Page:An Index of Prohibited Books (1840).djvu/225



 dispersion of his mystifications, and those ingenious tortuosities which have retired from every other profession than that of Roman controvertists. He will please to bear in mind, that the charge against his church is, not that she herself declares — trust her for that — but that from doings of her own proved upon her, it may legitimately be inferred, that in every single item of the spiritual articles in which she deals, she is saleable when her price is bid. Mr. G. therefore will excuse me if to his ineffective exculpation, I prefer the opinion of two of his betters in his church — that of the Pope, who affirms — Nee peccatorum venia nisi nummatis impenditur, and the tuneful Carmelite, a second Mantuan, who, with much more to the same purpose, sings — Sacra sunt venalia Romœ.

Should Mr. G. be inclined again to try his skill in the art, familiar to the defenders of his church, of confuting an opponent by omitting his main strength, he may become the unintentional occasion of exposing to the English public, more fully than has hitherto been done, the kind of "services" for which the Roman Penitentiary and her Tax-tables prescribe the pecuniary "compensation."

Sutton Coldfield, Oct. 14, 1840.

P.S. The reader may consult with advantage a review of my Venal Indulgences in the Church of England Quarterly Review for 1840, pp. 138–152, where he will see the old doctrines of Rome on the subject made the present by Dr. Murray's sanction of Dens's Moral and Dogmatic Theology. I take this opportunity to observe, that the Confessionals, as bills of pardon, &c. are distinctly mentioned in the Card. Poli Mandatum de Confessionalibus, &c. 1557, as faculties or licenses, called Confessionals, obtained from the Pope, or the Penitentiary office, by letter, or breve, or otherwise. See Wilkins's ''Council. Maj. Brit.'' iv., 14. See likewise ''Catal. Lib. MSS. M. Parker'' a Nasmith, No. cxi. 1610, p. 132.

In my Index of Gregory XVI., at the end of the note p. 68, add — The mistaken date is rectified by the fact, that Vergerio's Latin translation of the de Idolo Lauretano was first published in 1554; and the Epistle is addressed Othoni Henrico Palatine Rheni, dated Kal. Septembris, 1534, while in the 2d edition the Dedication, which is nearly the same, is Wolfgango Palatino Rheni, pridie Kal. Octobris, 1556. The Rev. Mr. Gibbings, who gave me this information, has mentioned the earlier edition in his Index of Brasichellen, Preface p. xvii.

By the same friend I am admonished, that before I treated Gerardus Busdragus as an ens rationis]], p. 82, I should have