That part of the preceding rule which allowed" the reading of the Bible translated into the vulgar tongue by Catholic authors," was qualified by the following proviso of Benedict XIV. :-"But if versions of this kind of books in the vulgar tongue are approved by the Apostolic See, or are edited with annotations drawn from the holy Fathers of the Church, or from learned and Catholic men, they are allowed."* Liberal, however, as this proviso seems, real effect it has none. The slightest reflection upon its conditions will at once convince the reader, that though it might suit the Pontiff to make a demonstration of the semblance of liberality, yet the reins were kept in his hands as effectually as ever. Let any unwelcome application be made for a licence, and here are the conditions, as strait, as numerous, and as dependent on interpretation as could be desired. No such thing as the simple word of God, "which is able to make us wise unto salvation," is to be permitted!

"Rule VII.-Books professedly teaching of lascivious or obscene subjects, or narrating or teaching them......are utterly prohibited; and those who possess them shall be severely punished by the Bishop. But works of antiquity, written by the Heathens, are permitted to be read, on account of the elegance and propriety of the language; though on no account shall they be suffered to be read by young persons."+

The reader will not fail to observe the easy virtue of Rome in thus giving permission for the reading of "obscene

works of antiquity, on account of the elegance and propriety of the language;" while the infinitely purer morality of the Scriptures is prohibited to be read, because, forsooth, if" the Holy Bible, translated into the vulgar tongue, be indiscriminately allowed to every one, the temerity of men will cause more evil than good to arise from it!!!" With as much reason might men be prohibited from eating or drinking, for fear they should abuse that liberty.

"Finally, it is enjoined on all the faithful, that no one presume to keep or read any books contrary to these rules, or prohibited by this Index. But if any one read or keep any books composed by heretics, or the writings of any author suspected of heresy, or false doctrine, [which are] condemned and prohibited, he shall instantly incur the sentence of excommunication; and those who read or keep works interdicted on another account, besides the mortal sin committed, shall be severely punished at the will of the Bishops."+

In addition to the ten rules of the Index, from which the preceding passages are cited, there are decrees respect ing prohibited books, not specially named in the Index. In these decrees, besides forms of prayer, calendars, martyrologies, necrologies, poems, Catechisms, and other elementary tracts on the doctrines of the Reformed or Protestant Churches, it is ordered that "all Bibles printed by Protestants, or enlarged by them with notes, arguments, summaries, scholia, and indexes," and also "metri

habere.

was confirmed by a royal ordinance. It is in full force in Ireland.*

Ninety years after the issuing of this Bull, the British and Foreign Bible Society was instituted at London, in 1804, for the single and benevolent object of promoting a wider circulation of the holy Scriptures, without note or comment, in the British dominions, as well as in other countries, whether Christian, Mohammedan, or Pagan; and its proceedings, as might be expected, called forth the bitter denunciations of successive Roman Pontiffs.

Pius VII. first issued a rescript to the Archbishop of Gnesn, Primate of Poland, dated June 29th, 1816; in which he denounced the circulation of the unadulterated Scriptures of truth, without note or comment, as a "crafty device, by which the foundations of religion are un dermined," and a "defilement of the faith most imminently dangerous to souls." Having exhorted the Archbishop to execute with the utmost earnestness whatever he can achieve by power, provide for by counsel, or effect by authority, to prevent the circulation of the Scriptures, Pius VII. reminds him of his episcopal duty, first of all, to expose the wickedness of this nefarious scheme (the circulation of the Bible) to the view of the faithful:

"And openly to publish the same, according to the rules prescribed by the Church, with all that erudition and wisdom in which you excel; namely, 'that Bibles printed by heretics are numbered among prohibited books, agreeably to the Rules of the Index,-No. II. and III.; for it is evident, from experience, that the holy Scriptures, when published in the vulgar tongue, have, through the temerity of men, produced more harm than benefit.' (Rule IV.) And this is the rather to be dreaded in times so depraved, when our holy religion is assailed from every quarter with great cunning and effort, and the most grievous wounds are inflicted on the Church. It is therefore necessary to adhere to the salutary decree of the Congregation of the Index, (June 13th, 1757,) that no versions of the Bible in the vulgar tongue be permitted, except such as are approved by the Apostolic See, or published with annotations_extracted from the writings of the holy Fathers of the Church.”+

Not many months after the date of the preceding rescript, the same Pontiff, on the 3d of September, 1816, addressed an objurgatory Brief to the Archbishop of Mohileff or Mohilow, the Romish Metropolitan of Russia, who had been guilty of the heinous crime (heinous in the judgment of Rome) of authorizing and exhorting the people committed to his care to procure modern versious of the Scriptures, or to accept them when offered, and attentively to peruse them. In this Brief, Pius VII. tells him that he ought to have kept in view what preceding Popes had always prescribed; namely, "That if the Holy Bible in the vulgar tongue were permitted everywhere without discrimination, more injury than benefit would thence arise."

After reciting the Constitutions of his predecessors, and particularly the Constitution Unigenitus, and further reprehending the good Prelate for omitting to enforce the traditions of the Church, Pius VII. concludes his denunciation of the Bible by telling him that he "should sincerely and plainly teach that the Christian faith and doctrine, as well dogmatical as moral, are contained, not in the Scriptures only, but also in the traditions of the Catholic Church; and that it belongs to the Church herself alone to interpret each of them."

In 1824, on the accession of Leo XII. to the pontificate, he issued an Encyclical Letter to all the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, and Bishops of the Roman obedience, dated May 3d; in which he urges them, by all means in their power, to keep the people from reading the Scriptures; and further gives his sanction to the Bulls of his predecessors against the circulation and reading of the word of God, which he audaciously termed the "Gospel of the devil."

The latest fulmination against the Scriptures was hurled by the present Pontiff, Gregory XVI., in an Encyclical Letter, dated the day after the nones of May, (that is, May 8th,) 1844. Having denounced the circulation of the Scriptures by the Bible Societies, and referred to the decrees of the Council of Trent, as well as to the prohibitions of preceding Popes against reading the Scriptures, concluding with the Encyclical Letter of Leo XII. last cited, he thus proceeds:→

"And the same thing was again done by our immediate predecessor, of equal happy memory, Pius VIII., in his Encyclical Letter issued the 24th of May, 1829. We, too, who with far inferior merit have succeeded to his place, have not omitted to exercise our apostolical solicitude upon the same object; and, among other things, have taken steps to recall to the memory of the faithful the rule formerly enacted, concerning translations of the Scriptures into the vulgar tongues." *

The Christian Alliance or League, at New-York, is next denounced in no measured terms; and all the decrees of preceding Popes against the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue are declared to be confirmed and renewed.

We are not surprised that M. Merle D'Aubigné's "History of the Reformation," and Dr. M'Crie's "History of the Reformation in Italy," should be honoured with the bitter denunciations of Gregory XVI., by whom they have been proscribed and condemned; for they contain such a developement of the principles and proceedings of the Romish Church; and Dr. M'Crie's History, in particular, contains such a delineation of the atrocious means resorted to for the extinction of the Reformation—that is, of pure and undefiled religion-in Italy; as would most completely open the eyes of the Italians generally, and especially of the "citizens of his own city," to the unscriptural and antiscriptural tenets and practices of the Popes and of Papal emissaries and agents. Unable to refute the statements of those historians, who have based their narratives upon indisputable authorities and documents, Gregory XVI. has denounced and prohibited them: just as his predecessors, Alexander VIII. and Innocent XII., prohibited Bishop Burnet's "History of the Reformation in England," + in which we have such important details respecting the abominations of Popery at the time the Reformation commenced in this country, and also of the cruelties perpetrated on the defenceless Protestants during the sanguinary reign of Mary.

To the authoritative declarations of successive Popes, above given, against the circulation and free reading of the Scriptures, we feel that it is perfectly

unnecessary for us to add a single reflection. They breathe, throughout, a determined and unmitigated spirit of hatred to the Bible; and no wonder,"for if the blessed truths of that divine book were once to become familiar to the ears and hearts of the poor, to whom that Gospel was preached," they would soon find out that they had long been following blind guides, who have "made the commandment of God of none effect by their traditions." Where, however, the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue are in the hands of a "people who know the joyful sound" of the Gospel, and who are devoutly grateful for that inestimable boon; there the emissaries of Popery cannot make any progress in proselyting. Of this important and delightful fact we have a signal illustration in the very ancient (we might say, primitive) Church of the Vaudois, and in the modern Christians of the island of Tahiti. The Vaudois have all along had the Scriptures in their hands. It was one of the charges made against them by their sanguinary Popish persecutors in the twelfth century, that they held that the text of the sacred Scriptures is to be received and believed in opposition to human traditions and comments. To the Vaudois were the Protestants of France indebted for the first French version of the Bible, (generally called "Olivetan's Bible," from the name of its ostensible translator,) which bears the date of 1535, and which was printed at their expense. And, notwithstanding the many centuries of persecution and oppression which the Vaudois have endured, their venerable Church, like the bush on the rock of Horeb, still subsists, burning, yet unconsumed. In the island of Tahiti, through the divine blessing upon the labours of the Missionaries of the London Missionary Society, the inhabitants, having experienced "the Gospel " to be "the power of God unto salvation," thirty years since renounced idolatry, with all its attendant abominations: and, having received from the Missionaries the precious gift of the holy Scriptures in their native language, they have continued, and still continue, steadfast in the faith of Christ, unmoved by the seductive efforts of the Jesuit Missionaries of Rome, who accompanied the French, when they illegally possessed