use of war? Who gains by it? Who loses by it? The answers are returned in lists of killed and wounded, in the grief of mothers and widows, in the ruin of families, and in taxes and debts of nations. There is something very striking in the attitudes of all the various peoples of Europe at the middle of this nineteenth century. We refer to the masses of the inhabitants of each country. There is evidently a disgust to war on the part of the people, when not violently excited by external circumstances. The contrast between the present attitude of France and its condition after its first revolution is truly remarkable. This contrast invites and challenges investigation, but which is foreign to this part of our subject.

It is by the comparison of two distant periods in the progress of a nation, or large portion of the world, and by striking the balance between them, that we perceive the advance or retrogradation made. Taking the world generally as affected by wars, from the beginning of the eighteenth century to the present date, a period of 150 years, or taking fractional parts, and comparing them with periods of equal length just before the Christian era, or during any equal period within that era, we shall probably ascertain that wars have been as frequent and as sanguinary and destructive in the modern periods as in any of the ancient. The history of modern Europe for the last hundred years is filled with narratives of wars and terrible slaughter. The invasion by Bonaparte of Russia may be compared with the invasion of Greece by Xerxes; and the fortifications of Paris within the last twenty years, are works, in one sense, as great as the wall of China. This is very remarkable, and presents a dreary and melancholy picture of human existence. Is it possible that man, generation after generation, must

bleed and groan and die by his own hands. What folly and madness!

To enable people to form some sort of conception even from a small part of the enormous waste of human life and destruction of human happiness and property caused by wars, we will state that in the Index to Hume and Smollett's History of England, under the head of "Battles and Skirmishes," there is the alphabetical list of the names of one hundred and ninety-one battles fought in various countries in which the people of Great Britain had some concern, and those battles were fought in the short period of about seventy years between the reign of William of Orange in 1689, and George Guelph II. in 1760. In the period from the beginning of George Guelph III. down through the American wars and the great French wars to Waterloo, and from thence to the massacre of the Kyber Pass and the carnage of Sabraon and Goojerat, and the wars in consequence of the seizure of the lands and cattle of the Kaffirs, the number of battles can scarcely be counted, and certainly the slaughter and the amount of misery cannot now be estimated.*

We have alluded to the alliance between war and religion among all heathen peoples, and even Mahomet preached and practised the doctrine of the "Koran and the sword." Christians in the governance of men

* In the complete Index to Gibbon's "History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire," brought down to the capture of Constantinople, in the year 1453, the words "Battle" and "War are not found in the list of the alphabetical references to the contents of the book. What is the inference from the absence of those two ominous words? Their number is LEGION, and a small volume would have been required to contain only the names of the wars, battles, sieges, skirmishes, and massacres, described in that celebrated history.

have endeavoured to unite religion with the civil and military powers, and in expressing the idea various forms of speech are used. It is recorded in the Memoirs of the celebrated Dr. Chalmers, that a parish schoolmaster expressed the sentiment in "The Bible and the Taws," which has been rendered into “The Bible and the Bayonet." The constitutional maxim in England, is the "Church and the State;" and thus the idea, in various forms of expression, of the union of the Christian religion with the powers of this world is embodied in the mind, and it will take long before the masses of men from the Bishop of Rome and the Archbishop of England to the shepherd and the parish schoolmasters shall be able to dissever the connection.

We will conclude this section with the state of the argument as it applies to the episcopal power at Rome. We have showed that its banner is one of Pretension, and its motto a Lie, and the union of the Bayonet and the Church is maintained in all the parts of that power. But the Bishop of Rome cannot trust the musket and bayonet to Romans, but hires foreigners to execute his military commands. The Scots in former ages, and the Swiss in modern times, have been and are soldiers who sold themselves and weapons to whatever power would buy them; but soldiers of fortune may be trusted, as their credit is at stake, and they know that as foreigners they would receive no quarter were they to be unfaithful. The Swiss troops stood by the Bishop of Rome in his extremity in the month of November, 1848, and would have lost their lives in his defence.* In November, 1850, it was said in the London newspapers that the Papal nuncio had applied to the Belgian government for authority to raise a legion of Bel

* The Swiss soldiers were those who chiefly fought during the three days in Paris for Charles X., in 1830.

gians; but, as reported, the application was coldly received.

General Oudinot, the commander of the French army, that besieged and took Rome in July, 1849, addressed in that city a deputation of cardinals, archbishops, and other dignitaries of the Roman church who waited upon him to thank him for his important services. He said, "I thank you in the name of France and the army for your good wishes. For my part I am proud of having defended the military honour of France, and re-established order. I am equally delighted to have had it in my power to serve the church and you, who must have suffered so severely during the evil days which you have passed through. Let us cast the veil of oblivion over those times of disorder, and labour to rectify what has been destroyed. Your long experience, your valuable knowledge of the wants of the country, are necessary to me. I rely on your co-operation and talent. The army and the clergy are the two great bodies called to save society."

* From the Nonconformist newspaper of 25th July, 1849.

ON THE

PAPAL STANDARD OF THE CROSS KEYS,

AND ON THE

EXTRAVAGANT PRETENSIONS OF THE BISHOPS OF ROME.

CHAPTER I.

The Pretensions of the Papistical power are stimulants to intellect, and challenges to private judgment. The challenge accepted. The nature of the demand made by the Bishops of Rome on the Credulity and Faith of Mankind.—The extravagant Claims acknowledged and sworn to by the supporters of the Church.-The Pretensions examined by the Scriptures. -Three things are required to be proved by the Bishops of Rome. The Evidence from the New Testament History shows that Peter did not consider himself invested with the "Power of the Keys," and it also shows that the words "Upon this Rock I will build my Church," apply to Christ Himself, and not to Peter, and, consequently, the Claims of the Bishops of Rome fall to the ground.-Evidences to show that the real Person and historical Character, Mary the Mother of Jesus, was not the mythical and immaculate Lady Mary of the Roman Church.

THE pretensions of the episcopal power, vested in Bishop of Rome, as put forth to the whole world, are unparalleled in the history of mankind. They serve as stimulants to the intellect, and challenge the private judgment of individuals.

We accept the challenge which those pretensions