"tis) contends that it is a primitive language, being the mother of the "Russian, Muscovite, Polish, Vandallic, Bohemian, Croatian, Dalma "tian, Valachian, and Bulgarian. It is esteemed that it holds a mid"dle place between the Hebrew and other Oriental languages, and "those used in the West; and it suits all climates. Some add, that it seems most adapted of all others to be made a universal language. "Some have attributed the Sclavonian alphabet and translation of the "bible to St. Jerom, but erroneously. For the Latin was in his time "the language of that country; and this St. Jerom calls his transla"tion into his own tongue, as Banduri (Animadv. in Constant. Porphy66 rog. de administ. imper. p. 117.) takes notice. The Sclavonian let"ters have no affinity with the Gothic; but were invented by St. Cyril "and Methodius, who derived them from the large Greek alphabet. "The Sclavonians have another alphabet of smaller characters for common use, particularly in esteem in Dalmatia, Carniola, and Istria; "also a third alphabet almost wholly different, which they seem to have "borrowed from the Croatians and Servians. This last is falsely as"cribed to St. Jerom. (See Cohlij Introductio in Historiam Sclavorum; "Jos. Assemani, 1. 4.) Of all the Sclavonian dialects the Polish has "been most cultivated. The Lithuanians are of a very different ex"traction, as their language, which is a dialect of the Sarmatian, de"monstrates."

So much for the liturgy in their own tongue; now as to the tyranny of the popes over the Bohemians. When Fox made, this charge why did he not state some of the acts of oppression committed by the popes, instead of contenting himself with generalities? Surely he could have furnished us with some specific case to enable us to judge how far the popes were deserving of censure, and how far the people merited praise. It might have so happened that the people of Bohemia were deluded by false teachers and false prophets, as the people of England have been long duped, and by none more so than by this Book of Martyrs; and this we are convinced, would be found to have been the case in Bohemia, if we could come at the facts alluded to by Fox. It is not every struggle of the people that leads to liberty, either civil or reli gious; for what were the struggles during the unhappy reign of our Charles the first, but the struggles of one party to oppress the other, and not to establish a system of freedom, which their ancestors enjoyed in full plenitude, before the pretended reformation was begun by the cruel and lascivious Henry the eighth. It too often happens that the people lend themselves to designing men, who raise the cry of liberty to gratify their own passions, which was the case with John Huss, Jerome of Prague, Luther, Calvin, and other pretended reformers, and the people lost their liberty instead of preserving it. From the year 977 Fox makes a skip to the year 1375, when a few "zealous friends of the gospel," are introduced as applying to Charles, king of Bohemia, to call a council to make an inquiry into abuses, and effect a reformation in the church. This request, we are told, embarrasses Charles, who not knowing what to do, applies to the pope for advice, and is instantly recommended to "punish severely those profane and presumptuous "heretics." Accordingly, it is said, the king banished all those who had been concerned in making the application to him, and laid addi

tional restraints upon the reformed Christians of the country, Now, we must here ask, who were these "zealous friends of the gospel?" Had they not a name? Why not give us the names and places of abode, the rank they held in society, and other particulars necessary to come at the truth? The fact is, at the time stated by Fox, there were no reformed Christians in Bohemia, but all were Roman Catholics. It was not till fifty years after, when John Huss and Jerome of Prague began to dogmatize, that Bohemia became disturbed with religious fanaticism and fury. Fox tells us that the martyrdom of these two men increased the indignation of the believers, and gave animation to their cause. Indeed! But why not submit with resignation and true courage, like the primitive Christians? Why not bear patiently the strokes of the executioner for conscience sake? Oh, no! such a disposition, which distinguished the primitive martyrs, and excited so much admiration in the Pagans, that many of them became Christians, never influenced the reformers of the gospel. They flew to the sword, and according to the predictions of Christ, they have perished by the sword.

Fox states, that in consequence of the condemnation of Huss and Jerome by the council of Constance, and the excommunication of their followers, contentions arose between the Papists and the reformed "Bohemians, which produced a violent persecution against the latter;" and he proceeds to give a detail of some of the consequences. Now the fact is, the doctrines of Jerome and Huss, like those of Wickliff in England, of which we shall have occasion to say something hereafter, aimed destruction against society under the cloak of religion. Had Jerome or Huss preached this doctrine to the Americans at the present day, they would have been sentenced most probably to death, but certainly to banishment or imprisonment. The opposition made to, and punishment of the dogmatizers could not, consistently with truth, be called persecution, because the resistance was merely self-defence, selfsecurity against innovators, that threatened to destroy the peace of society, and spread disorder and confusion among mankind. It is admitted by Fox, that the reformed cast twelve of the senators out of the windows, and committed other outrages. That a bloody war ensued, the reformed Bohemians arming themselves, to repel force by force, As to the pope going to Florence to excommunicate the Bohemians, and promising "full remission of all sins to the most wicked person I who should kill one Bohemian Protestant," there is just as much truth in this statement as in many others we have detected. Surely the pope could have excommunicated the reformed Bohemians as well at Rome as at Florence, for the latter place was not in his possesion, while the former was his chief seat and episcopal see. Neither were the refractory Bohemians Protestants, for be it observed, they held the doctrine of the mass, the seven sacraments, and many other points of faith which Catholics believe and Protestants reject. So that a Bohemian Protestant was unknown in those days, and consequently the pope would hardly be so foolish, if he had it in his power, to grant a remission of sins for killing what did not exist.

That a bloody war ensued is but too true, and many were the

66

cruelties practised by both parties; but it is neither just nor generous to make the Catholics all sanguinary and the revolting Bohemians all merciful. The pope sought other means than the sword to bring the infatuated disciples of Huss and Jerome to their senses. He employed the proper weapons of the church to bring them to a sense of duty and truth. He sent preachers among them, armed with eloquence and persuasion, one of whom, St. John Capistran, is stated by Mr. Alban Butler to have converted, in Moravia alone, four thousand of these deluded creatures. While these pious missionaries were occupied in wielding the arm of reason among the disciples of Huss, the leaders of his sect were engaged in spreading blood and carnage over the country. "To revenge the death of John Huss," writes Mr. Butler, "Zisca (whose true name was John of Trocznou) a veteran general, assembled an army of his followers, and plundered the whole country "with unheard-of barbarity. After the death of king Wenceslas, in 1417, he opposed the election of Sigismund, who was emperor of Germany, defeated his armies eight times, built the strong fortress "which he called Thabor, amidst waters and mountains, and died in "1424. Sigismund had made peace with him before his death, and at "the council of Basil promised the archbishopric of Prague to John "Rockysana, a clergyman, who had been deputed by the Hussites to the "council of Basil, but who abjured that heresy, upon condition that the laity in Bohemia might be allowed to communicate in both kinds. "The deputies of the council of Basil, and the catholic assembly at "Iglaw, in the diocess of Olmutz, in 1436, acquiesced; but required "this condition, that in case of such a concession, the priest should de"clare before giving the communion in both kinds, that it is an error "to believe that Christ's body or blood is alone under either kind. This "Rockysana boggled at: nor would the pope ever grant him his bulls. "His partisans, however, styled him archbishop, and he appeared at "their head till his death, which happened a little before that of "George Pogebrac, in 1471, who had been king of Bohemia from the year 1458; though secretly a Hussite, he demolished the fortress of Thabor, that it might not serve for a retreat to rebels."

66

Thus it appears that religion was made a cloak for sedition and rebellion, which has been the case in almost every instance with the innovators of truth. The reform, as it is called, meditated by John Huss and Jerome of Prague, was a system of the most pernicious licentiousness, and would no more be tolerated in the united states of America at this day, than it was in Bohemia in the fifteenth century. The doctrines preached by these dogmatizers struck at the foundation of all order and authority, and in the course of time must have rendered society a chaos of confusion and outrage. For example:-One of their tenets was, that the clergy ought to have no temporal possessions; now what would the clergy of the church of England, and the preachers of the sectarians in this same country, who are unanimous in their opposition to Catholicism, say, were a person to start up and maintain such a doctrine as this? Would they not call for a prosecution; or at least would they not oppose him with all the force they possessed? There cannot be a doubt but they would. And yet the resistance to such a doctrine in the fifteenth century by the fathers and professors of the

OF

For's Book of Martyrs,

CRITICAL AND HISTORICAL.

No. 22. Printed and Published by W. E. ANDREWS, 3, Chapter- Price 3d.

EXPLANATION OF THE ENGRAVING.-This cut represents the martyrdom of brother Michael Grellett, superior of a monastery of the Franciscan order, in France, who was hanged on a tree in the presence of the Hugonot admiral Gaspar de Coligni, and other chiefs of that party, notwithstanding the most solemn oaths had been given to the inhabitants of the town in which the monastery stood, that the Catholics, both clergy and laity, should remain secure and undisturbed. After the martyr was strangled and his body thrown from the tree, the cruel and impious band vociferated three times, Live the Gospel!!! A pretty sort of gospel these reforming miscreants followed.

Catholic faith, is made a charge of persecution, by men too who are at the same time combined to continue the persecuting laws against the Catholics, imposed for conscience sake.

Another of the tenets was, that persons in authority forfeited all claim to jurisdiction and power, while in a state of sin. Thus, then, supposing the president of the united states of America to be in the habit of tippling to excess, he would, according to John Huss's notions, be divested of his power. But were a citizen of America to disseminate such a doc trine at this day, and were he to get some people to believe him, would he be allowed to propagate his error under the cloak of religion, in these states, where perfect religious freedom is established? We are convinced there is not a reader endowed with a rational mind that would answer us in the affirmative: why then should the Catholics of the fif teenth and present centuries be reproached for doing that which Protestants would do for their own personal security at the time we are writing? What would a by-stander say, if a criminal, on being taken

before a police magistrate to answer some charge preferred against him, were to deny the power of the justice to take cognizance of the offence, because he, the magistrate, had committed some breach of the commandments of God, and therefore had forfeited all power vested in him by the state? Would he not be struck with dread and astonishment that such an idea should be entertained, and immediately perceive that, were it to become general, society would be disorganized? Most assuredly he would, and applaud the man who should endeavour to remove such pernicious prejudices from the mind of the offender.

The editors conclude this section "with an account of a pretended "PERSECUTION BY THE EMPEROR FERDINAND."-Such is the head or title they have selected, and they usher in their account with the following statement :-" The emperor Ferdinand, whose hatred to the "Protestants was unlimited, not thinking he had sufficiently oppressed them, instituted a high court of reformers, upon the plan of the inquisition, with this difference, that the reformers were to remove " from place to place. The greater part of this court consisted of Je"suits, and from its decisions there was no appeal. Attended by a "body of troops, it made the tour of Bohemia, and seldom examined a prisoner; but suffered the soldiers to murder the Protestants as they pleased, and then to make report of the matter afterwards." Such is the introductory account of this persecution, which no doubt has obtained innumerable believers. But it must be observed, that there were three emperors bearing the name of Ferdinand; the first reigned in the sixteenth century, and the other two in the seventeenth; how then are we to trace the accuracy of this account, when there is no clue left us for that purpose? Not a date, not an authority, and no specification in which of the three reigns this affair occurred. Is this the way an honest historian would go to work to obtain credit We think not. None but those well acquainted with the gullibility of Protestant prejudice would dare to send forth such a tale. The institution of a high court of reformers, upon the plan of the inquisition,, to reform the reformers of religion, is a clever idea to work upon the imagination; and the composing this court of reformers with Jesuits completes the climax. Then the summary mode of proceeding is calculated to excite the compassion of the reader: only think of this court of reforming Jesuits making the tour of Bohemia, and leaving the work of slaughter to the soldiers. A tour of pleasure to the court and a journey of labour to the soldiers. The Protestants murdered in the first instance and reported afterwards: something like the Irish chairmen knocking a passer-by down, and begging his leave to pass when the course is clear. There being no time specified, we are at a loss to know whether the sufferers were Hussites or Protestants; the editors say the latter, but we have our doubts on the subject. After some further improbable relations, a list is given of twenty prisoners who are said to have been executed in regular order, among whom are five lords, one earl, one knight, one doctor of physic, four gentlemen, a cripple, and seven without rank. All of them are described as making use of some commonplace talk, very suitable to delude the enthusiast, but, as we have so frequently had occasion to remark, not a date nor a voucher is produced, but all is mere assertion. It would therefore be a waste of time to