plots were hatched to keep the people in alarm, and the Jesuits were made the framers, the directors and the actors in them. By such means were the people instigated to look upon the new order as a set of monsters; and whenever a member of the body appeared in this island, the yell of Jesuitism was instantly raised; he was hunted like a wolf night and day; his pursuers never relaxed from the chase, until he fled the kingdom, or expiated by an ignominious death the crime of having sought to reconeile his repentant countrymen to the faith of the primitive Christians and martyrs. Nay, at this very day, when a man is guilty of acting treacherously or playing a double part, his conduct is called Jesuitical, from the supposition that the system of the Jesuits is one of deceit and perfidy, than which nothing is more false. We have thought it necessary to make these prefatory observations to enable

the reader better to understand the duplicity and cunning of Fox and his modern editors. We will now proceed to give his account word for word.

"PERSECUTIONS IN CHINA.

"At the commencement of the 16th century, three Italian missionaries, namely, Roger the Neapolitan, Pasis of Bologna, and Matthew Ricci of Mazerata, entered China with a view of establishing Christianity there. In order to succeed in this important commission, they had previously made the Chinese language their constant study.

"The zeal displayed by these missionaries in the discharge of their duty was very great; but Roger and Pasis in a few years returning to Europe, the whole labour devolved upon Ricci. The perseverance of Ricci was proportioned to the arduous task he had undertaken. Though disposed to indulge his converts as far as possible, he disliked many of their ceremonies, which seemed idolatrous. At length, after eighteen years labour and reflection, he thought it most advisable to tolerate all those customs which were ordained by the laws of the empire, but strictly enjoined his converts to omit the rest; and thus, by not resisting too much the external ceremonies of the country, he succeeded in bringing over many to the truth. In 1630, however, this tranquillity was disturbed by the arrival of some new missionaries; who, being unacquainted with the Chinese customs, manners, and language, and with the principles of Ricci's toleration, were astonished when they saw Christian converts fall prostrate before Confucius, and the tables of their ancestors, and loudly censured the proceeding as idolatrous. They occasioned a warm controversy; and not coming to any agreement, the new missionaries wrote an account of the affair to the pope, and the society for the propagation of the Christian faith. The society soon pronounced, that the ceremonies were idolatrous and intolerable, which sentence was confirmed by the pope. In this they were excusable, the matter having been misrepresented to them; for the enemies of Ricci had declared the halls, in which the ceremonies were performed, to be temples, and the ceremonies themselves the sacrifices to idols.

"The sentence was sent over to China, where it was received with great contempt, and matters remained in the same state for some time. At length, a true representation was sent over, explaining that the Chinese customs and ceremonies alluded to, were entirely free from idolatry, but merely political, and tending only to the peace and welfare of the empire. The pope, finding that he had not weighed the affair with due consideration, sought to extricate himself from the difficulty in which he had been so precipitately entangled, and therefore referred the representation to the inquisition, which reversed the sentence immediately.

The Christian church, notwithstanding these divisions, flourished in China till the death of the first Tartan emperor, whose successor, Cang-hi, was a minor. During his minority, the regents and nobles conspired to crush the Christian religion. The execution of this design was accordingly began with expedition, and carried on with severity, so that every Christian teacher in China, as well as those who professed the faith, was surprised at the suddenness of the event. John Adam Schall, a German ecclesiastic, and one of the principals of the missions, was thrown into a dungeon, and narrowly escaped with his life, being then in the 74th year of his age.

In 1695, the ensuing year, the ministers of state published the following decrce: 1. That the Christian doctrines were false. 2. That they were dangerous to the interests of the empire. 3. That they should not be practised under pain of death.

"

The result of this was a most furious persecution, in which some were put to death, many ruined, and all in some measure oppressed. Previous to this, the Christians had suffered partially; but the decree being general, the persecution now spread its ravages over the whole empire, wherever its objects were scattered.

"Four years after, the young emperor was declared of age; and one of the first acts of his reign was to stop this persecution."

We have before remarked that Fox was particularly cautious to keep the creed of these missionaries from view, yet with all his caution he has let enough out to prove they were Catholics, and acknowledged the supremacy of the pope. The missionaries are described to be Italians,

which is sufficient to denote that they followed the Catholic religion, as Protestantism had not then gained a footing in Italy. Next the controversy is referred "to the pope, and the society for the propagation of the CHRISTIAN FAITH." Observe ye this. We have it here acknowledged that the missionaries who first attempted to plant Christianity in China were in communion with, and under subjection to, the see of Rome, and that in this very city of Rome, the seat of the supreme head of the Catholic church, there was, as there now is, a society for the propagation of the CHRISTIAN faith. Remember too, reader, at the very time this society for the propagation of the Christian faith was consulted by the planters of Christianity in China, the pretended reformers were condemning the Catholic religion as being anti-Christian. Now, how will you, consistent with common sense, reconcile this gross inconsistency of conduct?" What are we to think of the intellectual faculties of the "few plain Christians," who have put out this book to diffuse, they say, "a knowledge and love of the genuine principles of "Christianity?" Can a system of religion be Christian and anti-Christian at the same time? Can a system of religion that teaches its followers to submit to persecution for conscience sake, be the teacher of persecuting principles? It is impossible. Fox may as well assert that black is white, or that the sun shines upon the earth when that luminary is obscured by a dark thunder cloud.

He goes on to say that this society for the propagation of the Christian faith pronounced that the ceremonies objected to were idolatrous and intolerable, which sentence was confirmed by the pope. Here then, we have the pope condemning idolatry upon the authority of John Fox and his modern editors, and these very same editors charging the pope and Catholics with being damnable idolaters. Is not this another piece of barefaced inconsistency? For how can Catholics be idolaters when the Church condemns idolatry? The wise editors were not aware of the admission they were here making. But the pope, it is said, acted with precipitation; he passed sentence upon a wrong statement, and the decision was treated with contempt by the Chinese. A true statement was afterwards sent him, and he found the customs objected to were entirely free from idolatry, and merely political. This is represented as placing the holy father in difficulty; but how so? If the pope had been deceived he could not help that; nor can we see how his decision could be affected. He condemned certain ceremonies to be idolatrous, supposing them to have been followed; but it afterwards turned out that these ceremonies were fictitious, and that others quite harmless and purely political were allowed. Well then the decree could not affect the innocent and political customs, it only went to condemn those which were wrong and sinful. The decree did not require to be revoked, because the customs supposed must still remain condemned, and the Chinese Christians would be thereby warned against falling into them, should such ever be proposed to them. To get out of this difficulty Fox causes the holy father to have recourse to the inquisition, a civil tribunal emanating from the pope himself as temporal sovereign of Rome. This is as silly a device as any Fox or his editors ever had recourse to for the purpose of deception. If the inquisition reversed the sentence, it must have had the sanction of the pope as head of the church, or chief magistrate of the