« السابقةمتابعة »
are ruins also of the Bishops' Castle, part of which, consisting of two upper stories of an old tower, has been converted into a county gaol. The Cathedral was built, as before mentioned, by Bishop Gilbert Murray in the early part of the 13th century. In a feud which took place between a tribe of Murrays settled in that country, and the Earls of Caithness, it was burnt, together with the town, by the Master of Caithness, about the year 1567. It is said that the present Kirk at Dornoch, erected by the Duchess Countess of Sutherland at an expense of £6000, is as nearly as possible a facsimile of the old Cathedral, the proportions and decorations having been carefully copied, but this statement would imply that the Cathedral could not have been destroyed in the conflagration of the town before mentioned.
The Bishops of Caithness had another residence at Scrabister or Scrabster Castle, near Thurso, in the northern extremity of the county, the vestiges of which still remain. Here it was that, about the end of the 12th century, John Bishop of Caithness was tortured by having his tongue cut out, and his eyes pulled out, and afterwards put to death.
Arms of the see of Caithness: Azure, a crown of thorns, Or, between three saltiers, Argent.
IT were much to be desired that men would bestow more of their attention on the philosophy of history-that they would learn to look on it, not as a mere record of events, but as a storehouse of precious lessons, garnered up by experience of the past for guidance in the future. When viewed in this light, the stirring catalogue of recent occurrences in the political world acquires a new and augmented interest. The expulsion of dynasties, the overthrow of long and, as they were deemed, firmly established governments; the waves of popular discontent swallowing up time-honoured institutions, and where they have not broken all bounds, surging and swelling with the uneasy motion which preludes the storm-these are but the outward exhibitions of principles which have long been working, though hitherto beneath the surface, and therefore perhaps but little noticed. Many a lesson might the leaders of our country glean as to the
tendency of the so-called 'Liberal' principles, which have received so much favour and development of late. But to one point in particular we would draw attention. We would wish to indicate, how serious a loss the cause of order sustains in the discouragement of the Church, and the fostering of a latitudinarian spirit.
In true Church principles will be found the best antidotes to the destructive elements, that threaten to convulse the world, and plunge it in the miseries of anarchy and war. A thoughtful mind will trace. the operation of precisely the same principles in the political and religious world,-the two great spheres of action for the mind of man. There is such a thing as religious republicanism. Dissent and schism spring from the same carnal principle of repugnance to submit to lawful authority, which incites the democrat to revolt. A republican constitution would seem in its ultimate elements to be in some degree an unchristian one. It is indeed agreeable to the pride of the natural man, which yearns for liberty, and will not brook submission. It flatters him with the idea, false and impossible though it be to realise, of self government. Yet this itself might suggest a doubt of its conformity to the will of God, for in the christian code, self restraint would seem to be as much the moral law, as external constraint is the inevitable physical law of man's being. But nothing conduces so much to the development of this impatient pride as the spirit of individualism, which is pampered, no less by the mistaken theology of separatists from the Holy Catholic Church, than by the false philosophy which preaches the rights of man.'
How completely in opposition to such a spirit is the teaching of the Church! She grafts the individual into her own majestic incorporation, and teaches him, that all the high privileges he becomes entitled to, are derived to him as a member of this society, and through its appointed channels. She teaches him to pour out his spirit in confession, and proffer his petitions as a member of the congregation. She teaches him to offer up his alms at God's altar in a common fund with those of his brethren, there to receive that consecration and benediction which makes them, like Pity, doubly blest, blessing him that gives and him that receives. She puts bis individuality out of sight in every thing save his responsibility. She does not advance that flattering fallacy, which the very laws of nature so unequivocally contradict, of the natural liberty of man. On the contrary, she pronounces him born the slave of sin and Satan ;
and though he is released from this bondage by the washing of regeneration in the waters of Holy Baptism, it is but that he may take on himself another service, and continue Christ's faithful soldier and servant to his life's end. She teaches him, that the dutiful affections of the citizen are due to his Sovereign and his Church, as those of the child to his father and his mother.
In a former number we glanced at some injurious tendencies of the principle of centralization, when carried to excess. The mischievous results likely to flow from an exaggeration of its opposite individualism demonstrate how necessary it is to grasp and hold steadily both principles in conjunction; for human conduct is like the ellipse which is formed round two foci.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SCOTTISH MAGAZINE AND
SIR,-I read the opening article of your April number with great pleasure. During the last 18 or 20 years, the subject of unfulfilled prophecy has occupied a goodly share of my thoughts. And, as my convictions during almost all that time have in the main accorded with Dr Todd's, I welcomed your remarks, as calculated to call attention to what I believe to be the great truth for the awakening of the Church in these last days.
The reason of my troubling you is, to ask correction of a mistake which does injustice (unintentionally I am sure) to two clergymen, to whom I am under the deepest obligations.
The words I refer to are these: 'In the year 1840 Dr Todd's Discourses &c., were given to the public, and at once excited a very intense and general interest, as being the first attempt, in modern times, to interpret those solemn predictions on the principle which had universally obtained in the Church in primitive ages, but which had been wholly superseded and become almost unknown in our own day.'
Now here are two mistakes.
1st, It is almost too much to say, that Dr Todd's lectures when published excited intense and general interest. I am sorry to say that owing to their costly form, these admirable lectures have had but a limited circulation, and of course could not have made so general an impression. I remember well, however, that when de
livered, the Dublin Protestants (par excellence) tried to get up a rumpus as if Tom Macguire had been preaching in the University pulpit. This called forth a very amusing article in the British Magazine; but I rather think the interest ended there.
2d, Dr Todd's services to the Church, as a tutor and divine, are so great and so generally acknowledged, that he can afford to do justice to those from whom he learned his prophetical views. This he has done so fully in both his books, that I rather wonder at your speaking of his lectures as the 'first attempt in modern times to interpret,' &c. And I shall be glad if these remarks help to do justice to two clergymen who preceded him in his enquiries, and whose works I should like to see in the hands of all Scottish Churchmen.
The two clergymen I refer to, are the Rev. S. R. Maitland, now Librarian at Lambeth; and the Rev. William De Burgh, now of St Mary's, Glasgow.
I cannot say exactly when Mr Maitland first published his thoughts on prophecy, but his first enquiry into the question of the 1260 days was certainly in circulation in 1826; and the second edition of his Second Inquiry, now before me, was published in 1829. In 1830, he published his pamphlet on Antichrist. In 1831, came out his reply to the Rev. Wm. Digby on the 1260 days; and in 1834, he demolished an insolent attack made on him by Mr Cunninghame of Lainshaw.
You will thus see that Mr Maitland had published largely on the subject during a period extending to at least fourteen years prior to Dr Todd's publication; and that, so far from his writings falling to the ground unnoticed, they stirred up no small controversy. Another fact, shewing how much attention was excited even by his first pamphlet, is this, that Edward Irving, in his noble preface to Ben Ezra, written in 1827, attempts a reply to Mr Maitland's arguments.
Allow me to say that the Church is scarcely sensible of her obligations to S. R. Maitland. For above twenty years, with a boldness and zeal, learning and acuteness, beyond all praise, he has done. truth's battle against whole legions of popular falsehoods. The Jesuit leaven of telling lies for God had been working mightily in the Reformed Churches, perverting the whole story of the Church's labour and conflict, and of God's dealings with her, from the 6th to the 16th century. No popish tradition ever held bigoted Romanist in firmer bondage to belief of a lie-eating out the very capacity for apprehending truth-than did these Protestant traditions of modern
growth. It would not be easy to count up the hosts slain by Mr Maitland. His letters to Rose, his various pamphlets on Milner's Church History, and Fox's Acts and Monuments, his most interesting essays on the Dark Ages, and his recent papers in the British Magazine on the Reformation in England, and the workings of the Puritanic element then and immediately afterwards, have done much to dispel many popular delusions on points of the highest importance; and, above all, have taught not a few to love and follow truth for her own sake, without first considering how she may affect their favourite theories, or bedim the glory of their old idols.
The Rev. Wm. De Burgh's writings on unfulfilled prophecy, though subsequent in date to the earliest of Mr Maitland's, were the result of independent investigation; and the lectures on the Second Advent-which ought rather to be described as Lectures on the Antichrist-were published in Dublin in 1831, in entire ignorance of Mr Maitland's previous writings.* Of these Lectures a second edition appeared in 1834 or 1835, and a third in 1841. 1841. In 1832, Mr De Burgh also published a series of Discourses on the Apocalypse, advocating the primitive interpretation. A second edition of these was published in 1833, a third in 1834, and a fourth in 1839. So that several years previous to Dr Todd's Lectures, his friend, Mr De Burgh, had, in the same city, published two works advocating the same views. Both works had a very extensive circulation-which they well deserve-being indeed excellent specimens of lucid scriptural exposition.
Trusting that your article, and this supplementary epistle, may incite your readers to the earnest and chastened study of the sure word of prophecy, wherein they will be greatly helped by the writings of Messrs Maitland and De Burgh,-I remain, SIR, your very obedient servant,
DEATH OF THE BISHOP OF GLASGOW.
SINCE the publication of our last number it has pleased the Almighty to afflict the Church of Scotland by depriving her of one of her chief
* I enclose a single Sermon on Antichrist by Mr De Burgh. You will observe, from the preface, that his views were formed so early as 1824.