'dentia multa callebat, post Imperatorum potentior ac ditior 'cunctis in regno.' It is farther mentioned by Leo, that Victor had set himself in the way of the designs of the former Pope-prædecessori suo-impedimento maximo fuerat.' In these particulars we have an explanation given of the choice made by Hildebrand, and of the depth of his policy. He judged wisely, that by the appointment of this individual, the Emperor would be deprived of his ablest adviser; and that an influential politician, who had hitherto been opposed to the interests of the papacy, would thus be gained wholly over. During the short pontificate of Victor, the soundness of Hildebrand's policy was clearly shown, though Victor himself never seems to have forgiven Hildebrand for his choice.* Victor II. was succeeded by Stephen IX., who enjoyed his dignity only a year, when Nicolas II. was raised to the papal chair. The pontificate of Nicolas II. is distinguished by the law which placed the papal election in the hands of the cardinals, with the consent of the people. The difficulties which had attended 'his own election,' says Mr Waddington, probably led him, under the guidance of Hildebrand, his counsellor and patron, 'to that measure which was the foundation of papal independ'ence.' Vol. ii. p. 61.—But the difficulty presents itself-How could so decided a measure be carried into effect? Of this, Mr Waddington gives no explanation whatever; and an incidental any * Victor proceeded in the work of reform, and Hildebrand was employed as his legate in France, to endeavour to put down the monstrous evil of simony. Various bishops were deposed by him; and Mr Waddington mentions, in a note, Respecting one of these, it is recorded by several writers, that having been guilty of simony, he became • unable to articulate the offended name of the Holy Ghost, though he could pronounce those of the Father and of the Son without 'difficulty.' Vol. ii. p. 60.—We have seen the story told in another way. The bishop had bribed all the witnesses who were to appear against him; and when he entered into the presence of the papal legate, he boldly demanded to be confronted with his accusers. Hildebrand fixed his eyes upon him, and asked if he had not been guilty of sinning against the Holy Ghost. The bishop protested his innocence. • Then,' said the legate, Repeat after me, Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost. Conscience-stricken, the guilty prelate in vain made the attempt; and falling down at the feet of Hildebrand, confessed that he was unworthy of his holy office. The searching looks, the thrilling accents, the awe-inspiring countenance of Hildebrand, with all the ideas of sacredness which attached to his character, imparted an irresistible power to his unexpected demand, and, in a superstitious age, it was enough to be considered as miraculous. allusion to the mother of Henry IV. is all that we have to guide us to what in reality is the key to many of the most important events that we afterwards meet with in the history of Hildebrand, viz. that Henry III. was now dead, and that the government was in the feeble hands of a minor. It was in consequence of this that a more decided line of policy was now adopted at Rome. In 1061, Alexander II. was placed in the papal chair, though the election was disputed. And here, again, Mr Waddington has omitted all mention of the circumstance that ultimately gave him full possession, viz. that the Archbishop of Cologne, who had secured for himself at that time the guardianship of Henry IV., was won over to the interests of Hildebrand. Mr Waddington, we think, attaches somewhat too much importance to the pontificate of Alexander II. He does not, however, overrate the degree of influence possessed over him by Hildebrand.* Upon the death of Alexander II., Hildebrand was called by the unanimous voice of the Romans to fill the vacant chair: (His election, by the way, according to our author, had probably been long delayed, because his stern virtues had made him unpopular; and then he was elected, because his stern virtues, after all, made him popular. See note, vol. ii. p. 66.) The two abuses that the Pope now set himself to reform are properly stated. 1. The marriage of the clergy; and, 2. The simoniacal sale of benefices. But the means by which he sought to accomplish the first of these reforms seem not to be understood by Mr Waddington. He quotes from the order of the council, held in 1074, the following passage: That the sacerdotal ' orders should abstain from marriage; and that such clerks as had already wives or concubines, should immediately dismiss 'them, or quit the priestly office.' And then he mentions, that, in prosecution of this object, he did not confine himself to *The following contemporary verses,' says Mr Waddington, in a note, perhaps do not much exaggerate the actual supremacy of Hildebrand: ، Papam rite colo, sed te prostratus adoro : Tu facis hunc Dominum-te facit ille Deum. The force of these verses' would have been somewhat increased, if Mr Waddington had informed us that they were addressed to Hildebrand by his friend Damian; that they were written upon occasions altogether different; and that the latter distich was in consequence of Hildebrand refusing to Damian a petition which the Pope had granted. 6 6 the weapon of spiritual censure, but sought to arm the temporal authorities in his service; and, last of all, after alluding to the opposition he met with, he states that the confusion 'created was gradually tranquillized by the progress of time, by the perseverance of the Pontiff, by the aid, perhaps, of the laity, by the indifference of the sovereigns,' &c. Now, we have to remark here, that an essential part of the decree that part which distinguished it from all the edicts of his predecessors, and which was contrary, indeed, to an ancient ecclesiastical canon is omitted by Mr Waddington. It was ordained that no layman should receive any of the ordinances of religion from a priest that did not comply with the new injunction. This presented to the superstitions of the laity of that age the strongest inducement to see the decree of Gregory executed; and instead of saying that the law was ultimately carried into effect, perhaps, by the aid of the laity,' he should have mentioned this as the chief cause. Legates were sent throughout different kingdoms, to enforce the observance of the statute, and they found the people interested on their side. The writings of the time are full of the violences and disturbances which were occasioned by the people refusing to receive the institutions of religion from married priests, and of the miseries to which the priests were thus subjected.* The proceedings of Gregory, in reference to the sale of ecclesiastical benefices, the circumstances which led him into a contest with Henry IV. rather than with the Kings of France or England, and the connexion of the question as to simony, with his views respecting the supremacy which it was his ambition to establish, are very imperfectly set forth, or not at all alluded to; but our limits remind us that we must not enter upon these topics. The propagation of Christianity among the northern nations is a subject of much interest; and we regret to say that Mr Waddington is here more vague and unsatisfactory than in any part of his work. There is no notice whatever of St Columba, or of his followers. The account of the introduction of Christianity among the English is worse than imperfect. The whole work is ascribed to St Augustine, though in reality the Northum Among the passages referred to, we may quote the following:Quocunque prodeunt clamores insultantium, digitos ostendentium colaphos pulsantium perferunt.' And another writer states, Laici corpus domini a presbyteris conjugatis consecratum sæpe pedibus con'culcaverunt et sanguinem domini voluntare effuderunt.' brians, the middle Angles, the Mercians, and East Saxons, were converted by means of the Columban missionaries. The account of the conversion of Denmark terminates with the labours of Angarius, and leaves us in doubt whether that excellent individual really performed miracles, or whether his success was altogether to be ascribed to his possession of the authority of a legate of the Pope. This is literally the substance of all that we have upon the subject. The struggle between Christianity and Heathenism is left unnoticed, and the real cause of the conversion of the Danes is not at all hinted at, viz. the connexion between the Danes and the Norwegians who settled in France and England, and who were converted to Christianity; and the efforts of the English priests with the support of Swein and Canute the Great. The account of the introduction of our religion into Sweden and Norway is equally defective; and Iceland is passed over altogether, though it presents some particulars of singular interest. The notices of the conversion of the Slavic nations are, if possible, still more meagre. But, perhaps, the most unpardonable omission is, that Mr Waddington takes no notice whatever of the moral influence of Christianity upon any of the nations thus converted. Upon this subject we would refer him to the fifty-fifth chapter in the History of the Decline and Fall,' where Gibbon points out many of the temporal advantages that were derived from the change of faith. We may refer him also to the passage in Milner that treats of this part of the Christian history where the prejudiced view of Hume is very fairly exposed. We intended to have brought forward some particulars connected with this and various other subjects; but we really find that to point out all the mistakes and to supply all the deficiencies of Mr Waddington would require far more space than we can afford for such a task. We shall now conclude what has been to us a painful duty, as many good qualities displayed by this writer would have disposed us to leave his work unnoticed. But it is surely of importance that the public should be made aware of the exact state of our ecclesiastical literature. We have neither time nor space at present to enquire into the causes of its deficiencies. the But we shall be happy if the remarks that have been made, shall direct public attention to the subject, and stimulate our theologians to increased industry in this field of enquiry. ART. IX.-1. Letter from LORD STANLEY to SIR THOMAS HESKETH, the permanent Chairman of the North Lancashire Conservative Association. Morning Chronicle, June 18, 1835. 2. Letter from SIR THOMAS HESKETH to LORD STANLEY. Morning Chronicle, June 27, 1835. 3. Address of the Reform Association to the People of the United Kingdom. Morning Chronicle, July 10, 1835. THE HE country is beset with political clubs and associations. This is an evil no doubt. But the evil is to be imputed much more to the excited state of the times, and to the causes which have led to it, than to the associations themselves. Discontents are most prevalent and extensive, when the government is much in advance or in arrear of the general intelligence of its subjects. For instance,-when the Hanoverian succession was established in this country on Whig principles, the system of government was considerably in advance of the public mind. Accordingly, there was wide disaffection, with much secret association and latent sedition spread over the least intelligent part of the community. Time and the temperate firmness of the government corrected or conciliated much of this discrepancy. A long course of opposition liberalized the Tory Jacobites, and the possession of power modified the views of the Whigs. By the middle of the century, there was found little difference between the two parties, save the circumstance of in or out of place. The discontents, and with them the secret associations, had died away -old hostilities had ceased, and undivided loyalty succeeded. The country was thriving and united. A war of brilliant achievements closed the reign of George the Second; and on the accession of his grandson, the Hanoverian succession had taken deep and firm root. A transition state had been gone through. An epoch had arrived when the views and ideas of the governed and of the governing were in general unison. It remained to be seen whether the rule of the new reign would be such as to maintain this harmony, by slackening the cords of its authority in proportion to the advancing knowledge and self-control of the people. Alas! the allurements of patronage and prerogative prevailed-a wide field lay open for the exercise of both, and it was sedulously cultivated during a long and prosperous reign of sixty years. The seeds of future discontents were then sown. Before the grave closed on George the Third, another change had taken place. The go |