sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions." It says nothing of the appearance of the bread and wine, and goes not into the question whether that appearance be a separable or inseparable accident, or whether it be a distinct reality having a body of its own, though possibly including some other body; much less does it speak of any operation upon the senses, miraculous or otherwise, so as to modify our apprehension of the nature of the things before us in the elements; but it goes to the denial of all change in the nature of those things, and through that denial to that of the corporeal presence of our Lord in them; which is another matter entirely, and has nothing to do with the question of sight or the suspension of the senses. Church of England does not stop to discuss the question whether, the Lord being corporeally present, be withholden from our sight by a miracle or not, but denies such presence. Nay, farther, the Church of England denies all presence whatever as necessarily connected with the elements. It holds a real or true presence, but declares it to be of a spiritual nature; and that real presence is confined to the faithful. As this point has already been proved, further argument upon it will be unne

cessary.

The

Nor is it correct to say that the Church of England, in excluding the doctrine of the corporeal presence, is warring only with individuals of the Church of Rome; for the authoritative teaching of that Church is, as has been stated in the sermon which led us to this subject, that "in the sacrament there is really present the actual body and blood, together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and there is a change of the whole substance of bread into his body, and of the whole substance of the wine into his blood," which must, if there is any meaning in words, entirely render the observations of Mr. Ward inapplicable.

We have gone at great length into the opinions cited, because we promised to contrast the recent teaching of certain persons in Oxford with that of the sermon we commenced with, and with the doctrine of the Church of England; and we promised to do so, because we thought it would be of service to the Church to pursue such a course: and when we reflect that the attempt of the Tractarian party at Oxford is to innoculate the junior graduates with their doctrines, that upon their going out into the Church they may work out their views, we cannot refrain from congratulating the Church at large on the well-timed publication of the sermon, with the consideration of which we began, testifying, as it does, that, notwithstanding the dishonest attempts that have been made, the whole of the youth of the Tniversity is not, as yet, depraved,

57

ART. III.-Vollständige Geschichte und Beschreibung des Heiligen Rockes zu Trier. Mit hohen bischöflichen Approbation. (A Complete History and Description of the Holy Coat at Treves. With the Bishop's official approbation). Coblenz. 1844. Third Edition.

2. Luther Revived; or, A Short Account of Johannes Ronge, &c. By A. ANDResen. London: Chapman, Newgate-street.

1845.

3. John Ronge, the Holy Coat of Treves, and the New German Catholic Church. Edinburgh: Nelson. 1845.

IT is impossible for any one-to whose heart the Church is dear, and who longs for the will of God to be done in earth as it is in heaven-to look with an eye of indifference upon the events which the last twelve months have given birth to within the Roman Catholic branch of the Church in Germany. We have, indeed, no sympathy with those who invite to an undiscerning and premature jubilation over the words and deeds of the first actor in that movement. We believe in no “ Luther revived;" we do not look or hope for him; and we should feel no joy in the actual standing up of such a person. The sixteenth century was no rehearsal for the nineteenth. Everything is good in its time, but out of its fit time the best thing is not good. Neither an individual, nor the Church itself, can live over again a day that has once gone by.

But considering the place which Germany occupies in the centre of Europe, and the manner in which, in God's providence, its people have been made to penetrate alike the Slavonic, the Italian, and the Gallic regions of Christendom-considering the general and increasing influence of its language, its erudition, and its manner of thinking-every movement of the German mind becomes interesting to us, and has a claim upon the serious notice of all who wish to understand the present, or to be prepared for the future, progress of God's dealings with his Church.

The two first publications, placed at the head of our article, have been selected as representing the two extremes of sentiment upon this subject which now engages the attention of the Church in Germany. The one is an argument for the genuineness of the holy coat of Treves, and an invitation to all pious persons to worship before it. The other is a publication in English, of the vigorous protestations of the humble chaplain, Johannes Ronge, against that and similar superstitions, and an invitation to all men to hail his rise, and sing pans of exulta+

tion over the prospects which he has been the instrument of opening before the human race. The third work has been added, principally for the sake of its historical details, and especially for the piece of autobiography which it contains.

Had we met with the argument for the genuineness of the holy coat in a production of Dean Swift's, we should have considered it a very happy and successful piece of drollery. A more amusing parody could scarcely be imagined on certain general arguments which one meets with in the works of theoretic theologians, and in the lighter neological books of biblical criticism and evidences. It is an attempt to prove a particular fact from general grounds, and runs pretty much thus:

That a tunic was worn by our blessed Lord; that as many as touched this vesture were healed-as for instance the woman who had an issue of blood for twelve years-that in it he was transfigured; and that it became bright and glistened with the divine glory; are facts ascertained to us by an express testimony of the four evangelists, those cherubim of the new covenant, men who were eye-witnesses of the facts which they relate, who wrote under the influence and guidance of the Holy Ghost, and whose works have come down to us as main pillars of our faith. These facts being established, it cannot be doubted, says our author, that on our Lord's crucifixion, the apostles or some of the more zealous disciples, did use every possible effort to rescue that holy and wonderful tunic from the hands of the enemies of Jesus, and to become possessed of it themselves. This is, indeed, too natural to require a single word of evidence or argument. And, furthermore, must not one, as a matter of course, suppose, even in the absence of all express witness to that effect, that the almighty and heavenly Father did not permit the sacred and holy vesture of his only begotten to remain in the blood-stained hands of wicked men, and to be withheld from the possession of the holy champions of the name and faith of Jesus. And is not this supposition, in itself so reasonable and indeed certain, put past all doubt, when we reflect that even the soldiers themselves -the rudest of the enemies of the Lord, the very men who nailed him to the cross-were so affected with reverence and awe in handling this robe, that they preserved it entire, and did cast lots for it as for an invaluable treasure.

Add to this what we learn from tradition, that Mary the holy mother of God, after the custom of that time, had, with her own hands, woven this tunic of her divine child, and that it grew and enlarged itself as he waxed in stature. For this oral tradition, we have, in truth, no express definite testimony: but who is there that will, who can call it in question?

If, then, we cast a penetrating glance back into those early days, are we not, as reasonable men, necessitated to concede, that the garments of our Lord were, by the apostles and first disciples, sought for and recovered, and kept with all care as a precious relic of the Son of the living God? Does not every one also at once perceive how easy it must have been for them, even without any extraordinary divine co-operation, to obtain, for a trifling piece of gold, those holy spoils, from men, probably in necessitous circumstances, who had laid hold of them as the customary perquisites of their cruel office? The least degree of sagacity and intelligence is sufficient, as we have said, to remove from the conjecture all doubt or hesitation.

There are, saith he, no means of ascertaining who was the fortunate individual who actually did obtain that precious relicwhether it was John, or Mary Magdalen, or perhaps Joseph of Arimathea, or Nicodemus, or, in short, who; but this need not affect our argument. And that, in the writings of the first century, we find no information upon this point (as, indeed, concerning the vesture altogether, no word of information--not a hint of what became of it-is to be found in those early records) can conclude nothing against our belief; for is it not beyond a doubt that, during the storms and persecutions of that time, many a precious jewel of evidence was lost, so much so that the scriptures themselves scarce furnish forth, without the aid of tradition, a sufficient exposition, even of the essentials of the faith? Nay, this absence of the mention of such a thing in the writings of the first centuries is only consistent with that which our reason would naturally expect; for, during the horrible time of persecutions, it is to be supposed that the more sacred and venerable any relic was, the more carefully would it be concealed from view, and kept from the common report of men; and only there would it be brought to the light of day, when the followers of Christ found themselves no longer pursued with fire and sword, or subject to the violence of those heathen tyrants, who, for centuries, had in every way sought to seize and to destroy whatever was reckoned holy and dear by the Christians.

*

Then follows a rhetorical account of the conversion, vision, victory, and proclamation of Constantine, and of the piety and zeal of his mother, of whom it is said by the author, that Christianity has to refer its victory and progress more to the enthusiasm and piety of this princess than to any other earthly cause. The induction proceeds further in this strain

It lies in the very nature of things that, with the triumph

of Christianity under Constantine, and the toleration which he had ordained, the Christians did gradually lay aside their former customary fears, and no longer made their relics and holy things matters of such mystery. Still more natural is it, that, on the visit of Helen to the Holy Land, all the faithful who in those parts were in possession of holy relics joyfully stepped forward to lay them before the eyes of this pious lady; and this the more, as her son had caused her to be honoured with the imperial crown. It is past doubt that, in answer to the request of this most Christian and pious empress, every single relic which yet remained in that theatre of the history of our blessed Lord was at once laid open for her veneration: and that she, whose unwearied zeal and distinguished success in seeking for the cross on which the Redeemer of the world had suffered are so well known, did also institute a diligent search for other relics, such as the lapse of three centuries might have suffered to drop into oblivion-and among these, most especially for the holy garments of Jesus-is a thing which, even in the absence of all evidence, may well be assumed expressly.

This being established beyond the reach of contradiction, what can well be more conceivable than that her diligent search was rewarded by a happy discovery of these things. And also, that she was urged and persuaded to retain possession of them is manifest, for in whose hands could those precious memorials be more secure than in those of the august sister and fellowChristian? All this is indeed so manifest that one feels a difficulty in conceiving on what grounds it can be that so many persons doubt, and indeed hold for next to impossible, that the Empress Helen ever was in possession of the holy coat.

Most foolish would it be after this for any one to call in question, except upon proofs of the most positive and forcible description, the fact that we are now in possession of that venerable relique. For if it be, as we have shewn, not possible merely, but much rather probable, and indeed in the highest degree probable, and as one may say, absolutely certain, that Helen did both discover and also get possession of it, are we not, in absence of any proof to the contrary, compelled, in the exercise of our reason, to assure ourselves, that Christendom is still somewhere or other able to shew the wonderful and precious deposit.

Then follows a similarly constructed argument to shew that Treves is the city to which the deposit was committed; what is modestly hinted at, or assumed as probable, in one sentence, springing up as irrefragably certain in the next. But we have said enough to shew by what sort of reasonings superstition