language of Christ at the marriage at Cana of Galilee, Mr. Newman, in his Sermons on Subjects of the Day, finds an argument for the "PRESENT INFLUENCE ANd power of THE MOTHER OF GOD."

"Observe, He said to His Mother, What have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come.' Perhaps this implies that when His hour was come, then He would have to do with her again as before; and such really seems to be the meaning of the passage. What have I to do with thee now?' I have had, I shall have; but what have I to do with thee now as before? what as yet? what till my hour is come?"pp. 39, 40.

What grounds Mr. Newman has for saying that this 'really seems to be the meaning of the passage,' the writer cannot pretend to conjecture. But the use Mr. Newman makes of it will be obvious from the following, which occurs shortly after:

"As to St. Mary, He had said, 'Mine hour is not yet come;' so He said to St. Peter, in the passage just cited, 'Whither I go, thou canst not follow Me now, but thou shalt follow me afterwards.' And as at his first feast, He had refused to listen to His Mother's prayer, because of the time, so to His Apostles He foretold, at His second feast, what the power of their prayers should be, by way of cheering them on His departure. Ye now therefore have sorrow, but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you. In that day ye shall ask Me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in My Name, He will give it you.' And again, Ye are My friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. Henceforth I call you not servants, for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth; but I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard of My Father, I have made known unto you.' In the gifts promised to the Apostles after the Resurrection, we may learn THE PRESENT INFLUENCE AND POWER OF THE MOTHER OF GOD."-pp. 42, 43.

By such modes of commentating, the Bible may be made to support any superstition whatever, as the taste of the commentator pleases. But, observe how Mr. Oakeley, who, it seems, would wish to recommend monasticism to the members of the church of England, has adopted quite a different turn to the story: the extract is long, but it is too curious a specimen of this system of meditation to admit of its being abridged :

"Though it is uncertain whose marriage it was that was celebrated at Cana of Galilee, let us, for meditation's sake, suppose it to have been that of St. John the Evangelist, which St. Jerome seems to affirm in his preface to St. John. Our Lady was present at it, not as a stranger invited to it, but as the elder sister, and as the person of the highest dignity; for it was her sister's house, and she was as it were at home, as the principal lady and manager of the feast. And this we may gather from three things. First, from the sacred text, which tells us that the Mother of Jesus was there, but, says of Jesus and his disciples, that they were invited; which we are to understand likewise of the rest of the persons present. When her sister, then, Mary Salome, the wife of Zebedee, came to her to Nazareth, which is about four leagues distant from Cana, and told her that she designed to celebrate the marriage of her son John, she went back with her to Cana, some days before the appointed time of the feast, to make preparation for it, so that, when the others were invited, she was already there. Secondly, we may gather it from her taking notice herself of the want of wine, which would seem to show that she was not there in the character of a guest, but as one who had the management of the entertainment, and observed therefore the want of wine. For, had she been sitting there as a guest, would the modest Virgin have sat, think you, by her Son, amongst the men? And, had she been sitting amongst the women, would she have discovered the want of wine, rather than any other? and, had she noticed it, would she have risen from the table to acquaint her Son? There appears an unseemliness in this; and therefore it is probable that she was not there at the time as a guest, but that she was engaged in arranging the entertainment; for we are told of her, that she was ever attentive in helping others. Thirdly, we may gather it from her giving the directions to the servants to go to her Son, and do

whatever He should command them; for from this it appears that she had an authority over them, and that she had the control of the feast, and was then anxious that there should be no want of anything. According to this view of the circumstances, then, regard our Lord Jesus eating amongst the rest, like any one of the company, and sitting not amongst the chief guests, but in one of the lowest places, as we may gather from His own words. For he would not imitate the manner of the proud, who chose out the chief rooms at feasts, whom He designed afterwards to teach; When thou art bidden of any man to a wedding, go and sit down in the lowest room. But He began first to do, and then to teach. Regard our Lady also, how considerate and cheerfully alert she is, and diligently attentive in seeing that everything is rightly done, and how she gives the servants what they require, and shows them how and with what things, to serve the several guests. And upon their returning to her, towards the end of the feast, and saying; 'We have no more wine to set before them;' she replied; ' I will procure you more; wait awhile.' And going out to her Son, who was humbly sitting, as I have said, at the end of the table, near the door of the room, she said to Him, My Son, there is no wine, and our sister is poor, and I know not how we shall get any.' But he answered, Woman, what have I to do with thee? This answer appears indeed severe, but it was for our instruction, according to St. Bernard, who says upon this passage, What hast Thou to do with her, O Lord? Art not Thou her Son, and she thy Mother? Dost Thou ask her, what have I to do with thee, Thou who art the Blessed Fruit of her pure womb? Is she not the same who conceived Thee, without injury to her modesty, and brought Thee forth, remaining still a Virgin? Is she not the same, in whose womb Thou sojournedst for nine months, at whose virgin breasts Thou wast fed, with whom, when twelve years of age, Thou wentest down from Jerusalem, and wast subject unto her? Why then, O Lord, is it that Thou dost now treat her thus severely, saying, What have I to do with Thee? Much hast Thou every way. But, ah! now I plainly see, that not as in anger, or as wishing to abash the tender modesty of Thy Virgin Mother, Thou saidst, What have I to do with thee? For on the servants coming to Thee, as she bade them, Thou doest without delay what she suggested. Why then, brethren, why had He thus answered her before? truly on our account, and on account of all who have been converted to the Lord, that we should no longer be disturbed by our regard for our earthly parents, or entangled by such ties in the exercises of a spiritual life. For, so long as we are of the world, we are plainly under duty to our parents; but having forsaken all things, even ourselves, much more are we free from anxiety as regards them. [That is, those who have taken monastic vows are freed from the fifth commandment-making void the law of God, by their tradition.] Thus we read of a hermit, who, upon his brother's coming to him to beg his advice, desired him to apply to another of their brothers, who had died some time before. Upon the other's replying with surprise that he was dead, So am I also,' answered the hermit. Admirably, therefore, has our Lord taught us not to be careful about our earthly relations farther than religion requires of us, in the answer which he made himself to His Mother, and what a Mother! Woman, what have I to do with thee? Thus, too, upon another occasion, when some one told Him that His Mother and brethren stood without, desiring to speak with Him, He answered, Who is my Mother, and who are my brethren? Where then are those who cherish such a carnal and vain concern for their earthly relations, as if they still lived in the midst of them?' Thus far St. Bernard. His Mother then, in no way cast down by this reply, but, relying upon His goodness, returned to the servants, and said; Go to my Son, and whatever He shall say to you, do.' They went then, and filled the water-pots with water, as the Lord commanded them. When they had done this, He said to them; 'Draw now, and bear to the governor of the feast.' And here observe, first, our Lord's discretion, for He sent first to the most honourable person at the feast. And secondly, that He sat at a distance from him, for His words are; Bear it to him, as though he were some way from Him. For, as he sat in one of the chief places, we may gather that our Lord would not sit there near him, nay, that He chose for Himself the lowest place. The servants then gave the wine to him, and to the rest, speaking openly at the same time of the miracle, for they knew how it had been wrought, and His disciples believed on Him. When the feast was over, our Lord Jesus called John apart, and said to him, PUT AWAY this your wife, and follow Me, for I will lead you to a higher marriage.' Whereupon he followed Him. By His presence, then, at this marriage feast, our Lord sanctified earthly marriage as an ordinance of God. But by His calling John from it, He gave us clearly to understand

that the spiritual marriage of the soul with Him in a single life is far more perfect. [And it is of that Lord who hath said, "that He hateth putting away," that this impious falsehood, worthy only of the heresy of the Manichees, is told for the benefit of members of the Church of England.] Our Lord Jesus retired then from thence, intending from henceforth to apply Himself publicly and openly to the work of our salvation. But He would first conduct his Mother back to her home; for it was meet that none but He should be the companion of our Lady on her journey. He therefore takes her, and John, and His other disciples; and they come to Capernaum, near Nazareth, and a few days after to Nazareth. Contemplate them, then, on their way, how they walk together, Mother and Son; how humbly they journey, and on foot, but most lovingly. O what a pair are they! never was such another pair seen on earth! Contemplate also His disciples reverently following, and listening to the words of our Lord. For He was never idle, but was always either doing or saying something good. They could never, surely, be tired travelling in such company!" -pp. 103-108.

So, "for meditation sake," we may go on supposing until the spirit of falsehood and delusion who presides over such arts of Meditation has brought us to contradict the commandments of God, and to represent the Lord as commanding an act which he has expressly forbidden, and of which he has solemnly declared his abhorrence.

Bonaventure was a Franciscan friar. And so he endeavours to recommend the voluntary mendicancy of his order, by representing the Lord himself as receiving alms. The passage is in the account of the return from Egypt :

"The next morning, when they are ready to set out on their journey, you will see some of the most venerable matrons of the city, and the wiser part of the men, come to accompany them out of the gates, in acknowledgment of their peaceful and pious manner of life, while among them. For they had given notice, throughout the neighbourhood, some days before, of their intention to depart, that they might not seem to steal away in a clandestine manner, which might have looked suspicious; the very reverse of their proceeding when they fled into Egypt, at which time their fear for the Infant obliged them to secresy. And now they set out on their journey; holy Joseph, accompanied by the men, going before, and our Lady following at some distance, with the matrons. Do you take the blessed Infant in your arms, and devoutly carry Him before her, for she will not suffer Him out of her sight.

"When they were out of the gates, the holy Joseph dismissed the company, whereupon one of them, who happened to be rich, called the Child Jesus to him, and compassionating the poverty of His parents, bestowed a few pence upon Him; and many others of the number followed the example of the first, and did the same. The Holy Child is not a little abashed by the offer, yet, out of love to poverty, He holds out His little hands, and blushing, takes the money, for which He returns thanks. The matrons then call Him, and do the same. Nor is the Mother less abashed than her Son; however, she makes them her humble acknowledgments. Do you share His confusion and that of His holy parents, and meditate on the great lesson here set you, when you see Him whose is the earth and the fulness thereof, making choice of so rigorous a poverty, and so necessitous a life, for Himself, His blessed Mother, and holy fosterfather. What lustre does not the virtue of poverty receive from their practice! and how can we behold it in them, without being moved to the love and imitation of their examples?"-Life of Christ, pp. 58, 59.

Did Mr. Oakeley understand Bonaventure's motive for representing Christ as receiving alms in this manner? And, if so, is religious mendicancy one of the virtues which it is the object of this movement to recommend? But these are matters of secondary moment. The point is, to observe the way the Scripture narrative is turned and twisted, and circumstances invented, to give colour to a particular doctrine. In a similar spirit, the writer of the Life of St. Gilbert has

It is

the audacity (for it is no less) to represent the surprise of the disciples at seeing the Lord conversing with the Samaritan, as if it was occasioned by their finding him in company with a woman. really most distressing to be obliged to transcribe such disgusting profaneness, but it is absolutely necessary to expose the mischievous character of the system. The passage occurs in the account of St. Gilbert's residence in the village of Sempringham, of which he was lay-rector. He and his chaplain lodged with a man who had a wife and children. The biographer proceeds :

"The daughter of the householder with whom he dwelt was a holy and devout maiden, whose modest graces endeared her to the hearts of all the villagers. She was Gilbert's scholar, and was growing up beneath his eye in simplicity and holiness. God however did not allow him to dwell long beneath this peaceful roof. One night he dreamed that he had laid his hand upon the maiden's bosom, and was prevented by some strange power from again withdrawing it. On awaking he trembled, for he feared lest God had warned him by this dream that he was on the verge of evil. He was utterly unconscious of the danger, but he revealed the temptation and the dream to his confessor, and asked him his opinion. The priest, in return, confessed that the same feeling had come over him; the result was, that they resolved to quit the neighbourhood of what might become danger. Gilbert had never wittingly connected evil with the pure and holy being before him; but his heart misgave him, and he went away. He knew that chastity was too bright and glorious a jewel to risk the loss of it; no man may think himself secure; an evil look or thought indulged in, have sometimes made the first all at once to become the last; therefore the greatest saints have placed strictest guard upon the slightest thought, word, and action. Even the spotjess and ever-virgin Mary trembled when she saw the angel enter her chamber. And He, who was infinitely more than sinless by grace, even by nature impeccable, because He was the Lord from heaven, He has allowed it to be recorded that his disciples wondered that he talked with a woman. All the actions of our blessed Lord are most real, for He had taken upon Himself the very reality of our flesh of the substance of the Virgin Mary ; but each action is also most highly significant and symbolical, so that, though all conduce to our great glory, yet all may be a warning to us in our greatest shame. Thus, though it would be unutterable blasphemy to connect with Him the possibility of sin, yet by this little act he has been graciously pleased to leave us an example, that as we should keep a dove-like purity of eye and thought, we should also, for the love of God, brave the scandal of evil tongues. And Gilbert imitated his blessed Lord, for though he fled from the very thought of danger, he still continued to guide her by his counsel; she does not disappear from the history, and by and bye we shall see that the dream might have another meaning."—pp. 23, 24.

But the

How could any person of ordinary purity of mind write such a disgusting story, and circulate it as an edifying work! object in quoting it is to show how the Bible is made to serve a purpose, and the passages of our Redeemer's life made to furnish sanctions for superstition-just as if the example of the Lord could be made to sanction that monastic "jealousy of intercourse with women," which these writers tell us is "characteristic of all the saints."

But there is no error which these fictions are more plainly designed to promote, than a superstitious reverence for the Virgin Mary. The reader has already seen what countenance this grievous delusion has received from Mr. Newman himself, in the passage quoted above from his Sermons on Subjects of the Day. Another most extraordinary passage is found in his Sermon on the Annunciation, in the second volume of his Parochial Sermons.

"Who can estimate the holiness and perfection of her who was chosen to be the Mother of Christ? If to him that hath, more is given, and holiness and divine

favour go together, (and this we are expressly told) what must have been the transcendant purity of her, whom the Creator Spirit condescended to overshadow with His miraculous presence? What must have been her gifts, who was chosen to be the only near earthly relative of the Son of God, the only one whom He was bound by nature to revere and look up to; the one appointed to train and educate Him, to instruct Him day by day, as He grew in wisdom and in stature? This contemplation runs to a higher subject, did we dare follow it; for what, think you, was the sanctified state of that human nature, of which God formed his sinless Son; knowing as we do, 'that what is born of the flesh, is flesh;' and that none can bring a clean thing out of an unclean.'"- pp. 147, 148.

Now, to say nothing of the absurdity of this argument-for if it be of any value at all, it must amount to a denial of original sin, and the doctrine of the fall of Adam; but, passing this by,-what can Mr. Newman mean by such language as this? Does he mean to propagate the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception?—and if not, what is the meaning or force of his argument? If the assertions he quotes from Scripture "that what is born of the flesh is flesh," and that "none can bring a clean thing out of an unclean," be used, as he plainly uses them, as a ground for determining the degree and nature of the sanctity and perfection of the Virgin Mary, because from her proceeded that which was without sin, then, obviously, her nature could not have been such as he supposes it was necessary it should be, unless it was kept free from original sin by an immaculate conception, as is commonly taught by Romanists. Nor is it easy to believe that so shrewd a writer as Mr. Newman, could have penned such an argument without having perceived its force. Indeed, the whole of the former part of the argument is just the common one used by the most extravagant writers in the Romish Communion-namely, that Mary must have merited to be the mother of the Lord; and it would be extremely absurd to suppose that, in this stage of the controversy, Mr. Newman could have been ignorant of the school from which his doctrine and reasoning were derived.

If such be the doctrine of the master, none can wonder at the extravagancies of the disciples. But it is not the object just now to expose their extravagancies, but to show the lengths they go to in their tampering with the word of God. Take another example. It is distinctly stated by St. Mark, that the first person to whom the Lord appeared after his resurrection was Mary Magdalene. “Now when Jesus was risen early, the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene." From which there have not been wanting Romanists to draw such conclusions as naturally present themselves to the devout mind. But Bonaventure must yield to the influence of that superstition which would make Mary the first and chief of all created beings; and therefore, in defiance of the words of holy Scripture, he will have it that the Lord appeared to her before he appeared to any one else. "You are to know," he says, "that nothing is contained in the gospel on his appearance to our Lady; but I mentioned it at the first, because the church appears to hold it," (p. 251;) and, in another place "how he appeared to his mother, is nowhere written; but pious belief is as I have related it." (p. 263.) So, although it is nowhere written, and nothing is said of it in the gospel, he proceeds to describe the appearance :