This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at|http: //books .google .com/I
ESSAYS ON ROMANISM.
PRINTED BT L. AND O. SKBLBV, THAMES DITTON, SURRKV.
ESSAYS ON ROMANISM
BY THE AUTHOR OF "ESSAYS ON THE CHURCH.
' <* • m
PUBLISHED BY R. B. SEELEY AND W. BUHNSIpE ^
AND SOLD BY L. AND G. SEELEY,
"FLEET STREET, LONDON.
MDCCCXXXIX.
n
1 ■
<^>UJ^
>i-
^^y^y
)
- " * • fc
► • • •
^ «i » V
a • •• > ■*
•^v a. »
. % I. ^* - -
d fc
The compiler of the present volame cannot ventare to offer it to the Christian public without a few words of explanation ; expressive both of his sense of its many deficiences, and of some of the causes which have occasioned them.
These deficiences might be divided into two classes: — those which have been intentional, and those which are involantary.
Probably, however, the chief among them may be reckoned to belong to both. The references to what is called ' antiquity' will be found to be few. In this respect there was an equal want of leisure for research, and of disposition to make such research, even had time been more attainable.
An opinion is now very industriously circulated, that it is only by an appeal to ' antiquity,' or ' tra- dition,' that Romanism can be effectually refuted.
The compiler has good reason for believing that none are more anxious for the spread of such an opinion, than the Romanists themselves. Nor is he at all surprised at this. His own conviction, not
VI INTRODUCTION.
hastily formed, is, that the Romish controversialist who can succeed in drawing his opponent away from the inspired oracles, and in resting the discassion chiefly apon the sayings or doings of councils or fathers, has already achieved more than half a vic- tory, and is at least secure against defeat. The worst that can happen to him is, the closing the discussion by a drawn battle.
From this conviction, the compiler of the present volume has generally declined to make any other use of the writers of the earlier centuries, than to shew, by brief references to their writings, that it was as easy to quote them on one side as on the other. Such he believes to be the case ; and he believes, also, that this Jatter ' confusion of tongues' has been as vrisely ordered as was that of Babel. The de- scendants of Noah proposed to themselves to make such a provision, as should render them, in any future deluge, independent of divine assistance. Exactly similar is the attempt now making, to raise such a pile of human authorities, as may enable its archi- tects to dispense with the word of God, as completely as they of old proposed to dispense with any future ark. The attempt is equally presumptuous, and its result will equally frustrate the expectations of itsr" authors.
In this respect, therefore, whatever may be the short-comings of the present volume, its compiler will not attempt to shelter himself under the plea of want of leisure. His neglect has been as much a matter of choice as of necessity. In many other respects the case is different. The distrac- tion of a variety of dissimilar and conflicting en- gagements and avocations, besides personal and
INTRODUCTION. Ml
innate disqualifications of vrhicb no one can be better aware than himself, will have left their traces in many errors, weaknesses, and failures. Of all these, the pany and faaltfai instrament mast, without re- pining, bear the blame. But amidst the whole, he is yet conscious that it is in the power of the Allwise to use even such an effort as this to some good pur- pose. And he would most of all desire, that should such be the case, the praise and glory may be as- cribed to Him alone, to whose gracious operation all such results will be solely attributable.
ERRATUM.
Page 144. line S0, instead of " exiles in Greece, Macedonia,"
read ** churches in Greece, Macedonia, &c."
CONTENTS.
I. ON THE RULE OF FAITH.
TBB NECESSITY OF AN INFALLIBLE GUIDE IN OUR SEARCH AFTER DIVINE TRUTH 1
II. ON THE RULE OF FAITH.
THE ROBflSH CHURCH NOT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH 26
III. ON THE RULE OF FAITH.
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH EXAMINED 45
IV. THE MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH.
uNmr' .' 76
V. THE MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH.
THE SANCTITY OF THE CHURCH OF ROME 95
VI. THE MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH.
CATHOLICITY 180
X CONTENTS.
PAGE
VII. THE MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH.
APOSTOLICITY 142
VIII. THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE 156
IX. THE RULE OF FAITH.
RBCAPITULATION OF THE ARGUMENT 194
X. THE RULE OF FAITH.
*HOLY SCRIPTURE,' OR 'THE CHURCH.' 2)2
XL THE PROTESTANT RULE OF FAITH.
THE GENUINENESS AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE HOLT SCRIPTURES. 242
XII. THE PROTESTANT RULE OF FAITH.
THE DIVINB INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURES 267
XIIL THE TWO RULES OF FAITH.
THE SCRIPTURES, OR ' THE CHURCH.' 288
XIV. INFALLIBILITY.
ON THE ALLEGED NECESSITY FOR AN INFALLIBLE CHURCH 310
XV. THE IDOLATRY OF ROMANISM.
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS 324
CONTENTS. x\
PAQB XVI. THE IDOLATRY OF ROMANISM.
IDOLATROUS WORSHIP 360
XVII. ROMISH DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES.
TRANSUBSTANTIATION 379
XVIII. ROMISH DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES.
THE MAS& 407
XIX. ROMISH DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES.
THE PARDON OF SIN; PURGATORY; AND INDULOENCBS 430
XX. ROMISH DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES.
PERSECUTION 453
XXI. DESTINY OF ROMANISM.
THE PROPHECIES CONCERNING THE PAPACY 473
y
ESSAYS ON ROMANISM.
ESSAYS ON ROMANISM.
I.
ON THE RULE OF FAITH.
THE NECESSITY OF AN INFALLIBLE GUIDE, IN OUR SEARCH AFTER DIVINE TRUTH.
There is one remark which seems to Dr. Milner, the Romish controversialist, to be of such weight, that in his work entitled, * The End of Religious Con- troversy,* he introduces it again and again, even to the extent of three or four repetitions. It is this : —
* There are, I believe, few of our Catholic priests in an . extensive ministry, who have not frequently been called in to receive dying Protestants into the Catholic churchy while not a single instance can be produced, of a Catholic wishing to die in any other communion than his own. O death, thou great en- lightener ! O truth-telling death, how powerful art thou in confuting the blasphemies, and dissipating the prejudices of the enemies of God's church ! '
Now though in this statement there is a degree
B
2 ESSAYS OK SOMAKISM:
of ezagg^eration, since individaal ckbcs hmve as- saredlj occarred, of persons forsaking tbe lt«mi«fc faifii on their dying beds, still, in the main, it is probably correct. lo fact, at first sight, one hardly understaods why the Papists should make it a matter of boasting, that while those who have left their commanion for the Protestant faith, generally did it in the fall possession of their health and fiicoltiesy deliberately, and in no haste or alarm ; those, on the other hand, who have abandoned Protestantism for their more conTenient creed, have for the most part taken that step in the confosion, alarm, and perhaps deliriom of a dying hoar. Bat the closing exclama- tion shews us the ground of the Papist's exaltation. Death, be says, is the great enlightentr^ the great truth-teller J and hi$ Terdict shews that the Protestant faith is often felt to be one on which it is unsafe to Yentare into the presence of the Eternal Judge. The conclusion which it is intended every Protestant should apply to his own case, would evidently sug- gest a doubt, whether he hinuelf will find it, in his last hour, a sound and satisfactory support?
Yet is there not something in this Romish exalta- tion, which may remind us of the opening chapters of the book of Job ? Might not Satan, were he now allowed " to present himself at intervals before the Lord, often venture on a similar attempt at self- gratulation ?
Were the Prince of Darkness thus permitted to address the Lord of life and glory, he might proceed in just such a line of observation, ' How much more natural, bow much more voluntarily paid, is the homage and obedience rendered me by my subjects, than that accorded to you by yours. Not only does
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 3
the far larger portion of the earth still acknowledge my sopremacy, bat the service of the myriads of my worshippers, is a willing and ready service. On the other hand, among those who profess to yield yon obedience, at least foor-fifths, in their hearts, woold prefer my rale. What multitudes are there, who spend their lives in feigned adherence to your power, but who, on their death-beds, are clearly seen to have been, in fact, my subjects rather than yours, and to belong, as such, to my countless muster-roll below.'
Sach might be Satan's boast; and a boast, too, quite as well-founded as that just quoted from the Romish divine. But although the fact alluded to by Dr. Milner is of too fearful a cast to seem well adapted for a controversial tract, still, as it is ad- duced, and adduced with more than usual emphasis, it may be as well not to rest content with shewing how it might be paralleled, but rather to give also what appears to be the only true explanation.
It will doubtless not unseldom occur, in a country like this, with twelve or fourteen millions of people, brought up in a nominal profession of Protestantism, myriads of whom, however, never hear even the sh'ghtest attempt at an explanation of the name, — that individuals drawing near to death, without any previous expectation of, or preparation for it, and overwhelmed with an alarm which makes them fly in tarn to every conceivable refuge or resource, — shall sometimes, among other expedients, fall upon that of a sudden conversion to Popery. These per- sons may, for the most part, be classed under two heads, as to their previous circumstances and cases ; bat their motive for embracing Romanism is one and
B2
4 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
the same ; to wit, a direfal certainty to which they have jast awakened, that the sort of religion they haye heretofore followed will not yield them peace in a dying hoar ; and an eager flying to Popery, as a creed which holds oat strong and positive assur- ances, that a certainty of safety belongs to all who truly profess it.
The two classes alluded to, are, 1. The Careless, and, 2. the PharisaieaL The first have been follow- ing, all their days, '* the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life ; " and now death seizes upon them unawares, and they are filled with, terror. The second have been aiming to live a re- ligious life, and have been expecting that that re- ligious life, consisting jof sundry prayers, and fastings, and church-goings, and alms-g^vings, would bring them peace at the last, although He who is the only Peace-maker between God and man, has scarcely filled even a secondary place in their devotions. But now eternity opens to their view ; their religious life begins to weigh lighter and lighter in their esti^ mation, when balanced against the demands of 6od*s pure and holy law; and they too, as well as the careless, are filled with alarm.
To either class the message of the Protestant min- ister is the same. He has no passport to heaven to give or to sell them. He stands by their bed-side a poor helpless sinner like themselves, and he has but one word suited to their case. That word is, *' Be- hold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world r'
But constant experience proves that there is no refuge which human nature,- even in its greatest alarm, will not prefer to this. And if^ in this mo-
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 5
meot of doubt and dismay, Popery comes io with her yast pretensions, and tells the frightened sinner, ' Behold the true church, out of which you cannot he saved, and in which you cannot be lost; here is extreme unction for yonr body ; a new sacrifice of Christ's actual body to be agaip, this very moment, offered up for your soul ; here is an infinite treasury of merit in the possession of the church, part of which, by alms-giying, you may procure to be set to your account ; and here are prayers both of saints above and saints below, all which the church can apply for your rescue from the purifying fires of purgatory,' — we say, who shall wonder that with all these magni- ficent.offers pressed upon her acceptance, poor hu- man nature, except omnipotent grace commands a rescue, turns from the simple call to faith in a Sa- Tiour, and eagerly embraces the tempting offers of the universal deceiver.'
The clenching argument, however, with the hesi- tating mind, in such a case as this, is that which we are now about to consider. The Protestant minister pretends to no infallibility, either in himself or in his church. He offers, as the alone guide, the word of God — the Bible. But the poor creature before him has, perhaps, and knows that be has, but a few hours to live, and despairs of understanding such a volume in that short space ; while to receive the wonderful message, ' Believe, and thy sins shall he hlotted out,* seems impossible without some stronger assurance of its truth.
The Romish priest, on the other hand, if he claims not infallibility for himself, boldly and strenuously
1 Rey. xviii. 23.
6 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
asserts it as the attribute of his church. In the words of Dr. Milner, he declares that ' the Catholic charch is the diviDely-commissioDed gaardian and inter- preter of the word of God ; and that, therefore, the method appointed by Christ for learnings what he has taught, on the various articles of his relis^on, is to hear the church propounding them.' * This method/ he proceeds, ' is the only one which leads to the peace and unity of the Christian church, and the only one which affords tranquillity and security to indi- vidual Christians during life, and at the trying hour of their dissolution.'' * Thus you have only to hear what the church teaches upon the several articles of her faith, in order to hnow with certainty what God has revealed concerning them.'^
It is this conclusive assumption, this assertion of a fact which the poor man has neither time nor strength to dispute, and which, if true, makes all safe, and assures him of salvation, that mainly tends to these death-bed conversions, as it does, also, to most of those which occur in health, and after calmer consideration. And, as it evidently lies at the very foundation of the whole argument, cutting the ground itself, if it be true, from under Protestantism, it seems both expedient, and in fact necessary, to com- mence any discussion on the doctrines and preten- sions of Romanism, at this preliminary point.
But in what way shall the inquiry be conducted? It seems to us that the most intelligible and practical course will be to individualize, if we may so call it, the investigation ; by imagining, not an abstract ar- gument, but a real inquirer.
1 End qf Contrm. p. 636. a Ibid. p. 173.
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 7
Oar readers and writers on Popery, in this country, xe too often either vehement opponents from their rery birth, or else men who, from their ultra views of sharchmanship, are favourably disposed towards Popery. In either of these cases the cause has been firtaally decided before a word of the argument has been heard. But the more honest seekeE after truth will not contend for victory, but will look for satis- faction. We can have no difficulty in picturing to ourselves such an one. ' Take the man whose life has been spent in various parts of the world, whether in eommercial pursuits, or in the service of his country. He has lived among all religions, and yet has, from that very circumstance, attached himself to none. Various warnings suggest to him the shortness and uncertainty of life, and he feels that, as yet, all be- yond the present scene is a matter of dread uncer- tainty. He therefore begins to inquire, in earnest, which is the way of salvation. But here he is beset by the various claims of the various churches and sects, and feels bewildered amidst the different schemes which are presented to his notice.
Thus far, however, he has advanced, and that so carefully as to be thoroughly settled in the convic- tion;—That it is wholly absurd and irrational to suppose that the world or its inhabitant came into existence by chance, or that the human race origin- ated itself: That the creator of the visible universe must be a being of inconceivable power, wisdom, and benevolence, and that it is most . improbable that, having made mankind, he would cast them loose to follow their own devices, without any further care about their fate or their conduct: That something within warns him of the existence of a principle.
8 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
wbicb the sleep of the body does not cause to slum- ber, and whicb it is not conceivable that the disso- lution of the body will destroy: That a secret consciousness of the difference between good and evil, and an impression of a future retribution, connected with the previous observations, convince him of the great probability, at least, of an hereafter ; in which he will have to know the Author of his being, and, what is still more important, will be called to account by him for all the actions of his life.
But this train of thought carries him forward, at once, to the most interesting question which can possibly present itself to the human mind, namely, on the supposition that there is an hereafter, and possibly a judgment at the very commencement of that here- after; how shall a human being prepare himself for that awful scrutiny ? By what rule, according to what di- rectory shall he regulate his conduct, or frame his plea ? How shall he learn the character and require- ments of his judge, and the best mode in which to approach his presence and propitiate his favour? Nothing can exceed the essential importance of these questions, or the interest which they are calculated to awaken in the mind of the serious and earnest seeker after truth.
Now the answer of a Protestant to these inquiries will be l>oth simple and straightforward. He will say,—
^ For my own part, I must confess myself a poor, fallible, erring human creature like yourself; and when I speak to you of the concerns of God and eternity, I dare not give you any surmises or notions of my own, or any views or principles learnt of other human beings. But I am able to refer you to a guide
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 9
which caDOot mislead or misinfomi you, to a hook, in short, which has been given to man by that very God, before whose judgment-seat we must all stand, as the guide and directory, both of his belief and of his practice. Knowing it to be his gift, and bestowed upon man for this very object, I dare not direct your view to any inferior source of knowledge.
' Nor is it necessary. For in the Bible, and there alone, we find ' shallows in which a lamb may wade, and yet at the same time, depths in which an ele- phant may swim/ There alone, we find ' truth with- out any mixture of error,' and * certainty without any alloy of doubt/
But the moment this reply is given, we may assure ourselves of the instant and total opposition of the Romish party. An open and unshackled Bible, ex- alted, too, to be the tole judge and arbiter in all mat- tens relating to our faith, — cannot co-exist with Romanism. And thus it happens, that in one shape or other, either open or covert warfare is constantly waged against the Bible by the votaries of Rome.
In the palmy days of the apostate church, her man- dates against the use of the scriptures were issued without the least disguise or qualification. * We strictly forbid,' says the council of Toulouse, * the Jaity to have the books of the Old and New Testa- ment in the vulgar tongue/ ' If any one shall pre- sume to read or possess them,' says the council of Trent, ' without permissionr of bis priest or confessor, in writing, he shall not receive absolution of his sins, except he first deliver them up.' ' And in like man- ner, at the present day, in Spain, Italy, or other Popish countries, copies of the scriptures, if disco-
1 JhlibriMfrohibitia. reg.iy.
10 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
vered by the police, are seized and destroyed, as contraband or unlawful articles.
In the midst of a Protestant population, however, and in a land where pretensions of this kind would be instantly spurned. Popery alters its tone. Here no objection is offered to the use of the scriptures, but only to their paramount authority. 'The Catholic rule of faith,' says Dr. Milner, 'is not merely the written word of God, but the whole word of God, both written or unwritten ; in other words, scripture and tradition, and these propounded and explained by the Catholic church. This implies that we have a two-fold rule or law, and that we have an interpreter or judge to explain it, and to decide upon it in all doubtful points.' '
This device, however, only differs from open war- fare with the Bible, in its greater insidiousness. To put scripture wholly out of sight, is, perhaps, the simplest and most effectual course; but, when this cannot be attempted, it answers nearly the same pur- pose to reduce the written word into subjection to the church's decisions. Chillingworth has well said, that ' He that would usurp an absolute lordship and tyranny over any people, need not put himself to the trouble and difficulty of abrogating and disannulling the Jaws made to maintain the common liberty ; for he may frustrate their intent, and compass his own design as well, if he can get the power and authority to interpret them as he pleases, and to have his in- terpretations and additions stand for laws ; if he can rule his people by his laws, and his laws by his law- yers. So the church of Rome, to establish her tyranny
1 Milner*8 End qf Controversy, page 11 6.
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 11
over men's consciences, Deeded not either to abolish or corrupt the holy scriptures, the pillars and sap- porters of Christian liberty. Bat the more expedite way, and therefore the more likely to be the success- ful, was to gain the opinion and esteem of being the public and authorized interpreter of them, and the authority oi adding to them what doctrine she pleased, under the title of traditions or definitions. For by tbis means, she might both serve herself of all those clauses of scripture which might be drawn to cast a favourable countenance upon her ambitious pre- tences,— which, had the scriptures been abolished, she could not have done ; and yet be secure enough of having neither her power limited, nor her corrup- tions and abuses reformed by them ; this being once settled in the minds of men, that unwritten doctrines, if proposed by her, were to be received with equal reverence to those that were written ; and that the sense of scripture was not that which it seemed to reason and understanding to be, but that which the church of Rome should declare it, seem that never so unreasonable and incongruous.' ^
But we are often met, in this stage of the argument, by assertions of the expediency and even the abso- lute necessity of some authoritative interpreter. A very fallacious analogy is introduced, between divine and human legislation. Dr. Milner remarks that ' in this kingdom we have the common or unwritten law, and the statute or written law, both of them binding, bat the former necessarily preceding the latter.' »
Nothing, however, can be more irrational, or more
1 CkiUiiiffworth*t Worha, fol. p. 40. » End of Controversy, p. 117.
12 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
presumptuous, than this method of prescribing a cer- tain course as a fit and necessary one to be taken by the all-wise Creator, merely because some of his short-sighted creatures have found it needful under their perpetual errors and imperfections. Two rea- sons may be adduced for the existence and validity of our common or unwritten law ; — 1. The imper- fection attending all man's works, which makes it im- possible for any parliament to construct a perfect code, and thus renders the rectifying hand of the judges often needful. 2. The fact, that we had judges in England centuries before we had parliaments, from which it naturally followed that their decisions, re- corded and handed down, became a sort of code, long before acts of parliament came into use among us. But neither of these reasons apply in the least to the dealings of God with his creatures; nor can any rational ground be assigned, why that divine Being who has vouchsafed us a revelation of His mind and will in the scriptures, should have left it in such ob- scurity as to need the perpetual interpretations of a number of human creatures like ourselves ; still less, that He should have purposely kept back half of that revelation, in order to entrust it to a mere vivavoce preservation, under the name of tradition*
The next objection waxes bolder, and adopts a .tone which is almost profane. It runs thus, * Jesus Christ wrote no part of the New Testament himself, and gave no orders to his apostles to write it, nor did he intend it to be, together with the Old Testament, the sole rule of religion.' < * The Almighty did not send a book, the New Testament, to Christians, and without so
1 End qf Controversy, p. 97'
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 13
mach as establishiDg the aathority of that book, leave them to interpret it, till the end of time, each one according to his own opinions or prejudices. Bat oar blessed Master and Legislator, Jesas Christ, hav- ing first established his own divine legation from his heavenly Father by undeniable miracles, commis- sioned bis chosen apostles, by word ofmouth, to pro- claim and explain, hy word of mouth, his doctrines and precepts onto all nations, promising to be with them even to the end of the world.' *
Now, not to dwell apon the indecency of this lan- guage, its assertions, are essentially untrue. If Christ ^gwe no orders to his apostles to write the New Tes- tament,' he did more ; — he sent down the Holy Spirit, who in discharge of his office, of bearing witness of the Saviour, inspired the apostles and evangelists to write these books. And by divers signs and won- ders, wrought before all the people. He did most fully establish the authority of those writings and of their authors. It is little short, then, of playing the infi- del,— ^to make light of the only book which God has given us, to teach us the knowledge of himself, and to describe it as scarcely more than a fortuitous col- lection of ancient writings.
An appeal to the Fathers, which generally follows, is less objectionable on the score of presumption. Dr. Milner, to establish the equality of tradition with scripture, quotes St. Basil and St. Epiphanius. The former says—* There are many doctrines preserved and preached in the church, derived partly from written documents, partly from apostolical tradition, which have equally the same force in religion, and which
* Mnd qf CoKtrtnerty, p. 1 18.
14 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
no oDe contradicts who has the least knowledge of the Christian laws.' And the last, ' We must make use of tradition ; for all things are not to be found in scripture.' ^
But he who seeks to establish any great principle by a reference to the fathers, ** seeks for the living among the dead." There is scarcely any position in theology, whether true or false, which may not easily be supported by quotations from some one or more of their number. But the folly of relying on them consists in this, that it is just as easy to find passages which make for one side of a question as for the other. And by this we may learn the uncertainty and contrariety of what is called tradition; and the im- possibility of finding any sure resting-place, save in the word of God. Against the words of Basil and Epi- pbanus, we may place those of Justin Martyr and Jerome. Justin says, ' If we will be safe in all things, we must fly to the scriptures, we must believe God only, and rest solely on his institutions, and not on men*s traditions* * Jerome says, * Whereas St. Paul will have bis own things to be kept, he will have no strange things added to them,*^ Thus it is quickly seen, that if we refer any question to the judgment of the fathers, we are likely to get into a chaos of differing opinions, but with little chance of arriving at a final verdict. On the real value of what is called ' Tradi- tion,' a late Romanist author, the Rev. D. O'Croly, lately parish priest of Ovens, near Cork, has written very sensibly. He says, —
* Tradition, about which so much has been said and written, is a mere nonentity in religion. It is called
^ End qf Controversy, p. 127. 2 Dial, cum Trj/p7io.
3 On 2 ThenoUonxana,
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 15
the aDwritten word, and may be denominated a sort of supplement to the New Testament. It is supposed to be a portion of revelation, which was not com- mitted to writing, but continues to be delivered orally as at first ; and 'has been transmitted in this manner from age to age, down to the present time. Now the great point to ascertain is, what this traditionary revelation contains, what dogmata it teaches ; what precepts it inculcates ; what particular maxims it recommends in contradistinction to the written word, or to the writings of the evangelists and apostles in the New Testament? Has the church, at any time daring the eighteen centuries of her existence, placed before the world in a tangible shape, or in due form, this grand section of the revealed word ? Has she ever ventured to define it either in whole or in part ? She has done nothing of the kind. The apostles and evangelists did not mark it down ; the first fathers followed the example of the apostles and evangel- ists, they slurred it over; their successors, in like manner, passed it heedlessly by ; councils that were assembled of every description, general and particu- lar, took no notice of it, and thus has it travelled down to our days without shape or form, — a sort of spiritual essence, unheeded, unperceived, untouched, undefined, and undefinable ; and this is to form an essential part of religion ! Tradition is a mere fig- ment, an empty name ! ' ^
Let us now, however, try to get a little closer to the practical question, and to ascertain, if possible, how the Romish rule of faith can be made actually avail- able.
' O'Cro/y'tf/n^try, p. 41.
l6 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
The Protestant offers somethiDg which is at least intelligible* He presents the written word of God, and avows his belief, that in that volume is contained all that is '' necessary to salvation/' so that " what- soever is not read therein, nor maybe proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of faith/
The Romanist, not daring, in this Protestant coun- try, to repudiate the holy scriptures, admits their authority and their value, but declares that an au- thoritative interpreter of their meaning is absolutely necessary, and that that interpreter, properly com- missioned, is only to be found in his church. His rule of faith, therefore, is, scripture and tradition con- jointly ; or, scripture as interpreted by the church.
Instantly, then, the question suggests itself to a plain man, honestly seeking after truth ; — Where is this ' scripture and tradition conjoined' to be found? or where is that authoritative interpretation of the scripture, which the church is said to be divinely commissioned to give?
Dr. Miluer's main direction, to all seekers after salvation, is, to ' hear the church, the divinely com- missioned guardian and interpreter of the word of God.' * * No sooner,' says he, • will you have sacri- ficed your own wavering judgment, and have sub- mitted to follow the guide whom your heavenly Father has provided for you, than you will feel a deep conviction that you are in the right and secure way.'«
The question, then. Is, How is the enquirer to ' hear the church,' and to submit to the guide thus
1 EndcfControveny, p. 536. 2 Ibid. p. 170.
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 17
divinely provided? We shall not be told, that by merely joining the commanion of the church, and submitting oarselves to her aathority, we thereby be- come perfectly safe for time and eternity. This will hardly be insisted on, for every one mast have be- come acqnaioted with persons who were devout and even servile followers of tfie religious ceremo- nies and requirements of the Romish church, and who yet were far from leading such lives as to en- courage any one to consider them secure of heaven.
Hence it is clear, that to become a Roman Catholic does not of itself give the enquirer that which he needs, perfect security, and an assurance that he is secure. Thus he is driven once more to ask. Which is the safe, the unerring way, to the discovery of re- Jigious truth ? If he is not to rely upon the scrip- tures— and these he is told will mislead him— on what is he to rely ? He is told that he must ' hear the church ;' but where, he begs to know, is he to hear her ? Does she speak through her ministers, and can he be sure that each of these ministers is so far di- vinely preserved from error, as to be actually inca- pable of misleading bim ? Only assure him of this, aud be will feel that a great point is gained. He will then have reached a height from which all the important truths connected with salvation will be clearly discernible.
No such pretension, however, will be put forward. If every individual ministerof the church were divinely preserved from error, then it would follow that they must all maintain the same doctrines, and differences and discords must be unknown. But this is notori- ously not the case, nor ever has been. One of their
saints, Hilary, anathematizes, in his epistles now ex-
c
IB ESSAYS OK ROMANISM :
tant, Pope Liberias, the then ^ saccessor of St. Peter/ At a later period, Platina, one of their own writers, says, that ' towards the close of the tenth, and begin- ning of the eleventh centuries, the chief object of the popes seemed to be, to reverse the decrees of their predecessors/ The disputes of the Jesuits and Jan- senists are matter of history, as well as the ecclesi- astical censures incurred by Fenelon and Pascal, men of whose virtues they now are very ready to boast, but who, when living, were treated by the church of Rome as almost heretics. And, to come down to the present time, in the volume already quoted, lately published by Mr. O'CroIy, he charges one of his brethren, another Roman Catholic priest, with having put forward * a disg-asting fm^ago of falsehood^ superstition, and blasphemy,' Clearly, then, it is impossible that it should be seriously contended, now-a-days, that each individual priest is, of himself, a vessel of infallibility, and divinely preserved from holding or teaching error.
It was only a short time back that a resolution was advertized in various newspapers, which had been adopted at a public meeting of Roman Catholics, held at Birmingham, and which ran as follows: — ^ That although the Theology of Dens has been re- cently published in Ireland, and adopted by certain of the Irish prelates, as a guide to the ecclesiastical conferences held in their dioceses;' * yet the mere opinions of Dens, or any other individual theologian, form no part of Catholic faith.' The same resolution further added, that certain sentiments put forth by Dens had been distinctly disclaimed by the Romish archbishop of Dublin. It would seem, then, that we cannot even resort to a system of theology which has
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 19
been put forth ander the sanction of a conclave of Romish bishops, without falling in the way of errors which an archbishop is obliged to disclaim?
It will not, then, we apprehend, be qaestioned, that the priests, individually, are liable to err. In fact, it is never denied that some priests, some bi- shops, and even some popes, have actually preached and published dangerous heresies. Still, however, we shall be told, that the promise of God remains un- shaken, and that in the church as a whole, and with the great body of her pastors, the Holy Spirit constantly remains, as a safeguard and a defence ; and with them, consequently, error can find no abiding home.
The obvious rejoinder is, that it is still left in doubt, where the enquirer is to find this unerring rule. It is admitted, that it is not a mere adherence to the church that will confer on him this vast immunity. It is admitted, also, that with each individual priest, error may be found, for that other priests, and even bishops, nay, even popes themselves, have already erred. Where, then, is he to go to find this ' church,' this * great body of her ministers,' with whom actual infallibility abides ? Does the church exercise this divine gift for the benefit of her children, or not? and if she does, in what assembly, or in what i^ecord shall he find it? She is the divinely-empowered ex- pdunder of the holy scriptures, it is said;— has she then, daring the fifteen hundred years of her exist- ence, g^ven her children an infallible commentary on the word of God ? If so, surely that guide which the enquirer needs, and which, he is told, the mere books of the Old and New Testaments, uninter- preted, can never supply, is already provided.
But no! — this great work is still a desideratum.
C2
20 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
There is no comment which bears even the seal of the church's aathoritative recommendation — much less is there any interpretation pretending to the least share of the church's collective infallibility.
Where, then, is the seeker after salvation to torn ? Does any collective body exist, with whom Christ's presence, which the Romish writers claim, operates perceptibly and undeniably in purifying away every tendency to error ?
Here the difficulty rather increases than diminishes^ Many of the general councils of the Romish church have occupied themselves in denying and refuting the decisions of former councils, and in anathematizing the ' infallibles ' of the preceding age. And as to the pope himself, his infallibility is the very point which has for centuries been disputed with the greatest heat among Roman Catholics themselves. In England and in France, good Romanists openly question the pope's personal infallibility. In Italy, and some other Catholic countries, to deny the sove- reign pontiff this attribute is looked upon as little better than deadly heresy !
To what point, then, has our enquirer been con- ducted? What progress has he made? The holy scriptures are denied to be any guide whatever, for, we are told that — * Jesus Christ wrote no part of the New Testament himself, and gave no orders to his apostles to write it, nor did he intend it to be, toge- ther with the Old Testament, the sole rule of reli- gion.' ' We then ask for some other rule, and are re- ferred to ' the church,' as the body in which Christ always dwells, and with whom error finds no lodge-
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 21
meDt ; bot beyond this general and yagae direction we cannot advance one step. The priests of tbiscbarch are not, it is confessed, gifted witb personal and indivi- daal infallibility* They have no infallible comment to put into the enquirer's bands, nor can they direct him to any person or body of persons, on whose di- rections be may rely, withoot the possibility of error. Is be not, then, altogether mocked by these pre- tenders to infallibility ? an infallibility which is ever in existence, bat never to be approached, or heard, or rendered tangible ; — an infallibility which answers admirably the purpose of maintaining the authority of tbe priesthood, but vanishes into air the moment it is invoked for any useful purpose.
What remains, then, but to retreat, disappointed, from this bootless search after an ignis fatuus of in- fallibility; and to resort to the intelligible principle of Protestantism. * This book, which I bold, and which I can read, is God's own revealed word : That is my rule, my guide ; I can have no better, and I want no other.'
A strange objection is the next that is offered. We have no right, it is said, to the use of the holy scriptures, while We are separated from the Romish church. It is insisted, by Dr. Milner, ' that the whole right to the scriptures belongs to the church. She has preserved them ; she vouches for them ; and she alone, by comparing tbe several passages with each other, and with tradition, authoritatively ex- plains them. Hence it is impossible that the real sense of scripture should ever be against her and her doctrine ; and hence, of course, I migbt quash every objection which you can draw from every passage in it, by this short reply : the church understands the pas-
22 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
sage differently from yoUy tl^erefore you mistake its meaning/ *
This IS, assuredly, spiritual despotism of the sim- plest and most decided character. And we see, here, bow the assumption of an infallibility seated in some unnamed spot, is turned to good account in the course of the controversy. A modest objector is put down in a moment. ' I might quash every objection from scripture,' says Dr. Milner, ' with this short reply. The church understands that passage differently from you, therefore you mistake its meaning/ Could anything be imagined more perfectly gratuitous in its assumption ? * I quash your objection,' says Dr^r Milner, * by the short reply, the church understands that passage differently,' &c. Thus, if Dr. Milner does not, in express words, claim infallibility as his own personal attribute, he acts as if no one could doubt his possession of it. ' / tell you, that *the church understands that passage differently, and that ends the question.' The Doctor's simple assertion is to close the argument. He could never prove that * the church' held this or that, but his sole declaration was to amount to the same thing. He could not produce her interpretation from an authorized com- mentary, for she has given none. He could not prove it by individual fathers, for one set of fathers had contradicted all that another set had said ; nor could he prove it by the decrees of councils, for other councils had decreed in an adverse way. Still, ' when / tell you that the church understands that passage differently, that is to end the argument*' A most exact picture this of the way in which this
1 End qf Controvergy, p. IS/.
OK THE RULE OF FAITH. 23
abstract infallibility, which can nowhere be pointed oat or described, is brought into practical use by the Romish priesthood !
Bat it is fearful to contemplate this asarpation of divine authority, whether we consider the abstract crime, merely, or its practical results. God, in great mercy, speaks to man in his written word ; and therein tells him how to escape everlasting woe, and attain to everlasting happiness. To imagine for a moment, what many most arrogantly and profanely assert, — that this message from God is not intelli- gible without the interpretation of certain poor crea* tores like ourselves, is as far removed from true rationality as it is from true wisdom and piety. Yet this audacious assertion is now boldly and perpetu- ally made, and men exalt themselves as the real possessors, for every practical purpose, of that infal- libility and immunity from error which belongs to God alone !
Let us, however, lift up our hearts to God in grate- ful adoration, for that he has vouchsafed unto us this most invaluable guide and directory, in our darkness and difficulties, while passing through the wilderness of this world.
' What,' says Bishop Jewell, shall I say more of THE SCRIPTURES ? how profitable and comfortable they are in all cases and parts of our life ! In adver- sity, in prosperity ; in life, and in death ; they are oar especial comfort. If we must fight, they are a sword ; if we hunger, they are meat ; if we thirst, they are drink : if we have no dwelling-place, they are a house ; if we be naked, they are a garment; if we be in darkness, they are light unto our going.
* They are comfortable in peace, in war ; in heavir
24 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM:
ness, in joy ; in health and sickness ; in abandance, in poverty ; in the day-time, in the night season ; in the town, in the wilderness; in company, and when thou art alone. For they teach faith, hope, patience, charity, sobriety, hamility, righteousness, and all godliness. Th£Y teach us to live, and thet
TEACH us TO DIE.'
Let as consider, too, the fearful consequences of that sore judgment of God, ' a famine of hearing the word of the Lord.' ' When the scriptures are not opened,' continues Bishop Jewell, 'when there is none that can edify, and exhort, and comfort the people by the word of God, they must needs perish. For they know not the way in which they should walk ; they know not whom to honour, nor upon whose name they should call : they know neither what to belieye, nor what to do. Hell hath enlarged itself, and hath opened his mouth without measure ; and they that are wilful and ignorant, and the chil- dren of darkness, go down into it.
' They become thrall and captives unto Satan ; their heart is bound up; they understand nothing; their eyes are shut up, they can see nothing ; their ears are stopped up, they can hear nothing ; they are carried away as a prey into hell, because they have not the knowledge of God.'
From such an awful state and condition, good Lord, deliver us ! But let us ever be on our guard against the attempts of those who would, on one pre- text or another, remove our feet from the rock of God's word, and place them on the sands of human inventions or interpretations. Many are the devices of this description which surround the enquirer's path at the present day. But let him ever remem-
ON THE RULE OF FAITH. 25
ber, that God has given to man only one hook, the Bible, and let him hold fast that one docament, the charter of his salvation ; constantly refusing to per- mit any haman work, whether the decrees of councils or the writings of the fathers, or the alleged conclu- sions of the church in general, to be for an instant associated or raised to ah equality with the word of God. No such association can be tolerated, even for an instant, without the greatest dishonour to God, and the utmost peril to our own souls.
II.
ON THE RULE OF FAITH.
THE ROMISH CHURCH NOT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
In onr first essay we seemed to have ascertained two things : — that some Rule of Faith, or infallible guide to truth, is absolutely necessary ; and that, practi- cally, the Romish church furnishes its disciples with no such rule, either in the form of an authentic re- cord of tradition ; an infallible commentary on the scriptures; or a ministry divinely preserved from error. We argued, therefore, that the sort of infalli- bility which she assumed, being no where to be laid hold of, or brought to any sinner's aid, was a mere empty name, a downright soul-deceiving delusion. For, after tracking the Romish controversialists hither and thither, from popes to councils, from councils to fathers, from fathers to unwritten, indefinite, and un- definable tradition, we found at last, that the only rule of faith which could be distinctly described or laid down, on any competent Romish authority, was that which Dr. Milner himself thus describes : ' All Catholics, if properly interrogated, will confess their belief in one comprehensive article, namely this : —
THE ROMISH CHURCH NOT CATHOLIC. 2T
I believe whatever the holy Catholic church believes and teaches ! ' ^
The Dr. however, had not fully described even this simple rnle ; for when a Romanist trcM so interrogated, and had given, as Dr. Milner said he would, this general reply, he was next asked, ' and what does the Catholic church believe ? ' His reply was, ' the Ca- tholic church believes what I believe/ Once more it was demanded, — ' and what do both you and the Catholic church believe?' To which his final an- swer was, * the Catholic church and I both believe the same thing ! '
However, leaving this first objection, namely — that the Romish church, while it professes to be empow- ered to prescribe an infallible rule of faith, does, in fact, give no other rule of faith than that of a blind submission to any thing and every thing which may be taught by any and by all her ministers, — leaving this, let us proceed to consider that fundamental prin- ciple, or rather assumption, upon which this exorbi- tant demand on the credulity of men is based. That assumption is, that the whole Christian faith, and all the records of it, of every sort and description, are her exclusive property. That Protestants should have any rule of faith is declared to be impossible, for the very simple reason, that they do not rightfully possess even the scriptures. A passage from Tertullian is quoted a^inst them, which runs thus :
* If you live near Italy, you see before your eyes the Roman church ; happy church ! to which the . apostles have left the inheritance of their doctrine with their blood ! It is plain, as we have said, that heretics are not to be allowed to appeal to scripture*
. 1 End qfCoiUrover$if, 18mo. p. I92.
28 £SSAYS ON bomanism:
since they have no claim to it. Hence it is proper to address them as follows : Who are you ? Whence do yoQ come? What business have yoa with my property ? The estate is mine ; I have the ancient, the prior possession of it. I have the title-deeds, de- livered to me by the apostles ; they have made their will in my favour ; while they disinherited and cast you off, as strangers and enemies.^ ^
Now to this passage we might justly object, that it contains much of the intolerant assumption of later days, and that the Bible, which is God's gift to man, is improperly described when it is called the gift of the apostles to the church. But we shall hot dwell on these minor points; preferring to come to the main question, which is. What right has the church of Rome to assume to herself the exclusive posses- sion of the title of the Holy Catholic Church, — tlie Church, — the spouse of Christ, — the successor of th^ apostles, — that body to which alone belongs the Sa- viour's promise, Lo ! I am with you alway, even to the end of the world.
It is upon this basis that her claim to be the only infallible guide rests ; it is on this assumption that she grounds the dictum, that a true Catholic has nothing to do but ' to believe whatever the church believes and teaches.'
We ourselves admit, — all Christians, we believe, admit, — that to be a true member of the Catholic church, of that church which is Christ's body, and which is to God himself as 'the apple of his eye,' is to be absolutely safe. To be within the pale of this church is indeed salvation ; to be beyond or without that pale is the extremest danger. And, although the
1 End qf Controogny, p. 126.
THE ROMISH CHURCH NOT CATHOLIC. 29
scriptares oaght to be placed before every man, yet we are willing to admit that the true and Catholic church has that peculiar property in them which a child may be supposed to have in his father's will, — an heir, in the title-deeds of his estate. But the question for our present discussion is. What right has the bishop of Rome, with those that follow him, to declare, that the people of Italy, Spain, Portugal, Austria, France, and three or four other countries, conjointly with some scattered adherents in other places, constitute this Catholic church, — that they, and they alone, are truly Chrises people; — and that the Christians of England, Scotland, Holland, Den- mark, Sweden, Russia, America, and all the east, are nothing but outcasts, rebels, heretics, and opposers of Christ's authority ! History affords no instance of arrogance more extraordinary, or pretensions more unfounded ; and it is certainly worthwhile to en- quire, with seriousness, upon what grounds so extra- ordinary a claim can be rested.
Dr. Milner has, indeed, a very short and easy way of resolving this question. He says, * In treating of this third mark of the true church, as expressed in our common creed, I feel my spirits sink within me, and I am a^lmost tempted to throw away my pen in despair. For what chance is there of opening the eyes of candid Protestants to the other marks of the charch, if they are capable of keeping them shut to this! Every time they address the God of truth, either in solemn worship or in private devotion, they are forced, each of them, to repeat : * I believe in THE Catholic Church : ' and yet if I ask any of them the question : Are you a Catholic ? he is sure to answer me, ' iVb, I am a Protestant ! Was there ever a
30 ESSAYS ON bomanism:
more glaring instaDce of inconsistency and self-con^ demnation among rational beings/'
This miserable piece of trickery, for it would be injustice to give it any better name, bas never been so plainly brought to view, as by Dr. Milner. Most other controversialists, even among the Papists, would bave feared to use so palpable a piece of sophistry. Por what is it, but a mere play upon words? His church has been accustomed, for centuries, to call herself * the Roman Catholic church.' Another body of religionists denominates itself 'the Methodists;' and a third, * the Unitarians.' To each we give, in common conversation, that title by which they choose to distinguish themselves, neither admitting nor de- nying thereby, the correctness of the claim>thus made. If we give to one sect the name of Methodists, we mean not in so doing to record our admission that they, and they alone, have any method or order in their religion. If we call another body ' the Unita- riansy' we do not at all acknowledge, by that term, that they are a whit more firm or more orthodox than we, in the great fundamental doctrine of the unity of the god- head. And so, when, in common parlance, we call the adherents of the pope what they choose to call them- selves, Roman Catholics, or, for brevity. Catholics, we no more mean thereby, to acknowledge any peculiar title in them to that appellation, than we do when we indulge the Methodists or the Unitarians with that name to which they happen to have taken a fancy. Miserable work, indeed, is it, to build a serious argument in such a controversy as this, upon such a flimsy foundation ! And worse than miser-
1 End of C<mtrover$if, l8mo. p. 279.
THE ROMISH CHURCH NOT CATHOLIC. 31
able;— for by thus directing our attention to mere
words and phraSes, we are obliged to retort apon the
doctor, bis own accusation.
For Dr. Miiner knew, wben he chose to represent the Protestant as replying No ! to the question, * Are you a Catholic?* that that very question, as he had phrased it, was nothing mor« than a trick, a trap set to catch the unwary. He was well aware that any Protestant who was worthy of the name, — i. e. who knew what he protested against,— could not reply * Noy' to the question, * Are you a Catholic V without understanding the question itself to mean, *■ Are you a Roman Catholic ? ' His negative could only apply to the Romish feature of the case, and that negative would not be uttered, except he fully understood that such was the purport of the question. To entrap such an one, therefore, into a reply which meant merely that he was not a Romanist^ and then to use that answer, as if he had admitted his dissent from that Catholic or universal church to which he, in fact, professed to belong, was a manoeuvre well worthy of a disciple of Loyola.
But the doctor talks of * self-condemnation.' Is there nothing of ' self-condemnation ' about his own reasoning ? He insists on the absolute necessity of the true church's being really Catholic or universal. This point is laboriously argued through a long chap- ter. And yet, when we turn to the title-page of his volume, we find the author there denominating him- self ' a Roman Catholic divine ! '
Now if ' self-condemnation * was ever to be discerned, it is assuredly here. This is the very contradiction in terms which, by the wondrous providence of God, the Romish church Has ever been made to carry about
32 ESSAYS ON BOMANISM :
with her. ' Raman Catholic ! ' The phrase, as far as meaning is concerned, is jast as ratibnal as it would he to talk of * the English aniverse/ But enoagb of this — let as endeavoar to find something more nearly approaching the form of an argument. Dr. Milner proceeds as follows : —
^ At the first promulgation of the gospel, its fol- lowers were distinguished from the Jews by the name of Christians f as we learn from scripture. Acts xi. 26. Hence the title of Catholic did not occur in the pri- mitive edition of the Apostles' Creed ; but no sooner did heresies and schisms arise, to disturb the peace of the church, than there was found to be a necessity of discriminating the main stock of her faithful children, to whom the promises of Christ belonged, from those self-willed choosers of their articles of belief, as the word heretic signifies, and from those disobedient separatists, as the word schismatic means. For this purpose the title of Catholic, or universal, was adopted, and applied to the trae church and her children. Accordingly, we find it used by the imme- diate disciples of the apostles, as a distinguishing mark of the true church. One of these was the illus- trious martyr St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, who, writing to the church of Smyrna, expressly says, that ' Christ is, where the Catholic church is/ In like manner, the same church of Smyrna, giving a relation of the martyrdom of that holy bishop, St. Polycarp, who was equally a disciple of the apostles, addressed it to 'the Catholic churches.' This characteristic title of the true church continued to be pointed out by the succeeding fathers in their writings, and the acts of their councils. St. Cyril, Bishop of Jerusa- lem, in the fourth century, gives the following direc-
THE ROMISH CHURCH NOT CATHOLIC. 33
tioii to his pupils : ' If yea go into any city, do not ask merely, Where ie the churchy or house of God T be* eaose the heretics pretend to have this: but ask, Which is the Catholic church? because this title be- longs alone to our holy mother/ ' We,' says a father of the fifth century, ' are called Catholic Christians/ His contemporary, St. Pacian, describes himself as follows : * Christian is my name, Catholic is my sur- name : by the former I am called, by the latter I am distinguished. By the name of Catholic , our society is distinguished from all heretics.' But there is not one of the fathers or doctors of antiquity who enlarges 80 copiously or so pointedly on this title of the true church, as the g^eat St. Augustine, who died in the early part of the fifth century. * Many things,' he says, * detain me in the bosom of the Catholic church —the very name of Catholic detains me in it, which she has so happily preserred amidst the different heretics; that whereas they are all desirous of being called Catholics^ yet, if any stranger were to ask them. Which is the assembly of the Catholics ? none of them would dare to point out his own place of worship/ To the same purpose, he says elsewhere : * We must hold fast ^e communion of that church which is called (ktholiCf not only by her own children, but also by aH her enemies. For heretics and schismatics, whe- ther they will or not, when they are speaking of the Catholic church with strangers, or with their own people, call her by the name of Catholic ; inasmuch as they would not be understood, if they did not call her by the name by which all the world calls her.' In proportion to their affection for the glorious name of Catholic^ is the aversion of these primitive doctors^ to every ecclesiastical name or title derived from par-
34 ESSAYS ON bomanism:
ticular persons, countries, or opinions. * What new heresy/ says St. Vincent of Lerios, in the sixth cen- tary, ' ever spronted up, withoat hearing the name of its founder, the date of its origin,' &c. St. Justin, the philosopher and martyr, had previously made the same remark in the second century, with respect to the Marcionite, Valentinian, and other heretics of his time. Finally, the nervous St. Jerome lays down the following rule on this suhject : ' We must live and die in that church, which, having been founded by the apostles, continues down to the present day. If, then, you should hear of any Christians not de- riving their name from Christ, but from some other founder, as the Marcionites, the Valentinians, &c. be persuaded that they are not of Christ's society, but of antichrist's.'
^ And are not these observations and arguments of the ancient fathers as strikingly true in this nine- teenth century, as they were during the six first cen- turies, in which they wrote ? Is there not among the rival charclies, one exclusively known and distin- guished by the name and title of the catholic CHUKCH, as well in England, Holland, and other countries, which protest against this church, as in those which adhere to it ? Does not this effulgent mark of the true religion so incontestably belong to us, in spite of every effort to obscure it by the nick- names of Papist^ Romanisty &c., that the rule of St. Cyril and St. Augustine is as good and certain now as it was in their times ? " *
Such are the reasonings of Dr. Milner. Bat surely one of his closing arguments recoils with prodigious
» End of Controvergyt p. 279—282;
THE BOMISH CHURCH NOT CATHOLIC. 35
force npon himself. For wkat is the chief point
on wiich he dwells? It is this ;— * In proportion to
tbebr affection for the glorious name of Catholic, is
the aversion of these primitive doctors to eTcry.eccle-
Mastical name or title derived from particular persons,
countries, or opinions.' And what, after all, Is the
main distinction of his own church, but that it is the
eharch of Rome ?
But the great fault of this argument of Dr. Mil- nei^s is, that there is a prodigious hiatus, or gap, in the very middle of it. The doctor shews, that the term * the Catholic church,* was one commonly used in the first six centuries, and he quotes many ex- pressions of the fathers in proof of the respect and veneration at that period attaching to it. He then comes down at once to the present day, and says, ' Here is that Catholic church, towards which the fathers expressed such respect and regard ; do you now shew the same feelings, and pay the like respect.'
Bat the whole gist and weight of the question at issue lies at that very point of the controversy which Dr. Milner has chosen to pass over in perfect silence. There has been a change in words even ; but there has been a far greater change in things. It is not true, although the Doctor would so represent it, that there is a Catholic church visibly discerned, and or- dinarily known by that name, now, as there was in the days of Cyril, Augustine, or Jerome. That which now endeavours to palm itself upon us, in the place of the Catholic church of the early ages, is detected by its very name. Even in Dr. Milner's title-page it stares forth as 'the Roman Catholic church/ But that name is not lightly or unmean-»
D 3
36 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
ingly added: and it jast makes this difference, that no one of those glowing expressions of allegiance or attachment which occnr in the early fathers towards the Catholic church, will hear application to the church of Rome*
Dr. Miiner is very unhappy in his choice of autho- rities on this point. He quotes Ctfril and Aufftutine^ and it is true that both these fathers speak with great warmth of the necessity of firm adherence to the Catholic church. In all their expressions we go with them. We, too, desire to belong to the Cathclie church, and never to depart from her communion. But it does not follow that Cyril or Angostine felt themselves at all bound, or that we acknowledge any tie, to the church of Rome ; and the fallacy lies in taking expressions which are intended for the one, and applying them to the other. We desire to re- main in the communion of the Catholic church, but against the rule of the Romish church we protest. Cyril and Aagustine, like us, adhered to the Catholic church, but disregarded the claims and pretensions of the see of Rome. The presidency of the. third general council was taken by Cyril, then patriarch of Alexandria, which fact of itself proves how little he thought of any claim of the Bishop of Rome to be considered as the head of the church. I believe that the Cyril quoted by Dr. Miiner is one of less note than the patriarch of Alexandria ; but as he has introduced the name, I must be allowed to refer to that celebrated man. As to Augustine, in his time a synod of 225 bishops, at Carthage, absolutely for- bade all appeals to Rome ; and his signature is affixed to that identical decree! What, then, be- comes of these two authorities, brought forward to
THE B0MI8H CHURCH NOT CATHOLIC. 87
establish the right of the charch of Rome to arrogate to itself the sole possession of Catholicity ?
The facts of the case, however, upon which the whole qaestion turns, are matters of history, acces- sible to all. Is it trne, that when the ancient fathers Spoke of onion and allegiance to the Catholic charch, as being an essential thing in a real Christian, they meant thereby to enjoin anion and allegiance to the see of Rome ? Bid they mean to assert that any one who opposed or disobeyed the mandates of the Bishop of Rome was thereby, and ipso facto, excloded from the pale of the Catholic charch ? Nothing of the kind: not an idea of the sort ever crossed their thoughts. What are the main outlines of the case, as regards the authority of the Bishop of Rome ?
There existed, for the first hye or six centuries, a body called ' the Catholic church,' which consisted of the great body of Christian believers and sound professors, in all parts of the world. This body was called ' Catholic' or universal, to distinguish it from the various sects and parties which sprang up here and there ; and to examine into, and pronounce sen- tence upon which, the great body of the faithful, by their bishops, were frequently accustomed to meet in general councils* It was so called by common con- sent, having no legalized existence, but regulating its own internal affairs by its own assemblies, being for several centuries frowned upon by the state.
Bat this Catholic church was not the Romish church. The pretensions of the Bishop of Rome to be the visible head of the church, and to have the power of excluding all who refused to pay him homage, were never heard of during all this period.
As the seat of empire, and as a see possessed of great
38 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
wealth, Rome always claimed for its bishop a post of honoar, and a seat of precedency. This was often con- ceded, but all pretension to authority over the church was for centuries denied. At the council of Nice, the first great assembly of that kind upon record ; summoned, not by the bishop of Rome, but by the emperor, there was no pope from Rome to claim the first place, but Eustasius, the bishop of Antioch, filled the chair. And by that council the four patri- archs of Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, and Alex- andria, were declared to be of equal authority and rank, answering nearly to our English archbishops. Previously to this (a.d. 196), when Victor, bishop of Rome, had endeavoured to impose his mandates on the churches of Asia, they steadily maintained their independence, and the epistle of Irenseus, bishop of Lyons, rebuked Victor for the attempt he had made. Again, in the middle of the third cen- tury, one of the greatest lights of the church, Cyp- rian, bishop of Carthage, repelled a similar assump- tion on the part of Rome, and maintained the inde- pendence and equality of the churches. Jerome also as explicitly declares, that all bishops are equal. Hilary, another father of great celebrity, so far from admitting the rule of the bishop of Rome, thus ad- dresses him, the then bishop being an Arian : ' I ana- thematize thee, and that the third time, O thoa pre- varicator, Liberius.'
Thus continued afi^airs, there being a Catholic, or visible and universal church, which by its councils decided all cases of importance, but no pope to assert his sole authority as Christ's vicar upon earth. The council of Ephesus, called the third general council, held A.D. 431, was presided over, as I have already
THE BOMISH CHUBCH NOT CATHOLIC. 39
remarked, by Cyril, the bishop of Alexandria.
Eighteen years after, another council was held, over
ffMeh the successor of Cyril was called to preside.
Bat the two rival sees, of Rome and Constanti- nople, continaed to increase in wealth and power, and to ei^hibit more and more of mutual rivalry and jealousy. The council of Chaicedon (a. d. 451) placed the two pontiffs on a level in rank and authority, and divided the visible church between them. Still, up to this period, there was no ' Roman Catholic church.'
More than a century after, the patriarch of Con- Hantinople attempted to assume the title of ' G3cu- menical,' or * Universal Bishop ; ' on which the then Inshop of Rome, Pelagius I. wrote as follows : — ' Re- gard not the name of Universal Bishop which John has unlawfully usurped ; for let no one of the patri- archs use so profane an appellation. Consider what mischief may be expected rapidly to follow, when even among priests such perverted beginnings break forth; — for he is near respecting whom it is written. He himself is King over all the sons of pride.' Gregory I. who succeeded to the holy see, uses even stronger language when speaking of this subject. He says, — ' / faithfully declare, that whosoever in his haughtiness shall call himself or desire to he called, the Universal Bishop, is the forerunner of Antichrist.^
At last, about the year a.d. 862, the two patriarchs mutually excommunicated each other, and a division took place which has never since been healed.
Nor was this the mere falling' off of a limb, or branch. It is probable that at that moment the Greek patriarch numbered the largest body of ad- herents. Some time before, the bishops of the west were reckoned to be eight hundred, and those of the
40 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
east, a thousand. But a large proportion of those formerly reckoned among the western churches fell to the share of the patriarch of Constantinople. There can be little ground to doubt, that a very large proportion of the Christian world, so far as the do- minion of either was acknowledged, adhered to the Constantinopolitan head. The Greek empire de- cayed and waned before the advancing power of Islamism ; but even in the eleventh century we find the patriarch of Constantinople presiding over sixty- five metropolitans, and more than six hundred bishops.^ In Britain, and other kingdoms of Europe, the authority of neither was implicitly acknowledged. But let us pause here for a moment, and reflect on the absurdity which would justly have been charged upon the Roman bishop, had he, at that moment, viewing the division of the Christian world into two g^eat portions, — declared that his division was the Ca- tholic, or Universal Church, and that all the rest of the professed followers of Jesus were mere outcasts and heretics.
In fact, nothing of the sort took place. Those high pretensions which Dr. Milner and other Romish con- troversialists are now so ready to put forth, — to the effect that the church of Rome is the Catholic church, and that all who are not of her communion are heretics and outcasts, — all these pretensions were then unknown. The zeal and anger of Gregory was excited, not by the refusal of the bishop of Con- stantinople to submit to him, but by John's assump- tion of the supremacy over the whole church. This pretension, by whomsoever made, he declared to
* Thomauin, part iv> p. 17-
THE RQMISH CHURCH NOT CATHOLIC. 41
mark the foreronner of Antichrist. Not assnming that title himself, he coald not foresee that in a compara- tiyely short period after, his own saccessors would daim it, and that soon writers would abound, like Dr. Milner, to argue that whoever was not in the church of Rome was not in the Catholic church.
However, let us bear in mind this fact, that on the separation of the eastern from the western churches, the real position of the Romish church, which now assumes the title of ' Catholic,' was that of the third in numerical strength, among the great subdivisions then existing in the church. The Greek patriarch had a greater body of adherents; and the churches of the east — Nestorian, Jacobite, &c. — outnumbered both Greek and Roman taken together.* Nor could the eastern body receive the name of a heresy or a schism, since on fundamental doctrines there was no difference between it and Rome, and their contentions arose mainly on points of precedence and authority, on which, up to that time, no general rule or decision had obtained.
But pass on a few centuries, and behold another great defection. At the Reformation, of that portion of the world which adhered to the Roman pontiff, nearly half revolted at once. England, Scotland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Prussia, Holland, and many states of Germany, separated themselves from the Romish church. At the present moment, even as to mere profeision, it may be questioned whether Romanism reckons a majority or only a minority of the nominally Christian world. But as to the reality ^ es^cept in Ireland, Belgium, and some parts of Spain,
» ntridui, i. 78-
42 ESSAYS ON ROKANISM:
she has scarcely any sincere adherents left. France is reckoned to have thirty millions of Roman Ca- tholics, and yet yoa scarcely ever see a man in her charches; and so entirely has Romanism worn itself oat in that kingdom, that a late orator in the Chamber of Deputies at Paris, admitted the ob- vious ' want of something to fill up the vacuum caused by the disappearance of Christianity?'
Thus it is evidently impossible to admit, for a single instant, the closing assumption of Dr. Milner* He says, in claiming for the Italian church the title of Catholic^ ' Does not this effblgent mark of the true religion so incontestably belong to us, that the rule of Cyril and Augustine is as good and certain now* as it was in their times ? ' We answer, No ! for the following reasons : — 1. Because the whole face of the Christian world has been entirely changed since the days in which Cyril and Augustine wrote. The faith professed tbroogbout this universal church was the simple and scriptural creed now received by all Protestants. Unity had not been destroyed by the assumptions and demands of the Roman bishops, nor had the main errors of Popery, — transubstantiation, the mass, the celibacy of the clergy, or the worship of images, — then taken root. The scriptures were honoured and obeyed ; and with internal unity, a form of government banded down by the apostles, and general purity of doctrine in fundamental points, it was natural that Cyril and Augustine should enjoin strict adherence to the Catholic church, and avoidance of all schisms and divisions. In their days, there was one Catholic, or Christian church, spread over many parts of the world, but holding one
THB ROMISH CHURCH NOT CATHOLIC. 43
doctrine, adhering to one creed, and deciding all qaestions by its assemblies or councils.
Now, howeyer, all is changed. We have the Greek churches, which are as ancient as that of Rome. We have also various bodies of equal antl- qoity ; as the Syrian churches, the Maronites, and others. And we have also the inhabitants of eight or ten kingdoms besides, who were formerly attached to Rome, but who have thrown off her yoke, and have protested against her corruptions. And after all these changes, what can be more evident, more undeniable, than this ; that the advice of Cyril and Augnstine, to cling fast to the Catholic, the universal church, can no longer apply. Let any man possessed of common sense, and not already embarked in this controversy, say, — whether there is any one Catholic or universal church visibly discernible at the present moment? And still more, whether it is possible, without the greatest violence to reason, and the plain meaning of the words, to declare, that the Romish church is the universal church, and that, conse- quently, the greater part of Christendom is out of the pale of Christian communion ? But,
2. We answer, no! — because this change in the state of Christendom, this distraction and disunion of the Christian world, has been produced mainly and almost solely by the misconduct of Rome herself.
The Christian church, which was one and united in the days of Cyril and Augustine, has been split into various, communions, chiefly by the intolerable assnmptions and unscriptural pretensions of the Ro- mish see.
Had Rome, in the seventh and eighth centuries, maintained Gregory^s position, that no one prelate
44 ESSAYS ON ROICANISM:
had a right to the title of universal bishop, she might have succeeded in preserving the nnity of the church. But she soon began to oppose the claims of the patriarch of Constantinople by advancing still higher claims herself ; and the end of this controversy was, the first great division of the visible church into two leading sections.
Again, having now only the west remaining to her, Rome soon made her yoke so heavy, that half of Europe cast it off. In the ninth century, she had broken off all connexion with the larger half of the Christian world. In the fifteenth, she quarrelled with half of that section which remained with her. And yet, after all these secessions,— secessions, too, caused by her own inadmissible pretensions, she coolly anathematizes the seceders, and declares that those who abide by her, and those only^ constitate the Christian or catholic church !
But this position is evidently untenable, except, indeed, she can show that with her, and with her alone, is the truth of Christianity to be found. If Christianity exists in other communions, as we must fain hope it does, then it must be impossible to main- tain the claim of the Romish church to be, exclusively and solely, the catholic or universal church* Histori* cally, as we have already shown, she is not so ; geo- graphically or statistically, it is equally clear she is not so; and consequently it can only be by the clearest proof, that the truth is with her, and with her aloney — that her right to the title can be established.
III.
ON THE RULE OP FAITH.
THB ROMISH RULE OF FAITH EXAMINED.
Wb hare seen, then, that the attempt to impose tbe decisions of the church of Rome upon mankind, as the decisions of the Catholic or Universal church, is wholly unwarranted by the facts of the case. Let ns now try to get a little closer to her pretensions, and to see what weight attaches to her claims, when con- sidered on their own intrinsic merits.
We shall nowhere find a more artful and effective statement of the case, as against the Protestant rule of faith, and in favour of the Romish, than in Dr. Wiseman's Lectures. He thus states the argument : — * The authority of history, or of ecclesiastical tra- dition, independently of the divine force allowed it by the Catholic, can prove no more than the genuine- ness or truth of the scripture narrative ; but to be available as a proof of inspiration, must carry us directly to the attestation of the only witnesses cap- able of certifying the circumstance. It may be true, that the church, or body of Christians, in succeeding
46 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
times, believed the books of the New Testament to be inspired. Bat if that charch and its traditions are not infallible, that belief goes no farther than a mere haman or historical testimony; it can verify, therefore, no more than sach testimony ever can; that is, outward and visible facts, sach as the publi- cation, and consequently the legitimacy of a work. The only way in which it can attest the interior acts which accompanied its compilation, is, by preserving the assurances of those who, besides God, could alone be witnesses to them. Now, ecclesiastical history has not preserved to us this important testimony; for no where have we the record of any of these writers having asserted his own inspiration. And thus, by rejecting tradition as an authority, is the only basis for the inspiration of scripture cut away.^ ' Hitherto, then, my brethren, of what have I been treating? Why of nothing more than the prelimi- naries requisite to commence the study of the Pro- testant rule of faith. I have merely shown that the obstacles and difficulties to receiving the Bible, as the word of God, are numerous and complicated ; and yet, if it is the duty of every Protestant to be- lieve all that he professes, because he has sought and discovered it in the word of God ; if, consequently, it is his duty to be satisfied only on bis own evidence, as the divines of his church have stated ; if, to attain this conviction, it is necessary for him to go through a long and painful course of learned disquisitions; and if, after all these have been encountered, he cannot come to a satisfactory demonstration of the most important point of inspiration, I ask you, can the rule, in the approach to which you must pass through such a labyrinth of difficulties, be that which
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 47
God has giTen as a guide to the poorest, the most illi- terate, and simplest of his creatures ? '' *
And having thus proved, to his own satisfaction at least, the weakness and uncertainty attendant on this course, he next proceeds to develope the Romish system. On this part of the subject he says,
* Let us suppose that, not coutent with the more compendious method whereby God has brought us, through baptism and our early instruction, into the possession of the faith, we are disposed to investigate the authority of its principles; we begin naturally with scripture — we take up the gospels, and submit them to examination.' ^
Here we must pause for an instant, to admire the Proteus-like changes of Romanism, and its wonderful power of adapting itself to existing circumstances. When, till the year 1836, did the Romish church, or any of its advocates, admit that in the investigation of our religious principles, we should ' begin natur- idly with scripture?' When, till now, was it ever said, ' we take up the gospels, and submit them to examination.' How opposite is the policy and the spirit here manifested, to the tone and temper of the church of Rome in those days, and in those coun- tries, in which she could safely venture to lock up the word of God from the sight of men. Even within the last twenty years, we have on record the vehement opposition of two popes to the use of the Holy Scriptures. In 1816, Pope Pius the Seventh denounced the circulation of the Bible in the follow- ing terms ; — * It is a crafty device, by which the very foundations of religion are undermined. It is a pes-
1 IFuCTium'f Second Lecture, p. 43. ' Third Lecture, p. 02.
48 ESSATS ON ROMANISM:
tilence and defilement of the faith most dangeroas to souls/ And Leo XII. in 1B24, denounces the Bible Society in eqnally energetic language. <It strolls with effrontery through the world, contemning the traditions of the holy fathers, and, contrary to the well-known decrees of the council of Trent, labours with all its might, and by every means, to translate, or rather to pervert, the Holy Bible into the vulgar language of all nations.'
This was the tone adopted by the Romish churefa, when on its own ground ; amidst a blind and devoted' population, with whom proofs and arguments were unnecessary ; with whom it was enough to say, *■ the church decrees, or declares so and so,' and implicit submission followed of course. But Dr. Wiseman has a very different task in hand. He is addressing a people who have been accustomed to be reasoned with ; and he knows full well, that if he were merely to pronounce to his hearers that he and his colleagues, were infallible, — the rejoinder would be, * Do you expect us to believe that, merely because you choose to say so ? ' He feels it absolutely necessary, there- fore, to seek for some credentials. And where is he to find those credentials, but in the Bible ? Whether he can find them there or not, remains to be seen ; but if he fails in that quarter, he is not likely to succeed in any other. Standing, therefore, before an English auditory, and feeling himself obliged to present to them something bearing at least the semblance of an argument, — he is compelled, however unwillingly, to begin with holy scripture ; and he accordingly says, * being disposed to investigate the authority of its principles (the principles of Romanism) we begin na- turally with icripture, — we take up the gospels.'
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 49
But it may be said, that Dr. Wiseman does not mean to recommend this coarse of proceeding. Of that we are well aware. He evidently prefers what be calls, ' the more compendioas method whereby God broaght as, through baptism and oar early in- straction, into the possession of the faith.' In other words he would wish a set of followers who having been baptized into the Romish church in infancy^ and having constantly heard, from their early in- stmctoTS, that the Romish church was the only true ehorch — the only safe church, have ever ranged them- selves among her disciples, without a single inquiry IS to the validity of her pretensions, or the truth of her doctrinal creed. These, we are aware, would be scholars after Dr. Wiseman's awn heart. But he knows that among his hearers at Moorfields, this sort of blind admission of the most arrogant pretensions^ cannot be generally expected. He is obliged to deal with them as with reasonable creatures. And he inds it impossible to construct a plausible scheme, on which to rest his system of belief, except by going at once to scripture, and endeavouring to frame a ease out of its testimony. Observe, however, the confession herein implied. If a man is contept with * the compendious method,' as Dr. Wiseman calls it, of believing without investigation, this be can do in any church and with .any creed. But if he is 'disposed to investigate the authority of his principles,^ if he is desirous of being able to ' give a reason of the hope that is in him,' then, even Dr. Wiseman himself can help him to no other course than to * begin naturally with scripture,' — to *■ take up the ^pels, and submit them to examination.' Thus» iftcr all his horror at the idea of the exercise of
£
50 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
< private judgment/ after all his proofs of the impos- sibility of a plain unlettered man's being ever able to discover the grounds of his faith in scripture, be is obliged at last to fall back upon the use of the Bible itself, — of that Bible which the council of Trent declared to be ' likely to do more harm than good/ and the reading of which that council declared to be unlawful even to the regular clergy themselvei, except ' with the permission of iheir prelates.' To a body of several hundreds of laymen, of all classes, rich and poor, learned and ignorant, — to the whole of these, without the least discrimination, does Dr. Wiseman address himself, assuming that they all possess the Bible, — that they all are able and compe- tent to study it, — and to each and all he addresses the same direction, that if they ' would investigate the authority of their principles,' they must ' begin naturally with scripture,' they must ' take up the gospels, and submit them to examination.' Here, then, we have the Protestant rule unhesitatingly adopted ; here we have a simple and absolute appeal to holy scripture resorted to; and we feel little hesi- tation in determining the motive to be, that Dr. W. knew and felt the utter impossibility of taking any other course; the impossibility of constructing in such form as to be fit for an English eye, his theolo- gical system, until he had found some solid founda- tion ; the impossibility, in short, of finding in the works and words of mere human beings, a basis whereon to build a system which was to reach eter- nity. He did well, therefore, in at least attempting to gain a groundwork from holy scripture ; but let it be observed that in so doing he has given up the old Komish ground of the unfitness of the scriptures for
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 61
tbe use of the common people, — he has carried his whole andience with him to the word of God ; and haTing so done, he is no longer in a situation to object to the Protestant Rule of Faith.
Bat we have stopped at the very opening of his argument. Not to misrepresent him, we proceed with the whole statement : —
* We take up the gospels, and submit them to ex- amination. We abstract for a moment from our belief in their inspiration and divine authority— ^we look at them simply as historical works, and intended for our information ; writings from which we are anxious to gather such truths as may be useful to our instruction. We^nd, in the first place, that to these works, whether considered in their substance or their form, are attached all those motives of human credi- bility which we can possibly require : — that there is, throughout them, an absence of every element which could suggest the suspicion that there has been either a desire to deceive, or a possibility of having been mistaken. For we find a body of external testimony sofBcient to satisfy us, that these are documents pro- duced at the time when they profess to have been written, and that those persons were their authors, whose names they bear. And as these were eye- witnesses of what they relate, and give us, in their fives and characters, the strongest security of their veracity, we conclude all that they have recorded to be certain and true. We thus arrive at the disco- very, that besides their mere narrative, they unfold to us a system of religion, preached by one who wrought the most stupendous miracles to establish and confirm the divinity of his mission. In other words, we are led by the simple principle of human
E2
52 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
investigation to an acknowledgment of the anthority of Christ to teach, as one who came from God : and we are thas led to the necessity of yielding implicit credence to whatever we find him to have taught. So far, the investigation being one of oatward and visible facts, cannot require anything more than simple, historical, or haman evidence.
' Having once thas established the divine anthority of Christ, we naturally inquire, what is it that Christ taught? and we find that he was not contented merely with teaching certain general principles of morality, — that he was not satisfied with unfolding to man- kind doctrines such as none before him had attempted to teach, and thereby making man acquainted with his own fallen nature and with his. future destiny ; but that, moreover, he took means to preserre those doctrinal communications to mankind. We find it obviously his intention that the system he established should be beneficial, not only to those who lived hi his own days, and heard his word, but to the entire world, until the end of time ; that he intended his religion to be something permanent, something com- mensurate with the existence of those wants of hu- manity which he came to relieve : and consequently^ we naturally ask, in what way the obligations which he came to enforce, and the truths which he suffered to seal, were to be preserved, and what the place wherein they were to be deposited ? If they were to be perpetual, proper provision must have been made for their perpetuation.
' Now, the Catholic falls in with a number of very strong passages in which our blessed Saviour^ not content with promising a continuance of his doc- trines, that is to say, the continued obligation of
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 53
faith upon man, also pledges himself for their actual preservation among them. He selects a certain body of men ; he invests them, not merely with great aa- thority, bnt with power, equal to bis own ; he makes them a promise of remaining with them and teaching among them even to the end of time : and thus, once again, he naturally concludes, that there must have existed for ever a corresponding institution, for the pceserration of those doctrines, and the perpetuation of those blessings, which our Saviour came manifestly to communicate.
* Thus then, merely proceeding by historical rea- soning, such as would guide an infidel to believe in Chrisffs superior mission, he comes, from the word of Chrlii, whom those historical motives oblige him to believe, to acknowledge the existence of a body, de- pository of those doctrines which he came to establish among men. This succession of persons constituted to preserve those doctrines of faith, appointed as the successors of the apostles, having within them the guarantee of Christ teaching among them for ever ; and this body is what he calls the church. He is in possession, from that moment, of an assurance of divine authority, and in the whole remaining part of the investigation, he has no need to turn back, by calling in once more the evidence of man. For, from the moment he is satisfied that Christ has appointed a sacoession of men whose province it is, by aid of a sopematural assistance, to preserve inviolable those doctrines which God has delivered — from that mo- ment, whatever these men teach is invested with that divine authority, which he had found in Christ through the evidence of his miracles. This body, so eonstituted, immediately takes on itself the office of
54 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
teaching and informing him that the saered volame, which he had been hitherta treating as a mere his- tory— that the docament which he had been perusing solely with a deep and sojemn interest, is a book which commands a much greater degree of respect and attention, than any human motives could pos- sibly bestow. For now the church stands forth with that authority wherewith she is invested by Christ*^ and proclaims : ' Under that guarantee of divine as- sistance, which the words of Christ, in whom yon believe, have given me, I pronounce that this book contains the revealed word of God, and is inspired by the Holy Spirit ; and that it contains all that has a right to enter into the sacred collection.' And thus the Catholic at length arrives, on the authority of the church, at these two important doctrines of the canon and the inspiration of scripture, which I endeavoured to show, at our last meeting, it M;as almost, if not quite impossible, to reach by any course of ordinary human investigation/ *
Sach is the artfully-framed argument, upon which Dr. Wiseman's main reliance is placed. The late Robert Hall declared the building the infallible authority of the church of Rome upon the scriptures, and the infallibility of the scriptures upon the church of Rome, to be ^ a gross insult upon the understand- ing/ In the passage just quoted, the utmost art of the sophist is exerted to conceal the real character of this attempt to deceive. For the purpose of his argu- ment, the doctor chooses to assume that the reader is to take up the scriptures, * simply as historical works, intended for our information/ A man may certainly so study them ; but let it be remembered, that as long
1 Wiaeman'a Third Lecture^ p. 62—5.
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 55
as be views them in this light, he studies them as an infidel, and not as a Christian. The very first step towards the acquisition of the Christian faith, is, the fall acknowledgment of Holy Scripture, not as a ' simply historical work,' but as the word of God. Till this point is gained, nothing is done. To read the scriptares as a mere * historical work,' is to read them as the productions of erring and fallible men, — of creatures who, from the essential imperfections of their nature, are actually incapable of narrating cir- cumstances or conversations of any length, without falling into errors, omissions, and misconstructions. Dr. Wiseman's basis, therefore, will not support his superstructure. If a candid inquirer reads the gos- pels as he reads Thucydides or Robertson, making allowances, as he goes on, for the imperfections of a hnman author, he will never attach such vast impor- tance to two or three ex)pressions in certain conver- sations there narrated, as to imagine that upon those expressions,— ^which may, perhaps, (upon this hypo- thesis,) have been erroneously given, — such a system as the papacy and the infallibility of the church of Rome could ever be legitimately raised. No ! before those few words upon which the Romish church seeks to found her vast pretensions, can ever be imagined eapable of sustaining such a weight, they must be fdlly believed to be the words, not of a mere ' histo- rical writer,' but of one who spoke or wrote as he was moved by the Holy Ghost.
But here the question assumes a new form. The reader believes the book he is reading to be either the word of God, or the word of man. It is not mixed and alloyed, for in that case none could tell which was the gold, and which the alloy ; but
56 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
it is, all of itf either the word of man or the word of God. If it is the word of man, or the fallible narrations of what the writers saw or heard, or supposed that they saw or heard, then it is no sof-* ficicnt foundation for so vast a soperstructare as an infallible church. But if it is the word of God, then have we found in it the most important posses- sion of which man ever gained the knowledge ; —an unerring guide to his Creator's mind and will— a guide which cannot err and will not deceive — a manual in which all the great doctrines of religion are explicitly set forth, with far more prominence and emphasis than is given to any of the passages on which the church of Rome founds her claims.
But it may be objected, that Dr. Wiseman only refers his hearers to the gospel for a single doc-< trine v — for the establishment of the authority of hia church. He says, ' When an ambassador presents himself before a sovereign, he is asked, where are his credentials? He presents them, and on the strength of them he is acknowledged as an {ambassador.^ In like manner, the doctor considers that the scriptures establish the authority of the church ; and that the inquirer is in possession, from that moment, of an assurance of divine authority, and, ' in the whole re- maining part of the investigation, he has no need to turn back, by calling in once more the evidence of man.' In other words, that the main use of scrip- ture to Christians in general, is to establish the au- thority of the church, which being done, the wisest course is, to close up the Bible, and listen only to the priest. But the illustration he uses detects the weakness of his argument. Scripture, he says, fur- nishes the credentials of his church : — These being
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 57
presented, and the official character of the bearer thus established, that document may be laid aside, and the fanctions of the ambassador begin. Now let aoy one who has ever read a dozen pages of scrip- ture, say whether this is even a tolerable description of them. The credentials of an ambassador are plain and brief, and concem, solely, that one point which they have especially in view. They describe, and identify, and empower, the person bearing them, and they do no more. On the other hand, the Bible is a large and extensive document, embracing the most important parts of the history of the world ; detailing a series of most important doctrines ; set- ting forth many wondrous prophecies ; detailing the whole history of redemption, and enlarging apon all the chief doctrines and duties of Chris- tianity. In the midst of all this immense variety •f interesting matter, there occur two or three brief passages which the Romish church chooses to un- derstand as investing her with almost illimitable authority. They consist of very few words, and of those few words the meaning is somewhat obscure, and has always been disputed ; ' Yet,' argues Dr. Wiseman, * the chief use of the scripture to the inquirer, lies in these two or three passages. In these, which a student might pass over without imagining that they contained anything remarkable, is involved the whole authority of the Romish church. These, especially, above all others, ought to com- BMukl the inquirer's attention. Having found and considered these, he is in possession of the cre- dentials of the church, he is to ' take for his guide those texts which appoint the church to teach,' and with this guide it is unnecessary for him to waste
58 ESSAYS Oy ROMANISM:
more time over the written word. For/ says he, ' while the authority of scriptare, as a rule of faith, is thas perfectly compatible with the existence of an authority to teach ; the existence of an authority to teach exclitdes, not indeed the scripture, but the all-sufficiency of scripture. For where there is a supreme authority given, and man is commanded to obey it, from that command there is assuredly no retreat And therefore the scripture must needs be received, so as to be reconciled with the existence of a supreme authority, in matters of faith, existing in the church/ Scripture, therefore, is subjected and declared inferior to, the authority of the church. The church is not bound hj, the words of Scripture, but the language of scripture is to be interpreted or modified by the decisions of the church. Little can it matter, therefore, whether the scriptures are read or not; and small reason has any one for reading them, since, according to Dr. Wiseman, there is a higher authority, to whose decisions it must be much more profitable to direct our attention.
Dr. Wiseman, then, alleges, that *■ merely proceed- ing by historical reasoning,' an inquirer must be brought to the conclusion, that the gospels are true and authentic narratives, that Christ was a divine person, possessed of the highest authority, and that he transferred that authority, on leaving this world, to his apostles and their successors. Having thus found a body so constituted, and preserved from error by supernatural aid, he argues that its infallible de- cisions must be a safer and a more authoritative guide, than the collection of writings called the Bible.
In opposition to which, we may observe ; — 1. That the Romanist can only arrive at this authoritative
THB ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. &9
g^ide, this infallible aothority, thus professedly drawn from scripture itself, by the use of the Pro- tesiant rule of faith, and 2. That when he has so at- tained it, it is no supreme authority that he has found, but only one attendant on, and ministerial of, the scriptures themselves.
First, then, in thus building the Romish church and its assumed authority, on a careful investigation of scripture, the Protestant rule of faith is most fully adopted, and all the objections to it virtually aban- doned. For let it be observed, that in previously insisting upon the impossibility of establishing the scriptures as the only rule of faith, Dr. Wiseman had objected, —
' That before any one could even commence the examination of that rule, he must have satisfied him* self, that all these books or writings which are col- lected together in that volume, are really the genuine works of those whose names they bear.' *
Also, ' that no such genuine work has been ex- cluded, so that the rule be perfect and entire/
Also, ' he must satisfy himself by his own indivi- dual examination, that this book is inspired by God.'
Also, that if the scripture is to be the rule of faith, * it must be a rule easy to be procured and to be held. Grod himself must have made the necessary pro- vision, that all men should have it, and be able to apply it.' «
Also, that all men ' must surely be able to compre- hend it.' * Such, therefore,' he proceeds, * are the difficulties regarding, the application of this rule; a difficulty of procuring and preserving the proper
1 Dr, Wiieman*i Second Lecturep p. 32. 2 ibid. pp. 44.
GO ESSAYS Oy ROMANISM:
sense of the original by correct translations ; a difii- calty df bringing this translation within the reach of all ; a difficulty, not to say an impossibility, of ena- bling all to understand it/ ^
Now, who 'can oyerlook this obvious inconsistency in the doctor's argument, in that each and every one of these objections applies with just as much force to his own proof of the church's authority. Finding it necessary, in England, not merely to om* tert, but to prove, the boasted authority and infalli- bility of his church, he tells his hearers that for this purpose,.' we begin naturally with scripture, we take up the gospels, and submit them to examination/ But who does not see, that the very instant he adopts this, the Protestant method of arguing, all his own objections, just before urged, return upon him with double force. Before this examination of the gospels can establish any thing, the student must, according to his own shewing, have satisfied himself that these writings are really the genuine works of those whose names they bear; that they contain all that these writers left on these subjects ; that they were inspired of God, and so on, to the end of his series of objec» tions !
He has, however, still another shift. He endea- vours to elude the force of his own objections, inas- much as he does not rest the same dependence on the scripture which Protestants do. With them it is every thing ; the sole rule of faith, the alone standard of morals. Dr. Wiseman's argument goes only to prove that before it can safely be thus relied upon, we ought to have an assurance of this authenticity
1 Dr. Wi$eman*$ Second Lecture, p. 47, 48.
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 61
and iDspiration, whicb, without the testimony of the charch, he thinks cannot be obtained. But while he adheres to this argument, he is very ready to use the gospels as a mere historical document, and to prove by them, the mission and authority of the Catholic church ! But he takes especial care that it is merely as a human testimony, as an historical document, that he has recourse to their aid. He is most expli- cit on this point, that up to the moment of the stu- dent's discovery of the power of the church, the scriptures had been nothing more to him than ' a mere history/ *
We are therefore compelled again to look steadily at this point of the case ; and to ask, whether it is possible to establish an infallible authority upon so slender and insufficient a basis ?
Before we can determine what weight and value is to be attached to the testimony of any author, espe- cially of an historical writer, it is clearly and abso- lutely necessary that we should first ascertain his I'eal character. If he be a dishonest and partial witness, then his evidence must be received with suspicion, and only credited where a full corrobora- tion is at hand. If he be a man of honour and inte- grity, then we shall listen to his testimony with reliance, and give it a general reception into our mindss but still allowing something for human error and misinformation. It is only upon evidence of a higher character still,—- of a far higher character in- deed, that we can venture to rest with safety and confidence, when the truths which concern our everlasting salvation are the subjects of the investi- gation.
1 Wiaeman's Third Lecture, p. 64.
62 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
Yet what is the coarse of reasoning adopted by Dr. Wiseman ? He takes up the gospels, merely y he assures as again and again, as historical docaments, of fair average credibility ; and in one of them he finds these words, said to have been used, on a certain oc- casion, by Christ, *' All power is given to me in heaven and on earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to obterve all things whatsoever I have commanded you* And, behold, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world"
This passage, according to Dr. Wiseman's argu- ment, we cannot know, — till we have admitted the aathority of the Romish church, and that charch has declared it to be inspired of God, — to be any thing more than a common, ordinary narration like those of the sayings of Caesar or of Socrates. But who will ventare to take up the pages of Livy or of Thucy- dides, or any other mere historian, and to pin his faith on the perfect accuracy with which every sen- tence of every conversation is noted down ? And who, treating St. Matthew's gospel ' as a mere his- tory,'— and so, according to Dr. Wiseman, it must be treated, (until we have submitted to the church, and the charch certifies its inspiration) — who will dare to pledge his faith upon the probability, (for if the gos- pel be a ' mere history,' it can be nothing more^) that these words of Christ's, narrated by Matthew thirty years after they were spoken, were narrated with per- fect accuracy ?
Who will assure us that not one word was added, nor one omitted ; or that the word so added or omitted was of no material consequence ? Will any student of history produce a passage of similar length, from
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 63
Herodotas or Tacitas, from Hume or Robertson, from any modern or any ancient writer, and aver that he is absoiately certain that the speech so set down in the record, is precisely and accurately the very speech, to ihe letter, that was uttered ? If not, — if it cannot even be imagined that such a thing exists, except by Inspir- ation, as a perfect record, made years after the fact, of a speech actually spoken, in the very words which really fell from the speaker, — ^why should this single passage in St. Matthew be taken to be the one soli- tary exception to the universal rule, of the imperfec- tion of human memories, and of human records. No, if the standing and authority of the church of Rome rests on nothing better than a passage of six or eight lines, occurring in ' a mere history/ — then, as- suredly, it rests upon the sand, and might challenge the annals of imposition to shew a weaker or a nar- rower foundation.
We, however, believe these verses of St. Matthew to have been penned under the influence of the in- spiration of the Holy Spirit, and to be, therefore, most accurately and authoritatively recorded. Dr. Wiseman's error is, in adducing them only as the testimony of * a mere history,' — as * human testimony.' If they be nothing better,— or, which is the same thing, if they are to be dealt with as if they were no- thing better than ' a mere history,' then might we as well attempt to found a religion on some story found in Xenophon or in Rapin, as to build the lofty pre- tensions of the Romish church upon a passage of some half dozen lines, occurring in the pages of one who might either have misconceived or half-forgotten what he had heard, if, indeed, he ever heard what he relates. Never was there a more monstrous dispro-
64 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
portion apparent, than this attempt to build an nni- versa! and infallible church, upon what is alleged to be nothing more than an act of the memory of a single, unsupported, and fallible man.
Had Dr. Wiseman sought a sufficient basis for his argument, he should have dealt with the scriptures in their proper character, of a revelation from God. This, their true character, can be established, and has been established, repeatedly and abundantly, without the aid of the church of Rome. This Dr. Wiseman knew, but he preferred even to risk his cause by resting it upon an insufficient foundation, rather than to declare, at the outset, the divine au- thority of holy scripture, and to take all the come' quences flowing therefrom. He was well aware that if it should appear that we have in God's word, an in- fallible guide and standard of doctrine, without the interference of the church of Rome, it might probably follow that men would perceive that this boasted infallibility of the church was not needed, and was, in fact, of no real use to them. They would be apt to argue that an infallible guide, to be of any utility, must be infallible, not only in the aggregate, but also in all its parts. The Bible was the work of inspi- ration, as a whole ; and each verse in it was equally true and equally divine. But if the church could be called infallible as a whole, was every priest of that church to be treated as infallible also ? If not, of what use was this abstract infallibility, since it was with some individual priest that each man had to do. Thus the Bible, if admitted and declared to be an inspired volume, must, in the exercise of common sense, be preferred to that church, which, although claiming infallibility, would not or could not explain
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 65
»Wy or throagh what mediam, that attribate was to i exercised.
Bat we have to remark, in the second place, that en we.re Dr. Wiseman's argument admitted, and e were to allow the possibility of establishing an fallible aathority by the testimony of a fallible wit- iS8f we ba?e not thereby got rid of the Bible, bat ITC merely enforced another duty ; and one which, ) clearly contained in scripture, is as little objected » by Protestants as it is by Romanists — namely, the aty of preaching the gospel ; as well as of distribut- ig it in the form of copies of the divine word.
Dr. Wiseman argues very vehemently ngainst the se of the scriptures as a rule of faith, and in favour f a settled ministry. We contend in favour of both, nd against neither. The scriptures require to be leralded and accompanied by the messengers of sal- ation ; on this point there is no difference of opi- lion : — require, we say, not absolutely, (for the Spirit if God can act by means of the written word alone, >r even without any human means whatever) but ;enerally. The command of Christ is two-fold, and >De injunction is as binding as the other. To bis postles, and to those who, after their example, should levote themselves to his cause, his mandate is, VeacA the gospel to every creature. To mankind enerally, who are to hear this gospel, his injunction J, Search the scriptures, for they are they which testify ftne.,
Now Protestants fully receive both these rules. Ve preach the gospel ; and we direct the people to ^arch the scriptures for a warrant for every word we ly. Nor will the Romish church, at least in Eng- ind, venture directly to impugn either of these two
F
66 ESSATS ON bohanish;
iDStractions. She exalts and extols the ministryy and she dares not openly deny the ase of the scrip* tares. Where, then, is the main ground of differenee between us. It lies in the opposite eonclusions to which we come, as to the ultimate authority on any question. The written woM, and the ministry, being both in operation among the people, the question is, which of the two is the greater ? We Protestants say, that the inspired word of Gt>d is the only infallible guide and standard, and that the ministers of the gospel are simply to preach what they find therein contained. We make, therefore, the Bible to be the ultimate standard, in case of any difference arising. The Romish church, on the other hand, asserts that the authority of scripture is subordinate to that of the ministry. In the words of Dr. Wiseman, ' the scrip- ture must needs be received, so as to be reconciled with the existence of a supreme authority^ in matters of faith, existing in the church.* To explain this dis- tinction as briefly as possible, the church of England declares that the ministers of the gospel have no right or authority to teach any thing as necessary to salva- tion, save what may be proved from holy scripture. The church of Rome, on the other hand, affirms that neither may the words of holy writ be understood in any other sense than that which she chooses to put upon them, nor is it true that scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation. With us, the Bible is the standard to which the preacher himself and every thing else is to be brought; with the Romanist the Bible may only be understood as the church chooses to interpret it, and to its contents they add an inde- finite mass of farther doctrines, under the title of the ^xir.n'vittrrt trr^ditions cf the c'lurcli.* The vast differ-
THE ROMISH BULE OF FAITH. 67
;e between the two systems, and the great sape- rity of the Protestant doctrine, is clearly apparent ey make the priest every thing, the Bible only sub- iary and attendant. We make the Bible every ng, and the priest, a minister, a preacher of God's ly word. Now the Bible, which we thus exalt to ! first rank, and take as our highest authority, is oily and exclusively divine. It contains ' truth thout any mixture of error,' and in being governed its dictates we cannot possibly err. But the priest, 0 is placed above the Bible in their scheme, is aere fallible man, liable to error, and open to temp- ion. They cannot, in pushing their favourite text, Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the rid," to its utmost limits, venture to imagine, that rist's constant presence and guidance is bestowed every priest of their church. To do this would to aver, that when a priest^ afterwards proved to insane, actually murdered an infant with his own Dds, in a village in Ireland, a few years back, under itence of performing a miracle, he then and there ted under the divine guidance and inspiration ! Yet s will not be asserted ; and if not, then how are we to derstand the presence and protection of Christ, and efe is the immunity from error which this alleged isence confers?
4>nd, after all the objections that can be made to i Protestant rule of faith, and amidst all the diffi- Ities propounded, — that rule will still possess one mense and decisive advantage over the Romish !e ; namely, that it is intelligible and practical ; it it can be pointed out and defined. ** Holy scrip- e containeth all things necessary to salvation ; so it whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be
68 ESSAYS ON ROlCAyiSH :
proved thereby, is not to be reqaired of any man, that it should be believed as an article of faith/' This statement, being accompanied, as it is, by a list of the books of holy scripture, is at least suffi- ciently clear. Dr. Wiseman, like most other Romish controversialists, endeavours to alarm us with a long array of difficulties, as to proving the inspiration of scripture, and as to understanding scripture, when proved ; — but while he thus strives to take away our hope, what does he give us in exchange? He aims to establish the superior and supreme authority of the church ; but had he succeeded ever so well here, still the question would return ; — when and where has the church spoken ?
The Protestant, on the other hand, puts into the poor man's hands a certain well-known book ; and tells him that that book, being the pure and unadul- terated word of God, being ^* truth without any mix- ture of error," cannot possibly mislead or deceive him. The Romanist dares not deny its divine character, but assures him that, though it be indeed the word of God, it will be impossible for him to understand it without the aid of the church. Obviously, then, supposing this view to be the correct one, the very next thing to be sought, is, that aid of the church which is re- presented as so essentially necessary.
Now the extent and nature of the Protestant rule was at all events sufficiently clear. The way of sal- vation was declared by him to be fully and suffici- ently revealed within the limits of this single volume ; and though not denying the existence of some diffi- culties, it was still believed that *' the wayfaring man, though a fooly should not err therein/' In striving, then, to weaken the poor man's reliance on this
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 69
goide. Dr. Wiseman Is surely boand to give him in excbange, one equally simple and easy of applica- tion. He is told, that " the church has a supreme authority to teach/' and that the scriptures cannot be understood without her teaching. But, in drawing from his grasp that which they do not deny to be the inspired word of Crod, — that which they admit to be in- fallibly true, what do the Romanists giye him that will bear the least comparison with what they ask him to resign ? What do they give him, in fact, except the mere oral instructions of a poor fallible man ? The church, they say, is infallible, and has the promise of being always presenred from error. But they will not venture to tell us that every individual priest is infallible, or that none of their clergy have ever fallen into error. So that while they take away that which is not denied to be infallible, merely on the ground that it cannot be understood, — they propose in its place a guide who is merely human, and who, consequently, may Jead us into ^ thousand errors.
The fact is, that this infallibility of their church, of which they make such boast, and which they press upon mankind as something far superior to the writ- ten word, is an iffnis fatuusj a notion or fancy which is ever fleeing before us, and which can never be found in any definite form. Even their highest au- thorities are divided as to where it resides ; whether in the pope alone, or in a council apart from the pope, or in a pope and council unitedly ; and even could this fundamental point be agreed upon, how far won Id the poor man be from deriving a benefit from either. The church is an infallible teacher, they tell us ; but where does the church teach ? The scriptures cannot be understood without her aid, they
i
70 ESSAYS ON BOMANISM:
say ; bat where is that aid afforded ? She g^yes no infallible exposition or commentary of the scriptures : the traditions upon which she lays such stress, are still ''the unwritten word;'^ that is, are still floating about in the minds, and memories, and fancies of men. Propound the most important question to this '' church,^' and of whom can you expect an answer? In fact, in what form does this '' church" present itself to the poor man, but in that of his priest? The priest represents ** the church ;" speaks the decisions of ** the church ; " is *' the church'' in his sole person. All the infallibility which is of any practical utility to the inquirer, is the infallibility of this priest. If he, indeed, — if every individual priest in their church can be supposed to be infallible, — then may the poor man have something whereon to rest. But if they cannot, and assuredly they will not, venture on this monstrous assumption, then it follows that the inquirer's guide, he who represents ** the church ;'' he who is all ** the church" that the poor man can get access to, is a mere erring, fallible man. So that, after all, this device of Satan, for it is nothing else, turns out to be a mere scheme for getting the poor man's Bible out of his hand, under the pretence of giving him something far better; and then deluding him with an empty phrase about the infallibility of the church, which ends at last in lay- ing him tied and bound at the feet of a poor human being like himself!
Again, however, we are sent to the words of scrip- ture, whether as inspired, or as '' a mere history ; " — we are required to listen to the words of Christ, and to Dr« Wiseman's comment on them : "' All power is given to me in heaven and on earth. Go ye^ therefore,
THE BOMISH RITLE OF FAITH. 71
ttiul teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father^ and of the Son, and of the- Holy Ghost, teach- ing them to observe all things whatsoever I have com- manded you. And, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the worlds (Matt, xxyiii. 18—20 )
The Doctor's comment rans thus: — ** I ask you, is not this a commission exactly comprising all that I said we might expect to find ? Does it not institute a body of men to whom Christ has given security, that they shall be faithful depositaries of his truth ? Does it not constitute the kingdom^ whereunto all nations should come? Does it not establish therein his own permanent teaching, in lieu of prophecy, so as to prevent all error from entering into the church ? and is not this church to last till the end of time ? Now this is precisely all that the Catholic church teaches, all that she claims and holds, as the basis and foundation whereupon to build her rule of faith. The successors of the apostles in the church of Christ have received the security of his own words, and his promise of '* a perpetual teaching/' so that they shall not be allowed to fall into error. It is this promise which assures her she is the depositary of all truth, and is gifted with an exemption from all liability to err, and has authority to claim from all men, and from all nations, submission to her guidance and in- struction." *
Here we are again treated with that insufferable assumption to which we referred in our last Essay. Throughout the whole we hear of *' the church," and *' the Catholic church,'' as if it were true that both at the present moment, and in all former times, there had always been a ** Catholic or universal church,"
1 WUeman*i Fourth Lecture, p. 109.
72 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
in some visible form, to which these expressions of oar Saviour might be safely applied. Bat this is a mere fiction : it is a gross misrepresentation of the case. In the first four or ^Ye centaries, there is no doubt, a really Catholic church existed. But this was not the church of Rome, any more than it was the church of £ngland. The first general council ever held, and that at a period when Christianity had spread over the whole ciyilized world, — was neither held at Rome, nor summoned by a pope, nor presided over by a bishop of Rome. It was called together by the emperor ; held at Nice ; and presided over by a Spanish bishop, as the senior member pre- sent. The same observation applies to several sub- sequent councils. In a century or two after, we find the four patriarchs, as they were called, of Route, Constantinople, Antiocb, and Alexandria, ascending to a rank above the other bishops of the church ; and still later the number is reduced to two, — Rome and Constantinople. After a long contest for the rank and authority of universal bishop, — the east and west finally separate,— each declaring hostility against the other. Blame may be attached to either side; but one thing is clear, that Rome, with her diyision of the Catholic church, could have no right or authority to unchristianize or cast off the whole body of the eastern churches. Here, then, was a permanent division of the Catholic church into two great sections. About seven centuries after, six or eight nations of Europe found the exactions of the Papal see so heavy, that they also threw off her yoke. And, judging by the rule, " by their fruits ye shall hnow them/' — we do not find England, Scotland, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, and parts of Germany,
THB ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 78
less moral, less peacefal, less indastrioas, or less re- spected than Italy or Spain, which adhered to Rome. We do not think, therefore, that in abandoning Rome, they abandoned Christianity.
Now when, after all these divisions and separa- tions, we find one branch of the professedly Christian world setting itself up as '* the church,*' ** the Catholic church,** we cannot look opon it or speak of it, as anything else than an instance of the most intoler- able arrogance, and the most anfoanded pretension.
Practically, too, this scheme is fraught with far more difficulties than Dr. W. himself has been able to allege against the Protestant rule.
'' Before any one can even commence the exa- mination of the scriptures,** says Dr. W., ** he must have satisfied himself that all these books and writ- ings which are collected together in that volume arei really the genuine work of those whose names they bear ; and also that no such genuine work has been excluded,** ^ &c. Equally clear is it, that before any one can apply our Lord*s words immediately before his ascension, to the church of Rome, he must have it clearly made out to him, that of all the various bodies of Christian ministers in the world, those holding under the bishop of Rome are the only ones who can rightly adopt and claim the promise then given. And, finding a multitude of other Christian churches in the world, with whom the Romish church holds no intercourse, he must see ** that no genuine** church ** has been excluded,** so that the body is really Catholic and entire.
Now to the inhabitants of a Roman Catholic conn-
1 WitemauU Second Lecture, p. 32.
74 ESSAYS ON robcanism:
try, or even to such persons, here, as have been long living in quiet submission to the Romish priesthood, and have been inured and accustomed to the high pretensions of that church, — the conclusion may seem natural enough ;~but in more than half the coun- tries of the globe, the case would be different.
The Greek Christians might argue thus : — ' Time was, when Rome and Constantinople were sister pa- triarchates in the san)e Catholic and universal church. In the seventh and eighth centuries, each see was filled in turn by men of more ambition and self-will than became their profession. Each alternately claimed the pre-eminence, while the other as firmly resisted the claim. Finally, the breach between these two sections of the general church became ir- reparable. The greater part of Christendom was di- vided between the two ; the eastern patriarch taking his portion, — the western his ; since when the visible church has never once acted in concord and union, but each country or section has taken its own course ; the greater part of Europe going with the bishop of Rome, and the Asiatic Christians, generally, with the patriarch of Constantinople. But, clearly, neither of these rulers had any right to exclude the other from his place in the visible church ; or to say, that his followers constituted the Catholic church ; and that all who are not subjects of his, were rebels to the great Head of the church.'
The Armenian would reason in a similar manner. ' Our church,' he would say, ' was formed at the begin- ning of the fourth century, when Rome advanced no pretensions to the dominion of the Christian church. At that period, at the council of Nice, no one thought of such a thing as any dominion or rule
THE ROMISH RULE OF FAITH. 75
exercised by the see of Rome over all other churches. We, therefore, were no rebels or de- serters from the allegiance of Rome, for, at that period, she claimed none. Since then we have beard, indeed, of her increased and exaggerated pretensions; bat they concerned us nothing. And are we to be nnchristianized and excluded from the ▼isible charch, merely because Rome, which is no mother of ours, has chosen to demand homage from the whole Christian world, and we, owing her no such submission, have refused to pay it?*
Of a similar character would be the remonstrance of a member of the Syrian church at Malabar. * For more than fifteen centuries,' he would say, ' have we preserved the Christian faith, which we never re- ceived from Rome, and which we are not willing to allow Rome to take away from us. The Portuguese, when they first came among us, and found more than a hundred Christian churches, said, *' These churches belong to the pope.'' " Who is the pope V* we an- swered ; '* we never heard of him." Aod was it to be endured that an Italian bishop, of whose name, even, we were wholly ignorant, and to whom we owed nothing of any kind, should send his demands of tribute and allegiance to us, who knew not even so much as tils existence ? '
Thus would all the easterns agree in declaring this assumption to be wholly unfounded ; their faith and doctrine was Christian, they would say ; their or- dination and succession was apostolic; and they were no rebels to any lawful authority of the pope, for of such authority they had no knowledge. What is the answer to their case ? It deeply concerns the present question, — for, if the Romish charch be not.
>
76 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM.
indeed, the Catholic church, but only a section of it, — then it must clearly follow that in such promises as were just now quoted, she can claim no more than a mere participation.
'* Xo, / am with you always,'* said the Saviour ; but with whom did he then promise to be present ? With his whole church ; with the Catholic church ; not with the church of Rome exclusively or especially ; with his whole church on earth, the representatives of which were then present. But if that promise was not made to the bishop of Rome, or to any other section of the church, then what title has that bishop, or any other, to impose laws on his brethren ?
Thus the Romish Rule of Faith is clearly open to two objections : First, it removes from its just supre- macy, as the sole and sufficient guide, and the ulti- mate appeal,— God's message to man, as found in Holy Scripture ; and hands us over from' a definite and intelligible rule to one which constantly evades the grasp, and affords nothing tangible or satisfactory to the enquirer. And, secondly, because, when it refers us to the judgment of the church, the Catholic church, as the only true rule of faith, it refers us to that which can no where be found, — inasmuch as the several divisions of the Catholic church are scat- tered over the face of the whole earth, disunited and contending against each other, — a state which is greatly caused by the unfounded pretensions of the church of Rome. We regret, then, this rule, both because it is dishonouring to God and his word, and because it refers to a 'Catholic church,'.which, partly owing to the divisions and dissensions caused by the claims of Rome, can no where, at least in our day, be discerned or consulted.
IV. THE MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH.
UNITY.
Wb have already denied the truth of the church of Rome's favourite assumption, — that she is *' the Ca- tholic church ; " and have combated it on the general ground, that there are other churches in the world besides herself, and that she can shew no title to ar- rogate to herself an exclusive claim to that title. She returns, however, to the charge, and contends for her sole right to that title, inasmuch as she alone, she alleges, can properly answer to the ancient de- scription, in being ** One, Holy, Catholic, and Apos- tolic/' This, then, will naturally become the next subject for consideration.
We will begin with Dr. Milner's statement. He says, ^ The chief marks of the true church, which I shall here assign, are not only conformable to reason, scripture and tradition, but they are such as the church of England, and most other respectable de- nominations of Protestants, acknowledge and profess to believe in, no less than Catholics. They are conr tained in those creeds which you recite in your daily
#
78 ESSAYS ON ROBiANISM :
prayers, and proclaim in yoar solemn worship. In fact, what do yon say of the church yoa believe in, when yoa repeat the apostles' creed ? Yoa say, / be- lieve in the holy catholic church. Again, how is this cbarch more particularly described in the Nicene creed ? You say, / believe in one catholic and apostolic church. Hence it eyidently follows, that the church which yon, no less than we, profess to believe in, is possessed of these four marks, unity, sanctity, catho" licity, and apostolicity. It is agreed upon, then, that all we have to do, by way of discovering the true church, is to find out which of the rival churches or com- munions is peculiarly one, holy, catholic, and apos- tolic: 1
Now here the learned doctor is rather hasty. He says, ' it is agreed upon,' but this is like many other of his assumptions. It has never been * agreed upon ' by any Protestants, that Dr. Milner should set about finding, among certain territorial or national churches, whether the Roman, the Greek, the Armenian, or the English, — by divers visible signs or * marks,' which ofthemis'the true church.' This, we repeat, has never been * agreed upon,' as Dr. Milner chooses to assert, but it is a mere fancy of his own. The ca- tholic or universal church, in which Protestants be- lieve, is not a visible but an invisible body — in fact, it is the body of which Christ is the head, and con- sists of all those, of every nation and from amongst all the visible churches, who have become, by regen- eration, living branches of the true vine, and stones of the heavenly temple. But let us admit for a mo- ment, for argument's sake, Dr. Milner's suppositioni
•
1 Miher's f^m* nf Cr.nfr- n r.w. p. ir(5.
UKITY. 79
that to find out the4nie church, it is only necessary to discover, which of the rival churches is ' peculiarly me, holyy eatholie^ and apastoHCf and let us see how be contrives to establish a claim to superiority, on all these beads, in behalf of his own church.
Unity is the first of these distinguishing features, and tbe Dr. begins by arguing that it can never be said to belong to the Protestants generally, or to the church of England in particular. He then proceeds to prove that it is a distinguishing characteristic of the church of Rome. He contends,
1. That unity is no feature of Protestantism, is saflSclently clear from the multitude of churches and sects which have sprung up among them. Bossuet wrote ' two considerable volumes on the Variations of Protestants/
2. That the church of England is equally destitute of it, is shown from divers opposing views advocated by different parties in the church ; — the orthodox, the evangelical, the favourers of Arianism and So- cinianism, as evidenced by many quotations brought from Blackburne, Balguy, Watson, Hoadley, and other celebrated preachers in the church.
3. That the church of Bome is ' strictly One,' is next shewn, — * first,' says Dr. M., * in her faith and terms of communion. Tbe same creeds, namely, tbe Apostles' creed, the Nicene creed, the Athanasian creed, and the creed of Pope Pius IV. are every- where recited and professed; the same articles of faith and morality are taught in all our catechisms ; and the same rule of faith is admitted by all Catholics throughout th^ four quarters of the globe/* Se-
80 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
coodly, ' she is also aniform in wliaterer is essential in her Litargy/ * So that/ continues Dr. M., ' when Catholics landing at one of the neighboaring ports, from India, Canada, or Brazil, come to my chapel, I find them capable of joining with me in every essen- tial part of the divine service/ And, lastly, she pos- sesses * a regular, uniform, ecclesiastical constitution and government, and a due subordination ; so that each single Catholic is subject to his pastor, each pastor submits to his bishop; and each bishop ac- knowledges the supremacy of the successor of St Peter.' ^
Such, then, are the doctor's positions with regard to the first point, and it may be as well if we discuss and settle this, before we proceed to the others. We will take up his statements seriatim, and assert, —
1. That differences and contrarieties of opinion are no more peculiar to Protestantism than to Popery. It is true that Bossuet did exercise his skill in draw- ing together a great collection of individual errors and contradictions ; but he never made out half such a case against the Protestants, as Mr. Edgar has since done against the church of Rome, in his Variations of Popery. The only fair and honest way of judging of this question, is not by raking up the words of this or that man, or the follies of some little sect or faction, but by taking a just and large view of the main features of each party.
Now on the side of Protestantism it is to he ob- served, that at the period of the Reformation, the various nations which threw off the yoke of Rome, all felt the necessity of some public document, or con-
> MUner'M End qf Controveraif, p. 194.
UNITY. 81
fessioD of faith, and all, acting independently, and wHboat combination, consent, or coll asion, proceeded to compose such declaration. Twelve Confessions, namely, the Angastan, Tetrapolitan, Polish, Saxon, Bohemian, Wittembergian, Palatine, Helvetian, French, Dutch, English, and Scottish, appeared within a few years. These were composed by clergy scattered all over Europe, and they represented the views embraced by all the Protestant nations of Europe. And instead of presenting, as Dr. Milner would have us believe, a chaos of contradiction and confusion, ' the harmony is truly surprising, and con- stitutes an extraordinary event in the history of man. The annals of religion and philosophy supply no other example of such unity, agreement, and con- sistency. All these comprehensive abridgments showed, in varied diction, an astonishing unity in the main, on all doctrinal questions, though they might differ in discipline, form, and ceremony.' > What trifling, then, is it, to turn away from this ex- traordinary proof of essential unity of doctrine, as shown in public documents, and to aim at proving contrariety by a reference to the errors and follies of individual writers.
But does the same unity mark the church of Rome ? By no means. How does Dr. Milner attempt to prove it? By her creeds. Well, but the church of England holds and constantly uses the three ancient creeds, as well as the church of Rome, and yet Dr. Milner will not allow the church of England to possess unity of doc- trine. And the fourth, the modern creed of Pope Pius the Fourth, which constitutes the main differ- ence between Rome and England, as far as creeds
1 Eigar^M VariaiUmt qf Popery, p. 3S. O
82 ESSAYS ON robcamism:
are concerned, makes the poor Romanist declare^ that he ' receives and professes all thingt that are de- clared by the sacred canons and general councUt ! '
Now, at first sight, assuredly here is a shew of unity. Every Romanist is pledged to profess the same thing that every other Romanist professes.
Bat if we look a little closer, all this apparent unity and agreement vanishes. The belief so professed, to be real and substantial, mast have certain de6nite ob- jects. Now when we enquire touching these, all shew or possibility of unity instantly vanishes.
The believer is to ' receive all things which are declared by the sacred canons and general councils.' Now, in the first place, the poor deluded man here promises what, in ninety-nine cases out of a hun- dred, is absolutely impossible. To 'receive and pro- fess ' a doctrine, it is at least necessary, we presume, that it should be presented to the mind. Now, how is this wholesale believer to know what * the sacred canons and general councils ' have ' declared ? '
His church gives him no help in this important matter. Not a single effort has she ever made, to place 'the general councils' within reach of her fol- lowers. It is only, then, in those solitary cases in which a man possessed of great wealth can purchase, — or, possessed of leisure and classical learning, can go to a public library and read, — it is only in these few cases, we repeat, that the disciple of Romanism can even know what it is that he has promised impli- citly to receive.
But this is only the beginning of perplexities. Sup- pose the neophyte to succeed in gaining access, by some means or other, to the voluminous records of the councils, a fresh difficulty immediately opens upon
UNITY. 83
him. This yery united church, — this ' centre/ in short, 'of unity/ is not even agreed within itself, which councils they are which are to be considered as * general/ and which, therefore, are bindiilg on the conscience of the believer!
' Gibert, a leading Romish authority, admits * the uncertainty of the Western Ecumenical councils/ Moreri grants ' the disagreement of authors in their enumeration. One reckons more and another less ; whilst some account these universal and approved, which others regard as provincial, national or con- demned.' A full detail of popish variety indeed would, on this topic, fill folios. This, however, is unnecessary. A statement of each individuaFs pecu- liar notions, on this, or indeed on any other subject, would be tedious and useless. The opinions enter- tained on this question, not merely by a few persons, but by influential parties, are worthy of observa- tion ; and these only, in the following pages, shall be detailed.
'Three jarring and numerous factions have, on the subject of general councils, divided and agitated the Roraish communion. One party reckons the general councils at eighteen. A second faction counts the same number ; but adopts different councils. These reject the councils of Lyons, Florence, Lateran, and Trent; and adopt, in their stead, those of Pisa, Con- stance, Basil, and the second of Pisa. A third divi- sion omits the whole or a part of the councils, which intervened between the eighth and sixteenth of these general conventions. The whole of these are omitted by Clement, Abrahamus, and Pole, and a part by Sixtus, Carranza, Silvius, and the council of Con-
}
b4 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
* One party in the popish commanion reckons the general coancils at eighteen. Of these, fiye met respectively at Ephesus, Chalcedon, Vienna, Flo- rence and Trent. Two convened at Nicaea, two at Lyons, four at Constantinople, and ^ve at the Late- ran. The patrons of this enumeration are, in gene- ral, the Italian faction, headed by the pope, and maintaining his temporal, as well as his spiritual authority. Baronius and Bellarmine, in particular, have patronized this scheme with learning and abi- lity ; but with a total disregard of all honour and honesty.
'Bellarmine, besides the eighteen which are ap- proved, reckons eight general councils which are reprobated, and six which are partly admitted and partly rejected. One, which is the Pisan, — strange to tell— is neither adopted nor proscribed. Bellar- mine's distinctions and decisions indeed are badly calculated to establish the authority of councils. His hair-breadth distinctions and arbitrary decisions, on the contrary, tend only to overthrow all confidence in his determinations and in universal councils.
'All the eighteen, however, were not accounted valid or unerring on tbeir first publication. Six, marked now with the seal of approbation and infal- libility, were, for a long series of time, in whole or in part, rejected, by a part or by the whole of Chris- tendom. These are the second, third, fourth, fifth, seventh, and twelfth general councils. The canons of the second, according to Alexander and Thomas- sin, were not received by the Latins till the Lateran council in 1215, a period of eight hundred and thirty-four years after their promulgation. Its faith, indeed, in opposition to Macedonianism, corresponded
UKITY. 85
with that of the westerns, and was, in consequence, admitted by Damasus, Gelasios, and Gregory. Its creed, however, was recognised only on the aathority of divine revelation and ancient faith. Leo rejected its canons. Simplicias and Felix, enumerating the councils which they acknowledged, mention only those of Nicsea, Ephesus, and Chalcedon. Gregory the Great declared that the Roman church possessed neither the acts nor canons of the Byzantine assem- bly, though his Infallihi^ty, in glorious inconsis- tency, elsewhere affirmed that he esteemed the four ecumenical councils of Nicaea, Ephesus, Constanti- nople and Chalcedon as the four gospels/ ^
Such is the inextricable confusion into which this compulsory ' unity without union' is sure to involve as. The honest and sincere enquirer, we may well suppose, will be almost in despair at the prospect which opens before him.
But suppose hi^i to wade or struggle through this preliminary difficulty, and to adopt some one of the numerous lists of councils, with a view of proceeding on his enquiries as to the belief of the church : he now finds, the very instant he moves forward, that he has only yet opened upon a series of perplexities.
The exact position of the pope, in the Romish church ; the extent of his supremacy and authority ; nay, the very names of the popes of former times, — all these matters offer each their peculiar opening for doubts and difficulties. The conflicting lists of popes, the disputes arising out of the schisms, in which there were sometimes two popes, sometimes three, at the same moment of time, — all these present a per- fect chaos of confusion.
1 Edgar't Varicttioru qfBtmaniiin, p. 96, 97*
86 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM:
Bat passing oyer these, the extent of the existing* pontiff's poweE and jurisdiction is eqaalJy a matter of strife and contention. 'The aathority attached to this dignity, remains to the present day undecided. Opinions on this topic have floated at freedom, un- fixed by any acknowledged standard, and uncon- trolled by any recognised decision. The Romisb doctors, in consequence, have, on the pontifical su- premacy, roved at random through all the gradations and forms of diversified an4 conflicting systems*
'These systems are many, and as might be ex- pected, are distinguished in many instances by tri- fling and evanescent shades of discrimination. A full enumeration would be endless, and, at the same time, is useless. ^ The chief variations on this topic may be reduced to four. One confers a mere presi- dency ; and the second an unlimited sovereignty on the Roman pontiff. The third makes the pope equal, and the fourth superior, to God ! ' '
The next step is from one difficulty to another. The infallibility of the church is a primary doctrine with all the Romish theologians. But the honest enquirer will wish to know what is the real meaning of this phrase ; and he will find unity, or oneness in senti- ment, just as far from Romanism in this point as in the preceding ones.
' All their writers, indeed, seem to agree in ascrib- ing infallibility to the church. Bat this agreement in words is no proof of unity in opinion. Its advo- cates differ in the interpretation of the term ; and apply to the expression no less than four different significations. Four conflicting factions, in conse-
I Variatioru qf Popery , p. 124.
UNITY. 87
quence, exist on this subject in the Romish comma- nion. One party place infallibility in the church ▼irtnal or the Roman pontiff.' A second faction seat ioerrability in the chnrch representative or a general coancil. A third class ascribe this prerogative to a anion of the church virtual and representative, or, in other terms, to a general council headed by the Ro- man pontiff. A fourth division, rejecting the other systems, persist in attributing exemption from error only to the chnrch collective or dispersed, embracing the whole body of professors, cfergy and laity/ *
These examples may suffice. It is enough to say, that turn where we will, and enquire into what doc- trine we may, the church of Rome, under the name of union, presents a perfect Babel of opposing opi- nions.
2. But as Protestants in the mass are declared to possess no traces of the feature of unity, so is it also denied to the church of England. And why? .She has all the points which Dr. Milner points out, as marking the possession of this characteristic by the church of Rome. She has all the ancient creeds, on the possession of which by the Romish church, Dr. Milner vaunts so loudly. She refuses only that of Pius IV. which is a modern invention. She has a liturgy, too, as ancient as that of Rome, but freed from the follies and idolatries of the missal; and that liturgy is the same in Calcutta, in Jamaica, at Newfound- land, in New South Wales. Just as Dr. Milner ex- ults, that a Roman Catholic from Brazil can join in his service, just as truly can we say, that an English- man going to Bombay, or a native Protestant from
1 rariationa qf Popery ^ p. 158.
88 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM:
Canada arriving in England, finds the service of the charch the very same with that to which he has always been accustomed. We never thoaght of making this circumstance a ground for calling the church of England the Catholic church ; bot.the ex- cellence, such as it is, is a»much her's as it is Rome's. And, equally with the Romish church, she has a well- constructed system of episcopal government, as effi- cient for all good purposes, but not so convertible into a means of tyranny and persecution, as that of the hierarchy of Rome.
3. But, says Dr. Milner, you have orthodox and evangelical parties among you, and Dr. Blackbume says this, and Dr. Watson says that. Apply the same method of reasoning to the Roman church. In having the ancient creeds, an ancient liturgy, and an episcopal government, she has nothing more than the church of England possesses. But in internal divisions, authoritatively acknowledged, and made manifest by inquisitions and anathemas, she far outdoes, or rather leaves altogether out of sight, any little differences which may have disturbed the har- mony of the church of England. What have we like the animosity that existed between the seculars and the regulars; between the monks and friars; between one order and another ; between the Je- suits and the Jansenists ; between the Ultramon- tanists and their French adversaries. In fact, until these latter days, in which the power of Rome has too far diminished to permit the continuance of these dissensions, — there never was a period to which the historian could point as free from ecclesiastical quar- rels and agitations. And yet Dr. Milner very con- veniently forgets all this, — ^boasts of the unity of
UNITT. 89
the 'Romish church, — and denies that any soch yirtoe exists in the church of England, hecaase, forsooth. Dr. B. has written a pamphlet against Dr. C. ; or Mr. B. has spoken slightly of Dean W. ! Bat this mani- fest injustice can ncTcr be allowed to pass. He most be content to treat the church of England and the church of Rome with some degree of consistency. Is an ecclesiastical community to be judged by its cor- porate and authorized acts and decisions, or by the errors and inconsistencies committed by its indiyi- dnal members? If the first, then we say that the public and authorized declarations and standards of the church of England exhibit a far greater degree of unity and consistency than the decrees of the church of Rome. And, if the conflicting opinions and follies of individuals are to be dragged into the controversy, then there would be no diflBculty in shew- ing one pope to have anathematized another pope, and one bishop another, from the very days of the first Gregory down to the present hour.
Well has bishop Jewell, 4n his immortal Apology, replied to this objection :— *
' And whereas they say we are divided into divers sects, and that some of us have taken the name of Lutherans, and others of Zuinglians, and we could never yet agree among ourselves concerning the sum of our doctrines; what would they have said if they had lived in the times of the apostles and holy fa- thers? when one said, '' I am of Paul, another, I am of Cephas ; and another, I am of Apollos : '' when St. Paul reprehended St. Peter: when, by reason of a quarrel, Paul and Barnabas separated one from the other, and went several ways. When, as Origen acquaints us, the Christians were divided into so
90 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
many factions, that they had no name common to them but that of Christian, and they agreed in nothing else bat that name, and, as Socrates informs as, they were derided publicly in the theatres by the people for their dissensions and sects ; and when, as Con- stantine the Great said, ' There were so many conten- tions and controversies in the church, that this yery single calamity seemed to exceed the miseries of the former times ' of persecutioo. When Theophilos, Epiphanias, Chrysostom, Augastine, RaflBnas, and Jerome, all of them Christians, all fathers, and all Catholics, contested with each other with most bitter and implacable animosity; when, as Nazianz0n saith, ' The members of the same body consumed one another/ When the eastern and western churches were divided from each other about leavened bread, and the time of keeping Easter — things of no mighty consequence. When in every council, which were then numerous, there was a new creed, and new and contrary decrees invented. What would these men have then said ? to whom would they have applied themselves? from whom would they have fled? in what gospel would they have believed ? whom would they have esteemed catholics, and whom heretics? Now there are only two names, Luther and Zuin- glius; and what a noise is made about them! But because these two men could not agree about a cer- tain point, shall we therefore think they are both in the wrong, that neither of them has the gospel, and that neither has preached well and truly ? '
' But who are they that so bitterly reflect on us for our dissensions ? Do they, in the mean time, all agree among themselves ? Have there never been any dissensions and controversies among them. Why
UNITY. 91
then do the Sootists and Tbomists agree no better concerning the merit of congraity and that of con- dignity ; concerning original sin in the Virgin Mary; and abont a solemn and simple vow? Why do the canonists affirm that auricular confession is founded on human and positive laws ; and the school- men, on the contrary, on divine institution? Why does Albertus Pighias differ from Cajetan ; Thomas from Lombard ; Scotus from Thomas ; Occham from Scotos ; Aliacensis from Occham ; and the Nominals from the Realists ? And that I may not mention the disagreements of the small brotherhoods and monks, some of which place their admired sanctity in eating of fish, others in living upon herbs ; some in wearing of shoes, others in sandals ; some in Hnen garments, and others in woollen ; some in black, and some in white xslothes ; some shave their heads broad, and others narrow ; some wear shoes, and others go bare- foot ; some are girded, and some go loose ; besides these, they should remember that some of their di- vines say, that the body of Christ is naturally pre- sent in the sacrament, which is again denied by others. There also are some who say, that the body of Christ in the sacrament is torn and ground with our teeth, and again there are others who deny this ; there are some who say, that the body in the sacra- ment hath quantity, others deny it; some say, Christ did consecrate by a certain divine power, others that he did it by his blessing ; some, that he did it by conceiving the five words in his mind, others that it was by uttering them. There are some that say, that of these five words the demonstrative pronoun *'this'' shewed the wheaten bread, others say no; but it relates to a certain '* vagum individuum'^ (a no
92 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
man knows what). There are some who say, ^^ Bogs and mice may truly and really eat the body of Christ ;" bat then tliere are others who stoutly deny this. There are some who say the accidents of the bread and wine can noarish, and others say the sabstance returns again. But why should I add any more? it is a long and troublesome business to count ap all their divisions : the whole form of their religion and doctrine is to this day controverted and oncertainy among those who first gave being and entertainment to it : for they scarcely ever agree, except it be as the Pharisees and sadducees, or as Herod and Pilate did of old, against Christ/ ^
Unity, then, in the church of Rome, exists in only one shape ; — that of ' absolute, unconditional submission to the teaching of the church.' ' Multitudes, doubt- less, there are, who say with Dr. Milner, ' I believe whatever the Holy Catholic church believes and teaches.' But this is not unity of doctrine; it Js merely uniformity of mental slavery ! The man who adopts this system does, in efiect, say to his priest, ^ I put myself into your hands ; do you believe for me whatever you think best, and I will subscribe it, pro- fess it, swear to it, or anything else you please.'
An unity of this kind does indeed exist among the adherents of the Romish priesthood ; but it is neither more respectable or more safe than the same kind of mental slavery as it exists in Ceylon, in Hindostan, or in Madagascar. It is merely the old device of Satan, by which men's consciences may be quieted, on the one hand, and religion turned inta a gainful trade, on the other : the multitude giving their souls
1 Apologkit cap. y. sec. 1. ' Witemant lect. 1, p. 17.
UNITY. 93
jiindfold into the hands of the priests of Baddhu, of Brahma, or of Antichrist ; and receiTing back, from the sellers of pardons, sundry soul-deceiving delosions. Such an unity exists in the Romish eharch ; bat it is not an unity of doctrine, in any correct sense of the word.
For * doctrine' is that which addresses itself to the understanding and to the heart, and to be really em- braced, it mast first be understood* And we have already shewn that it is impossible for Rome to offer to her adherents anything resembling unity of doc- trine, in this sense ; simply because she does not her- self possess it.
There is, there can be, only one source of unity in doctrine ; simply because there is but one source of truth. In the divine word that source is opened to as. In it there is no discrepancy, no inconsistency, no need of disunion. The nearer, therefore, men keep to it, just so much the nearer will they draw to each other. It is a common centre, where all who will may anite, and it is the only centre where such a genuine and real anion can take place.
Bat as troth is one, and the only source of real anion, so error is multifarious, and in itself essenti- ally destructive of unity. Just in proportion as men recede from the only centre of union, do they also recede from each other, but in an endless variety of directions.
Rome refuses, without hesitation and without re- serve, to abide by this centre of unity. It is a prin- ciple of action with her, to fly from the unerring word of God, to the erring and jarring decisions, in- terpretations, and opinions of men. And thus it is that by an inevitable consequence she banishes unity
94 BSSAYS OK ROMANISM*.
of doctrine from her pale. Her fondamental prin- ciple actaally renders it impossible. It never has existed, and it neter can exist, within her commu- nion. Her internal history consists of little else than a series of controversies and dissentions ; and it is only externally that she can offer a shew of anity ; which, however, is nothing more than the necessary credality of blindness, and the mute acquiescence of mental thraldom.
V. THE CHURCH.
THE SANCTITY OF THE CHURCH OF ROME.
From the first mark of the tme church, as stated by Dr. Milner, Unity, we proceed to the second — Sanc- tity. On this head. Dr. Milner remarks, that * Reason itself tells as, that the God of parity and sanctity coald not institute a relii^ion destitute of this character, and the inspired apostle assures us that, Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it ; that he might sanctify and cleanse it, with the washing of water, hy the word ; that he might present it to himself a glorioiLS church, not having spot or wrinkle* Ephes. t. 25, 27. The compa- rison which I am going to institute between the Ca- tholic church and the leading Protestant societies on the article of Sanctity or Holiness, will be made on these four heads ; 1st. The Doctrine of Holiness ; 2dly. The Means of Holiness ; 3rdly. The Fruits of Holi- ness ; and lastly, The Divine Testimony of Holiness.*^ He then proceeds to establish his first point, thus :
1 End ofControveny, p. 205, 306.
94 BSSAYS OK ROMANISM :
of doctrine from her pale. Her fandamental prin- ciple actaally renders it impossible. It never has existed, and it never can exist, within her commu- nion. Her internal history consists of little else than a series of controversies and dissentions ; and it is only externally that she can offer a shew of anity ; which, however, is nothing more than the necessary credality of blindness, and the mute acquiescence ol mental thraldom.
V. THE CHURCH.
THE SANCTITY OF THE CHURCH OF ROME.
From the first mark of the true church, as stated by Dr. Milner, Unity, we proceed to the second — Sanc- tity. On this head, Dr. Milner remarks, that 'Reason itself tells us, that the God of parity and sanctity could not institute a relii^ion destitute of this character, and tbe inspired apostle assures us that, Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it ; that he might sanctify and cleanse it, with the washing of water, by the word; that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, Ephes. v. 25, 27. The compa- rison which I am going to institute between the Ca- tholic church and the leading Protestant societies on the article of Sanctity or Holiness, will be made on these four heads ; 1st. The Doctrine of Holiness ; 2dly. The Means of Holiness ; 3rdly. The Fruits of Holi- ness; and lastly, The Divine Testimony of Holiness.*^ He then proceeds to establish his first point, thus :
1 End of Controversy, p. 205, 206.
96 ESSAYS ON romakism:
— * To consider, first, the doctrine of the chief Pro- testant communions : this is well known to have been originally grounded in the pernicious and impious principles, that God is the author and necessitating cause, as well as the avenging punisher of sin ; that man has no free will to avoid it ; and that justifica- tion and salvation are the effects of an enthusiastic persuasion, under the name oi faithy that a person is ^LCindiWy jmtified and saved, independently of any real belief in the revealed truths, independently of hope, charity, repentance for sin, benevolence to our fellow- creatures, loyalty to our king and country ; or any other virtue ; all which were censured by the first reformers as they are by the strict Methodists still, under the name of works, and by many of them de- clared to be even hurtful to salvation. It is asserted in the Harmony of Confessions, a celebrated work, published in the early times of the reformation, that ' all the confessions of the Protestant churches teach this primary article (of justification) with a holy con- sent ; ' which seems to imply, says Archdeacon Blackburn, ^ that this was the single article in which Ihey all did agree/ ' ^
Now one would naturally have expected, that after thus broadly stating those frightful charges against ' the chief Protestant communions,' and having alluded to *■ the confessors of the Protestant churches' as teaching the errors he lays to their charge,— ^ne would naturally have expected, we re- peat, that so grave an accusation would have been immediately sustained by a reference to these same documents. In any such reasonable expectation,
1 End qf dmtrowrsp, p. 206.
THE SANCTITY OF TUB CHURCH OF ROME. 97
however, the reader will be entirely disappointed. Not one single line from any one of the Protestant con" fessians is adduced hy the learned Doctor, in support of this grievous charge. Not an iota of proof, in fact, is famished, in support of this most extraordinary ac- casation ! What kind of condact is this in one who professes to receive as the command of God, the precept, ' Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighboar.'
Bat by what shew of evidence, then, does the Doctor sapport his accnsatioa ? By the following : seven short qaotations, of three or four lines each, from Lather ; foar from Calvin ; one from Beza ; one from Faller ; one from Strype ; one from Brandt ; and one from Bossaet. Now of these it may be safficient to observe, that some are the mere misrepresenta- tions of enemies ; others prove nothing whatever to the question ; while the remainder are merely the unguarded and strong expressions of two or three good but fallible men, writing in the heat of con- troversy.
Dr. Milner knows very well, that in the matter of predestination, free will, &c., these Protestant writers agreed entirely with Augustine, one of the greatest of the early fathers, to whose name the church of Rome pays the highest honour. He knows full well that the very passages he quotes from Luther and Calvin might be easily matched by others from the works of this great saint of his own calendar. He knows, too, that if whole churches are to be judged of by single expressions, culled from the writings of individual fathers, the' church of Rome may be proved guilty of Montanism by the works of Tertul- Ilan, and of Platonism by those of Origen. But he
98 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
knows also, that all such attempts at crimination are nothing else than the merest folly. He is well aware that a charch can only be convicted by its own acts and confessions. He opens bis accusation by charg- ing ' the chief Protestant communions' with ground- ing their doctrine ' on the pernicious and impious principle, that God is the author and necessitating cause, as well as the avenging punisher of sin ;' — he then alludes to * the confessions of the Protestant churches' as containing this doctrine ; — but he does not produce a single line from any one of them in support of the charge ! The reason is, that he could never find, among them all, a single word bearing any such meaning ; in other words, the whole charge is utterly and entirely false; and this he could not but have known at the time he made it I
Bat after thus calumniating the whole body of Protestant churches, and yet failing to establish one iota against them, the Doctor naturally comes to speak of his own church. And here we might have expected him to be a little more diffuse, and better prepared with proofs. Instead of which, though he has now to prove the more important part of his case, — that the Romish church is peculiarly the holy Catholic church, — he glances over the subject in little more than two pages ! In fact, his whole ar- gument, over and above some general assertions, is confined to this, that ' If the doctrine of the Catholic church was once holy, namely, in the apostolic age, it is holy still ; because the church never changes her doctrine, nor suffers any person in her com- munion to change it, or to question any part of it.'
A bolder defiance to truth than this never was penned. It supposes the whole history of the past
THE SANCTITY OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. 99
to have been blotted out of men's memories. What were all the doctrinal contests of so many successive coancils caused by, if the doctrine of the Catholic church ever remained the same, — unaltered and un« impugned ? Look at pope Zozimas and his synod at Rome ; see the council of Frankfort in a.d. 794 ; both approving the heresy of Pelagias ; and then behold various other coancils, ending with that of Trent, anathematizing that same doctrine, and all who held it. Nay, the yet more fatal error of Arius was first condemned by the council of Nice, then accepted by the council of Sirmium; the synods of Ariminum and Seleucia subsequently confirmed the adhesion of the church to this heresy, and the words of Jerome himself are, — * the whole world groaned to find itself become Arian.' Yet after the lapse of years this error waned and became nearly extinct, and has since been condemned by as many councils as had previously supported it. An equal changeability was exhibited by popes and councils in the cases of the Eutychian and Monothelan heresies. But enough has been said to show that this absurd boast, that ' the (Romish) church never changes its doctrine,' is one of the most groundless vaunts that ever came from the pen of a human being.
It may, however, be answered, that these heresies have now long since been subdued, and that the ex- isting doctrine of the Romish church is free from such stains. This may be admitted ; but still the argu- ment of Dr. Milner, that ' if the doctrine of the Catholic church was holy in the apostolic age, it must be so now, because it is never permitted to be altered or impugned,' is clearly gone, is entirely de- stroyed, and we have only to deal with the doc-
Ha
100 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
trinal standard of the Romish charch as we now find it.
What, then, is the real state of the case, as to the alleged holiness of doctnne of the charch of Rome?
It is this : in so far as she holds, in common with Protestants, the ancient creeds or professions of faith, called the Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian, — she possesses the trae and orthodox doctrine. Bat inasmach as she has added to that faith the whole accamalation of error contained in the creed of pope Pins the IVth, she has thereby alloyed and defiled the true faith with a mixture of many and great errors. And error in religion is never innoxious. It always leads to sin. Every single particle, therefore, of these additions to the ancient faith, is opposed to sanctity or holiness. The words of Christ exactly apply to her : * Ye have made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.' For instance,
1. The doctrine of Purgatory removes the salutary dread of eternal woe, and encourages men in the false hope of compensating for the sins they may commit in this world, by a merely temporary pun- ishment in the next :
2. The doctrine of Indulgences, and of Masses for the dead, evidently aids this delusion. By this latter figment, a man revelling in sinful pleasures during his whole life-time, may console himself with the hope, that by a sufficient legacy to the priests, for masses to be said after his death, he may escape even the tempo- rary inflictions of purgatory. And the former falsehood teaches the sinner that he may go on in the indul- gence of his lusts throughout the year, so that he re- serves a sufficient sum to purchase, at Christmas or
THE SANCTITY OF TBS CHURCH OF ROME. 101
Easter, an indalgence, or oblivion, from the eh arch, for the entire cancelling of his debt of sin.
3. By the erection of the saints and the Virgin into minor mediators, the resort of the sinner to Christ is greatly hindered. But neither the saints nor the Virgin can so much as hear the prayers of their worshippers, much less answer them ; — mean- while Christ, the only fountain of grace and of holi- ness, is hidden from the sinner's view, and conse- quently no aid is obtained in his daily warfare aguinst sin and the devil.
4. The enforced celibacy of the clergy has, in all ages, and to a fearful extent, been productive of the most dreadful immorality.
6. The seclusion of men and women under monastic vows has likewise led to the most revolting crimes.
Under the last two heads we shall merely adduce one or two testimonies, which will indicate the pre- sence of a wide-spread evil. .
Erasmus, himself a Romanist, confesses, of his own day, that
' A number of monasteries are so degenerated, that the stews are more ehaste, sober, and modest than they.' ■ ,
Blanco White, himself also formerly a Romish priest, says,
' Crime makes its way into those recesses, in spite of spiked walls and prison gates. This I know, with all the certainty which the self-accusation of the guilty can give.'
6. The practice of confession, as actually carried on under the rules laid down by the highest authori-
'' In Epitt Grynaco.
102 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
ties in the Romish church, inevitably leads to a fami- liarity with vice, which cannot- but produce the most frightful effects.
Mr. Nolan, another Romish priest, has lately borne witness to this fact. He says,
' There is not a Romish priest extant, who has acted in the capacity of a confessor, but most admit the truth of this observation, that each day's confes- sions had been the continued causes of unchaste ex- citements in his mind. Oh, my friends, there is no Romish clergyman, no matter how sanctified he may appear in your estimation, but must allow, that the first subject of his own confession to another priest, is an acknowledgment of his having indulged in un- chaste thoughts, on account of the indecent recitals made before him in the confessional.' ^
But he goes further, and asks,
' Has not this practice of inquisitorial debasement often exposed the weakness of the penitent, and has it not consequently furnished the lecherous disposi- tions of many priests with an easier and more appro- priate mode of seduction ? Has not the innocence of virginity been often despoiled through the confes- sional, and has not the morality of otherwise virtuous women been frequently corrupted through its lewd- ness ? Yes ! hellish instruction has frequently been imparted at this mock tribunal, whilst clerical crimi- nality there has often become the substitute for priestly absolution. Am I asserting what is false, or does not your own knowledge of circumstances bear me out in the truth of my observations ? Is there a single diocese in Ireland but furnishes proofs of
1 NoltaCt Third L$ttett, p. 23.
THE SANCTITY OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. 103
Romish clergymen who haye been suspended for the notorious crime of having converted the tribunal of confession into an apology for wickedness? The very diocese in which I officiated as a Romish clergy- man, affords sufficient proofs of the correctness of my statement/ ^
These are some of the peculiar inventions and practices of the Romish church, all brought into being in the days of her greatest power, and all protested against alike by the Waldenses and the reformed churches. But, we must further add, that in the ex- position of the Moral Law, that church shews herself to be far from holiness or sanctity. It would not be difficult, as we just now remarked, to shew that she has abrogated every one of the ten commandments. But we will only now advert to two or three of the more flagrant instances of this perversion.
Her divines teach, in the Maynooth class-books, that small thefts, practised by domestics, or by the poor towards the wealthy, are only venial sins :
They teach, that it is lawful, or rather praise- worthy, to violate an oath, if the interests of their church may be served by such violation :
They teach, that it is lawful, and in fact a duty, to take away the lives of those who oppose their church.
On these three points we must not here enlarge, as it would be easy to do. On the last two, indeed, we shall have to speak hereafter, when we come to treat of the conduct of the Romish church towards Pro- testants. The first, however, we must deal with in this place, since nothing can be more obviously and
1 JVo2a»'« TMrd Letter, p. 24.
104 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM:
inherently unholy, than the whole Romish theory of venial sin.
This theory, too, shews how groundless is the hoast, that their doctrine is still, at this moment, what it was in the days of the apostles. No such fancy as that of venial sin was ever heard of in the apostolic times.
The Catechism ' approved and recommended hy the four Roman Catholic archbishops of Ireland,' and published in Dublin in 1833, thus states this doctrine : —
* Does venial sin deprive the soul of sanctifying grace, and deserve everlasting pvnishment? *
* No, but it hurts the soul by lessening its love for God ; and by disposing it to mortal sin.'
' Where do they go who die in venial sin? '
* To purgatory?'
And, in the ' Abridgment of the Christian doc- trine,' revised and prescribed by the Right Reverend James Doyle, Romish bishop of Kildare, &c., we find this question and answer : —
' By what kinds of sin are the commandments broken?'
' By mortal sins only ; for venial sins are not, strictly speaking, contrary to the end of the com- mandments, which is charity.'
Then we come to the distinction between mortal and venial sins, in the same Catechism, revised and put forth by Dr. Doyle : —
< When is theft a mortal sin ? '
' When the thing stolen is of considerable value, or causeth a considerable hurt to our neighbour*
Clearly, then, the valet of a duke, who should merely abstract a moderate sum from his master's
THE SANCTITT OF THE CHUBCH OF BOHE. 105
pone, woold only be g:Bilty of a vernal sin ; and venial sin, this Catechism tells ns, does not amount to a breach of the commandments ! Bat we go on : —
' When is a lie a mortal sin ? '
' When it is amy great diskenmtr to God, or notable prejadice to oar neighboar.'
Bat in another Catechism, pablished by the pope*s legate, for the ase of all the charches in France, we find this question and answer : —
' Repeat the sixth commandment (of the church).'
' Thou shaft eat meat neither Friday nor Saturday.'
* What does this commandment forbid ? '
' Eating meat on Fridays or Saturdays, without necessity, under pain of mortal sinJ*
Thus is it taught by the Holt Catholic church, that to rob is not a breach of God's commandments, except the sum taken is ' considerable ; * — but that to eat meat on Fridays is a mortal sin, and is punished by hell-fire to all eternity!
Well may we apply the words of Christ to such teachers : ** Why do ye transgress the commandments of God by your traditions ? *' *' Woe unto youy hypo- critesy for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin^ and have omitted the weightier matters of the lawyjudg^ menty mercy, and faith.** " Ye make clean the outside of the cup and platter, but within they are full of extor- tion and excess." And what can be more monstrous than to allege, that a church whieh teaches to all her people such principles as these, is to be called holy in her doctrine ?
But it is time we proceeded to Dr. MUner's second bead, which concerns the Means of Sanctity. This part of his case he rests chiefly on the possession of seven sacraments by his church, while Protestants
106 ESSAYS ON EOMANISM:
have only two. Before, however, he can be allowed to assume these things to be means of sanctity^ he must shew them to be the ordinances of Christ ; otherwise they will come under the apostle's indignant denun- ciation ; ** If ye be dead with Christ, why are ye svhject to ordinances, after the commandments and doctrines of men ; which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will- worship, and humility, and neglecting the body ; " but possess no real value or utility. Now we know that Christ instituted Baptism and the Supper commemor- ative of his death, and we may be sure, therefore, that these are really ' means of sanctity.' But what like certainty have we of those other five things which the Romish church chooses to call '' sacraments ? " That church makes marriage, for instance, a sacrament ; and also, orders. Now we maintain the religions nature of marriage, and cherish it far more than the Romanists, who openly and avowedly prefer celi- bacy; but we find no where in holy writ that it is called a sacrament. So of orders, too, and confirma- tion, we have them both ; but we follow scripture in their practice. And we must continue still to believe that this plan is the safest and most advisable. We hold that '' marriage is honourable in all," as St. Paul instructs us. They, on the other hand, declare it to be, in many cases, criminal and dishonourable. We *' lay hands'* on those admitted into the church by confirmation, and in scripture we find nothing more. We '* confess our sins one to another,^* as the apostle enjoins ; but we do not permit unmarried priests to put interrogatories to our wives and daughters which it ' is a shame even to speak of* ^ for their lewdness and
1 See the chapter on Confession in Demf Theology,
THE SANCTITT OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. 107
obscenity. We ordaiD, by tbe imposition of bands, oor clergy; we Tisit and pray with oar sick; we preach repentance to all ; bnt we call none of these things s€KrameniS9 becanse they are ne^er so repre- sented in holy scripture. We have then, we trast, IB them, all that Christ intended to confer by them. The Romish chorch has chosen to swell them out of their scriptural dimensions, and thus to make * a show of wisdom in wiU- warship ;' but we may reasonably doubt if ever the followers of Rome have gained any additional * means of sanctity' thereby. And while it may well be questioned what advantage, in these respects, can belong to the church of Rome, it is sufficiently clear, that in two most material particu- lars all Protestant churches have a clear and import- ant superiority. We allude to the use of the holy scriptures, and the preaching of the gospel. These were the two great * means of sanctity' instituted by the Saviour, and both of these, in the Romish church, are suppressed or limited. '^ Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path/' saith the Psalmist. " All scripture is profitable,'* saith St. Paul, *' that the man of God may he perfect , thoroughly furnished to all good works.' But no, says the council of Trent, * the use of the scriptures is rather hurtful than use- ful.' And in the same manner is preaching discoun- tenanced, and whenever used, made only the vehicle of some absurd eulogies on the Virgin, or the saints, instead of a means of spreading the knowledge of that gospel, which is '* the power of God unto salva- tion," In these two important points, then, is the church of Rome far behind all the Protestant churches, in things which are most truly ' means of
108 ESSAYS ON ROBfANISM:
The third point named by Dr. Milner concerns the Fruits of Sanctity, On this head he says : ' The fraits of sanctity are the virtues practised by those who are possessed of it. Hence the present question is, whether these are to be found, for the most part, among the members of the ancient Catholic church, or among the different innovators, who undertook to reform it in the sixteenth and seventeenth centu- ries : ' ' and he adds, * Protestants are accustomed to paint in the most frightful colours, the alleged de- pravity of the church, when Luther erected his standard, in order to justify him and his followers in their defection from it. But to form a right judgment in the case, let them read the works of the contem- porary writers : an A-Kempis, a Gerson, an Antoni- nus, &c. ; or let them peruse the lives of St. Vincent Ferrar, St. Laurence Justinian, St. Francis Paula, St. Philip Neri, St. Cajetan, St. Teresa, St. Francis Xaverius, and of those other saints who illuminated the church about the period in question. Or let them, from the very accounts of Protestant histori- ans, compare, as to religion and morality. Archbishop Cranmer, with his rival. Bishop Fisher; Protector Seymour with Chancellor More ; Ann Boleyn with Catharine of Arragon ; Martin Luther and Calvin with Francis Xaverius and Cardinal Pole; Beza with St. Francis of Sales; Queen Elizabeth with Mary Queen of Scots ; these contrasted characters having more or less relation with each other. From such a comparison, I have no sort of doubt, what the decision of your friends will be concerning them in point of their respective holiness.' '
I MilnerU End qf Contnmersp, p. 235. 2 Ibid. p. 237.
THE SAKCnTY OF THB CHUBCH OF BOlfE. 109
Bat surely this is a miserably narrow view of tbe qaestion. We are now speaking of rendu ; of the general effect of the two systems, Popish and Pro* testant, opon mankind* And instead of taking an extended retrospect of the facts dcTcloped by his- tory. Dr. Milner picks out a dozen names on each side, and in?ites a comparison between these. Or at farthest, he sends os to ' the Lives of the Saintt' a book fall of the most incredible romances ; and supposes that the sanctity of his charch is established by such a docament as this ! Now all such trifling is quite as foolish as the conduct of the man, who, wanting to sell a house, took a brick out of it, and exhibited it in the market. How could any one tell, from a single brick, whether the bouse were well or ill built, commodious or inconvenient, small or large, strong or in a ruinous condition. And in like man- ner, how could any one learn, by merely considering tbe characters of a few selected saints put forward by Dr. Milner and Alban Butler, whether sanctity were the general condition of the Romish church, or the exception to its general condition. Assuredly, if the assumption is to be gravely maintained, that the church of Rome is distinguished by the fruits of sanctity, we must give to that question a far more extensive and rational consideration.
And to do this we ought to compare, 1st. different periods of the churcb*s history ; and, 2d. the state of different countries at the present time.
Now the history of the Catholic or Universal church may be divided into three stages — 1st. before tbe rise of Popery ; 2. during its reign and as- cendancy; 3. since its decline, up to the present moment.
110 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
The first of these periods may be said to consist chiefly of the first four or five centaries. Daring this period there was no pope, and although daring the latter years of it the pretensions of the bishop of Rome began to be magnified, and to pat forth a pro- mise of the rising papacy, still, daring all this period there was no one raler or vicegerent over the charch. Nor were the doctrines of transabstantiation, parga- tory, indalgences, the celibacy of the clergy, or image- worship, then received into the charch's creed. It was indeed the Catholic, not the Papal or Romish charch. Between the doctrines of the church in those days, and those held by the charch of England now, there was no essential difference. And in all this period, Christianity arose and prospered by the inherent brightness which the fruits of the Spirit made to shine around it The parity of her doctrine, and the general holiness of her members, agreed together. All existing records concur in awarding her the praise of shewing forth * the fruits of sanctity,' It was in those days that nearly all the men, whom both Protestants and Romanists admit to have been really saints, flourished. These were the days of Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenseus, Cyprian, Jastin Mar- tyr, Athanasius, Ambrose, Gregory Nazianzen, Chry- sostom, and Augustine, names to which the next thousand years furnishes no equal list. The church, in general, enjoyed purity of doctrine, (though to- wards the end of this period corruptions began to creep in), and, as a natural accompaniment of parity of doctrine, she possessed parity of morals, or 'the fruits of sanctity.'
In the second period, however, from the sixth cen- tury to the fifteenth, Rome reigned supreme. The
THB SANCTITY OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. Ill
papacy advanced with rapid strides, and soon its fatal shadow began to overspread the whole Chris- tian world. Monkery, will-worship, the setting ap new mediators, penances, prayers for the dead, and the worship of the wafer, now came in. All these, Dr. Milner will tell os, were so many * means of sanctity ;' bat one thing is very clear, that ' the fruits of ^anctity^ began rapidly to decline and vanish away* This we learn, not by the testimony of Protes- tants, but by that of members of the church of Rome.
Gregory, called St. Gregory, who flourished at the close of the sixth century, thus writes : — * I think, my beloved brethren, that God suffers greater evil from none than he does from the priests, when he beholds those whom he appointed to correct others, in themselves presenting examples of depravity ; when we sin, who ought to restrain sin?' ' The gold is obscured, because the life of the priests, formerly distinguished by the glory of virtue, has come through earthly and vile deeds to the ignominy of contempt. The stones of the sanctuary are scattered at the head of all the streets, because those who by their mode of life and prayer ought always to be within, by their wicked manner of life are always abroad.' ^
Here we have an nnexceptionable witness, one acknowledged by the Romanists as the head of the church, and successor of St. Peter, testifying two things, that the priests were * formerly distinguished by the glory of virtue,' but that they were now fall- ing away and becoming vile.
Passing on still further, we find a Carthusian named Laerius, speaking of the ninth century as follows : —
1 Gregory in Evang* Let. J. Con, 17.
112 ESSAYS ON BOMANISM:
* O worst of times, in the which holy men failed, and trath was rendered scarce by the sons of men/ ' About this time charity waxed very cold in every class of men, and iniquity began unasaally to abound/ ^
The tenth century may be taken to be more espe- cially the purely Romish one, for the whole world had now become thoroughly subjugated to the pope ; and Peter Waldo and John Wickliffe had not yet made their appearance. Here, then, undisturbed by schism, and possessing in their fulness, all those ' means of sanctity ' of which Dr. Milner boasts, we might have expected to see the church shine forth, '* clear as the sun, fair as the moon, and terrible as an army with banners." Yet what says their own ecclesiastical historian, Cardinal Baronius, of this period ? He speaks as follows — ' Behold the nine hundredth year of the Redeemer begins, in which a new age commences, which by reason of its asperity and barrenness of good, has been wont to be called the iron age ; and by the deformity of its exuberant evil, the leaden age; and by its poverty of writers, the dark age,* ' To our shame and grief be it spoken, how many monsters, horrible to behold, were ob- truded into that seat (the Papal throne) which is re- verenced by angels ! How many evils originated from them; how many tragedies were perpetrated! With what filth it was her fate to be besprinkled who was without spot or wrinkle, — with what stench to be infected, with what impurities to be deflled ; and with these things to be blackened with perpetual infamy.'
1 Laerku, Fascia, temper, ann. 874.
THE SAKCTITT OF THE CHT7RCH OF BOME. 113
Again, the same writer says, of a.d. 912, ^Wbat was then the face of the holy Roman eh arch ! How exceedingly foul was it, when most powerfal and sordid and abandoned women raled at Rome, at whose will the sees were changed, bishops were pre- sented, and what is horrid to hear, and nnatterable, false pontiffs, their lovers, were intruded into the chair of St. Peter/ * Thus lust, relying on the secu- lar power, and mad and stimulated with the rage of dominion, claimed every thing for itself/ ^
Passing on still farther, in a.d. 1075, we find one of the popes, Gregory the Vllth, thus writing to Hugo, Abbot of Clunium — ' When I look to the west, the east, or the south, I scarcely discover any bishops who are lawful, either in their entrance, or their mode of life ; who govern the people from the love of Christ, and not from secular ambition ; and among princes, I know none who prefer God's honour to their own, or righteousness to gain. Those among whom I dwell, I argue to be somewhat worse than Jews or the Pa- gans, as I often tell them/'
Of 1079, Genebrard says, * The priests were of most depraved morals, and the sacred things were despised by the people/ ^
Pope Innocent III. speaking in the Council of Lateran, says, — ' Evils have entered among the Chris- tian people. Faith perishes ; religion is disfigured ; liberty is confounded; justice is trodden under foot; heretics spring up ;vthe wicked rage.' &c.
Grosseteste, bishop of Lincoln, speaking before the pope in council, a.d. 1250, says, * Bad shepherds, the dearth of good ones, and the multiplication of the
1 Baronii Ann, Ecdea, An. 900—913. ^ Ibid. 1075.
3 Ckron. Geneb. lib. iv. An. 1079.
114 ESSAYS OK bomanism:
bad, are the cause of the comiption of the Christian faith and religion ; they are the cause of infidelity^ schism, heretical wickedness and vicious manners throughout the world/ ^
Gerson, chancellor of Paris, in a.d. 1409, in a speech delivered in the council of Pisa, thus com- plains, 'But from what roots am I to believe that these things have sprung? Truly from the foul pol- lutions of the clergy ; ' who, ' by their carnal wisdom and foul vices, destroy and pollute the church.' '
And thus have we proceeded even to the days when Huss and Jerome actually commenced the Re- formation ; and through century after century do we find it clearly and strongly stated, by a succession of Roman Catholic historians and divines, that the whole church was corrupt, polluted, and utterly destitute of that sanctity which, according to Dr. Milner, always has, and always must dwell with her.
Perhaps some Romanist may be ready to exclaim, * Why carry us back into all the mire and gloom of the dark ages, in order to find ground of crimination against our church ? '
But we hardly see how the expression — * the dark ages,' can consistently come from the lips of a member of the church of Rome. We^ indeed, may well so denominate the tenth, eleventh and twelfth centuries, because, on our principles, they were especially so ; the Romish church having efi'ectually quenched the two great means of enlightenment — the preaching of the gospel, and the use of those scriptures which were given to be a lamp unto our feet and a light unto our path. But with what shew of reason can papists
1 Brown*s Fascic, torn. 2, p. 251. ^ Labbe and Coamrt. Anno. 1400. P* 414.
THE SANCTITY OF TH& CHUHCH OF HOME. 115
call that period * a dark age/ when their cbiirch pos- sessed all those advantages in which Dr. Miiner dow exalts, and suffered none of those evils which he la- ments as arising from the spread of heresies ? Daring all these centuries she could glory as fully as at pre- sent, in all those four points which Dr. Miiner enu- merates as establishing her claim to the title of * holy,* She had the same doctrine which she now holds ; the same sacraments, penances, masses and missals ;— the same supposed saints; and the same alleged mira' cles. In all respects, then, she stood on the same ground as at present, with the additional advantage of being unopposed by Lutherans or Protestants of any description. To say that the barbarians had OTerrun the empire, is saying nothing ; for it is of the church that we are now speaking, and her light, had it been the pure and holy flame which Dr. Miiner describes, would only have shone with the greater apparent brightness amidst the surrounding darkness. Instead of which, it is of the corruption of the church itself Wi^i we are now speaking. And the one point on which we are anxious to fix attention is this, — that that very period of time at which the Romish church enjoyed the most perfect ascendancy, and in which. ' heresy ' or Protestantism was scarcely heard of, is just that period which all their own historians de- scribe as the most corrupt, the most wicked, the most appalling. Protestants can account for this with ease ; it is perfectly consistent with their views, that without the preaching of the gospel, or the use of the written word, the world should fall into utter apos- tacy and heathenism ; but how Romanists can recon- cile this state of the church with the full possession of those four things which, to their eyes, prove the
I 2
116 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
charch to be holy — viz. sanctity of doctrine, — the means of sanctity, — the fruits of sanctity, and the at- testation of sanctify, — it is not easy to see. Oar first remark, however, may now perhaps be admitted to be well founded ; that on a view of ecclesiastical his- tory, it appears that the days of the greatest ascen- dancy of the church of Rome were also the days of the greatest corruption and unholiness, and that the spread of Protestantism has been at least accompanied by a very great improvement in morals, both in the church and in the World. Our second observation is, that the two opposing systems ought to be tried, not only by a review of different periods of the church's history, but also by a comparison of the various countries of the world, as they now stand.
In doing this, it will be quite sufficient to advert to facts which are of general notoriety, and which no one will venture to dispute. Such as, the general character of Protestant nations throughout the world, compared with that of those countries which still acknowledge the sway of Rome. And, the active ** fruits of sanctity," or efforts of benevolence which are seen in each.
We ask, then, whether a great and remarkable dif- ference does not exist, a difference which strikes every impartial and indifferent observer, in the morals, ha- bits, liberty, and consequent peace and happiness of the Protestant and Roman Catholic states of Europe, Does any one think of questioning the fact, for in- stance, that the morals of the two neighbouring states of Denmark and Sweden are of a far higher cast than those of Spain and Portugal ; the first two being al- most exclusively Protestant; the latter two as exclu- sively popish. Or, to compare two countries closely
THB SANCTITY OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. 117
adjoiniDg, will it be denied that between Holland and Belgium, an equally perceptible difference exists, and as decidedly in favour of the Protestant state.
Travellers have universally remarked, that in pass- ing through Switzerland, they could always discover when they were in a Protestant canton, and when in a Popish one, by the marked difference in the state and comfort of the inhabitants. That this is just as obvious in Ireland, no one will think of questioning. While we are constantly hearing of the wrongs of Ireland, of the woes and miseries of that country, and of the consequent vice and immorality which reigns through the greater part of the island, we can- not forget that in one entire quarter of that kingdom, the people are peaceful, moral, prosperous and con- tented. But that quarter is the Protestant province of Ulster ; throughout which the vice and wretched- ness, the starvation and crime which almost univer- sally pervade the remainder [of the island, remain almost entirely unknown.
But let us take a general glance over Europe at the present instant, and remark the striking contrast it presents. Popery furnishes to its followers, accord- ing to Dr. Milner, a holy doctrine, means of holiness, the fruits of holiness, and a divine attestation of holi- ness ; in all which things Protestants are deficient Is it not extraordinary, then, that with all these vast advantages, and with the presence of Christ, as pa- pists tell us, always with their church, it should so happen that at this moment every Protestant state in Europe should be enjoying peace, and safety, and internal prosperity ; while every Popish state is, more or less, torn with intestine divisions, harassed with revolutionary agitators, or filled with alarms of some
118 ESSAYS ON bohanism:
such description. Sweden, Denmark, Pmssia, Hol- land, for instance, are in perfect rest, especially from within, having neither trouble nor dissension, except so far as a few Romish agitators have contrived to create disturbance. Spain, Portugal, France, Italy, on the other hand, are filled with disorganizing principles and revolutionary attempts. And here, in this very country itself, to what a degree of prosperity and inter- nal improvement are the two Protestant divisions of it advancing ; leaving the empire no one cause of dis- quietude, save in the agitation that pervades the Popish sections of Ireland. So clearly does this rale hold, in every case, that could a stranger to this globe be suddenly made acquainted with the state and prospects of all the nations of Europe, he could not fail to exclaim, without meddling with the religious question at all ; ' One thing I can see with a cer- tainty, which admits of no doubt ; that the chief evil to be avoided among nations, is Popery ; since, wher- ever it exists, there is misery and discord, and wher- ever it has no footing, there all is peace and prosperity.'
But there is another circumstance which, under this head, may justly claim our attention ; we mean, those '^ fruits of sanctity *^ which manifest the love of our neighbour, and are called by men in general, acts of benevolence.
We are aware, indeed, that the Romish church, having received of the wealthy in various ages, large endowments and estates for the use of the poor and destitute, does, in all parts of the world, ostentatiously assume the office of the general almoner. But we are not, either in this or the former points, confining our view to the clergy only. We look for " the fruits of sanctity '* among the people at large. And we say,
THB SANCTITT OF THB CHUHCH OF BOMB. 119
in the first place, that in Protestant countries the care of the poor and needy, of the widow and fatherless, is always a matter which attracts more attention than in Roman Catholic states. ' Let the traveller/ says one who had himself witnessed what he described, ' start from the Rock of Lisbon, and proceed through every part of Spain, Italy and France, and the wretch- edness and beggary which prevails in every town, village, &c. can only be appreciated by those who have witnessed such scenes.^ ■ On the other hand, in Denmark, Sweden, Holland, England, and Protes- tant Germany, the sacred duty of providing for the poor and destitute is sedulously attended to. Of Holland, indeed, it is recorded that when one of the courtiers of Charles IL jestingly anticipated the de- struction of Amsterdam, then threatened by the French, and basely betrayed by Charles, — the king, for once, checked his mirth, by the remark, * I am of opinion that God will preserve Amsterdam from being destroyed, if it were only for the great charity they have for their poor. ' -
But the same remark applies to the religious bene- volence of Romanists and Protestants ; we mean, to their respective exertions to Christianize the world. The church of Rome has, indeed, done much ; and at this moment there is a sort of college, de propaganda fidcy in operation among them. But where are the 'fruits of sanctity,' in this particular, among the Roman Catholics generally. Protestant England alone raises above half a million ; — more than £500,000 every year, — for this noblest of all purposes. Does Roman Catholic Europe, with its vast empires of
1 Mitford't Tour, vol. li. p. 76- 2 Kerr*» Bemarkt on Holland, part iii. p. 34.
120 ESSAYS ON BOMANISM :
•
France and Spain, Italy and Anstriay— does it raise even a tenth of this sum for the conversion of heathen nations? We trow not. The Protestant churches have at this moment many hundreds of labourers em- ployed among the heathen in every quarter of the globe: have the Romanists as many scores? — nay, have they one for every hundred that we can shew ? In these remarks we are not forgetting the great expenditure which is evidently going on in England^ in the erection of Romish chapels, colleges, &c. This peculiar effort is easily accounted for, both in its ob- ject and its sources. The priests begin to entertaii
m
a hope of re-conquering England for the holy see. Their exertions, consequently, are redoubled. And the doctrines of their church, as to the descent of even real Christians into purgatory, and as to the power of the priesthood to draw them out of that place, are obviously well calculated to give then yast power over the purses of the frightened and the dying. But there is nothing in all this in the least resembling the spontaneous contributions of Protes- tants, to send the gospel to Hottentots, to Esqui- maux, and to Tartars.
Surely, then, it must be admitted that with respect to the fruits of sanctity, or the evidences of practical holiness among the people, the balance inclines very greatly to our side. On a comparison of periods, we find that the most purely Popish times have been also times of the greatest corruption, vice, and moral darkness ; and on a comparison of countries, we find that Protestantism and morality, Romanism and im- morality, seem to be always closely connected. Then passing from the general condition of the people to the acts and doings which might be traced and com-
THE SAKCTITY OF THE CHURCH OF BOME. 121
pared, we find the temporal interests of the poor always better attended to, and the eternal interests of the heathen exciting far greater exertions, among Protestants than among Papists. On the whole, then, we consider, that Dr. Milner, in passing over this subject, as he does, in a very brief notice of two or three pages, shews that he was aware of being on onsafe ground ; and that in that feeling he was quite correct. There remains, therefore, now only his fourth point, that of the Attestation of Sanctity, to be considered.
On this point the Dr. says, * The learned Protes- tant advocates of reyelation, such as Grotius, Ab- badie, Paley, Watson, &c. in defending this common cause against infidels, all agree in the sentiment of the last named, that ^ miracles are the criterion of truth.' Accordingly they observe, that both Moses, Exod. iv. xiv. Numb. xvi. 29; and Jesus Christ, John x. 37, 38. xiv. 12. xv. 24. constantly appealed to the prodigies they wrought, in attestation of their divine mission and doctrine. Indeed the whole his- tory of God's people, from the beginning of the world down to the time of our blessed Saviour, was nearly a continued series of miracles. The latter, so far from confining the power of working them to his own person or time, expressly promised the same, and even a greater power of this nature, to his disciples, Mark xvi. 17. John xiv. 12. For both the reasons here mentioned, namely, that the Almighty was pleased to illustrate the society of his chosen ser- vants, both under the law of nature and the written law, with frequent miracles, and that Christ pro- mised a continuance of them to his disciples under the new law^ we are led to expect,, that the true
122 ESSAYS ON rohanism:
church should be distinji^uished by miracles, wrought in her, and in proof of her divine origin. Accordingly, the fathers and doctors of the Catholic church* ainoDgst other proofs in her favour, have constantly appealed to the miracles by which she is illustrated, and reproached their contemporary heretics and schismatics with the want of them.* '
Dr. Milner, then, gravely claims for his church the possession of miraculous powers through the whole of the middle ages, and even down to the present time. He recounts especially the miracles of St Augustine of Canterbury in the sixth century, of St. Bernard in the twelfth, and of St. Francis Xaverius, and St. Philip Neri in the sixteenth ; and he asks, ' Will you say that all the holy fathers, up to the apostolic age, and that all the ecclesiastical writers down to the Reformation, and since that period, that all the Catholic authors, prelates, and officials, have been in a league to deceive mankind?'
Now we answer that question without the least hesitation. We know, on the surest possible evi- dence, that by Christ and his apostles ^* the blind re- ceived their sight, the lame walked, the leperswere cleansed, the deaf heard, and the dead were raised up," We know also, on sufficient testimony, that these powers of healing did not instantaneously cease, but were con- tinued for some considerable period after the depar- ture of the apostles. But we see, too, that no such powers are possessed by any church whatever in the present day. If the Romish church could give sight to " one born blind,*' or raise on his feet one *' who had never walked,*' or call from the tomb one who had " been dead four days,'* — then indeed the controversy I MilnerU End qf Controverty, p. 240, 24^.
THE SANCTITY OF THE CHUBCH OF ROME. 123
between herself and the Protestant churches woaid assame a different character. Bat she has done no SQch thing. For the last three hundred years, dar- ing which the prevalepce of Protestantism has made it most desirable for her, if possible, to shew some such * attestation of sanctity,'-— daring all this period God wonld seem, even on her own shewing, to have deserted her; for those wonders which her chroniclers record, through all the middle ages, entirely cease when we come into the light of Protestant days. And as to the question, ' Whether all the Catholic authors, prelates, and officials have been in a league to deceive mankind,' — we merely remark, that when Genehrard, one of their own chroniclers, declares that * for nearly 150 years, aboat fifty popes deserted wholly the virtue of their predecessors, he\n^ apostate rather than apostolical,' and that * the priests were of mo9t depraved morah,* ^ and when Baronius, ano- ther of their historians, and a cardinal, tells us that the government of the church was in the hands of ' horrible monsters;* — when, we repeat, we find this testimony given by their own historians, and then meet with the most marvellous and often the most absurd stories of miracles performed, even at periods when it is thus universally admitted that the foulest corruptions overspread the church, — what conclusion can we come to, but that which Dr. M. suggests, that the legend-writers and their officials wei-e ' in a league to deceive mankind.' Nor can we forget that most of these miracle-workers had an end in view, — since by such stories the credit of their shrines and relics was raised, and gifts and offerings flowed in upon them, in exact proportion to the wonders said to be wrought.
1 Gmtekrard, Chron. h iv. An. 1079.
124 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
At the period of the Reformation, many of these things were searched into, and their fraad made manifest* Bat we mast proceed to inquire, — ^what says Dr. Mil- ner on the point of this ' attestation of sanctity,' as possessed by his charch at the present moment.
He says, * the charch never possessed miracnloas powers, in the sense of most Protestant writers, so as to be able to effect cares or other sapernatnral events at her mere pleasure : for even the apostles coald not do this : as we learn from the history of the lanatic child, Matt. xvii. 16. But this I say, that the Ca- tholic charch, being always the beloved spouse of Christf Rev. xxi. 9, and continuing at all times to bring forth children of heroical sanctity, God faib not in this, any more than in past ages, to illastrate her and them by unquestionable miracles. ' ^
In support of this assumption, he narrates, 1. The case of Joseph Lamb, who having fallen from a hay* rick, on the 12th of August, 1814, at Eccles, in Lan- cashire, so hurt himself that he could neither walk nor stand without crutches, till the 2nd of October, when he was taken to Garswood, and signed on his back with the sign of the cross, by the dead hand of F. Arrowsmith, who was executed at Lancaster in the time of Charles the First* On which being done, feeling a particular sensation and total change in himself, he exclaimed to his wife, * Mary, lean walk ! * which he forthwith did, and has continued to do ever since.
2. Mary Wood, who on the 15th of March 1809, cut her arm so seriously by a broken pane of glass, as to injure the tendons, and to deprive her of the ase of it Bat on applying a piece of moss from St.
^ Eni qf Contrmteny, p. 260.
THE SAVCTITT OF THE CHUBCH OF ROME. 125
Winefrid's well, on the 6tfa of Aagust, she foand, the next morning, that she coaid dress herself, having regained the fall use of her limb.
3. Winefrid White, who had suffered from a car- vatare of the spine, and a hemiplegia, or a paralytic affection, and who, on the 28th of June, 1805, on bathing in St Winefrid's well, foaod herself free from all her pains and disabilities, and able to ran or walk like any other yoaog person.
Such is the whole array of evidence which Dr. M. can master np, as of modern times, and within our own reach ; — but he also refers, at some length, to the miracles wrought by St. Xaverius, in India, and St. Lewis Bertrand in South America.
These latter, however, belong to the sixteenth cen- tury ; and we must be excused, at this time of day, from going into a very minute examination of legends imported from countries ten or twelve thousand miles distant, and of the date of two or three centuries back. It will be enough for us to examine Br. Milner's evidence of the ' divine attestation,' as applying to our own times. And the facts he adduces, it seems, are merely these; — a man had fallen from a hay-rick, and hurt his back, and being weak and lame, was restored to health and strength by the application of a dead man's hand : A girl had cut her arm, and felt a difficulty or disability in using it; but by the appli- cation of a piece of moss was enabled to use it as before : Another girl suffered under a diseased spine, was so strengthened by once plunging into St. Wine- frid's fountain, as to be ' able to walk, run, or jump, like any other young person.'
Now such stories as these hardly seem to require a word of comment; for our readers will for the most
126 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
part be well aware that several supposed miracles ot the very same description as these, were wrought by the disciples of Mr. Irving about four years since. And the exact similarity of the cases proves the identity of the delusion in both instances. The Irvingite miracles exactly resembled the Romish ones* In all of them, there was a patient labouring under a sup- posed disability to walk, to stand, to move her arm, &c. ; and in each of them some mighty supernatural agency is ostentatiously set to work, to remove this disability. The disability is removed ; the patient walks, or stretches forth his arm, and cries of a mir- acle resound on every side.
In all this two things are overlooked : 1. The power of fancy; and 2ndly, the character of the miracles recorded in holy scripture. On the first point, we shall merely allude to one fact, perfectly well known to the medical profession, which casts a strong light on the subject.
A few years since, a new invention was greatly trumpeted about in England, for the cure of persons who from various causes had become crippled in their limbs ; it was called ' the metallic tractors ; ' and far more miracles were wrought by it, in the course of a year or two, than Dr. Milner has been able to muster in support of the Romish church, on a review of a quarter of a century. So great was the excitement caused by this new discovery, that in one important city, much frequented by persons suffering from such ailments, the medical practitioners were on all hands beset by applications, either to adopt the new invention, or to give some sufficient reason for rejecting it.
Thus called upon, the physicians decided upon
THE SAKCTITT OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. 127
giving to ' the metallic tractors * a full and fair trial. They proceeded, on a given day, to meet in the prin- cipal infirmary or hospital of the place, in order then and there to apply these ' tractors ' to all the sick and lame there lying, who were aflSicted with any of the disorders which the said ' tractors' were under- stood to he ahle to cure. The diseased persons were made betimes acquainted with the new remedy to be applied, and looked forward with hope to their pro- bable cure. The result of the trial, however, ex- ceeded all expectation. Men incurably lame for half their lives ; cripples who had been bed-ridden for many years ; helpless objects who had dragged on a miserable existence for a quarter of a century, were seen pacing and almost leaping about, in transports of joy and gratitude. Never was there so complete a triumph !
Unhappily, however, for the fame and profit of the inventor, it turned out the next day, that the physi- cians had rightly appreciated the whole matter, and had shewn that the real virtue of these wonderful ' tractors * was no secret to them. It was frankly explained, that in the preceding day's trial, the things actually employed were nothing more than some pieces of painted wood, ingeniously contrived to imitate the original invention, and that not a single ' tractor,' nor instrument, nor any medical or surgical means whatever were employed ; nor was any one thing concerned in the matter, but all-powerful Fancy !
And thus has it been with other quackeries, beside * the metallic tractors,' and ' St. Winefrid's well.' Only take a person suffering from paralytic or ner- vous affections, and who has gradually become, or fancied that he has become, unable to move this or
128 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
that limb ; and tell him that by some extraordinary means he is to be suddenly cared ; and in all proba- bility, if you gain his implicit credence, something very much like a sudden and miraculous cure will follow. The mind acting in conjunction with the will, powerfully influences the whole machine. The nervous system still remains an unsolved problem, but its intimate connection with the hopes and fears, the alarms and determinations of the mind, is so far discernible as to render the things we are now con- sidering no longer matter of wonder. And observe, that throughout the whole, whether in the affair of the Irvingite miracles, or those warranted by Dr. Milner, or those performed by ' the metallic tractors,' it is always a lame person, one suffering from a con- tracted limb, or from some disordered functions, that is thus suddenly cured. A clear and indisputable miracle— one which no power but a divine and super- natural power could work, has never been produced by any of these pretenders. Let us see a man ** bom blind/* endowed with sight, or one who *^ never had walked,'' gifted with the power to move like other men ; or one who *' had been dead four days,'' raised from the tomb, and then we shall be dumb with awe, or only vocal in admiration. But stiffened arms re- stored by a piece of holy moss, or a crick in the back cured by a dead man's hand, and all the other stories of a similar kind, only awaken feelings of pity for the understandings of the deluded, or of disgust at those who thus practise on their weakness. We therefore cannot admit Dr. Milner's miracles to the rank which he claims for them, but must deny that in this as- sumed ' attestation of sanctity,' the Dr. has esta- blished, the least particle of his case.
THE SANCTITY OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. 129
Thus, then, have we concladed this branch of the sabjecty — the claim of the charch of Rome to the title of Holy. We have been obliged to deny each one of the four particulars into which this claim is di- vided. We believe that her doctrines are not holy — bat, in those points especially in which they differ from the scriptures and the Protestant faith, ex- ceedingly unholy: we consider that the means of at- taining holiness^ through Latin prayers perpetually repeated, bodily inflictions, and indulgences pur- chased by money, are far inferior to the Protestant means, of hearing the gospel and reading God's holy word. We must maintain also, that both the history of the past^ and an impartial view of the present ^ equally shew that the fruits of holiness abound more among Protestants than among Catholics : and as to the alleged divine attestation of her holiness, conveyed by miracles, we deny that the least ground for such an assumption can be shewn to exist. In the article of holiness, then, as well as in that of unity, we feel that Dr. Milner has wholly failed to make out his case.
VI. THE MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH.
CATHOLICITY.
The course of the argament brings as necessarily back to a part of the subject with which we have already dealt ; but this is hardly to be regretted, in- asmuch as every point in this great controversy ad- mits of being viewed in a variety of lights. The * mark' of Catholicity, as belonging exclusively to the church of Rome, is better stated by JDr. Wise- man than by Dr. Milner.
The former, Dr. Milner, says, ' The true church is Catholic, or Universal, in three several respects ; as to persons — as to places — and as to time. It con- sists of the most numerous body of Christians ; it is more or less diffused wherever Christianity prevails ; and it has visibly existed ever since the days of the apostles.' *
But this must be admitted to be reasoning of the weakest order. * The most numerous body!' What! is truth to' be discovered, then, by a mere appeal to
1 Milner't End qf Controveny, l8mo. p. 284.
CATHOLICITY. 131
nambers ? If so, why not embrace the theology of Confucius, who, in one single empire, has more fol- lowers than Popery can reckon all over the globe? And does Dr. M. seriously mean us to understand, that if Protestantism were to prevail in one or two more kingdoms than at present, and thereby throw the balance openjy and decidedly (as it now is in truth and fact) against Popery, it would then have become in his eyes the Catholic faith? Yet if he does not mean this, — what does he mean, when he asserts that the church of Rome is the Catholic church, because she has 'the most numerous body ' of followers ?
But the very fact itself is more easily assumed than proved. How is it made out that Rome has ' the greatest number' of adherents? By putting down half a dozen of the chief kingdoms of Europe, as France, 30,000,000 ; Spain, 20,000,000 ; Italy, 18,000,000, and thus soon running up an account, on paper, of a hundred millions of Romanists. But what does the Romanism of France amount to ? To nothing better than a tolerant, indifferent sort of Atheism. And what of Spain? Did not Blanco White confess, a dozen years since, that the bulk of the Spanish priests were merely concealed infidels ; and is not the fruit of their infidelity now showing itself, by the animosity of the popular party to the priests, the monks, and, in fact, to all religion? And yet it is only by calculating the populations of these great nations as wholly ' Catholic,' that the Romish controversialists are able to give some colour to their assumption, that the adherents to Rome are still * the most numerous body of Christians.'
But Dr. Milner's proposition has another feature.
K 2
132 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
He proves the ' Catholicism ' of his church's system by the fact, that her faith * is more or less diffused wherever ChristiaDity prevails? '
Now DO one will deny, that as Rome has still six or eight European nations in her communion, and as several of these have colonies, and carry on commer- cial transactions with every country on the globe, it must very naturally follow that some sort of Ro- manism is to be heard of wherever any kind of civi- lization, or any profession of Christianity exists. But this no more makes the church of Rome the Catholic or Universal church, than the fact that English ships and English merchants are found in every port in the known world, makes England the head of a fifth universal empire. The circumstance is easily accounted for, and proves nothing. The English tongue, and the Protestant English church, is now known in all parts of the world ; but who ever thinks of calling the church of England ' the Catholic church' on that account?
But Dr. Wiseman seems to be aware of the weak- ness of his predecessor's arguments on this head, and he certainly supplies their place by reasonings of a far more artful and effective character. He thus defends Ihe position :— ' Upon what grounds does the Catholic church arrogate to itself to be this one church? Why should not these prerogatives reside in the church of England ? Has not it also a claim to this authority ? Why not in the Greek church, or in various other oriental churches ? Why not in the collection of all churches together? On a former occasion, I shewed you, likewise, (and I quoted even the authority of a learned divine of the church of England, to prove it acknowledged) that even up to
CATHOLICITY. 133
a late period, the Catholic church was, as we believe it DOW, essentially the true charch of Christ, — that it was impossible to fix the period when it lost that title, other than aboat the period of the reformation —that is, at the celebration of the council of Trent. Others, however, put the period of its supposed de- fection much farther back. But at present, this matters not : for both parties concede the important fact, that we have prior existence ; for both consider US as essentially connected with the foregoing and well-entitled state of the church of Christ ; and the ODly question is, when we lost our right to that title. If we seek an illustration in the Greeks and their church, we find a manifest connexion and commu- nion with us up to a certain time : they then, by a formal act, throw off their allegiance, and erect themselves into an independent church ; and while all this happens, we move not, we remain in the same position afterwards as we did before they left us. In that act, did they acquire new claims, or did we, by it, forfeit those which we had before ? Com- ing down to a later period, it is acknowledged that the church of England separated from that of Rome; various reasons have been brought to prove that the separation was lawful, s^nd to justify the grounds on which it took place. There is, consequently, an ac- knowledgment that a change of state occurred in her, while we remain still in possession of whatever rights we previously held; and strong positive argu- ments must be brought to prove that we are not still what we were acknowledged to be previously — the church of Christ. We cannot be called upon for reasons why we are to be reckoned still the same. We stand upon our rights; as the successor to a
134 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
dynasty claims tbe crown of his ancestors, or as any member of the aristocracy in this country holds the lands of his ancestors legally given to them, from whom he inherits them : whatever branches of tbe family may have separated from it, or accepted other claims or prospects, that cannot shake the right line of succession of which he is the representative/ ^
This is a higher tone, and a more imposing plea, than that of Dr. Milner : — but though it is not quite so obviously vain and childish, it will be found of little weight, when seriously examined.
We are asked. If the church which is now the church of Rome, once was rightly called * the Catholic (or Universal) Church ; * when did it lose its claim to that title? We answer, when it ceased to he the Catholic or Universal church; when it no longer comprehended in its circle the whole Christian world ; when, in short, it became ' the church of Rome;' a title which is wholly incompatible with that of * Catholic,^ inasmuch as what is particular and limited, is in its very nature opposed to what is general and without limits*
The simple facts of tbe case are these : During the earlier ages of tbe Christian church, the followers of Christ, in all countries, preserved a feeling of bro- therhood and common connexion, founded on the scriptural basis of *■ calling no man master on earth,* The bishops of Africa could meet, and discuss and regulate their own affairs ; the bishops of G^aul could assemble and do the same ; and each of these na- tional synods claimed the common right of differing from, or assenting to, the opinions of Rome, or of
1 Dr. Wiaeman't Ninth Lecture, pp. 314—810.
CATHOLICITY. 185
Antiochy or of any other part of the church, as seemed to them needfal and right. Of this inde- pendence the acts and the writings of Irenasas, Cy- prian, Hilary, and many others of the fathers might be adduced in proof. And daring its continuance, the Universal or Catholic church continued indeed One; no part thereof tyrannizing over and assuming ' dominion over the faith* of any other part. The only distinction, therefore, which could be made, during all this period, was, between the One Catholic or Universal church, whose faith was built on Holy Scripture, — and the various sects of heretics, who ever and anon broke forth, all refusing obedience to the written word, and broaching fancies which the church at large knew nothing of, and which, when heard by it, were by common consent rejected.
But after a while, the encroachments of the Ro- man bishops brought on a division. ** Exalting him- self above all thht is called God, or that is worshipped,*' as had been foretold by St. Paul, the bishop of Rome demanded the absolute obedience of the churches, not only of Italy, but of Asia and the whole world. This claim, wholly unknown and unimagined during the first five centuries, and which by the great Gre- gory (a former bishop of Rome), had been vehemently renounced, and declared to be a sign and mark of antichrist — this claim at once divided and split up into divisions the Catholic church. The heads of the eas- tern and western divisions anathematized each other. Both of these reckoned among their followers many hundreds of bishops, and whole nations of professors of Christianity. The bishop of Rome then severed himself from one half of the Christian world ; made his church from that time forward ' the church of
13G ESSAYS ON ROMANISM *.
Rome* and tbas ceased to be in communion with any thing more than a section, a division, of the Catholic or aniversal church. In reply to Dr. Wiseman's de- mand, therefore, ' When his church ceased to be the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church?' we an- swer, without hesitation, There was a time when the church was one, visibly one, and when no division or section of it asserted a right to rule over the rest. After this, another state of things succeeded, in which, by the assertion of such a claim, put forward by Rome, the visible church was split into parts. The church of Rome was one of these parts, and so sbon as it became visibly a part, a section, just so soon did every individual member of it lose all right to say, ' My church is the Catholic church.'
Let us observe also the insidious manner in which Dr. Wiseman assumes the whole point in question, in speaking of the separation which took place, of the eastern from the western churches. He says, ' If we seek an illustration in the Greeks and their church, we find a manifest connexion and communion with us (Rome) up to a certain time ; they then, by a formal act, throw off their allegiance, and erect them- selves into an independent church ; and while all this happens, we move not, we remain in the same position afterwards as we did before.' Now this, we must, observe, is any thing but an ingenuous and honest statement. The facts of the case are noto- rious. During several centuries the more ambitious prelates, both of Rome and Constantinople, aimed at assuming a supremacy over the universal church. The first open attempt was made by the eastern pat- riarch. In A. D. 588, John, surnamed the Faster, then primate of tlie east, assumed the title of (Ecumenical
CATHOUCITT. 137
or Universal Bishop. Gregory, caUed the Great, then bishop of Borne, resisted this assumption. In one of bis letters these words oecnr, — *■ I confidentiT say, that whosoeTer calls himself nniTersal bishop, or desires to be called so, in his pride is the forerunner of Antichrist.' And both in this passag:e and in the whole controversy, it is abundantly apparent that Gregory claims for himself no authority or supre- macy over the easterns, but merely protests against the patriarch of Constantinople, or any other bishop, eastern or western, setting himself up as a visible head and ruler of the whole church.
In two or three centuries after, howcTcr, the eas- terns had grown weaker and less capable of main- taining the warfare, and the bishops of Rome more powerful and more ambitious. That very claim which Gregory had put from him as impious, in A. D. 590, one of his successors, in A. D. 862, openly as- serted, setting aside the election of a patriarch of Constantinople, and excommunicating him and his abettors. This claim was never afterwards in the slightest degree relaxed, and after two centuries more of contention, in a. d. 1054, a mutual and final anathema concluded the struggle. When, therefore, Dr. Wiseman chooses to say, that ' the Greeks threw off their allegiance and erected themselves into an independent church, while we (of Rome) remained just in the same position as we did before they left us,' — be wilfully overlooks three material points. 1. That in the time of Gregory and John the Faster, the Greeks evidently were as independent of Rome as Rome was of Constantinople. 2. That no allegiance could then be imagined to be due to Rome, when Gregory claims none, but merely protests that he
138 ESSAYS OS ROMANISM:
owes no sabjection to the Greek patriarch. 3. That, therefore, the Greeks could not afterwards * erect themselves into an independent charch/ having been independent from the very first; nor coald they * throw off an allegiance ' which they had never known ; still less could the Romish bishops of the ninth century, who assumed the title of * universal bishop/ be said to ^ remain in the same position ' as Gregory, who declared that any one pretending to that title was ' a forerunner of antichrist/ All the colouring, therefore, with which Dr. W. aims to tinge this transaction must be washed away : and then we come to the plain matter of fact, that the ecclesiastical heads of the eastern and western churches, after long contentions for superiority, at last irrevocably quarrelled, and divided the visible church. But then it must be borne in mind, that neither the one nor the other had the least right to say, ' we, and we alone, are the church, and all those people who refuse to submit to us, are heathens and reprobates.*
But we must not overlook the last clause in Dr. Wiseman's argument. He says, ' We stand upon our rights; as the successor to a dynasty claims the crown of his ancestors, or as any member of the aris- tocracy in this country holds the lands of his ances- tors legally given to them, from whom he inherits them; whatever branches of the family may have separated from it, or accepted other claims or pros- pects, that cannot shake the right line of succession, of which he is the representative.'
Now here the Dr. mixes up two arguments, one of which belongs to a later stage of our inquiry. When he talks of hereditary rights, of a crown descending
CATHOLICITY. 139
io SQCcession, and the like, we must bear in mind that he is assuming that which will shortly come mder discossion, namely, the claim of the alleged successors of St. Peter to rule oyer the whole Chris- tiaii charch. While this point remains open for fotare consideration, we cannot allow the whole matter in dispute to be taken for granted ; or admit, without protest, the claim put in by Dr. Wiseman.
But with regard to the rest of the above statement, we may ask, How does Dr. W. contrive to apply his own supposed case to the matter now before us ? He says, ' Whatever branches of the family may have separated from it, or accepted other claims or prospects, that cannot shake the right line of suc- cession, of which he is the representative.' Now no one wishes to shake ' the right line of succes- sion ' of the pope, or to deny that he sits in the chair founded by St. Peter. We Protestants set up no rival claim — no pretender to the popedom. We dis- pute not the succession^ but we object to the assump- tion of an authority which neither St. Peter himself, nor Linus, the bishop appointed by St. Peter, ever thought of claiming. Dr. Wiseman misses bis point. The question is not as to the pope's succession ; but as to the attempted excommunication, by the see of Rome, of all who do not humbly submit to its do- minion. Therefore, when Dr. W. says, * Whatever branches of the family may have separated from it, that cannot shake the right line of succession,' — we reply. No ! nor does their separation from the elder branch (even if it he the elder) deprive them of their blood, or their natural rights. What ' separation ' or other circumstance can entitle one branch of a family to set itself up as the whole family, and to de-
140 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
clare all the rest ipso facto alienated and cat off? The elder branch of the royal family of France, for instance, may have a better title to the throne than that member who now occupies it; but how coald the senior line acquire the right or the power to say to the younger, * You are for ever cut off and de- stroyed. You are no longer a part of the Bourbon family. We alone are the Bourbons, and the blood royal in future shall be held to run in our veins ex* clusively.'
No ! Dr. Wiseman's illustration is a most unfortu- nate one. The great Head of the church has, in every land and in every Christian community, some sincere followers ; who constitute unitedly the invisible ** Ca- tholic church.*' The visible church Catholic, if such a body can be supposed to exist, must be formed of all existing churches 'in which the pure word of God is preached, and the sacraments duly administered.' And even were Dr. Wiseman to succeed in establish- ing the right of the supposed successor of St. Peter to a primacy over all Christian churches, even that would not warrant an ' anathema' on such bodies of Christians as were not convinced of the justice of his claim. " He that believeth on the Son of God hath ever- lasting life, and shall not come into condemnation " s?Aih the scripture : and while this word remains true, it cannot be possible for any ruler of the visible church to cancel the promise of Christ, and to make submission to him, essential to salvation ! Dr. Wiseman has no more right to say, ' Ours is the Catholic church ; and all who are not with us, are out of that church, — in other words, are heathens and publicans,' than any one member of a family, whether the elder or the younger, would have to cancel his father's will, and of bis own
CATHOLICITY.
141
lole pleasare, to disinherit all those of bis brethren
wAo refased to render him the most entire obedience.
After all, then, the subtle reasonings of Dr. Wise- man succeed no better than the blant demands of Dr. Milner. The alleged ' mark * of Catholicity, as borne by the Romish church, comes at last to nothing more than this, — as Dr. Milner had in the first instance stated, — that ' it consists of the most numerous body of Christians/
Externally, perhaps, and judging by outward shew alone, this fact may be admitted, but between uni- tersality and a mere majorityy there is a wide distinc- tion. And let the Romanists remember, too, that there is one Tery awkward consequence connected with the resting their case on this single circum- stance. If the Romish church is to be declared to be the Catholic church, — and Dr. Milner so argues, — on the ground of her haying ^-the most numerous body * of adherents, — then what are we to say of that period when she unquestionably had not so numerous a body as the rival church? The Greek church in its first strength unquestionably outnumbered the Italian sec- tion. Was, then, the eastern body, as * the most numerous,' — the Catholic church of that day? And if not, — why not? Or was the Romish church then the Catholic church ; though it numbered only a por- tion, and the smaller portion, of the great body of Christians?
These difficulties, and others which will naturally suggest themselves, must shew, to any impartial in- quirer, that the claim of Catholicity, or universality, as an attribute or ' mark,' exclusively belonging to the church of Rome, is utterly groundless and up- supported by fact.
VII. THE MARKS OF THE TRUE CHURCH.
APOSTOLICITY.
We now proceed to the fourth ' mark/ alleged by the Romish writers to belong to the trae church, — namely, * Apostolicity.' But we find that the mo- ment the question is opened, a dispute commences touching the meaning of the term ! Dr. Wiseman shall speak for himself in this matter. He says, — * Once more, who are Apostolical ? Is it meant by this term, that the doctrines taught in the church are those of the apostles ? Most assuredly not. That the apostolic doctrines will be taught in the church of Christ is certain ; but that the teaching of true doctrines is the definition of apostolicity, is mani- festly erroneous. For apostolicity of doctrine is iden- tical with truth in doctrine ; and the discovery of one is the discovery of the other. One cannot be a means for finding out the other. It, consequently, must con- sist in some outward mark, which may lead to the discovery of where the apostolic doctrines are. It is in the Apostolic Succession that this principle resides, — in having the line of descent distinctly traced from
APOSTOLICITY. 143
tbe' present holder of the apostolical see, through those who preceded him, to tbe blessed Peter, who first sat therein. This is what was meant of old by the Apostolic church ; and this is the sense in which tbe fathers applied it. I satisfied you, in my last discourse, how Eusebius, Optatus, Irenaeus, and others, proved their faith to be the true one, by shew- ing that they were in communion with the church of Rome, and could trace their pedigree, through it, from the apostles. Thus, therefore, did they under- stand Apostolicity to be given as an outward mark, in the continued and unaltered succession from the time of the apostles. Here, again, although the mat- ter is manifest, I do not wish to take the question as one of fact, but to establish it on principle. We are the only church which claims this succession ; others do not ; at least, the only way they can, is by proving their episcopal line back to the time they separated from us, and then claim as their's that succession which forms the chain of our uninterrupted hierarchy. Such a course is at once oblique, and necessarily goes not to the root. They wish to be engrafted on us, rather than pretend to any root in the earth itself. Yet the Catholic church considers them as separa- tists from it, and consequently, they have no right to the succession which rests on her line.' ^
Now our first remark here must be, that this pas- sage contains some of the boldest perversions and misrepresentations of historic fact that ever were crowded into a single argument.
' Apostolicity ' is said to consist ' in the continued and unaltered succession, from the time of the apos- tles.' And then it is immediately added, ' We are
2 Dr, Wiseman* t Ninth Lecture, p. 320.
144 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
the only church which claims this succession ; others do not ; at least, the only way they cab, is by proving ' their episcopal line back to the time they separated ' from us/ &c.
Now this is really too indecent, especially in a man like Dr. Wiseman, who cannot plead entire ig- norance of all ecclesiastical history.
He speaks of Rome as though she were the mother and root of all the churches, and as though it fol- lowed necessarily that every other church must trace their succession from her. But what is the fact? .
The church of Jerusalem was constituted x)n the day of Pentecost, a.d. 29, and we find from scripture (Acts XV. 22.) that it acted and ruled, as head and mother of all the churches, with St. James as its pre- sident, long before the gospel was even so much as known at Rome.
The church of Antioch was formed about the year A.D. 40, by Paul and Barnabas, and enjoyed full Christian privileges and a regular government, long before any church of Rome was heard of.
The churches of Asia, especially that of Ephesus, were visited and set in order by St. Paul, many years before he was carried to Rome as a prisoner. The same may be said of Corinth, Philippi, and other exiles in Greece, Macedonia.
The church of Alexandria is stated by Eusebius to have been founded by St. Mark.
Here, then, are some eight or ten important churches, most of which, if not all, were founded ten, twenty, or even thirty years before the least trace of any body of Christians could be discovered at Rome. There is no doubt that St. Peter and St. Paul suffered martyrdom at Rome about the year^ a.d. 64,
APOSTOLICITY. 145
aving shortly before constituted the Christian church 1 that city, and appointed Linus its first bishop.
With these facts before us, what are we to say to iQch an assertion as Dr. Wiseman's, — that * we, [Rome) are the only church that claims this succes- non ; others do not ; at least, the only Hvay they can, is by proving their episcopal line back to the time they separated from us,' &c. Was there ever a more flagrant outrage on the truth of history ?
But the fact that most of the great eastern churches were in existence long before the church of Rome, is only a part of the case. Most of these churches sent out missions, from whose labours there arose various churches in the oriental regions, some of Which re- main until this day, having enjoyed an uninterrupted raccession of bishops for sixteen or seventeen cen- :nries, without the least contact with Rome.
At the present moment we find, the Greek church, inth its sixty or seventy millions of disciples, and ruled by bishops, none of whom would condescend to ;race their succession to the see of Rome : — the Ar- nenian church, reckoning some millions, and also lolding itself entirely aloof from Rome : the Nes- orians, also very numerous, and who take their irders from Constantinople and Antioch, and not rem Rome : the Syrian churches of Malabar, who, intil the arrival of the Portuguese on their coasts, lad never even heard of the pope, but derived their rders from Antioch : besides which ought to be .dded, the Copts, the Jacobites, and other eastern K>dies, none of whom know or care any thing as to be Italian hierarchy. Again, therefore, we ask. How ^ald Dr. Wiseman venture such an assertion, as that Etome is Uhe only church which claims Apostolic
L
146 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
succession ; ' or, at least, that sacb others as may do so, claim it only through her line, and by virtue of her ordination ?
But we may be told that we have said nothing of the western churches, — nothing of our own church, which must either trace its succession through Rome, or abandon the claim altogether. We will therefore at once proceed to deal with this question.
It is not true that Christianity in England was solely derived from Rome. When Gregory sent mis- sionaries to Britain at the close of the sixth century, those missionaries found many Christians already existing, who, from their adherence to the eastern mode of celebrating Easter, obviously were not of Romish origin.
But, passing over that point, let us look at Gre- gory's missionaries, and the succession derived from them. Gregory, it must be remembered, abjured all claim to the title or office of universal bishop : Gre- gory did not preach transubstantiation, or the celi- bacy of the clergy, or the worship of images, or any of the various later corruptions of the Romish church : Gregory, therefore, re-established an episcopal line in Britain, without connecting with it any of these corruptions.
Was it in the power, then, of Hlldebrand or any other of the tyrants who afterwards occupied the Papal chair, to force all these corruptions upon the English church, or, on their disobedience, to cancel the orders of the English clergy ? If this is alleged, let us see by what mandate of the great Head of the • church it is enforced.
But Dr. Wiseman says, ' The Catholic church con- sider them as separatists from it, and, consequently,
APOSTOLICITr. 147
they have no right to the saccession which rests on lier line.'
The ' consequently^ will not, we apprehend, be quite so apparent to an impartial reader as it is to Dr. Wiseman. Let us see how matters stand in our own case. Augustine, sent by Gregory, and or- dained by him to the see of Canterbury, had aposto- lical succession ; this will not be questioned. But Augustine was taught by Gregory himself, that ' any one who assumed the title of Universal Bishop, was to be looked upon as the forerunner of Antichrist.' Suppose, then, Augustine could have lived long enoogh to see the days when another Roman bishop did actually assume this title. Either, on the one hand, he must have abjured the doctrine of Gregory, and have acknowledged a supremacy which his for- mer bishop had declared to be Antichristian ; — or else, retaining his first position, he would have been excommunicated and cut off, and then, according to Dr. W., he would have ceased to belong lo the Apos- tolical line !
But how perfectly absurd is all this ! Can the sentence of an angry pontiff destroy an historical fact? If so, how many of the popes themselves were cast OQt of the Apostolical line ; Tor during centuries the pontifis of Avignon, of Rome, and of Perpignan, were constantly occupied in thundering out anathemas and excommunications against each other.
The truth, however, is, that the whole hypothesis of Dr. Wiseman is utterly untenable. The Aposto^ licity, which is Indeed a mark of a true church, re- lates not to the mere succession, but to the doctrines let forth. Such was the view of the Apostles them- selves. They ordained and sent forth divers, who
L2
148 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
afterwards fell into error. Among their own namber there was a Jadas; and among their followers a Demas, a Dlotrephes, an Hymeneas, and a Philetns. Never, therefore, do the Apostles instruct us to re- ceive every one upon whom Apostolic hands have been laid, irrespective of all regard to his life and doc- trine. On the contrary, their injunctions always are, to ** try the spirits , whether they are of God.' St John adds, '^ If there come any unto you, and bring not THIS DOCTRINE, receive him not into your house^ neither bid him God speed.** But St. Paul goes still further, and subjects even the Apostles themselves to the same test. *^ But though we, or an angel from heaven^ preach any other gospel unto you than that we have preached, let him be accursed." (Galatians i. 8.) Words cannot go beyond the strength or explicitness of this injunction. Apostles themselves might err; St. Peter had already erred ; (Gal. ii. 14.) but the unerring test to which even they themselves desired to be brought, was the * Apostolic doctrine,' which they knew to be already recorded in the sacred books by God's own inspiration, and in which no particle or taint of error could possibly be found.
Dr. Wiseman, and all the writers of his church, dislike this view of the question, and cling to the notion, that Apostolicity concerns succession and nothing else. But were we even to give way to them on this point, they would find it impossible to pro- ceed upon their own hypothesis. Let us try it in a single instance.
Regular succession from the days of the Apostles, according to Dr. Wiseman, makes a church an Apostolic church. Take, then, the case of Antioch. Here were the disciples first called Christians. This
APOSTOLICITY. 149
city possessed a regular church and bishop, at least twenty years before either were found in Rome. It is called by Chrysostom, * The Mother of the Faith/ And in the fifth century, Innocent, bishop of Rome, addresses the patriarch of Antioch, as * our school- fellow of the Apostolic see.'
How, then, is Dr. Wiseman to deny succession^ — if that be the only test, to the church of Antioch ? And if granted to Antioch, it must flow from her to many other churches in the east, her legitimate daughters. Thus the notion of succession, and that alone, being the only test, evidently fails ; unless Dr. Wiseman is prepared to admit that there are other Apostolic churches in the world besides the church of Rome ; the which, however, he will hardly do.
We must come back, then, to the only practicable and reasonable plan ; and must seek to discover an apostolical church by its apostolical doctrine. So reasoneth Gregory Nazienzen, who, in his eulogy on Athanasius, says, * He was elevated to the chair of Mark, not less the successor of his piety than of his seat In point of time very distant from him, but io piety, which indeed is properly called succession, directly after him. For he that holdeth the same doc- trine is of the same chair; but he who is an enemy to the doctrine is an enemy to the chair.' ^
Nothing, however, will ever induce the Romanists willingly to abide this test. And for their reluctance they have two very natural and sufficient reasons.
1. The first is, that in submitting the doctrines of their church to the test of the apostolic records, they would, in fact, be virtually surrendering the whole
1 21st Orat. In LaudUnu Atharuu.
150 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
qaestion of the rnle of faith. For, if the inqairer be permitted to use bis own reasoning faculties in dis- covering from scripture, whether or not the doctrines of the Romish church are, as they profess to be, apostolic, — by what means shall he afterwards be brought to surrender the use of these faculties in the still greater matter of his own salvation ? If yon admit that he is able to understand scripture, — to judge of its meaning, — and to try the church by its rules, you have, in fact, let in a principle, which, if once admitted, can never again be excluded. Hence it is, as we may easily perceive, that the church of Rome will never willingly concede this point, — that the apostolicity of her doctrine is to be judged of by the inquirer, by a reference to the writings of the apostles, themselves.
2. The remaining reason is still more cogent The church of Rome will never come to this test, because she well knows that she could not abide it for a single instant. Even at the very first step, — of a willingness to be judged by the divine records, she is utterly opposed to the views and principles of the apostles. Their injunctions were, " Prove all things^ hold fast that which is good'* Rome, on the other hand, to use Dr. Wiseman's own words, demands ' absolute, unconditional submission to the teaching of the church,' and declares that any man who goes to the Bible to search for doctrines, is a Protestant al* ready, and has given up Romanism, by the very act of beginning to read the Bible for himself ! ^ And she herein acts at least consistently. She knows that ail the errors which she maintains, and against
1 Wimman'* Firtt Lect. p. I?, IQ.
APOSTOLICITT. 151
wfaich we protest, have no support whatever in God's wordy and tbat, conseqnently, he who opens that wordy in order to ascertain their troth or falsehood, is already lost to her, and gained to Protestantism. Wisely, therefoi^, after this world's wisdom, does she direct her main effort to induce him to ' shut ap the book that is leading him astray ; ' ^ knowing tbat if this qannot be done, there is little hope of her re- taining her hold upon his mind. A fall and faithful investigation of her doctrines, in the light of God's word, is what she will never consent onto. She de- nies, therefore, tbat apostolicity has any reference to doctrine; because she knows well enough that her doctrines are not apostolic.
Let us look, however, a little farther into Dr. Wiseman*s argument, and see if there be any re- maining validity in it. He says, —
' Once more, who are apostolical ? Is it meant by this term, that the doctrines taught in the church are those of the apostles ? Most assuredly not. Tbat the apostolic doctrines will be taught in the church of Christ is certain ; but that the teaching of true doctrines is the definition of apostolicity, is mani- festly erroneous. For apostolicity of doctrine is identical with truth in doctrine ; and the discovery of one is the discovery of the other. One cannot be a means for finding out the other. It consequently must consist in some outward mark, which may lead to the discovery of where the apostolic doctrines are.'
Now any one who will steadily consider this pas- sage for a few moments, will see that it is a mere shew of an argument,— an external imitation of a
I Wi9eman*» First Lect. p. 19.
152 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
piece of reasoning, — without any reality or solidity about it. ' Apostolicity of doctrine is identical with troth in doctrine ;' and * one cannot be a means for finding oat the other/ This looks like an argument, when in reality it is none, but merely an adroit play upon words.
We believe that there is, and always will be, an apostolical church upon earth. How, then, shall it be known? We say, by its holding the true or apostolic doctrine. Dn Wiseman says that this cannot be its distinguishing mark, because the true doctrine and the apostolic doctrine are one and the same, and therefore the one cannot be a means of finding out the other. This is a sort of shadow, which it is almost impossible to lay hold of; — it has no body or reality about it* It is ' wordS, and no- thing else.^
It is asked, How shall the apostolic church be dis- cerned? The answer is, By the possession of the true doctrine, or the apostolic doctrine, — whichever term is preferred. To say that * the true doctrine * and * the apostolic doctrine ' are the same, is nothing but what is admitted. Use whichever term is pre- ferred, the argument remains the same.
And this kind of mark or test is quite preferable to that of an alleged descent or succession; inas- much as a mark of the true church ought to be some- thing generally discernible. Now it is easy for any one to possess himself of a copy of God's word, and to compare the doctrines of his church with the doc- trines of the apostles : but it is not at all easy, nor even possible, for one man out of a thousand to sa- tisfy himself that Gregory XV I, now said to be living at Rome, is verily and truly the lineal successor, by
AFOSTOLICITY. 1^
a regular series of ordinations, of Linas, the first bishop of that see. - True, he may receive this fact, if he chooses, on the assurances of others ; but what shall be said, then, of 'a mark' of the trae church which is not discernible, bat is obliged to be taken upon trust?
This * external mark ' hypothesis, then, will not bear the least examination. There is no external mark. Gregory the XVI. possesses no insignia or credentials bearing the visible impress of heaven : he has no other proof to offer, of his succession from Linus, than the mere assertions of himself and a num- ber of other interested persons. For many years toge- ther, in a former age (a.d. 1378 — 1417) there were two or three popes at the same time ; each claiming to be the successor of the apostles ; and while all this was going on, there were divers patriarchs in the east, at Constantinople, Antioch, &c., all of whom had far clearer proofs of their descent from the apostles, than any of the rival popes. How, then, could it have been possible, in the midst of all this confusion, to discern the Apostolic Church by the mere fact of continued succession ? Nothing can be clearer than the absurdity of such an attempt.
Thus, then, have we been forced to deny the claims of Rome, to be admitted to be " the One, Holy, Ca- tholic and Apostolic Church.'^ To no one of these four characteristics can she establish any valid title. Tet there is such a church, though Rome be unable to substantiate her claim. There is such a church, but it is not local ; nor governed by any human con- clave ; nor united by any visible or political system. It is " the church of the first'hom, which are written in heaven ; " it is the church that is *' redeemed unto God,
154 ESSAYS ON ROBfANISM.
out of every kindred, and tonfftie, and people, and nation**' It is the cbarch which Christ will, at the consumma- tion of all things, present unto His Father, in the glory of his own righteoasness, '* not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing." To this charch it behoves every man to see that he belongs ; but nothing can be more absurd or unreasonable, than to attempt to identify this chosen, redeemed, and sanctified com- munity, with those disturbing, demoralizing, and de- filing conspiracies of priests and Jesuits, which at present carry on a remorseless warfare against the peace and happiness of mankind, under the banner of the Roman see.
VIII.
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE.
We are now to enter upon a question, upon wbicb, as apon a hinge, the present controversy will be found greatly to tarn. We have seen that up to this poi nt the cbarch of Rome has failed to make good its ground. Its Rule Of Faith, 'the Church,' resolves itself either into a Yague nonentity, entirely unavailable ; or else is identical with the infallibility of every individual priest. Its claim to * Catholicity,' or the possession of the whole or universal church, seems very much to resemble the assumption of the Chinese, that theirs is the * Celestial Empire ; ' the only proof of which is, that they choose to call it so. While, in ar- rogating to itself the qualities of Unity, Apostoljcity, and Holiness, we discern nothing more than a great display of pride, self-conceit, and contempt of others ; since, assuredly, other churches can exhibit greater harmony ; a more implicit submission to the apostolic decisions ; and fruits of holiness, quite as pure and as abundant, as are to be found in the church of Rome. But we are now to enquire what can be said
156 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
in proof of the allegation, that Christ gave to Peter, and to all his successors in the see of Rome, a seat of authority, a delegation of power, for the regulation and government of the Christian church, in all suc- ceeding ages. For it is sufficiently clear, that if this point can be satisfactorily made out, it will be diffi- cult for any body of Christians throwing off this yoke, and refusing submission to the supremacy of Peter's successors, to clear itself from the guilt of schism. If the right of the bishop of Rome to a par- amount authority over the whole body of Christians throughout the world can be established, then their state, who cast off a yoke imposed by Christ himself, must assuredly be a doubtful, if not a perilous one. But if, on the other hand, no such power was dele- gated to Peter, still less to his successors, by the Redeemer himself, — then is the Papal authority, as now attempted to be exercised, a gross and unscrip- tural usurpation, and one marking him who assumes it, with a leading characteristic of Antichrist.
We shall probably gain the most satisfactory and complete view of the whole question, if we follow out the train of reasoning indicated in Dr. Wiseman's eighth lecture. It is not easy to find a more condensed or a more plausible statement, of the argument in favour of the Papal authority, than is furnished in that lecture. But it may tend to simplify the pre- sent discussion, if we take up the points in the fol- lowing order: enquiring, 1. Was Peter elevated by his Lord to a supreme authority over his brethren the apostles, and by consequence, over the whole church? 2. Was there any intimation given that such supremacy was to be continued after his death, in any line of succession ? and, 3. What are the
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 157
claims of the bishops of Rome to be considered St. Peter's rightful successors ?
We will commence, then, with the first point : — Was St. Peter elevated by Christ to a supreme au* thority o?er his brethren and the church in general ? Now the argument in the affirmative from scripture is thus set forth by Dr. Wiseman : —
* It is singular, that the moment Simon was intro- duced to our blessed Redeemer, he received a pro- mise that a similar distinction of name should be given to him, *' Thou art Simon, the son of Jonas, thou shalt be called Cephas, which is interpreted Peter/^
* It was oi\ occasion of his confessing the divine mission of the Son of God, that the promise was ful- filled. At the commencement of our Saviour's reply, he still calls him by his former appellation. '* Bles- sed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood have not revealed it to thee, but my Father, who is in heaven." He then proceeds to the inau- guration of his new name. ^* And I say to thee that thou art Peter." According to the analogy of the instances above given, we must expect some allusion in the name, to the reward and distinction with which it was accompanied. And such is really the case. The name Peter signifies a rock; for in the language spoken upon this occasion by our Saviour, not the slightest difibrence exists, even at this day, between the name whereby this apostle, or any one bearing his name, is known, and the most ordinary word which indicates a rock or stone. Thus the plirase of our Redeemer would sound as follows, to the ears of his audience : ** And I say to thee that thou art a rock." Now see how the remaining part of the sentence would run in connexion vnth the
I
158 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
preamble : *' and upon this rock I will bnild my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Such is the first prerogative bestowed upon Peter ; he is declared to be the rock whereon the impregnable church is to be founded.
* 2. Our Saviour goes on to say, ** And I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; and what- soever thou shalt bind upon earth shall be bound also in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.'' The second prerogative is the holding of the keys, and the power of making decrees, which shall be neces- sarily ratified in heaven^
< 3. To the two ample powers given here, we must add a third distinguished commission, conferred upon him after the resurrection, when Jesus three times asked him for a pledge of a love superior to that of the other apostles, and three times gave him a charge to feed his entire flock, — his lambs and his sheep.
* On the strength of these passages, principally, the Catholic church has ever maintained, that St. Peter received a spiritual pre-eminence and supre- macy. And, indeed, if in these various commissions a power and jurisdiction was given to Peter, which was proper to him alone, and superior to that con- ferred upon all the other apostles, it will be readily acknowledged, that such supremacy as we believe was really bestowed upon him by God.' *
Here, then, we have the last and most carefully- revised view of the whole argument from scripture in favour of the Papal supremacy. Now the first remark we shall make upon it, is, how impracticable
1 Wiseman, Lecture VIII. p. 266—26;.
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 159
and vain is that Romish standard of faith, called the Creed of Pope Pius the Foarth, to which every priest of the Romish church is sworn, bat which no priest ever yet did, or ever will, faithfully believe and maintain !
Dr. Wiseman has adduced several passages of scripture, and has affixed certain definite meanings to them, as the sense in which they are taken by the church of Rome. He admits, indeed, that some ob- jectors and opponents have read these passages in a different way, but throughout his whole statement we are left to suppose that it is only the Protestants and the ' opponents' that have thus perverted these passages, while to the Romish church they have ever conveyed the meaning he has himself ascribed to them. He tells us, —
* I allude to the attempt made many years ago, and lately renewed, to prove that the rock upon which Christ promises that he will build the church, was not Peter, but Himself.' * This interpretation, you will perceive, my brethren, can boast more of its ingenuity than of its plausibility; it seems rather calculated to betray the shifts to which our opponents feel themselves obliged to resort,' &c. &c.
Now Dr. Wiseman has promised, in the Creed of Pius IV. * never to take and interpret holy scripture otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.*
Yet he here, in this insidious manner, and charg- ing the interpretation he chooses to deny, wholly upon ' the opponents,' actually attacks the decision of a considerable proportion of the most eminent fathers : For instance, — Jerome says * The Catholic church is founded with
IGO ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
a firm root upon the rock Christ.' — (Ad Princ, Virg* torn. III. p. 173.)
Cyprian says, 'Christ himself is the rocA.* (Epis. 63.)
Chrysostom :~'^ He did not say, upon Peter, — for he did not foand his church upon a man, but upon faith. What therefore means, Upon this rock? — Upon the confession contained in his words.' — (Ser- mon on Pentecost, vol. vi. p. 233.^
Origen : — < But if you think that the whole church is built by God upon Peter only, what will you say of John, and of each of the apostles ? Shall we dare to say that the gates of hell were not to prevail against Peter in particular, and that they should prevail against the rest of the apostles.' — (Comm, on Matt, xvi.)
Cyril of Alexandria : — * When Christ said this, he called, I think, the immoveable and firm faith of the di86iple, the rock, upon which the church of Christ was founded without the possibility of falling.' — (Dial. 4. on Holy Trin. vol. 5. p. 509.)
Ambrose: — * Faith, therefore, is the foundation of the church, for it was not said of the flesh of Peter, but of his faith, that the gates of hell should not prevail against it' — (On the Incamat. ch. v. p. 711.)
Hilary: — 'The building of the church, therefore, is upon this rock of his confession. This faith is the foundation of the church.'— (^ On the Trin. book 6.)
Augustine: — 'Jesus said not. Thou art the rock, but. Thou art Peter. The^rock was Christ, whom Peter confessed.' — (Aug. Ret. I. 21.)
Where, then, is the unanimous consent of the fathers ; and where is Dr. Wiseman's candour and fair deal- ing, in representing as ' the shifts of the opponents,' the deliberate judgment of all these eminent fathers ?
THE SUPBEMACY OF THE POPE. 161
Bat it may be replied that these fathers do not themselves agree, Dor do they generally adopt the interpretation which Dr. Wiseman was combating, Tiz. that the roek spoken of was Christ,
We readily admit this, but they all reject that view which the doctor himself pats forward as the interpretation of '' the charch/' They all oppose and deny the assumption upon which Dr. W. rests his main argument for the papal supremacy, viz. that Peter was the rock upon which the church was to be bailt. And here we may observe the difference be- tween the practical use of the respective rules of faith adopted by the church of Rome and by Protestants. We are told by the Romanists that the plain written word of God, with the ase of common sense, and with prayer for divine assistance, is no guide what- ever ; and that in this way it is impossible that men should ever arrive at a right understanding of God's word and will. And we are assured that our only course is to submit to the judgment of * the church,' that is, the Romish church, in order to learn from her what is really contained in holy scripture. Now the church, to us, practically, means the priests of that charch, for we can never read the hundreds of folio volumes of the fathers and the councils ; and a com- mentary on holy scripture the church of Rome has not provided. Suppose, then, that we propose to consult ' the charch ' on the meaning of holy scrip- tare, — we go to Dr. Wiseman, perhaps one of the most learned and acute priests of that church now living,— and what dioes he do? Notwithstanding his vow, ' never to take and interpret holy scripture otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the Fathers/ he quietly gives us a sense directly op-
M
162 ESSAYS OK romakism:
posed to the interpretations of Hilary, Chrysostom, Origen, Cyril, Ambrose, Cyprian, Angnstine, and Jerome ; and never tells os a word of tbeir contrary opinion, but describes it as ' a device ' and snbterfage of ' the opponents,' i.e. the Protestants ! Now we would ask any reasonable man, is it not far better to maintain the right of reading the Bible for ourselves, with prayer to God for guidance, than to put oar* selves, blindfold, in the hands of men who thos assume to declare to us ' the judgment of the church,' and who give us that judgment after such a fashion as this!
But to resume ; — We cannot now go through all the mass of papal authorities on this point, bat the truth is, that there is no one topic on which the fa- thers, the councils, and even the popes themselves, are more divided than on the interpretation of this text. A very general view has been, that the rock on which Christ promised to build his church, was the faith or confession made by Peter. Launoy and Du Pin reckon forty-four fathers and popish authors who maintain this opinion, among whom are Augus- tine, Chrysostom, Cyril, Gregory, Ambrose, and Hi- lary; and the same interpretation was decreed in the general councils of Nicea, Constantinople, Con- stance, and Basil. Another sense given to the words, is that which Dr. Wiseman describes as one of the * shifts to which our opponents are obliged to resort.' How can Dr. Wiseman, without shame, use this lan- guage, knowing, as he does, that this very interpre- tation is defended bj Cyprian, Jerome, Origen, £u- sebius, Theodoret, Anselm, Theophylact, and many others ; and that in divers general councils the same view was asserted without any disclamation ?
But enough of the Fathers. We shall not tax the
THE SUPBBMACT OF THE POPE. 163
patience of our readers by going through the other points, or we might shew, in like manner, that the majority of the ancient fathers and commentators understand the donation of the keys to have been made to the college of apostles, and to the church in general, not to •the individual Peter ; and that the third passage. Feed my sheep^ is also a general com- mission, and not any special authority given to one person. Let us, however, go to the record itself, and, leaving fathers and councils, look '* to the word and to the testimony," for light on this, as on all other sobjects.
Let us compare the language applied to Peter with that applied to the other apostles, and we shall thus be enabled to judge whether any thing like supremacy was conveyed or implied in the former class of pas- sages. The two series may be thus arranged : —
*' / say unto thee that '' Built upon the foun' thou art Peter^ and upon dation of the apostles and this rock I will build my prophets, Jesus Christ him- church.** Matt. xvi. 18. self being the chief corner-
stone:' Eph. ii. 20.
" And the wall of the city had twelve founda- tions; and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb:* Rev. xxi. 14. ** And I will give to thee ** Verily I say unto you, the keys of the kingdom of whatsoever ye shall bind on heaven ; and whatsoever earth shall be bound in thou shah bind on earth heaven ; and whatsoever ye shall he hound in heaven^ shall loose on earth shall
MS
164 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
and whatsoever thou shall he loosed in heaven.** Matt.
loose on earth shall be xviii. 18. loosed in heaven,** Matt, xvi. 19.
** He saith unto him, — " Tahe heed unto your^
Simon, son of Jonas, Invest selves, and to all the floeh,
thou me ? He saith unto over which the Holy Ghost
him. Yea, Lord, thou hnow^ hath made you overseers, to
est tliat I love thee. He feed the church of God,
saith unto him, Feed my which he hath purchased
sheep," with his own blood." Acts
XX. 28*.
Now here it is as evident as possible, that jast the very same powers, privileges, and functions, which are ascribed to, or conferred on, Peter, in some pas* sages, are equally applied to his brethren in others. The evidence, therefore, of any supremacy, or even of any primacy or superiority, utterly fails.
But we do not wish to overlook the reasoning of Dr. Wiseman on this part of the argument. He says, * From the instances I have given, it is evident I may draw this canon or rule of interpretation in scripture ; that when a call, a prerogative, a com- mission, is bestowed upon one person singly, though the very same may have been bestowed upon others collectively, and himself together with them, he must thereby be supposed to have received a distinct and superior degree of it from the rest. Thus, therefore, it must be with Peter.' And he adduces two or three passages in support of this view.
He says, * Our blessed Saviour constantly incul- cated to all his disciples, and indeed to all his bearers, the necessity of following him. Only ** he
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 165
vrM foUawethf walketh not in darkness;'' all mast '< take ap tbeir eross and follow him ; " all his sheep mast know his voice and follow the shepherd. When, therefore, he addressed individaally to Peter and Andrew, to Matthew and the sons of Zebedee, the ▼ery same invitation, *' Follow me," did it ever occar to yovk to reason, that, because the very same invita- tion was repeated, on other occasions, to all the Jews in common with themselves, therefore, they were not meant to follow Jesns in a distinct and more peculiar manner? Again, our blessed Redeemer is repeat- edly isaid to have tenderly loved all his apostles ; he called them not servants but friends — yea, no one could have greater love for another than he mani- fested to them by laying down his life for them. When, therefore, John is by himself simply called the beloved disciple, as all the other disciples are also said to have been beloved, did you ever think of arr guing, that as no more is predicated of him singly in one instance than is of all the twelve in others, therefore, the love of Jesus for John, was nothing distinctive and pre-eminent? Once more. To all the apostles was given a commission to teach all nations, to preach the gospel to every creature, be- ginning with Jerusalem and Samaria, unto the utter- most bounds of the earth. When, therefore, the Spirit of God told them to separate Saul and Bar- nabas for the ministry of the Gentiles ; or when Paul individually calls himself their apostle, did yon ever think of concluding that, as this individual commis- sion was included and comprehended in the general one given to all ; therefore Paul was never invested with any personal mission, received no more here than the other apostles, and only groundlesslj arro-
166 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
gated to himself the apostleship of the Gentiles as his peculiar oflSce ? If in these instances you would not allow such conclusions, how can they be ad^ mitted in the case of Peter? Why are his special powers alone to be invalidated, by those which he re- ceived in common with the rest? ' '
These instances, however, do not saflSce to esta- blish the doctor's rule. In the first case, our Lord calls upon all his disciples, as a general mle, to follow his steps. He then, at a particular time, calls two or three individuals to follow him, as personal attendants and apostles. Here the different sense in which the words were used, is obvious. But when our Lord tells one of his disciples, on one occasion, " Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven ; " and then, on another occasion, repeats the same promise to the other disciples, the whole twelve being, it is admitted, at that time on an equal foot- ing ; it is by no means obvious that the words are used in a different sense in the first case, to what they were in the second. On the contrary, to take them in a higher sense, as applied to Peter, than when applied to the rest, is a mere assumption, rest- ing upon nothing. 2. St. John is called the be- loved disciple. Here is a plain and unequivocal proof that in a particular personal affection, this apostle was very dear to our Lord, and the proof of it is seen in his dying bequest. Now if any such explicit avowal of supremacy, bestowed on Peter, can be ad- duced, we shall be silent at once. But no such has ever been shewn. 3. A general charge was given to all the apostles, to preach the gospel ; but separate
1 Witeman, Lect. yiii. p. 376.
THE SUFREHACT OF THE POPE. 167
Ifld particalar charges were also laid upon certain of * tie apostles, at Tarioas times, to preach in particular fiaces appointed to them. All this is very intelli- fibie, hut how does it prove that the same words, addressed to the whole of the apostles, and to one . apostle, and clearly of general, not local or temporary application, mast necessarily have more force and value in one case, than in the other ?
Bat *■ there is another passage,^ Dr. Wiseman pro- ceeds, *■ which I have not included in those before lehearsed; becaose there is no express collation of aothority* conveyed in it ; although it clearly draws a distinction between the prerogatives of Peter and those of the other apostles, and shows how he was to be the object of a special care and protection. '^ And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath de- ared to have youy that he may sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for thee^ that thy faith may not fail ; aod /Aoti, being once converted, confirm thy bre- tiiren.'^ In this passage, Christ seems to draw a narked distinction between the designs of Satan against all the apostles, and his interest in regard of Peter. The prayer of our Saviour is ofifered for him specifically, that KU faith may not fail, and that, when he shall have risen from his fault, he« may be the strengthener of that virtue among his fellow- apostles* In him, then, there was to be a larger laeasure of this virtue ; and wherefore, if he was not to be in any respect superior to the other members of that body ? Nay, does not the very commission to strengthen their faith, imply his being placed in a more elevated and commanding situation ? * ^
1 WiMmxm, Lect. viii. p. 277.
168 ESSAYS ON ROttANISH:
Now, instead of confirming, as Dr. W. imagihes, his former arguments, this passage appears to ns to clear away whatever doubt might renuiin on the sob- ject. It reveals to us the exact position of Peter, and the reason why he, his actions, and his sayings, occupy so prominent a place in the New Testament history. This reason consists in his peculiar cha<^ racter. Instead of being, himself, that rock, that stable, solid character upon whom, as his worship- pers would tell us, the whole fabrio of the church might with safety be reposed, -^he was at once the most forward, the most rash, and the most unstable of the apostles. His peculiarity was a hasty and forward zeal. He is ever foremost, ever the first to speak. He is ready to cast himself into the sea, ready to die for Christ's sake. But he is also the most unstable. When he has cast himself into the sea, in a fervour of confidence, immediately his faith fails, and he begins to sink. When he has vowed to ' go to prison and death for Christ's sake,* in a few hours he is afraid of a servant girl. Even when he has drawn his sword in defence of his Master, in another moment he flies from the field. Still, how- ever, this forwardness naturally brings him always into the fore-ground, and makes him a leading cha- racter in the whole history.
In looking, then, both at the passage we have just quoted, '' When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren,** and at our Lord's thrice-repeated question, ." Lovest thou me ? *' we must remember the apostle's peculiar situation — we must bear in mind that Peter had just before, in the most distinct and emphatic manner, cut off and excommunicated himself. He had publicly and repeatedly denied that he belonged
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 169
to Christ, or had any part or lot in him. Without some such pahlic restoration as this, then, how na- tarai would it have been for the other apostles, or at least for the disciples at large, to haye refused the fallen apostle his place and rank among them. Might not we ourseWes, and the whole Christian church, JiaYe stood in doubt of Peter at this moment, and hesitated in what light to view him, or whether any other than the lowest and meanest place in the ohurch could ever be his ? Granting bis recovery to a state of grace, — still, how naturally might it have been said, that if the door of mercy were still open, and as a restored backslider, room might still be found for him, — ^yet, as to his former rank and stand- ing, the sentence must be, " Am bishopric let another take,** AIL this, howcTcr, the Lord clears away. His weak and frail servant had thrice denied all know- ledge of him ; he therefore thrice calls upon him for a declaration of his renewed attachment ; and tho- roughly to reinstate him in his office, he thrice gives him the pastoral charge, '* Feed my slieep" And yet now, so apt are men, and so adroit is Satan, in twist- ing scripture out of its most obvious meaning, — this mercy shewn to Peter, in restoring the poor back- slider, is exaggerated into some special reward or pri- vilege bestowed upon him ; and because he had trebly fallen, and received a thrice-repeated pardon, it is gravely argued that this, the most unstable of the apostles, is deliberately placed over the rest, as their head and their lord, and declared to be the rock, the foundation, on which the whole church should be erected I
And very similar is the misconstruction of the other passage. No one doubts that Peter's fall, his
170 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
repentance, his bitter grief, and his g^racioas reco- very, woald (p?e him an insight into the depths of the sinfalness of his own heart, into the snares and devices of Satan, and into the ocean of the love of Christ, which would enable him to *' strengthen his brethren'' ander temptation, and to comfort and op- raise those that had fallen, in a peculiar manner. But there is nothing in all this to lead us to suppose that Christ meant by this exhortation to give him any rule or authority over his brethren. The reoo* vered prodigal in the parable is specially rejoiced over ; but he is not rewarded for his recreancy, by being put in authority over his brother. On the con- trary, while the father justifies his joy at his return, he says to the son who had not fallen, *^ Lo, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.*' And so Peter might be an object of great interest to Christ, and might be enabled, by his sinning and suffering experience, to administer to the cases of others,^ without being at all entitled, by his falls and his re- coveries, to assume any supremacy over those who had never fallen after his example, or been renewed by his recovery.
But having now examined all the direct evidence from scripture, such as it is, we must proceed, in the next place, to the indirect or collateral evidence which may be found in the Acts of the Apostles, and in their epistolary writings.
And here the Romanist immediately suggests, that we find, immediately after the ascension of our Lord, the apostle Peter assuming the place of the leader and director of the whole college of Apostles : (Acts i. 15.) That the same apostle, immediately after- wards, is especially blessed by the conversion of three
THE 8UFBEMACT OF THE POPE. 171
thousand soals by a single sermon, on the day of Pentecost ! (Acts ii. 44.) And when the Samaritans reoelTe the gospel, Peter is the indiYidaal commis- sioned to form and constitute the church in that city: (Acts yiii. 14 — 17.) So is the word first preached to the Gentiles hy this same apostle : (Acts x. 34—43.) From these circumstances he draws a considerahle further support to his claim on behalf of the suc- cessors of St. Peter. Now it may be admitted, that much may be gained, as to the real meaning of a doubtful or disputed passage, by obserring how the apostles themselves, and their immediate disciples, received and understood the words in question. With this view, therefore, it is most important to watch and observe, in the closest manner, all the words and actions of the apostles and other rulers of the church in the first ages, in order to gather from those words and actions an answer to this one ques- tion,— Whether they knew anything of this alleged supreme authority, lodged by Christ in the person of one of their body, the apostle Peter? Now on this point let us observe—
1. That it is generally agreed that St Mark, the Mend and follower of St. Peter, wrote his gospel at Rome, about thirty years after our Lord's ascension. The church then had already existed one whole ge- neration without a visible head, except, indeed, St. Peter had been that head. Now, no one can doubt that the question of his supremacy, if any one at that time ever thought of asserting such a claim on his behalf, must have been asserted, and either esta- blished or negatived, long before the lapse of an en- tire generation. Yet St. Mark, St. Peter's own Mend, writes his gospel at the end of these thirty
172 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
years, and never once allades to any snch appoint- ment or ordinance of Christ ! Even those passages of our Lord's conversations, npon which the Ro- manists now rest their claim, are wholly omitted in St. Mark's gospel, as matters of minor conseqaence; as points not demanding any particular mention. What can he more inevitahle than the conolosioo, that St. Mark, the personal follower of St Peter, never thought of asserting any such claim on bis be- half? Had he regarded his friend and spiritual father ^ in this light, had he looked upon him as the apostle specially appointed by Christ to rule his church after his departure, is it conceivable that he could ever have omitted, in writing his gospel, all kind of allusion to so important a fact? But he is wholly silent ! What more decisive evidence of a negative character, could we possibly have, to shew that even at a distance of thirty years from our Lord's ascension, this supposed supremacy, vested in St Peter, was entirely unknown ?
2. The same silence is observable, too, in St. Peter's own epistles. Not one syllable is there of supremacy throughout the whole. His assertion of authority is far less explicit than that of either St Paul, St. John, or St James. It is in fact, a beautiful specimen of humility, altogether free from the least assumption. " The elders which are among you,** he says, " / exhort^ who am also an elder, and a witfiess of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaher of the glory that shall be revealed: feed thefloch of God,** &c. " And when the chief shep^ herd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away*' (1 Peter v. 1, 2, 4.) Here th^ apostle exhorts, not commands ; and he exhorts not as
1 1 PtUr V 13.
THE SUPREMACY OF THE FOFE. 173
a superior J bat as one of themselves, ** I who am also an elder.'' He also goes on to addace other characters, which he fills in common with the other apostles and disciples, — ** and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a pariaher of the glory : " in all which there is the very opposite to any claim of a peculiar rank, or privilege, or authority. And he concludes by ad- verting to " the chief shepherd," the one only chief shepherd, not himself, but Christ Jesus. Now these epistles were written about thirty-six years after our Lord's ascension. All this time, — the third part of a eentury, — then, must St. Peter, according to the supposition of the Romanist, have been filling the office of pope, and ruling the whole Christian church, and yet, when he writes two epistles to the churches, there is not the least trace to be discerned in either, of his supposed papal supremacy ! Here is a second strong negative proof, in the absence of direct evi- dence where we might have most rationally expected it. Which of the popes of Rome, for the last thou- sand years, have addressed a document of this kind to the Christian churches, without so much as onee alluding to their own authority ?
8. Another instance of the same entire silence, is visible in the writings of St. Paul. We cannot ima- gine—indeed it is never even supposed by any of St. Peter^s advocates, that St Paul exhibited any signs of contumacy or rebellion towards him. We might be quite sure that the entire submission to which his mind and spirit Whs brought, by the vision which appeared unto him near Damascus, would have shewn itself in the most unqualified veneration of any representative or successor of Christ,— of any dele- gated head of his church.
I7i ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
Yet we may search throagboat his Yarioas epistles, and never meet with the least allasion to either the pope or papal authority ! He writes to the Romans themseWes,— the date of this epistle, according to the best authorities, being about A. D. 58. At this time, according to all the historians and advocates of the Romish chnrch, St. Peter had been several years bishop of that city. Yet his *' beloved brother Pan l,*** writing to that church, opens his epistle without the least allusion to the apostle who is said to have been at its head, and closes it in the same silence. Nay, more, — he devotes a considerable space at its close, to the most affectionate remembrance of a great number of persons (nearly thirty), but entirely over- looks his brother apostle ! Surely this circumstance must be admitted to be altogether opposed to the supposition that St. Peter was at that time at Rome ; nor can we believe that one apostle would have ad- dressed a pastoral letter to a church which had, at that very time, another apostle presiding over it. But be that as it may, is not the supposition a most inconceivable one, that St. Paul, writing to the Ro- mans, and sending his affectionate greetings to a great number of persons, could have altogether omitted St. Peter, had the latter really been, at that the time, bishop of that church ?
But further : — St. Paul, a few years after, was him- self a resident in the Roman capital: and, while there, a prisoner, but still remembering *' the care of all the churches,^' he writes, successively, to the Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, to Timothy, and to Philemon. In these epistles, too, the names
» 2 Peter Ui. 15.
THB SUFBSMACT OF THE POPE, 175
of many brethren are introdaced, and many greetings oonveyedy bat still not a word of the sapposed bishop, of Rome, and first pope,- St. Peter ; who, at that time, according to the maintainers of his supremacy, mast have been in the full exercise of the plenitude of his power at Rome. And in these epistles of St. Paul, St. Jjuke sends his greetings to the churches, and so does St. Mark, and also Timothy,^ but St. Peter is wholly silent Nay more, not only does his brother apostle wholly omit all reference to him, but on one memorable occasion he speaks still more plainly: ** At my first answer no man stood with me, hut all men forsook meJ' ^ Now Protestants find in this fact no impeachment of the character of St. Peter, inasmuch as they do not even believe that he was in Rome at the time. But the Romanist is in a different posi^ tion. All his authorities insist upon it, that St. Peter was not only a resident in Rome at that period, but that he was actually the bishop of the church of Rome at that very time! They also insist upon it, that Christ had constituted him the Rock, firm and im- moveable, on which his whole church should be built : and yet we here find him, according to their own view of the matter, the head and leader of the infant church in Rome, basely deserting a brother apostle, and flying from the post of duty in the hour of peril ! ** iVb man stood with me,' says St. Paul, *' hut all forsooh me ; I pray God it may not he laid to their charge,"
This strange fact is inseparable from the Romish statement. All their leading authorities, Jerome,
Binius, Labbeus, Petavius, Spondanus, Bede, Bruys,'
«
I Col. iy. 10, 14. PkUip, i. 1 . 3 S Tim, ir. iff.
176 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
and Baronias, agree in asserting St. Peter to have arrived at Rome in the reign of Claodius, and to have continoed there, as the first pope, till his death nnder Nero. And they all equally agree, that his death and that of St. Panl took place at nearly the same period ; bat while we hear of St. Paal's imprisonment, on two occasions, and on the first for more than two years, nothing is said of any imprisonment of Peter* Had Peter been a fellow-prisoner of his brother apos- tle, it is quite inconceiyable that St. Paul shonld never once have mentioned him. Had he been free, and the bishop of the cbarch at Rome, and fulfilling his oflSce in supporting and comforting St. Paul, it is equally impossible that no allusion to the subject should have been made. And that he should have been there, and at liberty, and yet should have been one of those whom St. Paul describes as ** forsaking " him, — is certainly the greatest disgrace that we can attach to his name, and the most incompatible with the character of the Rock, which the Romanists claim for him.
Our conclusion, then, is simply this, — That the mere tradition, for it is nothing more, — upon which the church of Rome builds the assumption that St. Peter was her first bishop, is utterly at variance with the whole tenor of the apostolic writings ; and that the probability is,— supposing St. Peter ever to have been at Rome at all, — that he came there, perhaps to meet St. Paul, about the time of the latter's return, (all accounts agreeing that St. Paul took a journey between his first and second imprisonment) and that both meeting at Rome, constituted the church at that place, appointing Linus the first bishop, and were soon afterwards seized by the tyrant Nero, and in-
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 177
Tolved in the general massacre of the Christians to which he resorted, immediately after his own flagi- tioas attempt to bam the cityi This is the most tena- ble hypothesis we are able to discover, admitting, as it does, the testimony of tradition so far as not abso- lutely to deny St Peter's visit to Rome, and his mar- tyrdom there ; but refusing to admit it when wholly inconsistent, as we have shewn it to be, with every record we have, of the movements, and thoughts, and impressions of both these apostles.
Bat it may be asked, whether we can adduce no- thing of a more positive nature, in proof of the non- admission of this aathority on the part of the early Christians ?
We shall, therefore, proceed to remark on one or two circumstances of this kind ; as for instance, —
4. There are several passages in the Acts of the Apostles, in which Peter is seen, — as he is, in fact, throughout our Lord's own ministry, — as one of the most forward of the apostles. The passage in Acts i. 15. is just one of these, (^^ Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples,*' &c.) and there are several others. All these passages clearly shew the apostle to have been a zealous and energetic man ; but there is no trace whatever of the least claim to supremacy throughout any of them. And the third passage relied on by the Romanists seems not only to be wholly unsusceptible of such a meaning, but it nega- tives the very claim they would set up : for it runs thus, —
** When the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard timt Samaria had received the word of God, THE 7 SENT unto them PETER arul John." Acts ix. 14.
This 18 surely quite irreconcileable with the idea
N
1
178 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
of Peter's being at this time the first Pope. Only imagine, for an instant, the college of cardinals now meeting, to consider the state of their charches in Canada, and determining ''to send unto them Gre- gory and Paoli/' Would not a Romanist be shocked at the presumption of the college, in thinking them- selves empowered to send the holy father at their discretion? And would they not wonder how any second name could be associated with his, as if on an apparent equality ? Surely this verse is one of the least favourable to their cause that could possibly have been brought forward. But,
5. Observe, that as in the days of our Saviour, Peter, this supposed rock, shewed himself in fact, the most unstable of all the apostles ; and he whom, we are told, the Lord intended to place over his church, received at his hand more frequent and se- vere reproofs than any other, — so, when Christ bad ascended, and upon the Romish hypothesis, the su- premacy with all its attendant infallibility must have been actually held by Peter, we still find him vacillat- ing and unstable, ' dissimulating ' and denying the truth ; and receiving a reprimand at the hands of Paul, who was not even called to the faith until years after Peter had been an apostle. '' When Peter was come unto Antioch^ says St. Paul, *' I withstood him to the face, because he was to he hlamedm For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: hut when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissemhled likewise with him ; inso- much that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation: But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said
THE. SUPREMACY OF THE 70FE. 179
Mto Peter before tkem oily If thou, being a JeWf livest fUr the manner ef Gentiles^ and not do as the Jews, lAjf compelUst thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? *' Sal. ii. 11—14.
Now all this takes place, it is important to remember, ome twenty years after oar Lord's ascension, and at
period when, if Peter's supremacy was ever to be sown and acknowledged, it mast have been fully dmitted and established. Yet we here see the last- ailed of all the apostles, not submitting to his deci- ions, bat boldly and rightfully protesting against his infaithfulness ! Nothing can shew more distinctly ban this, that the popedom of Peter was, at this ime, utterly unknown.
6. Bat not only is there no trace whatever, during 11 these years, of the existence of this authority in be person of Peter ; but we have abundant evidence, hat, as far as any degree of primacy or precedence ras conceded to any one, that precedence was en- oyed by another.
We are not about to set up a rival pope, or to claim ior any other of the apostles that authority which re deny to Peter ; but we shall have no difficulty in Jiewing, that a sort of precedence, whether arising rom age, solidity of judgment, or whatever other »ase, was constantly conceded to one of the apostles, irhich apostle was not Peter. Take the following instances : —
" Peter said. Go, shew these things vnto James, and to the brethren." (Acts xii. 17.)
** And after they had held their peace, James an- mered, saying. Men and brethren, hearken unto me: IIt sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from vmong the Gentiles are turned to God.*' Acts xv. 13, 19
N9
180 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
'' And when we were come to Jenualem^' the day fol- lowing ^ Paul went in with us unto Jambs, and all the elders were present, (Acts xxi. 17, 18.)
** And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right handof fel- lowship : that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. (Gal. ii. 9.)
'< For before that certain came from J AMES, he did eat with the Gentiles." (Gal. ii. 12.)
Here we have, again and again, a sort of honour- able precedency given to James, which exceeds any of the like sort ascribed to Peter. We repeat that we claim no popedom for James ; bat that it seems perfectly clear, that James cod Id never have held this sort of place or rank among the apostles, had Peter been the divinely-appointed ruler and governor of the whole church.
The result of the whole inquiry, then, is as fol- lows:— First, we ascertain that the claim advanced by the church of Rome on behalf of St. Peter, rests merely, as far as direct scripture evidence is con- cerned, upon three short passages from the gospels ; which passages are very brief and general, and, as they ran quite parallel with other passages of the New Testament which speak of similar rights and privileges being granted to all the disciples, cannot be admitted to be conclusive on the point. Other and collateral evidence, therefore, must be called in. If Peter ever assumed this office, said by the church of Rome to have been conferred on him by Christ, we must sarely find some traces of it, in the subse- quent writings of the apostles, and in the book which records their leading words and actions. Now we
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 181
have a book expressly devoted to their acts, and we have the writings of St. Paul, St. John, St. Jade, and St. James, as well as of St. Peter hieiself. And these writings were prodaced by their respective authors at diflerent periods, from aboat twenty years after our Lord's ascension to about the sixtieth year. Now, would all these leaders and governors in the church so contrive their writings, as of set purpose to exclude all mention of the apostle Peter's supre* macy ? Or would Peter himself, if he knew such a trust to be reposed in him, write two letters to the eharches immediately before his martyrdom, and never make the least allusion to his pontifical dignity or authority, or provide or suggest any course to be taken immediately after his removal ? Can any one say tbat this is a probable story ? Or rather, would aot any one, struck with this strange circumstance, be ready to exclaim, ' It is impossible ! surely I can find some proof, from the apostles' writings, that they knew and consented to the dominion of St. Peter ? ' To any such, we would say, Search and look, and if you can find one single passage indicative of an established papacy, throughout all the apostolic writings, we will at once admit that you have made ont one very important point in favour of the church of Rome. But you will search in vain. No such passage do the apostolic writings contain : and the absence of it, — as it is altogether incredible, if the papacy were then actually established, that not a word should be found of the fact, in all these writings, — the absence of it, we repeat, does seem to us to be altogether decisive against the claim.
Having now reviewed, both the direct and the col- lateral evidence from holy writ, in support of the
182 ESSAYS ON ROBfANISM:
alleged primacy of St. Peter, we might fairly claim an immediate verdict ; for it is impossible that any merely human testimony or opinion (and such is all that remains), can su£Sce to establish so momentous a doctrine as that of the supreme authority of one bishop over the whole catholic church. But we shall not object to go on with the consideration of the case ; descending, now, from the conclusiye authority of inspired apostles and evangelists, to the more doubtful testimony of fallible human historians. Let us ask, then, what historical evidence the Romanists rely on, for the establishment of the two facts, — that St. Peter was the first bishop of Rome, — and that he bequeathed his full supremacy, whatever it might be, to his successors in that chair ?
Romish controversialists are very fond of treating these as points universally conceded. But so far from such being the case, long and learned argu- ments have been constructed to shew, that the greater probability is, that St. Peter never was at Rome at all! But we do not wish to urge a point which cannot now be positively decided, and which matters little to the main question. We are willing to admit, from the general tenor of those fragments of the history of the early Christian church which remain to us, —that it was most generally believed, in the second and third centuries, that St. Peter, as well as St. Paul, had visited Rome towards the end of his life, and had been martyred there. But having conceded that point, we have next to ask. What proof exists, from any authentic ecclesiastical record, that the apostle was ever bishop of Rome, or that he delegated any of his supposed plenary authority to those who might be bishops of that see after his decease?
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 183
It is replied, that Jerome distiDctly states, that " St. Peter, having preached to the Jews at Pontas, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, proceeded to Rome in the second year of Claadias, and held the episcopal chair twenty-five years."
Now Jerome wrote about the year a.d. 400, or more than three hundred years after St. Peter's death. Of coarse his evidence is worth very little, except so far as we are able to discern that his state- ments rest upon earlier and authentic records. Should an historian of the year a. d. 3500, for instance, find it asserted, in some writer of the year 1837, that Luther came to London and resided there ten years, and should he be quite unable to find the least men- tion of this fact in any of the records made in Lu- ther's own life-time, or for 300 years after, he would certainly set the whole story down as a fiction. And Jerome's story runs clearly counter, in this case, to various facts indubitably laid down both in the Acts and in the Epistles.
'' St. Peter,'* says Jerome, '' came to Rome and assumed the episcopal office, in the second year of Ciaudius." Now in disproof of this, observe
That Herod's death (Acts xii.) immediately before which St* Peter's imprisonment nt Jerusalem had taken place, was in the fourth year of Claudius :
That in the ninth of Claudius, all Jews were com- manded to depart from Rome :
That St. Paul went up to Jerusalem and found Peter there (Acts xv. 7), in the twelfth year of Claudius :
That in the next reign, that of Nero, St. Paul ar- rived in Rome, and found the Jews of that city quite uninformed as to the faith of Christ (Acts xxviii. 22),
184 ESSATS OK romakish:
which, had St. Peter, the apostle of the circamoision, been resident there for several years, certainly coald not have been the case. Jerome's story, therefore, dating above three hundred years after, can possess no value whatever, in the face of these authentic con- tradictions.
But we have next offered us, the evidence of Pa- pias, or rather what is called the evidence of Papias : For there is no work of his extant. We have nothing from him except a few scraps, scattered up and down in Ensebius, &c. at second hand. But why not take up Eusebius himself, and Irenseus, the best writers of that period, and honestly consult them, whatever their evidence may be ?
This the Romanists are not very ready to do, — and for the obvious reason, that there is not a tittle in either that will serve their purpose. But if we are to inquire what these fathers inform us as to St. Petei^s episcopacy at Rome, we must first consider a pre- vious objection ; — that no apostle ever assumed the limited and lower office of a diocesan bishop.
The mission of the apostles was, *^ Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.*' And, in obedience to this injunction, the apostles, and especially St Peter and St. Paul, travelled ex- tensively, and planted the gospel wherever they went, appointtng bishops^ but not settling themselves down permanently, in this or that place, as the over- seers of a single city or district. ' A bishop's autho- rity,' says Chrysostom, and Giannon, ' is limited to a city or nation ; but an apostle^s commission extends to the whole world.' ^ And so confesses Du Pin — ' The apostles perambulated the principal parts of
1 CArywMtom, 11. 8. Gtomon. i. 2.
THE SUPREMACT OF THE POPE. 185
the earth, and were coDfioed to no place or city/ > And Ruffinos, who lived in the foarth centary, is quoted in the Clementine Recognitions, edited by Cotelerius, as sajring distinctly, that ' Linus and Cletas were bishops in Rome before Clement, daring Peter's life ; they performing the duties of bishops, and he fulfilling the office apostolical/ ' This view of the matter, as it appears to us, seems entirely to negatiye the idea of St. Peter's having been the first bishop of Rome. He had much to do in the foundation of the church of Antioch, doubtless ; pos- sibly some connection with that of Rome, and also with that of Alexandria ; but he never was bishop of either place, any more than St. Paul was bishop of Corinth, or of Ephesns, or of Crete. And any one who takes the trouble to turn over the pages of Euse- bins, the earliest ecclesiastical historian now extant, will see how fully this view is borne out by his ac- count of the primitiye church. The Romish hypo- thesis is, that St. Peter was the first bishop of Rome, establishing there the supreme headship of the church, and the seat of infallibility, and bequeathing all his power and influence to his successors. Had this been the case, — and had the see of Rome been §o regarded by the early Christians, could so impor- tant a circumstance have escaped the notice of the first Christian historian, or could Eusebius, writing in the time of Constantine, two hundred and fifty years after, have so treated of the state of the church daring the first three centuries, as to keep the supre^ macy of the Roman see wholly out of view, if it were, in fact, really known and acknowledged in those days ? Surely not
> DuPin, 16. s Cota. i. 492.
186 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
Bat what is the view that Easebias giyes, of the state and standing of the Rbmish charch in the earliest times ?
We will endeayonr to state it. He gives ns, first, in his 2nd book, ch. iy. v. an old tradition or story of the garniloas Papias, of Simon Magas having visited Rome, and of Peter's following him there, to oppose him ; but he gives no date as to this fact. And we must bear always in mind, that Peter's message was, by agreement with St. Panl, (Gal* ii. 9.) especially to the circamcision, and yet that when St. Paal was brought to Rome, in the year A. D. 62, or the eighth of Nero, he found the Jews of that city wholly igno- rant of the gospel of Christ ; a proof indubitable, one would think, that St. Peter had not then been there. A few years before that, St. Paul had addressed his epistle to the Gentiles at Rome, but only to them as to isolated ' saints,' and not, as in Corinth, a ' church.' We must maintain, therefore, that up to the time of St. Paul's imprisonment at Rome, St. Peter was not there, nor was a church established. In fact, Jerome's account is at once negatived by the statement of Eusebius, book 3, chap. i. 'Peter is reported to have preached to the Jews dispersed through Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and Asia, and about the end of his days, tarrying at Rome, was crucified.'
However, Eusebius in another place tells us, (book 2. ch. XXV.) that at last both St. Paul and St. Peter were martyred by Nero, and about the same time. But he adds not one word of either of them having been bishop of that city, or of his having bequeathed his pre-eminence to his successor. But in his 3rd book, c. ii. he tells us that ' Linus was the first bishop of Rome, which he repeats c iv. And, at c. xix. of
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 187
the same book, he says, ' At that time Clement raled the church of Rome, being the third bishop after Paul and Peter. The first was Linns ; the second Anacletus.' In all this, therefore, the general idea presented is,. that St. Paul and St. Peter formed and ooostitated the chnrch at Romcy shortly before their martyrdom, and that Linas was the first bishop,— Linus, named by St. Paul, in his second epistle to Timothy, but not named by St» Peter in either of his epistles.
And precisely hereunto agrees the account given by Irenaeus, who wrote about a century before Euse- bios, and who gives exactly the same view. He speaks of the ' universally known church, founded and constituted at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul,' who, he adds, * delivered to Linus the bishopric to govern the church.'
Now here, surely, we have the best evidence that we can hope to obtain ; for Irenseus was the disciple of Polycarp, who was himself taught by the apostles, and appointed by them bishop of Smyrna. When, therefore, vfre are informed by him, not that Peter was the first bishop of Rome, and that he endowed that chair with supremacy and infallibility to the end of time, but that Peter and Paul founded the church at Rome, and appointed Linus its first bishop, we seem to have arrived at a full knowledge of the real fact
If it is made out, then, as this passage from Ire-> ncus seems to us to make it out, that Linus was in no sense successor to St. Peter; that Peter only ibanded the see, and that not singly, but in conjuno- tion with St. Paul, just as he founded that of An- tiocb, and probably many others ; then, let St. Peter
188 ESSAYS ON BOICAKISM :
possess, in his own person, what powers and prero- gatives he might, still the Papists have established no tueeestum — no transmission of those rights and powers to the bishop of Rome. Jnst as well might they be claimed for the bishop of Antioch, or for St. Mark, Petefs disciple, and his successors at Alex- andria.
But we are reminded of the strong language of Irenaeas touching the see of Rome, and also the par- ticular care taken by £usebius to record its suc- cession.
Now Eusebius does not particularize the bishops of one church solely, but of all the leading churches. In book 3, c. xix. for instance, he gives us the succes- sion in three churches — Rome, Antioch, and Alexan- dria ; in other chapters, of many more. But both he and IreoaBus naturally speak of Rome with the greatest interest and emphasis, that city being the capital and centre of the civilized world, and its church and bishop necessarily enjoying great celebrity and influ- ence from that single circumstance.
The question however is, what is his general lan- guage, with reference to the bishop of Rome, his precedence, or his authority ?
This will best be ascertained by turning over his pages with a view to ascertain when and on what points controversies first arose in the church ; and in what light the authority of the bishop of Rome was then considered ; — whether as the legal arbiter or not. Now the first circumstance of this kind which is recorded in Eusebius, occurs in book 5, c xxi. xxii. xxiii. It there appears that about the end of the second century, a difi'erence had sprung up, as to the right period for the celebration of Easter ; the
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 189
Asiatic ch arches caicalatiog it in one way, the wes- tern another. Here, then, if a central authority, a supreme head, had been then understood to exist In the person of the Roman bishop, we should have seen the whole matter submitted to his decision, and either a bull of the pope, or a decree of the pope and a council, would have decided the whole ques- tion. Instead of which, what does Eusebius tell us ? ' He says, ' a synod for this cause assembled in Pales- tine, of whom Theophilus, bishop of Caesarea, and Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem, were chief. At Rome there was a synod also gathered together for the same cause, whereof Victor their bishop was pre- sident. Again, there was another of the bishops of PoBtus, where Paulinus as the senior did preside ; land another of the bishops of France, which Irenseus did superintend/ Book 5, c. xxi.
Here nothing is more clear, than that Rome and its bishop are only mentioned as on an equality with Jerusalem, or with France. There is not a word of any peculiar value attaching to the decision of Victor of Rome, or of the synod over which he presided.
Bat we must go further. Victor himself, the dif- ference still subsisting, proceeded to censure the Asian churches, and to break off communion with them, on this account. To a modern Romanist, this seems quite natural. The ' decision of a pope, and especially of a pope with the support of a synod, would be held final with a modern Romanist. But nothing of the kind seems to have occurred either to Irenaeus or to Eusebius. On the contrary, Eusebius speaks with approval of several bishops who ' sharply reprehended * Victor for this step, of which reprovers Irenaeus is one. Irenaens, the disciple of Polycarp,
190 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
who was appointed to the see of Smyrna by the apos- tles themselves ; — Irenaeas not only disapproyes of the act and sentence of the bishop of Rome, bat he writes a letter to him, to rebuke him for caasing a schism in the charch. Is it possible, in the view of these facts, to imagine that either Irenseas or Ease- bias believed in the supremacy of the Roman see ? There is nqt the least trace of sach an idea, in the whole account of this transaction.
The next controversy that arises, is that of the re- baptizing of heretics. Here Cyprian, the most cele- brated bishop (afterwards martyr) of Africa, differed from the opinion of the Roman bishop. Each ex- communicated the other, and for many years, Car- thage and Rome were at mutual enmity. But there was no symptom throughout the quarrel, of any claim to infallibility on the part of Rome, or of the least concession of such a claim, on the other.
Again, in book 7, c. xxix. we find a synod held upon the case of Paul of Samosata. But we do not find the bishop of Rome, nor any representative of his, either presiding over that synod, or even present at it. The sentence having been passed, it was com- municated by letter, equally to the bishop of Rome and the bishop of Alexandria. There is nothing here to evince the least belief in the Romish supremacy. In fact, any stranger to the controversy, carefully perusing Eusebius and Irenaeus, would close both of them without ever having had a single idea tending towards papal supremacy presented to his mind.
The Romanists, however, are fond of quoting the description of the see of Rome, given by Irenaeus ?
This is a natural and just description of what must have been the rank and estimation, and circum-
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 191
stantial importance of the see of Rome, quite apart from any claim of supremacy. Look at the standing, at the present moment, of the hishop of our English metropolis. Yet London is not what imperial Rome was, nor are the rights and privileges of the bishop of London so undefined and so open to new and un- limited assumptions, as were those of the hishop of the metropolis of the world. Still, what a degree of importance, and of actual weight, is attached to every movement of the bishop of London ; and could it have been otherwise with him' who was the visible head of the Christian church in the imperial city ?
It only remains, then, to ask, what says the general current of history, as to the precedence, or power of the see of Rome ?
This is best answered by the single fact, that when Constantine summoned the first general Christian council, — the council of Nice, — the bishop of Rome, so far from being considered the natural president, as he must have been, on the supposition that the claims of the papacy were then well known and admitted,-^ was actually not present ; — and so far as we can see, the precedence was given to Hosius, bishop of Cor- doba, out of respect to his great age. Nothing, surely, can be more decisive than this, of the ques- tion whether the supremacy of the see of Rome was then known and acknowledged.
When, however, we descend to later periods of ecclesiastical history, we perceive a change.
As the Papal supremacy had, of course, a begin- ning, and as each succeeding year of the history, both of the church and of the empire, grows darker and more forlorn, after the days of Constantine, we might naturally expect, in tracing the annals of the
192 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM:
following reigns,- to come to the traces of the risiifg Papacy. And so, in fact, we do. The prediction of St« Paul, (2 Thess. ii. 7, 8.) that * when he who now letteth be taken out of the way, then shall that wicked one be revealed/ was exactly falfilled. Constantino removed the seat of empire from Rome to Constanti- nople, and though it was afterwards for a time re- stored, yet soon the imperial power, which had kept the episcopal in subjection, was finally taken from Rome, and the bishop became the first authority in that city. He that had let or hindered the rise of the Papal power, was now taken out of the way, and that power rapidly grew and increased to its present di- mensions. But there is no difiScnIty in tracing its rise, or in understanding its origin.
The conclusion, then, of the whole matter, is this : There is a certain course of evidence and reasoning, by which churchmen are accustomed to establish the divine origin and authority of episcopacy. Now that line of argument which we ourselves use towards dissenters, we readily submit to have applied to our own view, in the case of the Papacy.
Our meaning is this: We look upon Episcopacy to be satisfactorily established, because we find it, 1. To have been instituted by the apostles them- selves ; which appears by the cases of Timbthy and Titus, and by the instructions of St. John to the angels or bishops of the Asiatic churches : and,
2. To have been generally adopted by all the churches which have their origin in the apostolic days, as clearly appears by the writings of Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenseus, Eusebius, and others.
Now we desire that the same test should be applied to the pretensions of the see of Rome, and we are con-
THE SUPREMACY OF THE POPE. 193
tent to abide by the result. Let the Romanist take the Acts of the Apostles, and all the epistles, and shew as, if be can, the least trace of any primacy con- ceded either by the apostles themselves, or by any of their immediate followers, to St. Peter. Then let us proceed onwards,and consult every fragment of church history that is extant, and we shall have to pass over several eenturies before a shadow of Papal su- premacy appears. On these grounds, then, we come to the conclusion, that no authority is to be found for this alleged supremacy, and that the whole as- sumption is like all the other pretensions of Popery ; the offspring of later and more corrupt ages. Our verdict, therefore, is, 1. That scripture shews no su- premacy, or authority, conferred on Peter, more than on the other apostles : 2. That even if a doubt re- mained on this point, on that of a permanence of such authority, vested in some alleged successors of the apostle, it cannot be denied that scripture is wholly silent : 3. That the bishops of Rome have no more claim to be considered the successors of the apostle, than the bishops of Antioch or Alexandria: and, 4. That the voice of all antiquity witnesses, that the supremacy of the Romish see was wholly unknown for the first three or four centuries, and only sprang op on the decline of the imperial power.
IX. THE RULE OF FAITH.
RECAPITULATION OF THE ARGUMENT.
It will be admitted to be evidently expedient, at this stage of our discussion, to pause for a short time, in order to review the course of reasoning through vFhich we have passed, and to recapitulate the leading arguments bearing upon the grand question
of the RULE OF FAITH.
The Protestant rule has been often referred to, though briefly, as consisting of holy scripture alone : but our chief attention has been given to the consideration of that opposed to it by the adherents of Rome, which rule, if simply and honestly stated, is nothing else than the church. We have been occupied in discussing the claims of the bishop and clergy of Rome, both to assume to themselves the title of ' The Catholic Church,' and, under that title, to claim the attribute of Infallibility. And we will now endeavour to review, in a very few words, the line of argument through which we have travelled in the preceding essays.
Our first glance at the subject brought before our view the two opposing principles as to the Rule of
BECAFITULATION OF THE ARGUMENT. 195
Faith ; when it appeared that the favoarite position taken up by the Romish controversialists, was, that their church was ' The holy Catholic Church/ and therefore iofallible ; a position which we at once proceeded to controvert ; and to show that the assump- tion of Catholicity on the part of the church of Rome, — the assertion that the whole church of Christ is comprehended within its communion, — is not only most arrogant and intolerable, but is also altoge- ther at variance with historical facts. We observed, that on more than one occasion, the general or Ca- tholic Church, consisting of all bodies of Christians adhering to the faith of scripture, had been split and divided by the misconduct of the see of Rome : — That in a.d. 862, half the Christian world was forced to withdraw from all connexion with that see, by the novel and inadmissible assumption of absolute power, by its then bishop ; and that seven centuries after, six or eight kingdoms were simultaneously roused, by the corruptions and exactions which Rome had introduced, to cast off at once all subjection to her. Now all these churches, whether eastern or wester^, consisted of baptized persons, ministered to by bi- shops, priests, and deacons, as regularly ordained as any that Rome could offer. Standing, therefore, ex- actly on a footing with the Italian church, in all re- spects, as these churches did, it was clearly a groundless and intolerable assumption on the part of the bishops of Rome, to assert that all Christian communities not submitting themselves to their au- thority, were thereby excluded from the pale of the Catholic or Universal Church. The Romanist, then, being driven to bis second
line of defence, we had next to consider in what way
o a
1
19G BSSATS ON romakism:
he asserted the title of his charch to exalt herself to this position of sapremacy, and to assume that all who were not of her communion were withoat the pale of the Christian oharch. This claim appeared to be rested upon two facts: 1. The character of the Romish charch, as the One, Holy^ Catholic, and Apes' folic Church; and, 2. The aothority vested by Christ in St. Peter and his successors. We therefore pro- ceeded, in the next place, to investigate these pre- tensions of the church of Rome. And we considered them in their natural order.
The Unity of the church of Rome we found to be a mere assumption ; for, talcing its popes, we found one pope perpetually controverting and excommuni- cating another ; looking at its councils, we found no two of them in perfect agreement ; and examining its theologians, we found as many varying sects and opinions, as are to be found in the freest forms of Protestantism itself.
Its Holiness was refuted by the least inquiry into the facts of that church's history. Its representatives and rulers, the popes, bearing, as they did, the title of ' Holiness,* were frequently, as their own historians have testified, * monsters of wickedness,* Its periods of the most undisturbed tranquillity and unresisted rule, have been periods of the most awful iniquity that the annals of Christendom can exhibit. And, at the present day, the comparative morality of any people may usually be guaged by this rule; — if Popery be predominant, there is assuredly great wickedness ; but if Popery have bat a slight hold upon the community, and Protestantism more gene- rally prevails, then there is a proportionate degree of virtue, morals, and happiness among the people*
RECAPITULATION OF THE ARGUMENT. 197
Its Catholicity, or universality, had been already denied, inasmuch as there were notoriously whole kingdoms, and not one or two, but ten or twelve, which possessed a regularly-ordained Christian mi- nistry, and the sacraments of the gospel, and which numbered, altogether, above a hundred millioDS of professing Christians, and which yet acknowledged no sort of connection with the church of Rome.
Its Apostolicity yielded as little advantage. If by this term was merely meant, the descent of its mi- nisters, by continued succession of ordinations, then the like descent could just as easily be proved by the bishops of the Greek, the English, and many other cbarches. Or, if the term described, as it ought, the doctrines derived by its clergy from apostolic au- thority, then a greater respect for apostolic doctrines conld be pleaddd on the part of the Protestant churches, than on that of Rome.
In all these four pretensions, therefore, the proof failed, and neither the Unity, the Holiness, the Catho- licity, or the Apostolicity of Romanism was found to be effectually established.
We proceeded, therefore, next, to the investigation of the important statement, that a peculiar authority was vested in St. Peter and his successors, to rule and govern the church ; an authority which, if estab- lished, would have condemned as contumacious, all who ventured to assert their entire independence of St. Peter's chair.
But here also the proof fell utterly short. The commission given to St. Peter was merely a parallel one with that given to the other apostles ; repeated, indeed, with emphasis, lest that apostle's fall should have been thought to have deposed him from his
198 ESSAYS ON ROlfANISM :
office. Of its descent to any of his followers, either in Rome or in any other see, not the least proof coald be addaced. That St. Peter was ever bishop of Rome, is not only doubtful, but the strongest rea- son exists to believe that he never filled that chair ; that no apostle, in fact, ever became a diocesan bishop ; but that St. Peter and St. Paul, meeting at Rome shortly before their martyrdom, constituted the church in that place, and appointed Linns its first bishop. No trace of any universal bishopric, or of any supremacy over the whole church, either in Rome or elsewhere, appears for centuries after : on the contrary, the decrees and decisions of that see were freely canvassed and resisted by Irenseus, Cy- prian, and many other of the early fathers. The su- premacy of St. Peter, then, over the whole church, is neither found in scripture nor in church history ; and the supremacy of the bishop of Rome was never so much as mentioned for several centuries. Nor is there the least reason adduced^ why the latter should follow from the former. Even could we discern any tokens of a primacy in St. Peter, — still it would re- main to be proved that those who presided over the Romish church after bis removal, and who possessed neither his divine inspiration nor his miraculous powers, were nevertheless to succeed to the posses- sion of his place and prerogatives. This may be assumed; but not a tittle of proof has been ofiered, in establishment of so extravagant an assumption. But that both St. Peter, and the bishops of Rome, did often err, and were resisted and overruled, is abundantly proved, both from the writings of the apostles, and from the records of the early church. There remains, therefore, not the least ground for
BECAPITULATION OF THE ARGUMENT. 199
any pretension, on the part of the church of Rome, to demand the credence or the submission of any human being, either because she is the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church, or because she wields the authority of St. Peter. She is nothing more than a church among other churches ; her bishop merely one among others, and her right to claim the pros- tration of the mind to her decisions, is clearly seen to be an assumption altogether unfounded.
There is, however, one feature of the case repeat- edly urged by Dr. Wiseman, which we have up to this period forborne to remark upon. It is, the ana- logy which is alleged to exist between God's dealings with his church under the Old Testament dispensa- tion, and under the New. It is observed, that undei the Mosaical law he instituted a fixed and perpetual priesthood, confined to one family, presided over by a single head, and ruling over the whole ecclesias- tical community, in such sort that any person refus- ing submission and adherence to this body and its legally-appointed head, was, ipso facto, * cut o£f from his people/ And hence it is argued, that some such plan or system of organization might be expected under the new dispensation. Accordingly, says Dr. Wiseman, — * It is on this form of argumentation that I have endeavoured to proceed. First of all, I con- sidered the outward form and inward constitution of the church of Christ, to which be confided bis re- ligion, as a state foreshown, constituted, and actually existing* As a state foreshown ; inasmuch as I ex- plained to you, how God had ever worked in a cer- tain coarse or order of his providence for the pre- servation of truth among mankind ; how a certain provision was made of old, whereby doctrines and
200 BSSATS ON roiiakism:
hopes revealed to mankind, bat lost to most of the world, in the cormptioD which ensoed, were pre- served, in the constitation of a certain establishment dedicated to that porpose. I showed yon that this system was merely figurative of that which is to come : that all the figores, all the imagery and rea- soniog, and the very phrases which applied to it, were also applied to that which has succeeded it, as though this were to be nothing more than the per- fecting and fulfilling thereof. I endeavoured, at the same time, to explain how it was the natural order of God's providence that the course once commenced should go on in a persevering ordinance, until the end ; and how, although we might expect a more perfect developement, and brighter manifestations, it would be expecting a violation of his plan of action among men, if we anticipated any sudden change, or complete interruption, in that course which he had once commenced/ ^
And in another place the Doctor similarly argues : ' From this it would appear, that the means taken by God's wisdom for preserving those doctrines of hope which he had communicated unto mankind, was to institute a visible and compact society, within which he, virtually, guaranteed their perseverance, and over which he watched with tender solicitude : and we see that bis action upon this body was not detailed upon each individual, but through a more select order of men, constituting a graduated hier- archy, whose duty it was to edify by example, to purify by sacrifice, to instruct by explanations of the law, to stand, in fine, between God and his people,
1 Witeman, Ztecfura ix. p. 299, 800.
BECAPITULATIOK OF THE ARGUMEKT. 201
ministering unto both, as bis chosen servants, and tbeir appointed teachers. The object of this Internal organization could only be the preservation of essen- tial anity of worship and of heart. Reuben was obliged yearly to come from beyond the Jordan, and Zebu Ion from over the mountains, and both to wor- ship with their brethren at one altar in Jerusalem, lest new opinions or rites should creep in among them, and that communion which is the essence of religion be even slightly broken.
' Now, looking for the application of this beautiful constitution, to the dispensation whereof it was a shadow, the first thing that must strike us is, how completely the New Testament links the one unto the other, by applying to the new state all the imagery and phraseology employed in prophecy, as descriptive of the peculiar characteristics of the old. The church, or dispensation of faith, is now the king- dom which was to be restored with its worship by the Son of David ; there is a priesthood and an altar, there is authority and subordination, there is union and unity all as before; and indeed in the later prophecies of the old law, the church is never other- wise described than as the revival, extension, and perfection of the former state. Now this is all ex- plained only by two reflections. First, that the for- mer constitution was not abolished but exchanged, and by that change perfected ; and in this manner did Jesus say, that he came not to abolish, but to complete or accomplish : secondly, that the former was a type, and merged into its reality, not so much dying as passing into a second existence, where a true sacrifice covered a typical oblation, where re- demption given passed before redemption expected,
202 ESSAYS ON R01UVI8M:
where ancertaiDty had ripeoed into knowledge, and hope yielded its kingdom to faith/ '
Soch is Dr. Wiseman's argument, and it both de- serves and invites a reply. Two objections to the conclusion which Dr. Wiseman seeks to draw from the premises he laj^ down, naturally present them- selves : — These are as follows —
1. A certain well-defined order of priesthood ex- isted in the Jewish church, and it had a single, di- vinely-appointed head. But nothing can possibly be more distinct, or positive, or beyond the reach of mistake or doubt, than the divine appointment of the family of Levi to the priesthood, and of the family of Aaron to the pontificate. We have, there- fore, a right to argue in our turn, that if God had really intended to constitute a second primacy over his whole church, under the New Testament, he would have been as explicit in his commands as he was in the Old. And it is because we find not the least trace of any such appointment, that we demur to the allegation, that the see of Rome was intended to occupy the same place, under the new dispensa- tion, that the high priest occupied under the old. Shew us even a tenth part of the evidence in favour of the supposed successors of St, Peter, that any de- scendant of Aaron, occupying the office of high priest, could have adduced, and we are loyal subjects of * the holy see * from that moment.
But instead of any such evidence, all we find in the New Testament tends in an exactly opposite direction. The epistle to the Hebrews, for instance, is devoted to a comparison of the Mossiical dispensa-
1 Witeman* Lecture iv. p. 93, 94.
RECAPITULATION OF THE ARGUMENT, 208
Hon "with that which was to follow it. Most anques- Uonably, therefore, had it been the divine will that the Jewish church and its ecclesiastical system shoald be followed by a similar constitution, mo- delled, in all its visible features, upon the first, we should here have found it delineated. Instead of which, we find jast the contrary. We find the sacri- ficing priesthood for ever abolished : '* And every priest (under the Levitical priesthood) standeth daily ministering^ and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins : but this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, for ever sat down on the right hand of God: From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified, Heb. X. 11—14.
And the high priesthood and headship of the church is again and again declared to be permanently centered, not in the bishops of Rome, but in Christ. " We have a great High Priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God,*' (iv. 14.) " They truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to con" tinue by reason of death; hut this man, because he con" tinueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.'* (vii. 23, 24.) Dr. Wiseman tells us that we have ' a priesthood and an altar,' in the pope and the mass, of which Aaron and his sacrifices were only typical. But St. Paul not only does not say this,— which, if true, he certainly would have said, — but he plainly tells us that our high priest, the head of the gospel dispensation, ** is passed into the heavens ; " and that we are not now to look for a succession of priests, as in Aaron and his race, who '* were not suffered to continue by reason of death/' but to one ;
204 ESSATS ON ROfMANISM:
*' We have such m High Priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens*'* (viii. !•) Nothing, then, can be more complete, than the opposition between the apostle Paul and Dr. Wise* man. Bat we pass on to observe,
2. That we must not forget, when the demand made is of implicit submission — that the priests under the Mosaical dispensation, indisputable as was their divine appointment, were frequently found to be but '* blind leaders of the blind ; " nay, were, especially in our Saviour's own times, the most decided and bit- ter opponents of the truth.
Now the demand made upon us by Dr. Wiseman and Dr. Milner, on behalf of him whom they tell us now occupies the place of the High Priest, is of nothing less than implicit submission. The church of Rome, says Dr. Wiseman, * is the depository of all truth, and is gifted with an exemption from all lia- bility to err, and has authority to claim from all men, and from all nations, submission to her guidance and instruction.*^ And this is said, we must again re- peat, of a church whose alleged commission bears not the least comparison with that which was indis- putably given to Aaron and his successors.
Now if even the successors of Aaron, invested in the clearest manner with the pontificate and all its plenary authority, — if even these fell into the most fearful errors, — what eould be expected of those who act under the far less distinct and emphatic authority conveyed in the Saviour's- parting words? If the High Priests were not * gifted with an exemption from all liability to err,' how can we assume that the
1 Wiaeman, Lecture iv. p. 100.
BECAPITULATION OF THE ARGUMENT. 205
Popes are so preserved ? If that pontifif who received his mitre and his vestments in the immediate pre- seoce, and almost by the very hands, so to speak, of God himself, was so far from being thus exempted from error, that even within sight of Mount Sinai he was fonnd assisting the people in an act of idola- try, ~ what ground can there be for assuming that a greater ' exemption ' from error is promised to the priesthood or the pontiff of our own times ?
If it is objected that Christ left a special promise to his disciples, just before his ascension, that he would be with them always, even to the end of the world, we reply, that this circumstance constitutes no distinc- tion between the cases, nor does it secure ' exemption from error/ We know that God himself was visibly present, in a pillar of a cloud and of fire, with the Israelites in the wilderness, and yet both the priests and the people were continually transgressing against Mm.
Dr. Wiseman, however, notices this objection, of the errors and transgressions of the Jewish priest- hood and people, thus : * But you will say, with all the precautions which his providence took to secure the safe transmission of his promises, see how fear- fully they of old did fall from him, and forget all that he had taught, them ; and shall be then be supposed to have retained the same imperfect institutions now, which failed him so sadly then ? Now far from there being any objection in this to what I have hitherto said, it seems to me rather a confirmation thereof. Much falling off there often was — a total loss never.'
What the Dr. means by saying * a total loss never,' we cannot divine. Our Lord's own words to the Jews were, " The kingdom of God shall be taken from
206 ESSAYS ON ROMAKISM:
you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." Matt. xxi. 43. And so it was in the end. But the point we wish to insist upon is this : — To establish the decisions of the Romish church as the rule of faith, it is necessary that its advocates should assume, as Dr. Wiseman, we have seen, does assume, — that that church < is the depository of all trdth, and is gifted with an exemption from all liability to err.' Now, will any one say, that the two or three sen- tences in the gospels, on which Dr. Wiseman affects to rely, confer on the successors of St. Peter and of the apostles, greater honours, immnnities, and privi- leges than were bestowed upon Aaron and his suc- cessors in the priesthood ? Surely not ! The Jew, then, under his dispensation, eighteen hundred years ago, might as reasonably believe and contend, that his spiritual guides, who *' sat in Moses' seat," were *' exempted from all liability to err,'' as the Papists can now claim the same exemption for the pope or the clergy of Rome: This is clear.
We ask, then, where was their ' exemption from error,' when they became *^ the betrayers and mur- derers of the Just One," — when they "killed the Prince of Life,** — when they ** rejected the stone which God appointed as the head of the corner," — when they " slew and hanged on a tree, him whom God had exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance unto Israel, and forgiveness of sins? "
This question must be answered, or Dr. Wiseman's argument recoils upon himself, with tremendous force. The analogy is selected and insisted on by himself. He alleges the case of the Jews as exhibit- ing an outline and leading scheme of God's plan with the Christian church ; and the authority and
RBCAPITULATION OF THE ARGUMENT. 207
Gommission of the High Priest and his assistants are especially addaced as typifying the intended platform of the coming Christian church. We then naturally inquire, whether, seeing that the commis- sion, ordination, and investiture of Aaron and the high priesthood, were certainly more explicitly de- tailed, and apparently more emphatic, than that of the apostles, — it must not be naturally concluded, that the same degree of infallibility or exemption from error, which is claimed for the Christian priest- hood, belonged also to the preceding order? This must be admitted to be a reasonable conclusion. We then observe, that the high priests shewed their ' lia- bility to err * in an hundred instances, and especially in their condemnation of the Son of God. Dr. Wise- man's own case of analogy, therefore, on which he lays so much stress, evidently becomes a broken reed, and runs into his own hand. The pope succeeds the High Priest; stands in his place; succeeds to his primacy and rule : at least, so says Dr. Wiseman. Well, the High Priest crucified the Lord of glory ; what security have we that the pope may not, in the person of his servants, again persecute and put to death the Son of God ? The question is naturally suggested by Dr. Wiseman *s own argument ; but it is impossible to find a satisfactory reply to it.
But the reader will be almost tired of these nega- tive conclusions. Shall we never, he will be apt to inquire, arrive at any thing more satisfactory ? If the Romish Rule of Faith proves to be nothing worth, can you, for the Protestant churches, establish any thing more satisfactory ? Or are we left, in point of &ct, without a guide, on this ocean of life, to direct our course by mere baseless speculation ?
208 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
We can reply with confidence, God be thanked ! that we are not so left. There is a gaide, the most unerring and infallible ; a rale, perfect as eternal justice and truth could construct; and this guide, this rule, is so accessible, so simple, so intelligible, that among us, at least, every man will be left wholly without excuse, who either neglects or refuses to be regulated by its directions. This rule is nothing else than the Holy Scripture, the written word of God, revealed by the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the third person in the ever-blessed Trinity, to db/era of his servants, in dififerent ages of the church, and preserved under his providential care, to be, in all ages, the gaide of his people, in their journey through this wilderness, towards their eternal rest.
Many, however, will be inclined to doubt, whether there is sufficient ground for supposing that the scriptures were really intended for this purpose ; that they were meant for universal perusal ; and made level to the general understanding of mankind, so as to answer the purpose of an universal rule ?
But if such persons are not unbelievers, — if they accept the Bible as the word of God, having no doubt whatever of its divine character, they will be neces- sarily compelled to believe its own testimony as to its purport and intent. Now this testimony is most full, clear, and explicit. It no where describes itself after Dr. Wiseman's fashion, as furnishing merely * cre- dentials to the church;' which church is then to be the great teacher. On the contrary, while it con- stantly represents the priesthood as an erring and fallible body, often negligent, often heretical, often idolatrous, often misleading and seducing the people ; it ever asserts its own purity, sufficiency, and unerring
RECAPITULATION OF THE ARGUMENT. 209
truth, as constitating the odIj safe and divinelj-ap-' pointed guide for all mankind.
** The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple* The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart : the commandment of the Lord is pure, en- lightening the eyes. The fear of the Lord is clean, en- during for ever : the judgments of the Lord are true, und righteous altogether. More to he desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweetei* also thati honey and the honeycomb- Moreover by them is thy urvant warned : and in keeping of them there is great reward/' (Psalm xix. 7 — 11.) •* Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way ? by taking heed thereto ac- cording to thy word." " Thou through thy command- ments hast made me wiser than mine enemies : for they are ever with me. I have more understanding than all my teachers : for thy testimonies are my meditation.'* ** Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path," " The entrance of thy word giveth light ; it giveth understanding unto the simple.'' (Psalm cxix. 9, 96, 99, 105, 130.) *' To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isaiah viii. 20.) " And Jesus answering said unto them. Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God." (Mark xii. 20.) '' These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word Mfith all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.'* (Acts xvii. 1 1.) ** W/iatsoever things were written aforetime were written fur our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope." (Rom. xv. 4.) " All scripture is given hy inspiration of God, and is profitable
p
210 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
for doctrine^ for reproofs for eorrtetiomjfor imtruetioKin rigktemuneu : that the mmn of God moy be perfect, tho- roughly furnished unto mil good worhM'*2T\mA\\. 16, 17.
Now, in all these passages we cannot but perceive that the attributes ascribed to the scriptures partake of the divinity of their aathor. Perfection is con- stantly asserted to be their character. They are un- erring, and they are of universal utility. . Every re- commendation of them is to all ; every assertion of their object and aim cledrly assigns their value and their use, not to the charch only, but to all manhind. They are to * give understanding to the simple : * they are to enable ' the young man to cleanse his way** They are to be the universal test, insomuch that whatever is not in agreement with them, is at once, and ipso facto, condemned.
And let it be remembered, that all these excel- lences are ascribed to the scriptures, without reserve. It is admitted, indeed, that ' the unlearned and an- stable' may ' wrest' * the scriptures to their own de- straction,' just as a roan roay poison himself with that which was prescribed to him as a medicine; but it is never for a moment conceded that, in them- selves, the scriptures are anything but what is per- fectly wise, and excellent, and holy. But a very different language is held with regard to the priest- hood, which Dr. Wiseman would have us to believe to have been God's special * provision' for the * pre- servation of his truth among mankind.'
In Jeremiah ii. 8. God says, " The priests said not, Where is the Lord ? and they tliat handle the law knew me not," In Lament, iv. 13. the miseries of Jerusa- lem are declared to be ^*for the sins of her prophets, and the iniquities of her priests, that have shed the blood
RECAPITULATION OF THE ARGUMENT. 211
of the just in the midst of her,*' Ezekiel xxii. 26. bears the same testimony — " Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned my holy things,*' Hosea vi. 9, says, ** the company of priests murder in the way" Zcphaniah iii. 4. '^ her priests have polluted the sanc- tuary and have done violence to the law,** And Malachi ii. 8. addresses the priests in these words, '* Ye have departed out of the way ; ye have caused many to stumble at the law, ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the Lord of hosts.**
Bat what is Dr. Wiseman's answer to all this. It is merely that *' much falling off there often was, — a total loss never." Now even if we were to admit this, — which, however, is not true, — still, what is the admission obviously implied, as regards a rule of faith ? To say that there was * a frequent falling off' is to confess, in so many words, that the priesthood was not infallible, — that it often fell into error. Such, therefore, as guided themselves solely by the coun> sels and instructions of the priests, would be, of necessary consequence, liable to be led astray. They would be following a rule which was not infallible ; whereas those who preferred that rule to which Pro- testants adhere, would be secure of infallible guid- ance. " The law of his God is in his heart; none of HIS STEPS SHALL SLIDE." (Psalm xxxvii. 31.) Here is the great practical distinction between the two rules of faith about which we are contending; and here is irrefragable proof of the superiority of the Protestant rule. But we must not open, in the pre- sent essay, a question so large as that which is now pfesenting itself before us, and the consideration of which will naturally come under our view, on the next occasion.
P2
X.
THE RULE OF FAITH.
* HOLY gCRIPTURE,' OR * THE CHURCH.'
We are now to return to the main question, and once more to compare the two opposing principles, — that of the Protestants, that Scripture is the only rule of faith ; and that of the Romanists, that ' God has appointed bis Church the infallible and unfailing depository of all truth,' *
The Protestant rule haying been briefly explained at the close of the last Essay, it will be advisable here to examine closely the difficulties pointed out, especially by Dr. Wiseman, in the practical applica- tion of that rule.
We may begin with an observation of the Doctor's, that Protestantism, from its very fundamental prin- ciple, demands of its disciples a course of study and investigation, which, to by far the larger proportion of mankind, is absolutely impossible. He observes —
' The fundamental principle of Protestantism is
1 Wiaeman's First Lecture, p. 10.
* HOLY SCRIPTURE,' OR * THE CHURCH.' 213
tbis, that THE WORD OF God alone is the true STANDARD AND RULE OF FAITH. But, to arrive at this, there is a loDg coarse of complicated and severe inquiry. You must, step by step, have satisfied yourselves, not merely of the existence of a revela- tion ; but, that such revelation is really confided to man in these very books ; that they have been trans- mitted to you in such a state, that the originals have been so preserved, and the translations so made, as that you are confident, that in reading them you are reading those words which the Spirit of God dictated to the prophets and apostles ; and, still more, that you have acquired, or that you possess, the lights necessary for you. to understand them. You must not only be satisfied that the Bible has been given as the word of God, but you must be ready to meet the innumerable and complicated difficulties which are brought by others against the inspiration of par^ ticular books, or individual passages ; so. that you may be able to say, that from your own knowledge and experience, you are internally convinced, that yoo have in that book the inspired word of God, in the first place ; and, in the second, that you are not only authorized, but competent, to understand it. How few, my brethren, are there who can say, that they have gone through this important course ; and, yet, it is the essential ground of Protestantisno, that each one is to be considered responsible to God for every particular doctrine which he professes — that each one must have studied the word of God, and most have drawn from it the faith which he holds. Unless he does all this, he has not complied with those conditions which his religion imposes upon him ; and, whatever reasons or motives he may feel
214 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
or quote for being a Protestant, it is manifest that they noways lead him essentially to the practical adoption of the ground-work of his religion.' ^
Now the learned Doctor has here availed himself of his rhetorical skill to conjure up difficulties and obstacles which have no real existence, or which, at least, have no peculiar existence in the Protestant system. For what does this objection amount to, when closely scrutinized? As applied to the present question, the point laboured at by the Doctor, seems to be this, that no one can be a sound Protestant, without a long and painful course of study ; — that this is a necessary condition of our system, and that as this is plainly impossible to the great bulk of mankind, therefore Protestantism cannot be that re- ligion which God has given for the comfort and sup- port of alK Now this may be answered by a simple recurrence to experience. There is no practical dif- ference in this respect between the two systems. The bulk of mankind must, and in fact always do, receive the first principles of their religion, impli- citly, or upon credence. The Protestant teachers and theologians present to the people a book, the Bible, and tell them, what they themselves believe, that it is the inspired word of God, and the only foundation upon which their religious belief can be safely built. Thousands and millions accept their assurance ; repose their faith in this book ; either omitting or being incapable of the preliminary in- quiry, How this book can be proved to be God's word ; but finding it to be, in their own experience, * the power of God to their salvation,' they thank-
1 Wiseman*» First Lecture, p. 8, 0.
* HOLY SCRIPTURE,' OR * THE CHURCH.' 215
fally accept it, cordially attach themselves to it, re- fose all other rules, and all additions to this rule, and finally die, trusting in the testimony which this book pyes to Christ, and resting their souls with confi- dence on Him. Now these are genuine Protestants, inasmuch as they receive and adopt the great Pro- testant principle, as Dr. Wiseman himself expresses it, of * The Word of God alone, the True Stan- dard AND Rule of Faith.' And, in the implicit or QDphilosophical mode of their adherence to their re- ligions belief, they are obviously on a par, and really far more justifiable than the multitudes who adopt the Romish rule; — the church, — without any more inves- tigation into the real grounds of their reliance than the aforesaid Protestants. The one class receive * the bread of life,' not always rationally or on philo- sophical data ; but experience soon sets them fully right. They are soon in the predicament of the Sa- maritans, who told their towns-woman, *^ now we be* lievCf not because of thy saying ; for we Iiave heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.** John iv. 42. The gospel comes to them * in power and in much assurance ; * and they know with the best sort of certainty, that it is bread indeed that they have received, by the spiritual sus- tentation which their souls have derived from it. Nor is their reception of God's word altogether implicit and unreasoning. Few Protestant pastors entirely omit occasional explanations of the external evi- dences for the scriptures. They frequently appeal to the common sense of their people, by proofs which are level to all orders of intellect. And, amidst all, there is the inherent glory of the word itself, declar-
216 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
iDg, as plainly and andeniably as the san itself^ that it 18 none other than the work of God.
The followers of Rome, on the other hand, adopt just as implicitly the faith proposed to them, and rest their all upon the foundation of < the church;' not knowing, in fact, what ' the church ' is in which they believe; while, instead of after- ass urance, de- rived from the experience of their own souls, they find nothing better than the false repose of delusion.
This it may be said, is an assumption of that which has yet to be proved. But we were led into this by Dr. Wiseman's own equally illegitimate claim. He denies the right of any one to the name of Protes- tant, until he has first investigated the whole system of external evidence. We maintain, on the other hand, that the poor man who merely accepts the Bible as it is presented to him, clinging to it alone for his spiritual hopes, and refusing any other rule or guide, is, in so doing, a genuine Protestant. We further add, that the great bulk, both of Protestants and Papists, must of necessity take their religious system very much on the testimony of others; the great difierence, however, consisting in this, that the Protestant, resting upon the simple word of God, cannot be mistaken or misled in the security of his foundation, while the Romanist not only takes his system quite as much upon trust as the most igno- rant Protestant, but falls into the fatal error of rest- ing bis hopes on a merely human, and therefore un- safe foundation. This, however, is the chief point which we shall have to establish in the course of the present argument. Let us now consider the reasons assigned by Dr. Wiseman for refusing the holy scrip- tures as a sole and sufficient rule of faith.
* HOLY SCRIPTURE,* OR ^ THE CHURCH.' 217
Dr. Wiseman objects, that the scriptnres could (rer be intended as the rule of faith to all men, for ! following reasons : —
L ' In the first place, before any one can even nmence the examination of that rule, which his irch proposes to him, he must have satisfied him- f that all these books or writings, which are col- ted together in that Tolume, are really the genuine rks of those whose names they bear ; and that no h genuine work has been excluded, so that the 3 be perfect and entire ; and, in the second place, most satisfy himself, by his own individual exa- lation, that this book is inspired by God.' lereas, * the majority of Protestants live and re- in Protestants without ever having gone through I course of conviction.' * 'he Doctor then proceeds to observe — . That ' all this inquiry is but secondary or pre- inary, when compared with the great investiga- I into the inspiration of the scriptures. These ptures are inspired; that is the general, and ibtless the trae, belief. But, on what grounds s it resf^ Is it a matter of very simple demon- iion, or which proves itself almost intuitively ? * The authority of history, or of ecclesiastical tra- on, independently of the divine force allowed it ;he Catholic, can prove no more than the genuine- i or truth of the scripture narrative; but to be liable as a proof of inspiration, must carry us ictly to the attestation of the only witnesses able of certifying the circumstance. It may be i, that the church or body of Christians, in suc- iing times, believed the books of the New Testa-
WUeman*8 Second liecture, p. 32. 36. 2 ibid. p. 37.
219 ESSAYS OK rohakish:
ment to be inspired* But if that chnrcfa and its tra- ditions are not infallible, that belief goes no farther than a mere human or historical testimony ever can, that is, outward and visible facts, such as the pabli- cation, and consequently, the legitimacy, of a work. The only way in which it can attest the interior acts which accompanied its compilation, is, by preserving the assurances of those who, besides God, could alone be witnesses to them. Now, ecclesiastical history has not preserved to us this important testi- mony, for nowhere have we the record of any of these writers having attested his own inspiration. And thus, by rejecting tradition as an authority, is the only basis for the inspiration of scripture cat away/
Now from these two statements, the following con- sequence arises : —
' I have shown that the obstacles and difficulties to receiving the Bible, as the word of God, are nu- merous and complicated ; and yet, if it is the duty of every Protestant to believe all that he professes, because be has sought and discovered it in the word of God ; if, consequently, it is his duty to be satis- fied only on his own evidence, as the divines of his church have stated ; if, to attain this conviction, it is necessary for him to go through a long and painful course of learned disquisitions ; and if, after all these have been encountered, he cannot come to a satis- factory demonstration of the most important point of inspiration, I ask you, can the rule, in the approach to which you must pass through such a labyrinth of diflicultics, be that which God has given us as a guide to the poorest, the most illiterate, and simplest of his creatures?'
'HOLY SCRIPTURE,' OR * THE CHURCH.' 219
Bat, 3. ' If we are to suppose that God gave his boly word to be the only rule of faith to all men ; it must be a rule, therefore, easy to be procured, and to be held. God himself must have made the neces- sary provision, that all men should have it, and be able to apply it. What, then, does he do? He gives us a large volume written in two languages, the chief portion in one known to a small and limited country of the world. He allows that speech to become a dead language, so that countless diffi- Gulties and obscurities should spring up regarding the meaning of innumerable passages. The other portion he gives in a language spoken by a large body of mankind, but still by a very small propor- tion, considering the extent of those to whom the blessings of Christianity were intended to be com- municated ; and he gives this book as a satisfactory and sufficient rule.
* In the first place, then, he expects it to be trans- lated into every language, that all men may have access to it. In the second place, it must be so dis- tributed, that all men may have possession of it ; and, in the third place, it must be so easy that all men may use it. Are these the characteristics of this rale ? Suppose it to be the only rule of all who believe in Christ, are you aware of the difficulty of Qodertaking a translation of it? Whenever the at- tempt has been made, in modern times, in the first instance it has generally failed ; and even after many rq>eated attempts, it has proved unsatisfactory. Had I time, or were it necessary, I could shew you bam various reports of the Bible Society, and from the acknowledgment of its members, that many ver- aooBy after having been diffused among the natives
220 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
of coantries to be cooverted, have been necessarily withdrawn, on account of the absurdities, impietieS) and innumerable errors which thej contained. And this is the rule that has been put into the hands of men ! But look to 'the history of e?en more cele- brated translations, such as are put forth by autho- rity. I speak not of those early versions, whicli were made when the knowledge of the facts and circumstances was fresh, and when those who wrote better understood the language. But look at any modern version, such as that authorized in these realms. Read the account of how often it was cor- rected, what combinations of able and learned men it required to bring it to a tolerable degree of perfec- tion. Then its worth, as a rule, must depend upon the skill and fitness of individuals for the task of translating ; and we cannot suppose that the provi- dence of God would stake the whole usefulness and value of bis rule upon the private or particular abi- lities of man. And this is the first difficulty to its being considered the ordinary rule appointed of God. 4. ' The gospel's being the rule of faith, can have no connection with the circumstance, that the press, by the aid of the strongest mechanical power ap- plied to it, has now produced the Bible in measure- less abundance. God could not mean, that for 1400 years man was to be without a guide ; and that man- kind should have to wait until human genius had given efficacy to it by its discoveries and inventions. Such cannot be the qualities or conditions of the rule. We must look for it as one for all times, and for all places ; as something coming into operation as soon as delivered, and destined to last until the end of time. We cannot, therefore, admit, as the
* HOLY SCRIPTURE,' OR * THE CHURCH.' 221
only necessary rule of faith, that which depends for its adoptioD on the accidental instrnmentality of man, and requires essentially his unprescribed co- operation.'
Again, 5. * This difiQcuIty of disseminating the lopposed rule of faith is much exceeded by that of Doderstanding it : for to be the rule of faith, it can- not be sufficient that men should possess and read it, bat they must surely be able to comprehend it. In fact, who ever heard of the propriety or wisdom of placing in men's hands a code, or rule, which it was impossible for the greater portion of them to com- prehend ? '
And the Doctor thus sums up his statement: — ' Such, therefore, are the difficulties regarding the application of this rule : a difficulty of procuring and preserving the proper sense of the original by correct translations; a difficulty of bringing this translation within the reach of all ; a difficulty, not to say an impossibility, of enabling all to understand it.'i
These, then, are Dr. Wiseman's objections to the admission of holy scripture as the sole rule of faith. Our reply naturally divides itself into three allega- tions. The first is, that these difficulties suggested by the Doctor, if they be real and insuperable, must terminate, not in Romanism, but in infidelity: The iecond, that these difficulties, however, are not in- superable, but will be found to dissipate on a closer examination of the subject : . The third, that the Doctor's own system is beset with not only the same, bat ten times greater difficulties, and difficulties
1 Witemttn*8 Second Lectwet p. 45'-47.
222 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
which neither sophistry nor solid reasoning can re- move.
The first of these objections, — that the Doctoral arguments iead, not to Popery, bat to infidelity, may offend or startle a sincere Romanist. Bat why shoald he express surprise or indignation at sacb t charge? One of the Romish clergy, the Rev. Blanoo White, testifies to this practical resalt. He tells ns, of himself, that while yet a priest, — ' The con- fession is painful indeed, yet it is due to religion-* I was bordering on atheism J * If my case were sin- gular, if my knowledge of the most enlightened classH of Spain did not furnish me with a multitude of sudden transitions from the most secure faith and piety to the most outrageous infidelity, I would sub- mit to the humbling convictiou, that either weakness of judgment or fickleness of character had been the only source of my errors. But though I am not at liberty to mention individual cases, I do attest, from the most certain knowledge, that the history of my own mind is, with little variation, that of a great portion of the Spanish clergy,' •
But why recur to words or written confessions? Have we not the striking fact upon record, that on the 11th of November, 1793, the Romish archbishop of Paris, with a body of his clergy, appeared at the bar of the National Assembly, and there renounced Christianity, acknowledging that they had for many years been teaching what they believed to be a lie !
And might we not multiply cases of this sort till a volume should be occupied in narrating them ? Our object, however, is to shew, that Dr. Wiseman's
I WhUt^t Evidence, p. 7, 8.
* HOLY SCRIPTURE,' OR ' THE CHURCH.' 223
own principles necessarily lead to infidelity; and we only allade to historical facts in corroboration of this allegation.
Oar argument is this: Faith, which is the essence fuid life of all real religion, mast have some basis on which to rest. Now Protestants ofier to the inqairer asareand safe foundation. They say, * This is the word of the Almighty God ; upon this you may rea- sonably trust your eternal interests.' And they main- tain that the evidence which is accessible to every ioqairing mind, is sufficient to establish this fact, of the Divine Inspiration of the Bible. On the other band, the Romanist denies, with the infidel, the suf- ficiency of this eVidence, and plainly affirms that only by the authoritative decision of his church, can we learn with any certainty that the scriptures are in- deed inspired writings, and therefore infallibly true. Instead, therefore, of first establishing the Scriptures as our infallible and all-sufficient rule. Dr. Wise- man's course is as follows : —
' Let us therefore, suppose, that, not content with the more compendious method whereby God brought us, through baptism and our early instruction, into the possession of the faith, we are disposed to in- vestigate the authority of its principles; we begin naturally' with scripture — we take up the gospels, and submit them to examination. We abstract, for a moment, from our belief in their inspiration and divine authority — we look at them simply as historical works, intended for our information, writings from which we are anxious to gather such truths as may be useful to our instruction. We find, in the first place, that to these works, whether considered in their substance or their form, are attached all those
224 ESSAYS ON rohakism:
motives of human credibility which we can possibly require : — that there is, throughout them, an absence of every element which could suggest the suspicion^ that there has been either a desire to deceive, or a possibility of having been mistaken. For, we find a body of external testimony sufficient to satisfy us, that these are documents produced at the time when they profess to have been written, and that those per- sons were their authors, whose names they bear. And as these were eye-witnesses of what they relate, and give us, in their lives and characters, the strong- est security of their veracity, we conclude all that' they have recorded to be certain and true. We thus arrive at the discovery, that besides their mere nar- rative, they unfold to us a system of religion, preached by one who wrought the most stupendous miracles to establish and confirm the divinity of his mission. In other words, we are led by the simple principle of human investigation, to an acknowledgment of the authority of Christ to teach, as one who came from God : and we are thus led to the necessity of yielding implicit credence to whatever we find him to have taught. So far, the investigation being one of out- ward and visible facts, cannot require anything more than simple, historical, or human evidence.
'* Having once thus established the divine autho- rity of Christ, we naturally inquire. What is it that Christ taught? And we find that he was not con- tented merely with teaching certain general prin- ciples of morality, that he was not satisfied with unfolding to mankind doctrines such as none before him had attempted to teach, and thereby making man acquainted with his own fallen nature and with his future destiny ; but that, moreover, he took means
* HOLY SCRIPTURE/ OR * THE CHURCH.' 226
presenre those doctrinal commanications to man- id. We find it obvioaslj his intention that the (tern he established should be beneficial, not only those who lited in his own days, and heard his rd, but to the entire world, until the end of time ; it he intended his religion to be something per- inent, something commensurate with the existence those wants of humanity which he came to relieve : d consequently, we naturally ask, in what way i obligations which he came to enforce, and the iths which he suffered to seal, were to be preserved, d what the place wherein they were to be depo- ed ? If they were to be perpetual, proper provision ist have been made for their perpetuation. ' Now, the Catholic falls in with a number of very ong passages, in which our blessed Saviour, not ntent with promising a continuance of his docr nes, that is to say, the continued obligation of faith K)n man, also pledges himself for their actual pre- rvation among them. He selects a certain body of Bn : he invests them, not merely with great ^ntho- y, but with power equal to bis own ; he makes em a promise of remaining with them, and teach- g among them, even to the end of time ; and thus, ice again, he naturally concludes that there must ive existed for ever a corresponding institution, for e preservation of those doctrines, and the perpetu- ion of those blessings which our Saviour came anifestly to communicate.
' Thus then, merely proceeding hy historical reoion- 7, such as would guide an infidel to believe in irist s superior mission, he comes, from the word of lirist, whom those historical motives oblige him to ilieve, to acknowledge the existence of a body, de^
Q
226 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
pository of those doctrioes which he came to esta- blish among men. This succession of persons consti- tuted to preserve those doctrines of faith, appointed | as the successors of the apostles, having within them ^ the guarantee of Christ teaching among them for '^ ever; and this body is what he calls the Church. ^ He is in possession, from that moment, of an assnr- l ance of divine authority, and, in the whole remaining |^ part of the investigation, he has no need to tarn i back, by calling in once more the evidence of man* f For, from the moment he is satisfied that Christ has * appointed a succession of men whose province it it, by aid of a supernatural assistance, to preserve iii^ violable those doctrines which God has delivered— from that moment, whatever these men teach is in- vested with that divine authority, which he bad found in Christ through the evidence of his miracles. This body, so constituted, immediately takes on itself the office of teaching and informing him that the sacred volume, which he had been hitherto treating as a mere history — that the document which he had been perusing solely with a deep and solemn interest, is a book which commands a much greater degree of respect and attention, than any human motives could possibly bestow. For now the church stands forth with that authority wherewith she is invested by Christ — and proclaims, ' Under that guarantee of divine assistance which the words of Christ, in whom you believe, have. given me, I pronounce that this book contains the revealed word of God, and is in- spired by the Holy Spirit; and that it contains all that has a right to enter into the sacred collection.' And thus the Catholic at length arrives, on the au- thority of the church, at these two important doc-
' HOLY SCBIPTUBB/ OR ' THE CHURCH/ 227
rines of the canon and the inspiration of scriptare, vbich I endeayoored to shew, at our last meeting, it vas almost, if not quite impossible, to reach by any Bourse of ordinary human investigation.' >
We find, then, that Dr. Wiseman treats the scrip- tures as mere human writings, ordinary though au- thentic histories, until he has established the authority of the church; and then the church, by her infallible authority, teaches him the inspired character of these books. And here we detect the untenable nature of his argument : and discern how it naturally follows, that when men have rested their belief in holy scrip- ture on this insufficient foundation, they are very likely to come, on a more mature consideration, to doubt both the one and the other.
Dr. Wisemah sets out, we must bear in mind, with the supposition, that the gospels, in which he is about to seek for the church's authority, are to be eonsidered ' simply as historical works,' and as ' a mere history.'
Now out of this * mere history/ he is to draw proofs sufficient to establish, — not any light matter, but the institution of an infallible body of spiritual teachers and rulers, and the consequent duty, incumbent on every human being, of absolute, unconditional submis- sion to the teachinff of the church.* ^ It will surely be admitted, that to place this immense demand upon a clear and unquestionable foundation, must require a weight of evidence altogether overwhelming.
But what are the proofs Dr. W. adduces, for the establishment of this, the one fundamental point in his whole system ? We quote his own words.
1 Wiaeman*8 Third Lecture, pp. 63—65. > tf^ieeman** Fint Lecture, p. 17, Q 2
228 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
' Now (in reading the gospels) the Catholic falls la with a number of very strong passages^ in which oqv blessed Saviour, not content with procuring a con- tinuance of his doctrines, that is to say, the continued obligation of faith upon man, also pledges himself for their actual preservation among them. He selects a certain body of men ; he invests them not merely . with great authority, but with power equal to hif own; he makes them a promise of remaining with them, and teaching among them, even to the end of time,' ^ &c.
Here, however, we have nothing but Dr. Wise- man *s own assertion, that in the gospels he finds < t number of very strong passages ' establishing his in- fallible church. We still require to have those pas- sages pointed out. And, accordingly .in his next lecture (the fourth) the Dr. proceeds to quote, —
1. And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying y All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost : teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you : and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Matt, xxviii. 18—20.
2. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him : but ye know him ; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. ^ John xiv. 16, 17.
3. But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth. John xvi. 3.
1 TFiiieman*9 Third Lecture, VV- ^» <i^'
' HOLT SCBIPTURB, OR ' THE CHURCH/ 229
4. Upon this rock will I build my church ; and th§ ff/ef of hell shall not prevail against it. Matt. xvi. 18.
5. Then said Jesus to them again. Peace be unto you: ss my Father hath sent me, even so tend I you, John xz. 21.
6. He that heareth you heareth me ; and he that dss^ piseth you despiseth me ; and he that despiseth me des' piseth him that sent me. Lake x. 16.
Now these six texts are all that we find adduced by Dr. Wiseman in support of his assertion, that in the gospels he meets with ' a number of very strong passages/ 'in which Christ invests ''the church '' with power equal to his own* Let us then, in the next place, carefully consider whether, on any reasonable view of the case, the infallible authority and do- minion of Dr. Wiseman's church can be admitted to be proved by these six passages.
But we do not propose to enter upon a critical ex* amination of these texts. Our inquiry is rather a preliminary one. It concerns merely the external, rather than the internal value of this evidence. It is not what these passages declare? — ^but with what foree and authority are their declarations accom- panied ? For we must bear in mind that it is only as ' mere histories ' that we are to receive these records. That the gospels are inspired we cannot know, ac- cording to Dr. Wiseman's argument, until we first submit to the church's teaching, and receive her as- surance that they are so» Up to that point they can be admitted merely and ' simply as historical works ;' as ' human testimony ; ' as ' the evidence of man/ >
Well, then, we are to take up the book of Matthew, or of John, precisely as we take up Josephus, or
1 WUeman*i Third Lecture, 62,64, 67.
230 ESSAYS ON bomakism:
Bede. Soch is Dr. Wisemao's injiinction, and we are now endeavoaring to follow oat his reasonings to their practical resolU.
But no mere hvman historian ever yet prodneed a narrative on which, in all its points, and in every particular, we coald wholly and satisfactorily rely. The utmost merit that the highest of such writers has ever yet reached, is that of honesty, — of faithfulness, — of not intending to deceive. No man living will venture to declare his perfect belief in every word set down in either Livy or Tacitus, Josepbns or Eusebias. General accuracy, and an evident desire to narrate things as they really occurred, is the very utmost praise that can be awarded to any ' mere hu- man historian.'
Take up, then, these two or three writers, Matthew and Luke and John, and see what is the amount and . weight of their testimony, considered under all these qualifications.
The matter in question concerns certain brief ex- pressions of Christ, uttered by him about A. D. 28 and 29. Now the first question is, tvken were these words of Christ recorded ? At what time were the books in which they are set down, written ?
The answer to this inquiry is, that Matthew, ac- cording to Irenseus, wrote his gospel about a.d. 61 : Luke composed his about a. d. 63 or 64 ; and John, his, not much before his death, in A. D. 100. So that many years, as far as we know, passed away, before these few sentences of Christ's ntterings were so muck as written down.
Now, we would desire, at every step we take, to
have it distinctly understood, that it is Dr» WitenuaCs
' view of the case, and not our own, that we are endea-
ft
* HOLT SCRIPTURE,' OR ' THE CHURCH.' 231
vooripg to follow oat to its legitimate results. Our own coarse woald hejirst to ascertain the inspiration of the holy scriptores, and then to sabmit to their decisions on all points ; bat this woald not answer Br. Wiseman's parpose. It is necessary for his end, —which is to force as to sabmit to the aathority of Jhs cbarch, — to persaade as that antil we do so sab- nit oarselves, there can be no rest for the soles of oar feet ; and accordingly he woald have as believe that withoat receiving her decisions we can never know whether the scriptares are inspired or not. But we mast contend, on the other hand, that by this coarse ' of proceeding, we shall reach no end, except that of believing nothing at all* For the ' mere human testi- mony ' of two or three ordinary ' historians,' can never establish so momentous a fact as the institu- tion of an infallible church. And this we shall pre- sently see.
Matthew and Luke appear to have set down, about thirty years after they w^e uttered, certain words of Christ ; — and John, about forty years after this, cer- tuD other words. Now if we had first ascertained the point, that these writers were guided by the in- spiration of the Holy Spirit, we should admit without hesitation, as we ought to th, that these few sentences are recorded with perfect accuracy. But if Dr. Wiseman insists on our . taking these records as 'mere human testimonies,' and as ' the evidence of man,' then we are obliged to tell him that no mere man, unassisted by a higher power, could ever set down the actual words of a conversation, thirty, forty, or sixty years after it occurred, without considerable variations from the words actually used. Conducting, then, the inqoiry on Dr. Wiseman's own plan, taking the con-
292 XS8ATS ON ROMANim:
cloding words of the history penned by Matthew, andl considering it ' simply as an historical record,' a mere ' haman testimony/ we can only receive it as we would receiye all other ' historical works ' of good character ; and obserring that the conversation al- laded to was not recorded until about thirty yean after it had taken place, we come to the condosioii which every one would adopt in a similar case,— putting inspiration out of the quettion^ — and suppose that something of the general tenor of what is there set down, did actually occur. We might even go farther than this, and say, that had the narratives of the evangelists been penned at the very time when the events took place, it would still be anreasonahle to rest so vast a question as this on the accuracy with which a ' mere historian ' had reported a few words of a conversation. A well-known anecdote will illustrate this point.
After one of the battles of Frederick the Great, king of Prussia, that mo/iarch desired to inform himself, on the same afternoon, as to some circum- stance which had occurred in a part of the field from which he himself bad been absent. He called round him all the principal officers who had been on the spot, and required a distinct account of the affair. But instead of receiving at once a clear and consis* tent narrative of the transaction, he found every one of the witnesses differing from the other on some im- portant point, so that it was almost impossible to arrive at any clear understanding, even on a matter which had occurred only a few hours before. Per- plexed by this confusion and contradiction, the king turned to one of his friends, and exclaimed, ^ And this then is history T
* HOLY SCRIPTURE,' OR ' THE CHURCH/ 233
We migbt add another instance of the state of doobt into which we necessarily fall, when we come to deal with ' mere histories*' Take the case of Foxe's Book of Martyrs. Here is a work which was produced at the ▼ery time when the most interesting facts narrated in it, ^corred. Protestants generally believe the nar- ratives contained in it to be troe and faithful. They rely opon it as a correct account of real facts. But Dr. Milner, in his < End of Controversy/ can find no better term for it than ^ Fox's lying book of Martyr^/ — ' Fox's ponderous folio of falsehoods.' Thus we get into the region of dispute and controversy, the mo- ment we attempt to rely upon the credit of any ^ mere history.'
We desire, however, not to be mistaken. We are not disputing the credibility of the Evangelists. We believe that we are bound by the strongest reasons to accept their narratives as most literally and exactly true and faithful. But we arrive at this conclusion only bp first ascertaininff their inspiration. Dr. Wise- man, in opposition to this view, persists in arguing that their inspiration can only be gathered from the infollible decision of the Romish church. Then, if we ask him how he proves the infallibility of the said charch? he adduces five or six passages from the gospels, which gospels we are to take, he says, as ^ mere human histories.' And it is here that our ob- jection comes in. We maintain that his whole argu- ment fails, inasmuch as it is wholly irrational, looking at the evangelists as 'mere human historians,' — to suppose that they were capable of setting down, with perfect accuracy, in the year A. D. 61, or 64, or 100, the very words of a conversation which took place A.D. 29. If we are to look upon them in this light, we
234 ESSAYS OK ROICAKISM :
must necessarily receive their accoont of these trans- actions with some doubt and abatement We cannot profess to believe that the words reported by them, were the very identical words spoken by Christ ; and thus the degree of authority conferred on the apos- tles, and the fact of infallibility itself, said to reside in the church, comes to be altogether a matter of doubt We say that this is the only reasonable way of considering the matter; and we tell Dr. Wiseman, in the plainest terms, that it is wholly impossible to establish an infallible church upon the ^ mere human testimony' of a fallible historian. We can never submit to so immense an authority, we can never realize so awful, so momentous a fact, as that of the establishment of an unerring tribunal among men, on any dicta or mandate lower than that of God him- self. He himself must speak, who alone could esta- blish and empower such a tribunal, and we must know, without the possibility of a doubt, that it is He that speaks, and that we have His very words before us. Mere human testimony, — the evidence of a * simple history ' cannot suffice, for no mere history was ever produced by man in which a thousand errors were not discernible, and if error can have taken place here, our ground of confidence is gone. No- thing, in fact, but the voice of inspiration will suffice in this case. But Dr. Wiseman plainly tells us that ' the only basis for the inspiration of the scriptures,* is, the church's infallibility; that we must, in short, admit the infallibility of the church,* and then receive her decision that scripture is inspired, or we can never arrive at any certainty of its inspiration at all. We, on the other hand, have made it clear, we trust, that nothing but God's own word, nothing less than
<HOLT SCBIPTUBE,' OR, ^ THE CHURCH.' 235
the Toice of inspiration dearly ascertained, can suf- fice to establish an infallible aathority ; and thas are we inevitablj bronf^ht, on Dr. Wiseman's yiews, to the fearful condasion of believing neither the scrip- tures nor the church ; of believing, in short, nothing!
But it may perhaps be objected, that both parties admit the inspiration of the scriptures, and should not, therefore, quarrel so much about the mode in which this inspiration is proved ; the result appear- ing to be the same.
But it is not the same* We, the Protestants, con- tend that the inspiration of the scriptures is capable of clear and irrefragable proof, on the most sufficient grounds, admitted among men in ordinary cases. We assert that the evidence of their divine character is such, that men are left without excuse, if they refuse to listen to them as to the word of God. This is one of our chief controversies with the infidel. Now Dr. Wiseman and the Romish controversialists come in here, and first side with the infidel. They tell us that it is impossible to establish our case, in the way, and by the reasonings which we bring forward. They add, indeed, that the scriptures are really inspired, but they go on to say, that the only way by which they have arrived at the knowledge of this fact, and the only way by which it can be established at all, is by the authoritative decision of the church. The* church, that is the Romish church, ' stands forth,' to use Dr. Wiseman's own words, — < with that authority wherewith she is invested by Christ — and proclaims, * Under that guarantee of divine assistance which the words of Christ, in whom you believe, have given me, I pronounce that this book contains the revealed word of God, and is inspired by the Holy Spirit ; and
236 ESSAYS OK roicanism:
that it contains all that has a right to enter into the sacred collection.'
Thas the Romanist first takes part with the infidel, and declares it to be useless to attempt to prove the inspiration of the scriptures by anj ordinary eoorse of proofs or arg^aments. And having thus deprived ns, as far as it is in his power, of every valid and suf- ficient argument, he offers us instead, one whoUy illogical and untenable, one which no astute and clear-headed infidel will ever be satisfied with. ^ The scriptures are inspired,' he says, ^ though this cannot be proved by fair argument : ' — < The scriptures are inspired, and you ought to believe it, because the church declares it/ Now nothing more palpably il- logical than this was ever proposed to the reasoning faculties of men. The Romanist is arguing with the unbeliever, with one as yet unsatisfied either with the divine authority of the scriptures, or the divine commission of the church. And he tells him, 'You most receive the scriptures as inspired, for such is the decision of the church.' The infidel naturally rejoins, * But why am I to submit to the decision of the church that they are so.' Th'e answer is, * Be- cause the scriptures assure us of. the church's inabi- lity to err.' * So that,' the infidel would reply, ' I am to receive as divine, a book which I take to be a 'mere device of priestcraft, merely because those priests tell me that it is divine. And if I ask why I am to submit to their decision, and believe what is contrary to common sense, the answer is, that this book, which I rather imagine they manufactured themselves, declares them to be infallible I But this is too gross an imposition to pass with me. Just as reasonably fnight I become a Mahometan at once.
•holy SCRIPTUKE/ OB, *THE CHURCH/ 287
For did not Mahomet declare the Koran to be the inspired word of God, given by him, and did not the Koran in retam assert Mahomet to be the chosen prophet of God ? Here is jast the same sort of false reasoning. In fact, what should prevent any set of religions impostors, in any age of the world, from concocting a pretended revelation, describing them as the anointed messengers of God, and then assum- ing to themselves this infallible authority, and insist* ing upon the reception of these writings upon their authoritative decision that they were inspired. Or, to take a more familiar case. Two unknown persons euter my house, and propose to me to entrust some important matter to them. I have doubts as to both of them. But the first assures me of the honour and integrity of the second, and the second vouches for the character of the first. Have I any real guarantee in this, their mutual recommendation ? Is there any thing more in it than two impostors might offer with the utmost ease ? '
Dr. Wiseman, however, has attempted to reply to this objection. He says, ^ But some perhaps will say 'these are mutual and consequently insufficient testi- monies ; you believe that the scripture first teaches yon the church, and then that the church teaches you the scripture.'
^ To this I might reply, that there is a fallacy in the very reasoning. When an ambassador presents himself before a sovereign, he is asked, where are his credentials? He presents them, and on the strength of them, hb Is acknowledged as an ambassador ; so that he himself first presents that document, whereby alone his mission and authority are subsequently established.'
288 ESSAYS OK moumsH:
' But in fillet the mrgnment is fmlsely stated. We do not believe the ebnreh on the nnthoritj of scnp- tare, properij so called ; we believe it on the autho- rity of Christ ; and if his conunands in her legaid, were recorded in any other book which we felt oor- aelves bound to beliere, although uninspired, we should receive them and consequently the authori^ of the church, equally as now.' *
This reply virtaally concedes the point for which we are contending. It consists of two parts — First, the illustration of an ambassador, of which the Rom- ish controversialists are very fond. He says, * When an ambassador presents himself before a sovereign, he is asked, where are his credentials? He presents them, and on the strength of them, he is acknow- ledged as an ambassador ; so that he himself first presents the docaments whereby bis mission and au- thority are established.' Now here it is plainly implied, that the ambassador has with him creden- tials of the real character of which there is no donbt. A person presenting himself at court, whose person was wholly unknown, and whose real character and mission was doubtful, would not find the diflSculty cleared up by presenting papers respecting which there was the same doubt as concerning himself. His credentials might, indeed, establish his credit, but only if their own character was perfectly indubitable. And just so we contend, that the church can never establish such a claim as that of an infallibility, on less than inspired authority. She must fii'st of all commence with this. Mere human testimony, which may be full of error, will not suffice.
^ Wuemm*» Third Lecture, p. 65.
'HOLY SCRIPTUHB/ OK, * THE CHURCH.' 289
A word misplaeed, a phrase omitted, things which constantly oecar in every haman aathor, may en- tirely change the sense of any passage. And so, when Dr. Wiseman says, in his second observation, that * we do not believe the church npon the autho- rity of scripture, properly so called ; we believe it on the authority of Christ ; and if his commands in her regard, were recorded in any other book which we felt ourselves bound to believe, although uninspired, we should receive them and consequently the autho- rity of the church, equally as now ;' — it is again clear that he is obliged to assume the inspiration of the gospels, to make his argument a valid one. Our only certainty that we have ' the authority of Christ ' in the gospels, rests on their inspiration. Without this all is doubtful and uncertain. And thus we see that it is absolutely impossible for the Romish church ever to construct a single argument of even apparent consistency, without somehow or other assuming this necessary point. And yet she persists in deny- ing the possibility of knowing the inspiration of scripture without her aid, and thus leaves her- self, at last, without any solid defence against the iofidel.
Let us now endeavour to bring the view we have been taking, into the compass of a few sentences. The point we have been labouring to establish is this— »that the objections brought against the Protes- tant rule of faith by Dr. Wiseman and others, tend, if followed to their just and logical consequences, to -settle the reasoner's mind, not in Romanism, but in infidelity. This we prove as follows : —
The Protestant, feeling the want of a rule of faith, a sure and infallible guide, to conduct him safely
240 B88AT8 ON mOMAWUll:
towards Uie oDseen world, examines the eridenoes in favoor of the aothenticity and inspiratioii of the holy scriptores. These evidences he finds to be amply sufficient; and he is thas brought to see that the Bible is, in very deed, the Word of God. From this instant it becomes his Infmllihle €inidtf the guide of his steps, the safegaard of his way.
Bot the Romanist, seeing that if the Bible is thos enthroned in its rightful dominion, there will be little chance of establishing the authority of his churchy denies, not only that the scriptures vrere ever intended to occupy this place, but he denies also that their inspiration and divine character can thus be ascertained without the interference or aid of his church. He boldly takes the in6del line of aign- ment, arrays in opposition all the difficulties and dis- crepancies that he can muster ; and finally concludes that it is only by first admitting the authority of his church that we can come to know that the scriptures are inspired.
But imagine for a moment that this point is con- ceded to the Romanist, and that we are thus deprived of the rule which we fancied we possessed — namely, the unerring word of God. We now pause for a mo- ment, and look around for some guide in this wilder- ness— some friendly pilot, by which we may reach the haven of eternal rest. And what is proffered to us? The church? Well, then, of course we ask whether the evidence in favour of the church is clearer, stronger, and more unembarrassed with dif- ficulties than that in favour of the Bible. If we were not to take the inspiration of the scriptures for granted) of course we must not be asked to take the divine authority of the church for granted either.
*HOLY SCRIPTURES,' OR, 'THE CHURCH/ 241
What, then, are the credentials of the charch? — what is the eyidence of her divine commission, — •▼idenee so clear, so indisputable, that all that can be adduced in favonr of the inspiration of the scrip- tares shrinks from comparison with it?
The evidence by which this charch of Rome esta- blishes her divine commission, is stated by Dr. Wise- man to be nothing more than hye or six passages in certain old books, written by Matthew, and Luke, and John, about 1800 years since. These old books Dr. Wiseman will not permit us to look upon as in- spired,— for until we have Jirst ascertained the church's commission, and received her decision as to their inspiration, we must only consider them as ' mere historians/ But in these old writings we find five or six passages, not designating Rome, any more than Constantinople ; not pointing to the pope, any more than to the archbishop of Canterbury ; but pro- mising a general presence and blessing to the disci- ples of Christ in all ages.
And upon these five or six passages. Dr. Wiseman builds the assumption, that Christ appointed the pope and the college of cardinals at Rome to govern the church in all ages, making their decision infalli- ble and without appeal ; and that the duty of all mankind is neither more nor less than that of ' abso' hUCy unconditional submission to the teaching of the dmrchJ This Church then becomes our infallible BULB, and we now receive the scriptures at her hands, and believe them to be the word of God, merely be- cause she declares them to be so.
But this scheme is not logically tenable. We will not now discuss the passages cited ; their bearing and import may be more or less absolute and dis-
242 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM.
tinct. Bat we will merely obsenre, that if we are Uf take them as ordinary 'baman historians/ and to accept their narratives jast as we should those of other parties, writing, like them, many years after the occarrences related took place, we must necessarily look upon every sentence, every word, in fact, of these &ve or six passag^es, as being more or less un- certain. The itispiratian of the writers being put otU of view, there is not a word of these few brief passages, of the accuracy of which we can feel positively as- sured. What really occurred may have been, by the omission or addition of a word or two, materially altered. Upon such a basis as this, therefore, it is idle to think of resting so vast an edifice as an in- fallible tribunal. As well might we attempt to erect St. Peter's on a quicksand. The attempt utterly fails. The result, then, is as follows : The Romanist first takes part with the sceptic in denying the possibility of establishing the divine inspiration of the scriptures : He then endeavours to rear up an infallible and di- vinely-commissioned authority in the room of the scriptures, — but upon no better foundation than a few brief sentences of two or three ' mere historians/ who, of course, might err, — might be misinformed, or might misconstrue what they heard. This attempt necessarily fails ; and having previously declared it impossible to ascertain the inspiration of the Scrip- tures without the aid of the Church, the poor Roman- ist is necessarily left, if he conducts the inquiry with logical precision, without any escape from the gulph of infidelity.
XL THE PROTESTANT RULE OF FAITH.
THE GENUINENESS AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE
HOLY SCRIPTURES.
Proceeding with the consideration of Dr. Wise- lan's objections to the Scriptures as a Rale of Faith, e are now to enter upon the second point, — that the ifficalties raised by Dr. W. in the way of an ordi- ary and unlearned person, are not of that serious or isurmountable character which he would have us to ippose. And perhaps it will be the most satisfac- iry method, if we follow, step by step, Dr. W.'s wn argument.
His first difSculty,- as he himself states it, is this : lat ' before any one can even commence the exa- ination of that rule, which his church proposes to im, he must have satisfied himself, that all those )oks or writings, which are gathered together in lat volume, are really the genuine works of those hose names they bear ; and that no such genuine ork has been excluded, so that the rule be perfect
R2
244 ESSAYS ON ROMAKISlf:
and entire.' ^ In other words, be most be coDTinced that the scriptures are aothentic docaments, and that the canon has been so settled as to be clear and in- disputable. Now we trust that there will be little diflBculty in shewing, that the proofs and evidences on these points are so clear, so abundant, and. so ac- cessible, as to offer to every candid inquirer absolute demonstration, and that, by means of an inyestiga- tion, which need be neither laborious nor prolonged.
This investig^ation, however, concerns two distinct questions. We have the Hebrew scriptures, or the books of Moses and the prophets, which were en- trusted to the Jewish church, and which, under God's providence, were kept entire and pure from error by that church. And we have also the Greek scriptures, or the books of the New Testament, of which tbe Jewish people never had charge, but which were deposited with the Christian church, and which that church, like the Jewish, has preserved whole and unconfonnded with any spurious produc- tions. This point, indeed, is worthy of remark, and ought to call for our grateful admiration. Both the Jewish church and the Christian have fallen into great sins and backslidings ; but still that one pe- culiar duty which God put upon them, he took care that they should accurately fulfil. To the Jews * were committed the oracles of God,' so far ~as the Hebrew prophets had declared those oracles ; and to the Christian church, the like records concerning the gospeL The Jewish church even denied and cruci- fied the Lord of glory, and was driven into exile and slavery for that crime; — but still this especial duty
1 Wiaeman*9 Second Lecture, p. 3S.
\
THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 245
of bearing witness to the ' holy oracles' was never forgotten, and to this hoar that witness is borne, and those oracles are preserved, eyen in the midst of the most total apostacy and rejection of the gospel. The ancient Christian churches, too, as first planted at Jerusalem, at Antioch, and at Rome, ha?e fallen into fearful error and apostacy ; but still the doty of bear* ing witness to the oracles committed to them is in force, and that witness they do accordingly bear. Thus the Jewish church is perfectly clear and unfal- tering in her testimony to the Jewish scriptures; and the Christian churches, including even Rome herself, bear equally unhesitating witness to the Christian records. Each, in its own department, fully discharges the duty laid upon it. And thus it comes to pass, that the only apocryphal or doubtful writings which at all interfere with the clearness of this testimony, are those which Rome has endea- Toored to add, not to her own sacred deposit, the Christian records, but to those of the Jews, — ^to those with which, as keeper, she had no concern. In her own department, — the care of the books of the New Testament, — even Rome herself was not permitted to go astray ; but inthat in which she bad no office or function, the care of the Hebrew scrip- tures, she was left to follow her own devices, and to do what mischief she could. But let it be always remembered, that the Jews, the keepers of the He- brew scriptures, are perfectly decided in their eyi- dence as to what those scriptures comprehend ; and the Christian churches, which have the charge of tbe New Testament, are equally agreed on the canon of that part of holy writ. The only dispute has arisen from the church of Rome having gone out of
246 ISSATS OB
its aivB pcovnce, mmd mammeA tke right oC addnig to tke caMMi oC iJk Jemuk ttriftmnM^ with the setUe- of wkick ske had Bolkiiig wkatevcr tD do.
Ha^iBg Made this ■>■■■> m paaug, we will bow to the wadm sehfcct. ProWbl j H wiU he tke best coarse to take caeh of these two series by itself awl to bcfia with the Gicck scripdncs, the books of the New TestasKBt. Dr. Wiscana*s okiectkNi is,— that great dificolties meet the iaqoirer who wishes to ascertain, 1st. that all these books or writings are reallj the genoiiie works of those whose names they bear; and, 2Dd. that nothing has been omitted at excladed which ought bj right to form part of the series.
To this qaestion we will now address oif rseWes. And first, let as bear in mind the aniyersal experi- ence of mankind, as to the difficalty, or rather the impossibility, of gaining credence and establishment for a forged work, especially if the matter contained in that work be of any importance or interest to mankind generally. We are told that David Hume, aboat a century ago, wrote and published a History of England. There is no one, of coarse, now living, who can at all attest the fact, from his own know- ledge, that this very man Home did write that iden- tical book ; and yet the man who refased to believe that fact would be justly considered as little better than a fool. And why? First, because the book has been universally received, in our own time, and in that of our fathers, as that of the author whose name it bears; and, secondly, because an immense body of corroborative evidence is accessible, consist- ing of the testimonies of various persons of that and succeeding periods, all testifying to the fact, that
THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 247
such a man did actually live at the time in qaestioD, and that he did write and publish that book.
Bat may not the pablic of that day have been de- ceived into the reception of a spurious work ; and may not the writers in question have been involved in the same error? Such questions are best an- swered by inquiring, whether it would be easy, at the present instant, to gain credit for a forgery, pur- porting to be two additional volumes of the same history ?
Every one at all acquainted with such matters, knows in an instant that the thing would be impos- sible. The imposture would be instantly detected, and the forgery, if it were remembered at all at a distance of fifty years hence, would only be remem- bered as a forgery*
General reception, then, is the strongest possible evidence for the authenticity of any work. Why do we entirely believe that Thucydides and Herodotus wrote the histories which bear their names, or that Virgil produced a poem called ' the ^neid,' or Milton one entitled * Paradise Lost?' Because we know by abundant experience, that an imposition Qpon the whole body of intelligent and educated nen who are living at any one time, is, in any mat- ter of moment, absolutely impossible ; and that con- sequently, if a whole generation of such men have admitted a fact of this kind, the evidence of its tmth is little short of that of oor own senses.
Upon these principles we receive the works of mrious celebrated heathens, who lived in the same age with the evangelists and apostles,— such as Livy, Ceesar, and Seneca, — although we have not, for any one of their works, evidence of the hundredth part
248 ESSAYS ON BOMANISM:
of the strength of that which confirms the aathen« ticity of the Greek scriptures. We receive them without a doubt. Not a dissentient voice, among ali the philosophers and learned men, whether Christian or infidel, ventures to suggest the least ground for hesitation. And, in fact, any man who plainly de- clared his disbelief in the genuineness of Caosai^s Commentaries, would be instantly set down, by all competentjudges, as an irrational person, or in other words, as all but an idiot.
But it may be said, that this is all very well in the case of mere human works, the truth and authenticity of which may be of small importance; but that we must require, in a case of this vast and momentous kind, some higher evidence than mere human testimony?
Let us, however, reflect for a moment, what it is that we are asking ! God has given to mankind a book, which is intended to be *' a light unto their steps, and a lamp unto their path." We are not now to ejnter on that part of the subject, or we should urge, in the first place, that the intrinsic character of such a work must be its strongest evidence of au- thenticity. . The book of God must be such a book as no human being could indite. And the Bible is nich a book. But we must not open this part of the question. We keep to external evidence, and re- mark, in the first place, that it were wholly unrea- sonable to expect that God, having given such a book to man, should set aside the laws of nature, and should himself, by a personal manifestation, or by an an- gelic messenger, place it in each ihdividuars hand, as his immediate gift, supernaturally conveyed. Abundantly sufficient is it, if this book be not only found, when examined, to be such as God alone
THE TBUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 249
coald have dictated; but if its aothentioity and gefiaineiiess, as the true and real production of eer- tain inspired prophets and apostles, whose names are thereunto affixed, and whose histories are fully Imown, be made not only as clear as the genuineness of other works, but a hundred times more so. And tikis has been done, as we shall now proceed to shew.
Confining ourselves, at present, to the point of the genuineness and authenticity of these books, we first propose this view of the case :
Suppose the inquirer to have been born about the year a.d. 110, or shortly after the death of St. John, he would then have found, when he came to man's estate, a certain book, preserved among the Christian churches, which was called St. John's gospel, or the history of Christ written by him. This book he would have found eyerywhere held, by these Christians, in high esteem, it being copied, read, and preserved among them as a document of the highest value.
Of St. John himself, his labours, his character, and the certainty of his having really written the book in question, he would baye found many who could testify of their own personal knowledge. Ene- Diies, too, there would be, but not one of these ever thought of questioning the fact, that the apostle was io truth the author of the said book.
Now, under these circumstances, what could he lo but fully admit and believe this fact, that the K)ok in question was really produced by St. John ? Lnd having thus received it, he would naturally each the same thing to the generation which sue- eeded him, and they, in their turn, to that which illowed. It is thus that we know that David Hume rote a history of England, and John Bunyan, * The
250 ESSAYS €m mOMMMOMZ
Pill^Bi's Pra^icas.' Amd if we begin to object to tbis sort of testiBonj, we sball very soon come to den J tbat there ever was soch a person as Bonaparte, or soch an e? eot as the battle of Waterloo.
We have thus placed onrseWes in imafination ii the second ceotary. Bat may we not as well deal with the fact as it is, and shew bow we now, in the nineteenth centory, assure oarselTcs of the aathes- ticitj of these books ? Let ns ask, first, how do we satisfy oarseWes of similar matters concerning other documents. For instance, as a late writer asks, ' How do we know that the surrey of England, called Doomsday Book, was written in the eleventh cen- tury .' I apply the like arguments. We received by distinct transmission the historical fact. It was mat- ter of record. It has been referred to by contemporary and all succeeding historians. It has been appealed to in our courts of law, from a.d. 1100 to the present time. I am, therefore, just as certain of the authen- ticity of this celebrated document, as if I had lived at the period when it was first compiled.' ^
Or, to go back to the very period of our own sacred books ; how do we ascertain the genuineness of any of the great Roman authors of the Augustan age — of the writings of Seneca, for instance, who was put to death by Nero, about a. d. 68, or very near the pe- riod of the martyrdom of St. Paul ? * I answer, on the same principle as before, because I can trace up the book from the present age, in successive reference or quotation, through each preceding age to the very time in which he lived. I turn to Tacitus, the cele- brated contemporary historian, whose writings have
1 Wilton't Eoidencu, vol. i. p. 71.
THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 251
r
been in every one's hand ever since, and there I read the account of Seneca. I turn to Qaintilian, who flourished within twenty years of Seneca's death, and there I find a criticism on his works. From that day to the present I see those works referred to, quoted, commended, blamed, by men of different classes, ages, nations, and opinions, in opposition to eaeh other in almost every other respect, but all aj^eeing as to the authenticity of these books, I have here all the evidence I could desire. I am as certain of the historical fact concerning the writings of Seneca, as I should have been if I had lived at the time/ 1
But we assert something more than this. We assert that the evidence in favour of the genuineness of the books of the New Testament, is far stronger than that in favour of any other ancient books whatever. And it is so, to a degree which sets all comparison at de- fiance. We may particularize : —
1. The testimonies borne to them by indepen- dent writers, both friendly and unfriendly to their contents.
2. The immense number of ancient manuscript copies, which are found in every part of the world.
3. The evidence of facts which are open to our own observation, and which confirm the statements therein made.
Let us begin with the testimony borne to them by authors of every age.
We receive the writings of Seneca, as has just been observed, because we find his history recorded in Tacitus, an historian of that day ; because we find
1 WiU(m*9 EvUmeet, vol. i. p. 72.
252 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
QaintiliaD, a writer immediately following him, cri- ticising his works as known and authentic produc- tions, and because we find those writings preserved, referred to, quoted, and handed down to us, through each successive age from that in which he lived to the present. Now let us try the New Testament by a similar rule.
The first disciples of the apostles, like the apostles themselves, were not selected from the wise or learned of the earth, nor could we expect to find many remains of their writings. Yet there are frag- ments now extant of no less than six of the fellow- labourers of the apostles ; Clement, Hennas, Bamahat, Ignatiiu, Polycarp, and Papias, all of whom were personally acquainted with the apostles, and who, even in the short pieces of their production which still remain, cite the books of the New Testament, as works universally known and admitted as of au- thority among Christians, not fewer than two hundred and twenty times.
In the next century this testimony becomes still more extensive. We have thirty-six writers, whose works, in whole or in part, have come down to us, and so numerous are their citations, that a large part of the New Testament might be collected from their writings. Justin Martyr, for instance, — who was born A.D. 89, and died a.d. 164, gives us nearly two hundred quotations. We also find abundant evidence in these writers, that the scriptures were at this time customarily read in the churches, that they were col- lected into volumes, and that translations of them into other languages were then carrying on.
In the third and fourth centuries, the evidence of this kind becomes too voluminous to be even de-
THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 253
scribed. More than a huDdred authors remain, all Pilose works bear testimony to the same leading fact, that the books which we call the New Testament were then universally received throughout the Christian ;iiarcb. Quotations become so numerous, that in one iogle father, Atbanasius, they exceed twelve hundred. Lnd n&w we find, as we might expect, great atten- ion given to the settlement of the canon. Spurious ooks bad appeared. Councils are therefore held, nd the most careful inquiries gone into, as to the enuineness of every book ; and those only are ad- litted into the sacred collection, whose title is esta- lisbed by sufficient and concurrent testimony. Thus; he very inquiry through which we are now passing, ^as gone into at a period when the best possible vidence was attainable — when, in all probability, he very autographs of the apostles themselves were till extant ; when the disciples of those who had seen nd conversed with them were still living ; and when he churches which they had formed still existed in he very form and order in which they had them- elves constituted them.
It cannot be necessary to proceed any further with his chain of evidence, for every one who is conversant irith ancient writings must know that from the period »f the council of Nice, a.d. 313, the whole literature »f Europe bears continual and unvarying witness to he fact, that the scriptures were universally re- ceived, and that those scriptures were the same looks which we now possess under that title. We rill just allude, however, to the evidence of the ad- rersaries of the Christian faith during these early periods. For instance, we find Celsus, a heathen philosopher, living about a. d. 175, arguing against
254 ESSAYS OK ROMAKISIC:
Cbristianity with the greatest earnestness and acute- ness ; but he never thinks of denying either the ex- istence or the genuineness of the books of the New Testament. On the contrary, he argues upon them as authentic works, and as generally receiTod* So also does Porphyry, another heathen opponent, io the next centary. He, too, like Celsus, opposes the Christian faith, but he does not think of denying the authenticity of the Christian scriptures. Julian, again, the emperor, argues against Christianity with all the zeal and bitterness of an apostate, but he deals with the gospels as the unquestionable writings of the apostles and disciples of Christ, and as generally ad- mitted and acknowledged to be such.
This is but a slight sketch of the immense body of evidence which is extant, establishing the fact, that the books of the New Testament were generally re- ceived, at the time of their production, and at every subsequent period, as the true and genuine works of the disciples and apostles of our Lord. But we proceed.
Secondly, to remark on the further proof afiforded by the circumstance, of the vast number of ancient copies of these books which have come down to us.
The standard works of ancient classics or historians have been generally preserved by a few remaining manuscripts. Ofsome we have ten or twelve; of others two or three, of many only one. Yet, when the in- ternal character of the work is consistent with that of the author, and we hav« the collateral proof de- rived from the allusions and criticisms of contempo- rary writers, we do not hesitate to adopt even a single manuscript as a valuable and genuine relic of an established authoc
THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 255
Bat instead of ten or twelve, or even of fifty or an handred, the ancient manuscripts of the New Testa- ment are nambered by thousands. Every ancient library throughout Christendom abounds with them. Nor are these manuscripts the production of any particular age, but of all, even from the days of the apostles, down to the invention of printing. No pos- sible proof can be imagined, more conclusive than this, of the fact, that in all these ages they were known, and in all of them highly prized and hon- oured.
About ^ye hundred different manuscripts of the New Testament are known to have been collated, and by these collations or comparisons another fact has been established, namely, that so carefully has the watchful eye of God's providence guarded the sacred text, that not one of all these hundreds of transcribers, in all ages and ajl countries of the world, has been permitted to introduce a single fundamental alteration, or even a doubt tending to weaken any one doctrine of the Christian faith.
We will mention a few of these ancient copies, in order to shew the extraordinary completeness of the proof arising from this branch of evidence.
In the British Museum, among a multitude of an- cient copies, we find especially the Codex Alexan- drinus, or Alexandrian copy, which was presented in 1628, by the patriarch of Constantinople, to king Charles I. That patriarch stated, in a schedule thereunto annexed, that the traditional history of it described it as having been written by Thecia, a noble Egyptian lady, about 130Q years before that time, (a. d. 1628,) or about the period of the council of Nice, in the beginning of the fourth century.
256 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM:
In the Vatican at Rome we find the Codex Vaticawu, a manuscript which is assigneil by antiquaries to the fourth centary, and which contains not only the books of the New Testament, bat also the Greek Version of the Septoagint.
At Cambridge is deposited the Codex Beza, or copy of Beza, who presented it to that university in 1581. It contains the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, in Greek, with the Latin version in use before the time of Jerome. This manuscript is as- signed by Dr. Kipling to the second century, though other learned men contend for a date somewhat later.
In the Royal Library at Paris is the Codex Ephroemif a very ancient manuscript, containing the whole of the Greek Bible, though the earlier part is somewhat defaced. The same library also possesses the Codex Cleromontantis, a manuscript of St. Paul's epistles in Greek, with the ancient Latin version. It was found in the monastery of Clermont, and is believed to be of the date of the sixth or seventh century.
We may add, that it was but the other day that a splendid manuscript of the whole Bible, written by one of the chiefscholarsof the court of Charlemagne, was publicly exhibited in London. But of that period, and of later dates, manuscripts abound in every part of Europe.
We might extend this series of proofs by referring to the various translations which are known to have been made, such as that of Jerome, into Latin, in A. D. 384— that of Uiphilas, into Gothic, about the same period — that of Frumentius, into Ethiopic, also in the fourth century ; that of Miesrob, into Armenian, of the fifth century ; with the Anglo-Saxon, of the eighth,
THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 257
and the Sclavonian, of the niDth, centuries, — bat we mnst desist. The difficnlty, in truth, that chiefly perplexes us here, is, how to select from the abun- dant and overwhelming proofs which press npon us on every side. But we must hasten onwards, and shall advert next, very briefly, to the evidence of facts.
What we mean by this expression, will be seen by simply referring to the standing evidence afl'orded by the Lord's Supper. This custom, or rather rite, is now, and has been for eighteen centuries, in uni- versal use among all Christian churches. Christians can satisfactorily explain its origin and intent, by referring to the account of its institution in the gospel and epistles. The narrative and the fact pre- sent a perfect agreement. But if we reject this ac- count of the matter, then we find ourselves in this difficulty, that a practice exists among all the Chris- tian nations of the earth, of the origin and meaning of which no satisfactory account can be given. For no other account than that which the gospels furnish, has ever been produced by any of the opponents of Christianity.
A like evidence is furnished by the other sacra- ment, that of baptism. Perhaps it may be said that the admission of converts into the profession of a religion has generally taken place by some kind of baptism. But Christian baptism is a baptism into the names and worship of the Trinity— Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. These ancient books, for the au- thenticity of which we are now contending, tell us that this rite was instituted by Christ himself in this very form, above eighteen hundred years ago. And we can prove without difficulty, by a great number of ancient writers, that such a rite has been observed^
s
258 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
tbroQghoat all those centuries, by sach as professed to believe and obey Cbrist. And to close the chain of evidence, we see with our own eyes the fact now in existence around us ; a fact of the origin of which we find no other rational account than that which the gospels supply.
Again, Christians observe, with religious worship, the first day of the week, 'differing therein, not only from the heathen, but also from the Jews. Whence arises this distinction ? The gospels explain it. It was on the first day of the week that the Saviour rose from the dead ; and his disciples, from that time forward, hallowed that day as their Sabbath, and met together to break bread, to hear and read the scriptures, and to exhort one another to faith, and to works of charity.
We ought, perhaps, to have given a fourth class of proofs, namely, the corroborations of scripture which abound in the works of the adversaries of Christianity : such as Tacitus and Pliny, two learned heathen writers, each of whom bears witness to the fact of the existence of the Christian religion and the worship of Christ ; the one, about the year A. D. 60, the other, about a. d. 170 ; and both of whom confirm the leading facts as to the death of Christ and the character of his religion. In Jose- phus, too, a Jewish writer, decidedly hostile to Chris- tianity, we have various confirmations of all the leading facts of the gospel history ; as we have also in the Mishna, a collection of Jewish traditions, pub- lished about A.D. 180, and in the Talmud, compiled between a.d. 300 and 500. And lastly, Mahomet himself, when founding a rival faith, expressly al- ludes to our Lord, and to John the Baptist, and
THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 259
speaks of Christ's miracles and his ascension as an- dabitable facts. Bot we almost fear overwhelming the question with sach variety of proofs, and there- fore shall only add, in closing this part of the sub- ject, that there is not a fact in all ancient history which is established by evidence of one hundredth part of the strength which combines to prove the genuineness and authenticity of the books of the New Testament. We might deny the existence of Julias Caesar, or of Charlemagne, or even of Bona- parte himself, with much more shew of rationality than we can question the existence of the apostle Paul, or the fact of his having bequeathed to the church his invaluable epistles.
The foregoing remarks, however, are confined to the question of the authenticity of the New Testa- ment; and we have still to speak of the Hebrew scriptures.
The one question, however, is included in the other. If we arrive at a satisfactory conclusion as to the New Testament, — that it is an authentic col- lection, written, unquestionably, by the authors whose names it bears, — and if its doctrines and averments be not only ^eneraZ/^ true, but in all cases infallibly so, being inspired by the Holy Spirit, — then we shall find the whole question as to the Old Testament already disposed of. For, throughout the New Tes- tament are the Hebrew scriptures constantly ap- pealed to, their statements confirmed, or taken to be altogether indubitable, and their whole contents to be '* given by inspiration of God," ** for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness/'
We may, therefore, next proceed to the question of the Divine Inspiration of the scriptures, which, in-
S 2
260 ESSAYS ON RCHKANISM:
deed, is the point on which Dr. Wiseman predicted that we should find the greatest difficulty.
But we must first remark, that another important point, — the Credibility or truth of the books of the New Testament, is, in effect, involved in their au- thenticity or genuineness. I mean, that having ar- rived at a certainty that the books in question are not forgeries, but that they were actually written at the times, and by the persons whose names they bear, we shall find it impossible to avoid the next conclusion, — namely, that they were true records of things which really occurred.
These books relate, not a series of ordinary or im- material occurrences only, but a course of the most extraordinary and supernatural events that ever took place on the earth. The authors either witnessed and knew the truth of the things which they relate, or they were a company of the greatest liars and de- ceivers that the world ever saw.
That they were liars and impostors is in the last degree improbable, inasmuch as the system of morals which they preached, was the highest and purest ever inculcated upon man. It included perfect holiness, in thought, word, and deed, and especially forbade falsehood, under the penalty of eternal misery in hell.
The declaration of the gospel of Christ, and the in- culcation of this system of pure and holy living, offered to them no prospects of earthly gains, or hon- ors, or power ; but the very contrary. They preached this faith and morality throughout whole lives of suf- fering, contempt, and hardship, and died, for the most part in cruel torments, without any one of them abandoning his Christian profession.
The supposition, therefore, that a set of men, of
THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 261
irreproachable lives, and preaching a system of the highest and purest morality, would persist, through a long series of years, in a tissue of the grossest false- hoods, and all this without any one human motive, without a hope of gaining any thing but scorn and suffering for their pains, is about the most extrava- gant specimen of improbability that ever was ima- gined. And when we remember that during a period of sixty or seventy years, not one of their number ever gave way — not one, amidst all their sufferings, ever threw off the disguise and acknowledged the whole to be an imposture, we must certainly admit that, on the hypothesis that the system was based in falsehood, the so long endurance of so great a number of persons, without any imaginable motive, in braving the severest persecution in its assertion, was the most stupendous moral miracle that the world ever beheld !
But that the gospel history is a falsehood, is more than improbable : it is impossible.
The general reception of the gospels, upon which we have already dwelt, as proving their genuineness and authenticity, proves this also.
We have seen that these books, the gospels and epistles, were, from the very beginning of Christianity, received and preserved with honour, as sacred books. We have seen that in the age immediately succeed- ing the apostles, they were universally admitted as authorities, and were quoted as such by every Chris- tian writer. This evidence grows and increases with the spread of Christianity, and we soon see the canon formed, catalogues of the sacred books authorita- tively settled, and translations of the now completed New Testament commenced.
Now all this establishes in the most irrefragable
262 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
manner, the fact, that from the ^ery beginning of Christianity, these books were admitted and recog- nized as true*
These books, however, abound witb narratives of the most extraordinary facts. The times and places of those events are always ^iven, and maltitodes of witnesses are appealed to, as knowing the troth of the facts so stated. Now that sach narratives as these, if they were altogether false, should have been aoiver- salfy received as true, is nothing less than utterly impossible.
True, it might possibly be asked, Did not Maho- met, in the Koran, pretend to have been the subject of divers miracles ; and has it not been shewn, in one of our former essays, that many miracles, gene- rally received in the Romish church, were, in fact, no miracles at all?
These remarks, however, only go to strengthen our position. Mahomet, asserting a divine mission, and therefore standing in great need of miracles to esta- blish his claim, yet never ventured to assert that he had publicly performed a single such act True, he relates marvellous stories of being carried up to hea- ven on a mule, and the like, but such narratives as these prove nothing. Any impostor may narrate dreams, and visions, and spiritual revelations, con- cerning which not a single person besides himself knows anything, and he is beyond the reach of con- tradiction. But to raise the dead, or to give sight to the incurably blind, is a more difficult task. The common sense of mankind will not submit to impo- sition in such matters as these ; and accordingly Mahomet never ventured even to profess his power to perform acts of this description.
THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 268
And just the same is the case with the Romish charch. Their miracles, like those of the Trvingites, are generally done in a corDer ; in some secluded nannery, or private apartment, and they consist in restoring a lame hand, or giving strength to a weak- ened back, or some other dubious sort of proceed- ing, which fancy or medicine might have effected, without calling in supernatural aid*
And here it is that the truth of the New Testa- ment writers is manifested in such resplendent clear- ness. Take the case of St. Luke. He, like St. Matthew and St. Mark, records the remarkable fact, that during the hours of Jesus' agony on the cross, there was a supernatural gloom, the sun itself being darkened : and that at the moment of his death, there was an earthquake which rent the solid marble veil of the temple ; and that these manifestations so struck the centurion and the multitude, that they openly expressed their conviction of the divine cha- racter of Christ !
St. Luke then goes on to assert that shortly after oar Lord's departure, a supernatural gift of tongues was conferred on the disciples, whereby they, being previously ignorant Galileans, were instantaneously enabled to speak with fluency, the tongues of all the various foreigners who visited Jerusalem. He adds, that on the same occasion, a single sermon of St. Peter's produced so astonishing an effect on the peo- ple at Jerusalem, as to convert at once about three thousand souls !
tie next tells us that a certain man who had been lame from his mother's womb, and who was well known by all the frequenters of the temple, was, in that great resort, and at the hour when it was most
264 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM:
thronged, pablicly and instantaneously cared of his lameness, by a single word from St. Peter !
Not to particalarize each of the sapernataral events recorded by him, we will merely add that he dis- tinctly asserts that at Joppa Peter restored to life a woman who had lain some hours dead, and that this '* was known throaghoat all Joppa." He tells as that the same apostle, being confined with most extraor- dinary care in the prison at Jerusalem, was released by an angel in so miraculous a manner, as to leave the keepers without any reasonable account to give, of his escape ; another fact which must have been matter of perfect notoriety, if true. And of St. Paul he narrates many equally miraculous circumstances.
Now these narratives, be it remembered, were pub- lished, in the face of all, whether friends or opposers, in the very theatre of all these mighty deeds* If all these strange facts were mere inventions, what but shame and confusion of face could have been the lot of the author and his book? Let any one, in the present day, publish a story, that on a certain cala- mitous day, such as that of the death of the Princess Charlotte, the passing of the Romish Relief Bill, or the death of Mr, Irving, all England was covered with a supernatural darkness, not atmospheric merely, but arising from a visible loss of the sun's brightness. Let him add, that at the same moment the earth shook, and an immense chasm opi^ned in the dome of St. Paul's cathedral. What would be said of such an historian ? Would there be a single voice raised in his defence? Would it be possible that at the end of five or ten years, his narrative could be quoted as possessing the least authority ? Most assuredly not. The book might be remembered, it is true; but
THE TRUTH OF THE SCRIPTURES. 265
it would only be mentioned by contemporaries as either the work of a madman, or a most audacious collection of falsehoods.
But what was the fate of St Luke's narrative? Do we find, in any of the writings of the heathens and Jews of that day, any reproach directed against the eyangelists or apostles, as publishing a series of the most monstrous fictions? Not a word — on the contrary, eyery allusion that we find is a confirma- tion of the truth of these records. Joseph us confirms many of the principal facts narrated in the gospels. So does Tacitus ; — and the early Christian writers, SQch as Justin Martyr, in appealing to the emperors for justice, constantly refer to the archiyes of the empire, in which, as they assert, there was deposited under Pilate's own hand, a full confirmation of all the chief facts of their case. Tertullian boldly says, ' Search your own public records ; at the moment of Christ's death, the light departed from the sun, and the land was darkened at noon-day, which wonder is related in your own annals, and is preserved in your archives/ *
The main feature of the case, however, is, that these books, the gospels and other portions of the New Testaments, were universally received and honoured in the highest degree. They stated facts of the most extraordinary character, and the truth or falsehood of those statements must have been universally known. To suppose that the whole body of the Christians, knowing them to be filled with the most ootorions falsehoods, — asserting miracles which never took place, and gifts of tongues and wonderful con-
1 Apology t c. 21.
266 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM.
versions of which no one ever heard, woald neverthe- less have exalted them to divine honours, would he beyond all credibility. To sappose, too, that, if they were so filled with falsehoods, and were generally known to be fabaloas, none of the opposers of the gospel, such as Celsus, Porphyry, or Julian, should ever have poured contempt upon them ; nay, shoald even have admitted their statements to be generally correct, is equally out of all reasonable belief. The fact is, that their general reception, and their unim- peached admission even by the enemies of the gos- 1 pel, fully establishes the fact of their substantial Truth.
XII. THE PROTESTANT RULE OF FAITH.
THE DIVINE INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURES.
Our last essay closed the CLrgumeni on the genuineness I and authenticity of the Holy Scriptares, and we now come to speak of their Divine Inspiration.
Such, at least, is the natural course ; though, in- deed, if their genuineness and authenticity be con- ceded, their inspiration seems to follow as a necessary consequence.
Not that we would assert, that if a narrative is shewn to be authentic and generally credible, it is therefore to be admitted as of divine authority ; but that, considering the things declared in the books in question, and the authority continually assumed therein, we must come to one of two conclusions, — either that the apostles and evangelists were liars and impostors; or that they really wrote under the ^idance and direction of the Holy Spirit. Now we have already come to the conclusion that it was im- possible that they could be liars and impostors, and
268 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
yet be received as trae witnesses by all the myriads of the eariy Christian charch : conseqaently there is only the other conclusion remaining to as.
But it will certainly be advisable to state this ar- gument somewhat more fully and explicitly. We begin, then, by observing that the apostles them- selves lay claim, without hesitation, to divine autho- rity and direction. They do this both impliedly^ in speaking of the Old Testament writers and compariog themselves with them ; and expressly, by asserting, in plain terms, their own inspiration.
1. Impliedly: The Old Testament is repeatedly spoken of, both by Christ and by his apostles, as a divine revelation. It is said — " The Holy Ghost iy the mouth of David spake;** — " How doth David tn Spirit call him Lord ; "— " Who hy the mouth of thy servant David hast said," — ** Well spake the HoLY Ghost by Esaias the prophet, saying** Sfc. — " Searching what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified before- hand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow,** " The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved BY THE HoLY Ghost." •' XJnio them (the Jews) were committed THE ORACLES OF GoD."
Now this divine character, which is constantly as* signed to the Old Testament scriptures by the writers of the New Testament, is at other times equally claimed for both. This is seen by such expressions as, '^ Built upon the foundation of the apostles and PROPHETS." ** That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, AND of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Sa- viour.'* All scj'ipture is given by inspiration of God,
THE INSPIBATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 269
tmd is profitable for doctrine ,* &c. '* Even as our be- loved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom GIVEN X7NTO HIM, hath written unto you ; in which are some things hard to he understood, which they that are un- learned and unstable, wrest, as they do also the other SCRIPTURES, unto their own destruction**
Tbas we find the apostles distinctly speaking of the Inspiration of the books of the Old Testament, as a matter respecting which no one entertained any doubt, and then equalling their own writings with them. But,
2. They expressly asserted their own Inspiration. And here we must unhesitatingly contradict Dr. Wiseman, who, in one of his most intrepid assertions, says, ' Nowhere have we the record of any of these writers having asserted his own inspiration.'^ Let the untruth of this representation be seen in the fol- lowing passages.
The evangelists record the direct and explicit pro- mise of Christ, that the Holy Ghost should, after his ascension, descend upon them, and dwell in them, as ^n infallible guide.
" When the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto ^ou from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which jproceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me : " and ^* he will guide yon into all truth : for he shall not speah of himself ; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speah : and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me : for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you** (John xv. 26 ; xvi. 13, 14.)
'* / will pray the Father, and he shall give you ano- ther Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever,
■ WiMeman^t Second Lecture t p. 43.
270 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
even the Spirit of truth, whom the world eaimot receive, because it seeth him not^ neither hnowetk him; but ye know him, for he dwelleth with you, and shall he in you." (John xiv. 16, 17.)
*' But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, what' soever I have said unto you.** (John xiv. 26.)
** And when they shall bring you unto the synagogust^ and unto magistrates and unto powers, tahe ye no thougkt how or what ye shall answer, or what ye shall say : for the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what yt ought to say y (Lake xii. 11, 12.)
^' Take no thought how or what ye shall speak ; for tt shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak* For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in youJ* (Matt. x. 19, 20.)
And the apostles claim this character, for their de- liberate and official communications to the church. When James and the church at Jerusalem wrote to the churches of the Gentiles, by the hands of Bar- nabas and Paul, they say, without hesitation, ^' It seemed good to the HoLY GHOST, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things** (Acts XV. 28.)
St. Paul closes his epistle to the Romans in this manner : Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began : but now is made mani- fest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith,** (Rom. xvi. 25, 26.)
THE INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 271
In bis first epistle to the Corinthians, he tells that charch, ** My speech and my preaching was not with en- tieing words of mans wisdom, hut in demonstration of the Spirit and of power : that your faith should not stand in ths wisdom of men, hut in the power of God,'* " But as it is written, Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us hy his Spirit : for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God* For what man hnoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? evert so the things of God hnoweth no man hut the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, hut the Spirit which is of God ; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God, Which things also we speak, not in the words which main's wisdom teacheth, hut WHICH THE Holy Ghost Teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are fool- ishness unto him, neither can he know them, hecause they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judg-^ eth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that^ he may in- struct him? But we have the mind of Christ/' (1 Cor. ii.4, 6, 9— 16.
And subsequently, in the same epistle, he says, ** If any man think himself to he a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are THE COMMANDMENTS OF THE LORD/* (1 Cor.
xiv. 37.)
To the Galatians he says, " / certify you, hrethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. Far I neither received it of man, neither was I
272 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
taught it, hut by THE REVELATION OF Jesus Christ.** (Gal.i. 11,12.)
And another apostle, St. John, the writer of one of the gospels, three epistles, and the Apocalypse, com- mences the latter book in these words, *' T^e Revela- tion of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must slu>rtlg come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John*** ^* 1 was in the Spirit on the Lord*s day, a^d heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last : and, What thou seest, write in a book.** (Rev. i. 10, 11.)
Dr. Wiseman's assertion, therefore, is most iinjas- tifiable. The distinct claim of the writers both of the Old and New Testaments, is, that they were the mouth of God — that God spake by them — and that the books so given to the church were to be separated and kept sacred above all other writings, as being
THE HOLY scriptures — the ORACLES OF GOD.
But it may be said, that, admitting that Dr. Wise- man went rather too far in this assertion, and con- ceding that the writers of these books did in fact claim for themselves the attribute of inspiration ; still this does not, surely, establish that claim. We are not to admit their inspiration merely because they assert it.
Certainly; — not simply because they assert it; that would, indeed, be too much like the assumptions of the church of Rome. But let us consider the whole facts of the case, and try the claim thus set up by the most exact and rigid rules of reasoning that can be devised.
Here are a number of persons, known by history to have been apostles of Christ, (for Mark's gospel
THE INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 27t
was written under the direction of St. Peter, and Luke's under that of St. Paul ;) and who are there- fore participants in whatever divine influence may have been shed on those apostles. These persons write various books, in which they distinctly assert, as we have just seen, the fact of their inspiration. They present themselves, in short, as messengers from God, speaking and writing under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit. This claim, as we have abundant proof, was universally admitted by the Christians of that day. The books in question were received into all the churches, as the undoubted oracles of God. It was in this light that they were regarded by all the chief guides of the early church. Clement, who was bishop of Rome during the lives of some of the apostles, says, * Look into the holy scrip- tures, which are the true words of the Holy Ghost. Take the epistle of the blessed Paul, the apostle, into your band ; verily he did by the Spirit admonish you.' Justin Martyr says, ' the gospels were written by men full of the Holy Ghost' Irenaus says, ' the scriptures were dictated by the Spirit of God, and therefore it is wick- edness to contradict them, and sacrilege to alter them.' * The gospel/ he adds, * was first preached, and after- wards by the will of God committed to writing, that it might be for time to come the foundation of our faith.' This was the universal belief of the early churches, and it was a discerning and discriminating belief. They did not blindly accept as scriptures whatever might be offered. Various forgeries and imitations of the apostolic writings were put forth, but all such were rejected. Those which were ad- mitted to this high rank were only such books as were satisfactorily known to have been of apostolical origin.
T
r
274 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
But, — it may be asked, — are we sore that in thai accepting the books now called the New Testament, the early Christians acted reasonably and upon good grounds ; and are their reasons must we receive these books as cause the first Christian churches
We reply, — that every kind of evidence is offered to us. Our belief does not rest upon one or two facts only ; but all possible circumstances whick could be imagined, as tending to aid and strengthen our belief, are offered to our mind. It is much to find that the sacred books are handed down to as with the unanimous concurrence of all Christian churches of all ages and countries, as ' tlie true ttf ings of God.* But we have even more than their ac- j^ ceptance to guide us ; we have the grounds and rea- sons of that acceptance, as open and as clear as they were to the early Christians themselves.
Reflect, now, for a moment, what eyidence we should require, were a preacher or messenger to coQie to us, declaring that he had a commission from on high— a direct communication from God to our- selves and others. Of course we should demand some proof of the reality of his mission. We should say to him, * It is easy for any one — whether he has deceived himself or means to deceive us— to say that he is clothed with divine authority, and bears a divine commission;, but the test which we must apply to you is. What can you do? A messenger from on high will have power from on high, where- by men may know him to be indeed sent of Him, who alone can bestow such power.'
Now the two chief credentials which it has pleased God to place in the hands of his messengers to mao,
THE INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 275
ire. Miracles and Prophecy ; the power of suspending tbe laws of natare ; and the power of foretelling fatnre events. Whoever can satisfactorily shew kimself possessed of these two signs of apostleship, or of either of them, has an anquestionable claim upon the attention of mankind. These two signs or credentials are distinctly pointed out in scripture as evidencing the presence of divine power. The fore- knowledge of future events is distinctly claimed in the Old Testament as a divine prerogative : ** lam the first and I am the last ; and beside me there is no God. And who, as I, shall calif and shall declare it, and set it in order for me, since I appointed the ancient people ? and the things which are coming, and shall come ; let them shew vnto them J' '' Thns saith the Lord, ask me of the things to come, concerning my sons : ** ^* who hath declared this from ancient times 1 who hath told it from that time? have not I, the Lord? and there is no God beside me.*' (Isaiah xliv. 6, 7; xlv. 11, 21.)
The other credential of divine authority was natu- rally called for by the Jews, who asked, " What sign shewest thou, that we may see and believe thee ? what dost thou work ? ** (John vi. 30.) And Christ himself recognised the justice of this demand, when he said, ** The works that I do, they bear witness of me" And when appealed to, not in infidel scorn, but in the spirit of sincere inquiry, he produced these creden- tials to the inquirer. It is said, —
*' And John, calling two of his disciples, sent them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come ? or do we look for another ? " " And in the same hour, Jesus cured many of their infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits ; and unto many that were blind he gave sight. And said unto them, Go your way, and tell John
T 2
276 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
what things ye have seen and heard.** (Luke viL 19^ 21,23.)
Tbas our Lord distinctly shewed that he eoDsi- dered it perfectly unnecessary to add a single word in confirmation of a proof so irrefragable of di?iM authority. Nicodemus, also, plainly admitted botb the fact and the inference, when he said, '^ We kmm that thou art a teacher come from God: for no mtm tn do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.** (John iii. 2.)
Nor can anything be more entirely consistent with right reason, than this view of the case. The laws of nature, as they are called, are nothing more than the settled regulations which God has himself im' posed upon the visible creation. These regulation he allows none of the creatures of his hand to trans- gress or change without his direct authority. Con- sequently, when any man is able, openly, and in the face of day, to divide the sea, and make a way through the great deep — to cause the sun-dial to go back a considerable portion of the day — to open the eyes of one born blind, or to restore life to one from whom the spiilt has departed — it at once becomes a matter admitting of no rational doubt, that he is clothed with divine power and authority; — that he is a special ambassador from God himself.
And equally clear is the other point. A view of the future is, beyond all question, open to none but God himself. Not the highest archangel — not Satan himself can .fathom the mind and will of God as to future events ; and upon that mind and will all future events turn. The man, therefore, who is able to foretel with truth the events of a future time, gives the clearest possible proof that he may say
THE INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 277
with David, " The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, ttnd his word was in my tongue,'* (2 Sam. xxiii. 2.)
Now each of these credentials was possessed in the greatest fulness and clearness, both by Christ himself and by his apostles. The miracles wrought tad prophecies uttered by our Lord himself we need not now consider, as the point we are discussing is rather that of the divine mission of his apostles than of his own. But the fact is equally beyond dispute, that those sent out by Christ, to proclaim his gospel, and from whose hands we have received the New Testament, did possess, as certainly, if not to the same extent, these two supernatural powers, of working miracles, and of foretelling future .events, at did Christ himself.
The mission of the apostles may be said to have commenced on the Mount of Ascension, when their final instructions were given to them, in terms dif- fering greatly from any previous message. These instructions ran thus : *^ Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (Mark xvi. 15.) And the evangelist adds, that '^ they went forth and preached everywhere ; the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs fol- lowing." (v. 20.)
Now the details of this their preaching, and of these accompanying " signs," we find in the Acts of the Apostles. We there learn that, immediately after our Lord's ascension, the disciples assembled at Jerusalem, " to wait for the promise of the Father** *< the Holy Ghost.** This baptism of the Holy Ghost was given to them ten days after their Lord's ascen- sion, and it was accompanied with signs of an extra- ordinary character. The power of understanding
278 ESSAYS ON aOMANISM:
and speaking all langaages was suddenly bestowed on these poor and illiterate men, so that ^^ men out af every nation under heaven" heard them speak, **e9erfi man in hit ot&n ttAigue wherein he wa$ horn,** And ifli- mediately followed another wonder, of not less mag- nitude. Three thousand men, who had tbemselTes *^ with wiched hands crucified and tlain** the Lord Jesus, were '' pricked to the heart *' by a single ser- mon from the lips of Peter, and at once joined the despised and persecuted church.
Immediately after this commencement, Peter and John, going op to the temple at the hour of prayer, were enabled, in the name of Jesus, to restore to strength and soundness, a man who had been ^* hm from his mother's womb," This deed was done in the presence of multitudes, and of its entirely super- natural character there could be no doubt.
Closely following this, upon the mere rebuke of Peter, two persons, Ananias and Sapphira, fell down dead, as a punishment for their hypocrisy and false profession; and it is added, in the very same chap- ter, *^ And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people ; insomuch that they brought forth the sick into the streets^ and laid them on beds and couches, that at the least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them. There came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed every one." (Acts v. 12—16.)
In the next chapter we are told that ** Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracUs among the people" (Acts vi. 8.)
In the Tiiith, that '* Fhilip went down to the city of
THE INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTUBE8. 279
Stmnna, and preached Christ unto them. And the j^eople with one ateord game heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing, and seeing the miracles which he did. For unclean spirits, crying with loud voice, came out of many that were possessed with them ; and many taken with palsies, and that were lame, were healed- And there was great joy in that city," (Acts viii. 5—8.)
Id the ixth, the raising of Dorcas to life by the bands of Peter, after she had been sometime dead, is narrated.
Id the xiiith, we observe the infliction of blindness on Eiymas the sorcerer, at the word of Paul, in panishment for his opposition to the truth.
In the xivth, a man at Lystra, " impotent in his feet, being a cripple from his mother^s womb, who never had walked: the same lieard Paul speak: who sted- fastly beholding him, and perceiving that he had faith to be healed, said with a hud voice. Stand upright on thy feet* And he leaped and walked. And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in t/ie speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men," (Acts xiv. 8.)
In the xixth, we read that " God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul: So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them," (Acts xix. 11, 12.)
Thns, in addition to the authority derived from being sent by one who was known to all men as a doer of *' mighty works," (Matt. xiv. 2.) the apostles were themselves fully furnished with this unqnesti- ooable credeDtial of heaveD. Nor was the evidcDce of Prophecy wanting, though the full developement of its power and value, as a proof of inspiration, can
280 ESSAYS ON eomanism:
only be seen in the lapse of ages, wfaile tfaat of Mi- racles is instant and perfect on the spot
The gift of foretelling fatare events was occasion- ally exhibited by the apostles, in cases wherein tbe speedy accomplishment of the prediction rendered this proof of their divine aathority as available as that of a miracle itself. Such instances are seen in Acts xi. 27—30, and zxvii. 22. Bat the real vahie and weight of this branch of evidence can only be properly appreciated by looking at the Bible b» a whole, as indeed it is treated by St. Peter and St. Paul; (2 Peter iii. 16; 2 Tim. iii. 16.) and taking ia, at one view, the long series of prophecies therein contained, nearly the whole of which have already been fulfilled, and the remainder are now in coarse of fulfilment.
We find, for instance, the grand prediction, em- bracing the whole of the nations of the earth, that *^ God should enlarge Japhet,'' and that he sboold 'Mwell in the tents of Shem ; " and that the descend- ants of Ham should be the '^ servants of servants." (Genesis ix. 25, 27.) exactly fulfilled. We find the promise to Ishmael, that he should become '* a great nation/' and that his hand should be against *< every man, and every man's hand against him/' (Gen. xvi. 12 ; xvii. 20.) and we find this also exactly fulfilled*
Esau, or Edom, according to several predictions, (Jer. xlix. 17. Ezek. xxv. l2. Joel iii. 19. Amos i. 11. 'Obad. x. 18.) we find ** cut off for ever," and made a '* perpetual desolation." Nineveh has been so completely destroyed, that the place thereof can- not be known. (Nahum i. 3.) Babylon has been ''swept with the besom of destruction,'' and is male '* a desolation for ever, a possession for the bittern.
THE INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 281
and pools of water." (Isaiah xiii. xiv.) Tyre has become '' like the top of a rock, a place for fishers to spread their nets upon/' (Ezek. xxyL 4, 5.) while Egypt is ''a base kingdom, the basest of kingdoms," no more able ''to exalt itself above the nations/' (Ezek. xxix. 14, 15.) We then open another im- mense prophecy, whose publication many centuries before the event is as certain as anything can be, that after the three universal empires, of Assyria, Persia, and Greece, there should arise a fourth, more power- ful and more terrible than either ; that that empire should be broken up into ten kingdoms; and that another power, diverse from the rest, should arise among them, and should subdue and absorb three of these kingdoms ; all of which, without entering upon the question of the papacy, we have seen literally accomplished in the history of the Romish empire. Next we turn to the predictions concerning the Jews ; and here we find our Lord's prophecy, that the city and temple at Jerusalem should be so entirely de- stroyed, that ''(here should not be left one stone upon another," that " the people should fall by the edge of the sword, and be carried away captive into all nations ; '' and that *' Jerusalem should be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled," (Luke xxi.) accomplished to the very let- ter. We find also divers other remarkable predictions, many of them of a thousand years back, such as that " the sceptre should depart from Judah, and a law- giver from between his feet,'' when Shiloh, or Mes- siah came ; (Gen. xlix. 10.) that " the people should dwell alone, and not be reckoned among the nations," (Numb, xxiii. 9.) that, in their apostacy, the Lord should " scatter them among all people, from the one
282 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
end of the earth even anto the other," and that ** among these nations should they find do ease, nei- ther should the soles of their feet find rest,** that th^ should he *' sifted among all nations, like as com Is sifted in a sieve, yet shoald not a grain fall to Ike earth," (Amos ix. 9.) and that they sfaonld "^ abide many days without a king, and without a prioee, |;; and without a sacrifice ; " (Hosea iii. 5.) and e?ay word of these various and minute predictions ve have seen exactly accomplished. Lastly, we oone to the latest writers in the sacred canon, and it is impossible to ascribe to anything else than the spirit of prophecy, the portraiture drawn by St Panl of the Man of Sin," that should be revealed; who should '* exalt himself above all that is called Ood, or that is worshipped, so that he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God;'' whose immediate appearance was only prevented by the existence of the Roman Imperial power, but that he should be *^ revealed ** when that power should he '* taken out of the way,'' and that among his charac- teristics should be those of " forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats." (2 Thess. ii. 4. 1 Tim. iv. 3.) Or what but the same spirit of prophecy could have enabled St. John to pourtray as he does, by the common consent of all commenta- tors, the then unknown powers of the Saracens and the Turks, who were not to arise, till after the lapse of centuries. (Rev. ix. 1—21.) Thus we see that these two great signs or credentials of their mission were abundantly possessed by the writers of the sacred scriptures, and we must never forget, that they have not even been claimed by the preachers or priests of any other faith.
THE INSPIRATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 283
We are aware that we shall be asked whether Bother the heathen priests nor he who called himself ** the prophet of God," Mahomet, ever laid claim to these credentials ? What, it will be demanded, were the oracles of the ancient heathen ?— and on what was Mahometfs claim to the prophetic character founded ?
The ancient oracles were either the devices ()f crafty priests, or the working of evil spirits, or both. Bnt there is nothing recorded of them which is not perfectly conceivable of a canning and far-sighted human being. For instance, when Croesus consulted the Delphic oracle, touching his intention of attack- ing the Persians, he obtained this reply,—' Croesus, crossing the Halys, shall destroy a great empire.' Mow this answer encouraged him to proceed ; yet on his overthrow, and the destruction of his own em- pire, the oracle was made to appear to have spoken exactly the truth. And after all, what was the reply, bat an artful double meaning, contrived so as to suit either of the two most probable results ?
As to the other sign, that of miracles, we may search in vain the whole annals of Paganism and Mahometanism, for a single fact, to parallel the case of the iame man healed in the temple, as recorded in Acts iii. 6, 7. Mahomet, indeed, expressly disclaims all pretensions of this kind in the Koran. He thus speaks : They say^ unless a sign he sent down unto him from his Lord, we will not believe : Answer, signs are in the power of God alone, and I am no more tlum a fmhlic preaeher. No, the scriptures abound in the nost wonderful predictions, most of which are al- ready fulfilled before our eyes ; and they contain the records of hundreds of miracles, each of which would have stamped the word accompanying it as a revela-
284 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
tion from heaven ; and besides these scriptnres there is DO other book, no other relig^ion in the world, which can shew either prophecy or miracle.
The serious, but undecided inquirer, may, how- ever, have two more questions to pot: the first is, Can I be sure that these predictions were pronounced and recorded before the events, and not afterwards ? The second : Granting that a miracle, if I saw it per- formed in my own presence, must compel my submis- sion to him who worlced it, as a divine messenger, sttll, am I equally bound to bend to this credential, when I only hear the report of it, after a lapse of centuries?
On the first point nothing can possibly be better established than the fact, that all the books which we now call the Old Testament, were in existence, were preserved as holy oracles by tbe Jews, and were translated from Hebrew into Greek, in Egypt, at least two hundred years before Christ. The inquirer, in fact, may as well begin to doubt the existence of Julius Caesar, or of Charlemagne, or of the Duke of Marlborough, as to question that a man named Moses lived about 1500 years before Christ, and wrote the books which are ascribed to him. Here, therefore, not to go into the like particulars as to David, Isaiah, or others, we have a great number of the chief pro- phecies, especially those concerning Christ, the dis- persion of tbe Jdws, and the fate of many other nations, unquestionably in existence many centuries before tbe event. And equally certain is it, that the writings of St. Paul and St. John, which foretel the rise of the Papacy, the ravages of the Saracens and Turks, and other important events, were current in the church several centuries before the fulfilment of those predictions.
THE INSFIBATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 285
And, as to the second question, we would observe, that a certain degree and amount of testimony is fully equal to the evidence of our own senses ; and that when that testimony is made matter of public record, its force and value loses nothing by time. For instance, we never saw Bonaparte, nor did we ever speak with any one who had seen him. And yet, from the vast amount of evidence extant, we arrive at such a conviction of the fact, that we could as soon doubt our own existence, as we could ques- tion the fact that Bonaparte lived and reigned in France, from 1803 to 1814-.15.
Now this general testimony to the fact will esta- blish it just fully to tbe minds of the men of the next century, though none of them can have any personal knowledge of its truth.
And, in like manner, the abundant written testi- monies to the miracles wrought by the apostles ; the admission of their enemies, the general belief of the facts by the whole Christian church of that day, and the entire absence of a single word in denial of the truth of these statements, all go to establish the whole narrative on such a basis, that the question of one century, or ten, or twenty, is perfectly immate- rial to the whole question.
What, then, is the suin of the whole matter? It is this : Mankind stands in need of a revelation from heaven. This every man's conscience witnesseth. A dark and gloomy eternity rises before his view, on which nothing but divine illumination can shed the least ray of light.
There is but one document which so much as pre- tends to this character. Search throughout the world, whether Mahometan or heathen, there is not
286 £SSAYS OK ROMANISM:
even a yestige of any writing which professes to be the Word of God, except the book whose character we are now considering.
That book is an ancient collection of writings : of this there can be no doubt, since scarcely an heathen author exists, who does not in some way or other attest its antiquity, or confirm its statements.
These writings have ever been received and valued, by those who possessed them, as the oracles of God. And their existence and their pretensions, having been at all times known, no refatation of those pretensions has ever been furnished by those, who, if they knew their falsehood ^ assuredly would have made it known to others.
These writings uniformly assert the divine inspira- tion of their authors. They bear mutual witness to each other, and they appeal also to miraculous proofs of divine authority ;^-which appeal, though made in the face of multitudes of opposers, has never yet been met. They also appeal to a second evi- dence,— that of prophecy, with which it is unde- niable that their pages are filled, and which of itself furnishes a proof which is altogether irrefragable.
Lastly, they are consistent with themselves, and with the character they claim. They present to us views of God, so sublime and so befitting, that none but God himself could have afibrded them. They ofier us also a code of morals altogether casting shame upon the highest efforts of human moralists and philosophers, and the adoption of which by man- kind at large would of itself establish heaven upon the earth, — a code, too, which could no more have been invented or promulgated by a set of impostors and cheats, than devout aspirations could arise from
THE INSPntATIOK OF THE SCRIPTURES. 287
a fallen spirit. And, finally, they depict man him- self as he really is, a task which the experience of six thousand years has ahandantly shewn to he wholly beyond man's own power. They shew him his true character and condition ; explain his malady ; point oat the only remedy, and then place within his reach the means of obtaining the best of all evidence, that of his own heart, and sonl, and affections. They elevate man, wherever they are received an4 obeyed, to the highest degree of virtue and happiness which his nature will admit; while their rejection involves a correlative degree of misery and debasement.
Every proof, therefore, and every evidence, short of a visible or aadible miracle, worked for every indivi- dual man, is already afforded to us. More distinct or positive assurance, except God should himself speak from heaven to each sinner personally, we could not have. If God has spoken to man, assur- edly he has spoken to some purpose. Knowing the wants of the human race, he would not stoop from heaven to address them, without applying to those wants exactly the remedy that was most suitable.
Take, then, this book to your own closet, remem- bering that every possible external proof of its divine origin has been already afforded ; and see if you do not find all these proofs abundantly reinforced, by the admirable adaptation of its contents to your own personal wants and desires. No one ever entered upon a candid examination of the Scriptures, in this point of view, and with prayer for the Holy Spirit's guidance, without arriving at a sure conviction, and that upon tlie best grounds, of their Divine Inspira- tion,
XIII. THE TWO RULES OF FAITH COMPARED.
V THE SCRIPTURES, OR ' THE CHURCH.'
We have now considered, each in its tarn, the Rom- ish and the Protestant rales of faith. We have en- deavoared to shew, that an opposition to the reception of the scriptures as the sole rule, leads to infidelity ; — and that the difficulties suggested by Dr. Wiseman are not insuperable. But we are now to propose a third objection, — to wit, that the Romish principle, ' that God has appointed His church the infallible and unfailing depository of all truth,' ^ is beset with not only the same, but ten times greater difficulties than those which have been pointed out in the Pro- testant rule.
This evidently involves a comparison of the two rules of faith ; and to conduct this impartially it will be necessary to pass again in review all Dr. Wiseman's objections to the use of Holy Scripture as a rule.
But it may be as well to ask, at starting, what is
1 Wi9eman*8 First Lecturet p< 20.
THE TWO RULES COMPARED. 289
the particular point concerning which the two sys- tems are to be especially compared ? It is that of inapplicability. Dr. Wiseman asserts that the Pro- testant rale is ' franght with so many difficulties, as absolutely to render it in practice inapplicable, and void of fruit.' And we shall now endeavour to shew that this objection attaches in a much greater degree to the Romish rule, than to the Protestant. But this we must do by passing in review all the alleged 'difficulties/ arrayed by Dr. Wiseman against the Qse of scripture, and inquiring whether they do not apply far more decidedly to the rule and standard which he himself proposes.
Let us, then, to do full justice to Dr. Wiseman, recapitulate the 'difficulties' which he brings for- ward, and as far as possible in his own words.
Dr. Wiseman contends that the books of scripture cannot have been intended to constitute the rule of faith, for the following reasons : —
1. That the adoption of such a rule implies a ne- cessity, on the part of every individual receiving it, of a tedious investigation into the genuineness and authenticity of those books :
2. Also, of a further inquiry, as to whether no other books of equal authority liave been lost or ex- cluded, so as to leave the rule incomplete :
3. Also, whether it be beyond doubt, that these books were not only the real productions of their alleged authors, but were actually given by divine inspiration.
And, considering that these three points include a vast field of inquiry and laborious investigation, the doctor asks, ' Can a rule, in the approach to which you must pass through such a labyrinth of difficul-
u
290 ESSAYS ON rokakism:
Ues, be that which God has siven as as a g^ide to the poorest, the most illiterate^ and the rimplest of his creatures ?
4. Bat the sapposition that 'God gave his holy word to be the only rale of faith to all men/ leads to another diflScalty ; it mast ' be translated into eveiy langaage, that all men may have access to it' Now, says Dr. Wiseman, ' are yoa aware of the diflScalty of andertaking a translation of it ? Whenever the at- tempt has been made in modem times ; in the first instance it has generally failed, and even after many repeated attempts, it has proved ansatisfactory.* ' And we cannot suppose that God would stake the whole nsefalness and value of his rule upon the pri- vate or particular abilities of man/
5. Again, consider the paucity of copies of the Bible, until modern times. ' God could not mean, that for 1400 years man was to be without a guide ; and that mankind should have to wait until human genius had given eflScacy to it by its discoveries and inventions. Such cannot be the qualities or condi- tions of the role.'
6. Lastly : ' To be the role of faith, it cannot be sufficient that men should possess and read it, bat they most sorely be a'fole to comprehend it. In fact, who ever heard of the propriety and wisdom of plac- ing in men's hands a code, or rule, which it was im- possible for the greater portion of them to compre- hend ? '
' Such, then,' says the doctor, ' are the difficulties regarding the application of this rule : a difficulty of procuring and preserving the proper sense of the original by correct translations; a difficulty of bringing these translations within the reach of all ; a difficulty,
;
THE TWO RULES COMPARED. 291
not to say an impossibility, of enabling ail to under- stand it.* 1
These being the several points, upon which Dr. Wiseman rests his conclusion, that the scriptures were not intended as a sole or sufficient rule of faith, we shall now proceed to shew, that the same or still greater difficulties attend the adoption of the Rom- ish rule.
But let us first understand, distinctly, what we are to bring into comparison with the sdriptures, as fur- nishing mankind with a safer and more unerring guide than God's own revealed word?
This may be described in Dr. Wiseman's words, as ' the church of Christ, which has been appointed by God to tajge charge of, and keep safe, those doc- trines, committed to her from the beginning, to be taught, at all times, to all nations.' ^
With this definition of the Romish rule, let us pro- ceed at once to consider Dr. Wiseman's first objec- tion, and to inquire whether his own rule is free from the difficulties which he professes to find in the use of the holy scriptures.
His first objection is, that, Mf all men, even the most illiterate, have a right to study the word of God, — if it be not only the right, but the duty of even the most ignorant, to study that word, and thence to draw his belief: — it is likewise his duty to satisfy himself that it is the word of God." And ' in the first place, before any one can even commence the exa- mination of that rule, which the church proposes to him, he must have satisfied himself that all the books and writings which are collected together in that
1 Wigeman*8 Second Lecture, p. 48.
3 Hmmain*$ Third Lecture, p. 61.
U 2
292 ESSAYS OK eomakism:
Yolume, are really the genuine works of those whose names they hear/ *
Now let us keep this practical diflScalty fixedly m view, and inquire whether the rule which Dr. Wise- man proposes as * a more excellent way/ is not htt very far, more diflScnlt of application than that to which be himself objects.
The doctor is dealing with the case of one who is in neutral circumstances ; that is, of one who has not yet finally received the scriptures as the word of God. And he argues that if, instead of first sub- mitting himself to the church, and then receiving the scriptures on her authority, the inquirer begins by endeavouring to satisfy himself as to the divine aa- thority of the sacred writings, he will find the di§- culties so great, and the investigation so tedious, as to make it manifest that this was not the course iiH tended by God; but that the church is to be first submitted to as our guide, and then the scriptures re- ceived on her guarantee and recommendation.
Now let us try this course for a few moments, and see if we have really changed for the better.
The very instant the inquirer sets out, he will find that he has not improved, but considerably deterio- rated bis prospects of success.
Protestantism proposed to him the Bible as his rule and guide. Now at least there was a remark- able concurrence of testimony in behalf of this book. There is but one Bible in the world, and in every coro- ner of the earth this one book is known, and is ac- cepted by all sorts or societies of Christians, as God's own revealed word.
1 Wi8eman*8 Second Lectwre, p. SS.
All the Tisible eoDcar in this one great pout. The Bwiigh chw^ whether in Italj, Id BdgiBM, ia Ifetoad, ia Mexiea, or in Malahar, deelarcs this heok to he the vord of God. The Greek choieheo, imm St. Pctenhu^ to Athens, froBi AnBeoim to Alexoodiia, all ooite io the same testimonj. The oncieBt Sjiiao chwehes. the Maronites, and the Waldenies, alike agree with all the daoghteis of the refofmatioa ; and vhcrever a professing Christian is to be foond, no Matter of vhat mtion or of what coaunoaioD^ — theie ve hare a wit- ness to the hkcU that all Christendom accepts the holy scriptores as the revealed word of God.
Bat mark how woeliillj the inqairer has darkened his prospect, when he tnms away from this proposed role, on the score of the sopposed dijfinUiy of ascer- taining its genuineness, and takes op, instead, the pretensions of either the Romish, or any other visible church.
We presented to him a Bible; — which he could see, and lay hold upon, and read, and consider. Here was something tangible, and something as to the divine character of which he bad the united tes- timony of all Christians, throughout all ages, and in all places. Now what does the Romanist offer to him, as a preferable guide ? Let Dr. Wiseman him- self state it: 'Our rule,' he says, Ms the church of Christ, which has been appointed of God to take charge of, and keep safe, the doctrines committed to her from the beginning.'
Here we see at once how materially the inquirer's position is changed for the worse. The rule or guide which Protestantism proposed to him, was one which he could himself consult, peruse^ consider; and in
294 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
the troth of which all Christendom, of all charches^ and all nations, were agreed. Instead of which rule he now has one offered him which is an impalpable shadow ; a mere ideal thing ; which be can neither see, nor hear, nor in any practical way consult; and respecting the troth and authority of which, Cbri*' tendom is greatly divided.
We have said that the Romish rale is one which can neither be seen, nor heard, nor consulted ? What we mean is this : The Bible is here, and we may at once sit down and study it; bat where is *the church,* which Dr. Wiseman recommends as a more safe and eligible' guide ? Where can we see or bear this church ; and in what mode or by what channel does she speak ? In a word, when the opponent telU us of a Rule, — a Guide :— we ask him to put us in possession of it, and to give us a practical example of its use and of its utility ? What is it, that, in- stead of this Bible, the church of Rome offers us as a guide to our inquiries ?
But here the Romanist will confess that there is a little difficulty, — if we require a document, a book,— to serve as substitute for the Bible. The description given by Dr. Milner of the Romish rule will explain this difficulty. He says, * The Catholic rule of faith is Scripture and Tradition; and these propounded and explained by the Catholic church.' . Now scrip- ture is indeed accessible, but that taken alone the Romanist holds to be an imperfect rule, and its use in this way to be dangerous. And tradition has never been red need to a system, — a second Bible ; nor can he put it into our hands, or direct us to any place in which we can find it.
But Dr. Milner adds, ' as propounded and ex-
;
THE TWO RULES COMPARED. 295
plained by the Catholic church/ Now where has the church propounded this rule ? By the doc- tor's language we might almost suppose, that the eharch had added tradition to scripture, by way of a commentary or appendix, and that thus a perfect rale was obtained.
There is, however, no such work. The church has never put forth any commentary ; nor any system or code of faith and morals, on infallible authority; although many individuals, upon their own private responsibility, and without pretending to infallibility, have written such treatises.
Of course it is useless to refer to mere human productions, as we are now seeking for something better than what is admitted to be the word of God. The question, then, remains, as the church has not spoken, authoritatively, by a written work, where and how we can '' hear the church ; '* — as it is said we must hear her, to be in the safe road to salvation.
The Romish controversialist, however, feels a de- gree of diflScuhy here. Some, indeed, have argued, that ' He who established his church, has appointed her pastors to rule, govern, and teach in his name ; and has promised that he will watch over these his ministers, and be ever with them, and that his Spirit shall lead them into all truth. He has therefore commanded all to follow their guidance and teaching, without distinction of persons, and without limita- tion as to time, since he is with his church for ever.'' ^ But most of them will feel some difficulty in adopt- ing this language for themselves, and in claiming, personally, the attribute of infallibility. It is beyond
* Third Leciunaf Bev, F, Martyn, Romiihpriett of WaUallt p. OS.
296 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
a doubt that there have been, and still are, wicked priests, wicked bishops, and even wicked popes. It is impossible, therefore, to set up men as infallible guides to others, who cannot keep the right way themselves.
Thus we are still without either a written or a speaking guide. Is * the church ' a mere abstraction; or, if we are to listen to her voice, tell us where it is to be heard ?
No answer, however, can be given of a more ex- plicit character than that of Dr. Wiseman, when he says, ' The successors of the apostles in the church of Christ have received the security of bis own words and his promises of a perpetual teaching, so that they shall not be allowed to fall into error. It is this promise which assures her she is the depo- sitory of all truth, and is gifted with an exemption from all liability to err, and has authority to claim from all men, and from all nations, submission to her guidance and direction.** *
This sounds well, but still it does not advance ns one step. Suppose, for a moment, for argument's sake, that we admit or take for granted, all that Br. W. says about the church's authority, the question still remains unanswered, — if we are to hear the church, where J or hy whom does she speak? Our position is, that the Romish rule is more inapplic- able, and less easy of adoption and use, than the Protestant. So long, then, as Dr. W. does not deny the infallibility of the word of God, but merely wishes to add another infallible authority to it, he elearly gives the advantage to the Protestant, who
* fFiMHum** Fourth Lecture, p. lOQ.
THE TWO BULES COMPARED. 297
bolds oat and tenders bis rule of faith in the Bible ; inasmuch as he seems anable to point oat where his farther infallible role is to be foand.
The simple trath, however, is, that if Dr. Wiseman were able to point out the real seat or dwelling-place of his church's boasted infallibility, he would do more than the most learned doctors of his church have ever yet been able to accomplish. For, in fact, the dis- putes upon this yery question have been endless, and the decision of the qaestion impossible. One party contends that the church's infallibility dwells in the pope; — others, that it is found only in a general council ; a third class, that it is in a pope and council conjointly ; while a fourth describes it as resting in ' the living voice of the great body of Roman Catholic pastors.' And surely' nothing can be clearer than this, that until they can settle among themselves where this infallibility of the church is really lodged, the course dictated by common sense is this, to rest content with that infallible rule, — the written word, — whose excellence and divinity even tfaey themselves do not venture to deny ; and to leave the reception of a farther and better guide, until the doctors of the Romish church can settle it among themselves, where it is to be found. In the produceableness^ then, — if we may coin such a word^ —of their rule, the Protestants certainly have the advantage. But does not the objection we are con- sidering go further than this ?
It certainly does : it demurs to the admission of the Bible as our rule ; in that, before any one can be jastified in so receiving it, he must go through a long investigation as to the genuineness, authen- ticity, and inspiration of the books of scripture.
298 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
Now we are to try Dr. W.'s rale by bis own objeo^ tions. We ask, therefore, is it a rational coane for the inqairer to adopt, to accept any person wbo caUi himself a Roman Catholic priest, as an infallible guide, without any investigation at all? — or can we sappose that that investigation, if gone into, would prove more easy or more simple than the former one) to which Dr. W. so strongly objects?
For instance : just as Dr. Wiseman objects, tbtt before any one can rationally receive this book, called the Bible, as the word of God, he must go through a long coarse of inquiry, as to the history of the book, — who were its authors or compilers, and what are the real nature of its claims ; so we now retort upon him, that before he himself, or any other priest, can expect to be received by a sincere in- quirer, as the divinely-commissioned messenger of God, an exactly similar, and quite as difficult a scrutiny must take place, as to the nature of their claims to be so regarded. Nothing, surely, can be clearer than this. If it is unreasonable to expect an unenquiring and implicit reception of the Bible, even though backed by the universal testimony of all times and of all countries, how much more absurd would it be to demand for any one who happened to be called the Roman Catholic priest of a certain neighbourhood, that same sort of unenquiring and implicit submission. Fallibility, and liability to err, it is obvious, are far more likely to be found in a body of some tens of thousands of human beings, even supposing them to be divinely sent, than in one single book, which, if divinely inspired, is doubtless free from error. Investigation, then, into their real claims and character, if necessary in the one case, is
'■
THB TWO Bjn.BS COMPARED. 299
just as necessary in the other. This will hardly be denied. The only question, therefore, is, which of the two investigations is likely to prove the most troablesome and laborioas.
Now there can be no doabt that the enquiry into the claims of the Romish clergy must be far more tedious and complicated than that into the authen- ticity and inspiration of the scriptures; and there is also this important difiference between them, — that while the divine character of the scriptures can be easily demonstrated^ so as to be placed beyond the reach of a rational doubt, the other inquiry, instead of leading us to any satisfactory issue, lands us in a quagmire of most unprofitable and interminable con- troversies.
This difiference is manifested by all past experi- ence. There has never yet been an instance of a patient and serious inquirer into the character of the holy scriptures, coming to any other conclusion than that of their authenticity and inspiration. On the other hand, hundreds of the best and greatest men that Christendom has ever seen, have examined into the claims of the church of Rome, and have been anable to admit them. At least, therefore, it cannot be said, that a satisfactory conclusion is as easily to be attained in the one case as in the other. But the point for which we are now contending is this, that an investigation, and a laborious one, is equally ne- cessary in both. This is best seen in the utter failures )f those Romish writers who try to escape from this necessity. Take, for instance. Dr. Wiseman's third lecture, and see how ludicrously abrupt is his attempt ;o leap to a conclusion on this subject, without having aid down any premises.
900 ESSAYS ON ROMANIBlf :
Dr. W. says: *Tbe Catholic falls in with anombef of very strong passages, in which our blessed Sa- vioar, not content with promising a contioaance of his doctrines, that is to say, the continaed obligatkm of faith upon man, also pledges himself for tbeir actual preservation among them. He selects a ce^ tain body of men : he invests them, not merely with great authority, but with power equal to his owa; he makes them a promise of remaining with tbem, and teaching among them even to the end of tine: and thus, once again, he naturally concludes, that there must have existed for ever a corresponding ii- stitntion for the preservation of those doctrines, and the perpetuation of those blessings, which our Sa- viour came manifestly to communicate.
* Thus, then, merely proceeding by historical rea- soning, such as would guide an infidel to believe in Christ's superior mission, he comes, from the word of Christ, whom those historical motives oblige him to believe, to acknowledge the existence of a body, depositary of those doctrines which He came to establish among men. This succession of persons constituted to preserve those doctrines of faitb, appointed as the successors of the apostles, having within them the guarantee of Christ teaching among them for ever ; and this body is what he calls the church. He is in possession, from that moment, of an assurance of divine authority, and, in the whole remaining part of the investigation, he has no need to turn back, by calling in once more the evidence of man. For, from the moment he is satisfied that Christ has appointed a succession Of men, whose province it is, by aid of a supernatural assistance, to preserve inviolable those doctrines which God has
THE TWO' RULES COMPARED. 901
lelivered — from that momeDt, whatever these men teach is invested with that divine aathority, which be had found in Christ throagh the evidence of his miracles/ *
Now we wonld ask any one capable of an impar- tial judgment, whether anything pretending to the form of an argument, and yet so preposterously de- ficient of all the essential parts of one, was ever be- fore seen ? For, let it be remembered, the Doctor bad jast been objecting to the Protestant Irnle, in that it required a long coarse of investigation. He therefore certainly does not take for granted a similar investigation in his own proposed rale. His argument is to stand jast as he had stated it, and it therefore rans thas : Christ selected twelve apostles, conferred on them the Holy Ghost, and promised to be with them and their successors in his charch to the end of the world : therefore^ the Romish charch uid the Romish clergy are infallible guides, and the )nly infallible gaides ! What connection there can ^, between the premises and the conclusion, in ;his proposition, it is wholly impossible to imagine ! The proof, all-essential to the validity of the argu- nent, that the pope and the Romish clergy are the ightful successors of the apostles, is wholly omitted; ind we are desired to leap to the conclusion, that >ecause Christ, on the Mount of Ascension, pro- nised to be with his church to the end of the world, herrfore we may go and hear Dr. Wiseman at Moor- ields, or any other Romish priest at any other chapel, with a certainty, that * whatever these men :each is invested with divine authority;* while all
1 Wi»eman*» ThWd Lecture, pp. 63, 64.
302 ESSAT8 ON bokanism:
tbat the otber Christian miniBten in tbe kiiifdoDi teach, is notbiDg but their own nnanthorised imagin- ings ! May we not ask, m-hether so ootrageons a demand on the credulity and simplicity of his hearers was ever before made by a preacher professing ra- tionality ?
•But it may be said, that we misunderstand Dr. Wiseman, for that he could not mean to demand an implicit assent to such a statement, without a preYioos investigation ; and that in his subsequent lectures he invites and draws on that very discussion.
We, however, are only dealing with his argument as we find it We know, indeed, that the Doctor, in other parts of his series, enters upon the remainder of the discussion. But we believe that he purposely omits it here, and for a very obvious reason. He had just been arguing against the Protestant role, as one leading to a long and troublesome investigation; and he now presents his own principle, in contrast, in a far simpler and more succinct form. If he had stated his argument properly, and not in the absurd way in which he has left it, he would have spoiled his own contrast; for he would have shewn the Romish rule to involve quite as tedious an investiga- tion as did the Protestant. And that is the point to which we have been endeavouring to come ; namely, that as the adoption and reception of the Bible, as our sole Rule of Faith, implies a previous investiga- tion of its claims to be considered a divine revela- . tion, so does that submission of the mind to the dicta of the Romish priesthood, which Dr. Wiseman de- mands, imply a previous and far more troublesome investigation of the claims of that priesthood, to be admitted as the rightful successors of the apostles.
THB TWO RULES COMPARED. 303
And thus when Bn Wiseman asks, * Can the rale, on the approach to which yoa mast pass through sach a lahyrintb of difficulties, be that which God has g\y/en to the poorest, the most illiterate and simplest of his creatures?' we retort upon him his own question, and ask, ' Can your Rule, in the approach to which the poor man must be dragged through all the con- troyersies and quarrels of all your threescore folio volumes of councils, be that which God intended for the poorest and the simplest of mankind? '
We now pass on to the next difficulty suggested by Dr. Wiseman, which is this : —
2. Before any one can accept the Protestant Rule, it is in the next place necessary, that he should have satisfied himself not only that the sacred, books are genuine and authentic ; ' but that no such genuine work has been excluded, so that the Rule be perfect and entire.'
This is but an amplification of the last objection. But we thank Dr. Wiseman for stating it ; since it very naturally suggests a kindred difficulty in his own course.
Let us suppose that some one, in his search after truth, had followed the course which we just now shewed to be necessary ; had filled up the hiatus in Dr. W.*s reasoning, and had made out the succes- sion of the Romish priesthood to the apostles. How clear is it that the next step in the inquiry must be that which this objection of Dr. WVs suggests. He mustlnquirenotonly whether these persons, claiming to be the successors of the apostles, are really so, but also whether ' no other genuine successors have been excludedi' The promise made by the Saviour was not to a portion of his church, but to the whole ; not
904 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
to the sacceMors of St Peter odIj, bat to tkoie of St. James and St. Thomas also.
Now it is a fact open to every one's obserfalioB, that the charch of Rome is not the onlj ChristiaB church apon earth. We find the Greek chnrchythe Syrian, and other eastern chorches, and in Europe the Protestant churches. Of these, most of the eas- tern churches are of equal antiquity with that of Rome, and among the Protestant churches there an those which can trace their descent from the apostolic times, without relying upon their connection witb the pnpacy. Consequently, when Dr. W. claims for his own church the sole possession of divine autho- rity,' and treats all others as heretics and infidels, he forces any one who really wishes to understand what he believes, to plunge into the whole controversy.
There is another church, for instance, in the east, called the Greek church, which is as unquestionably descended from the apostles as that of Rome. She was once in fellowship and communion with Rome; she is now at enmity. How comes this? Is she really a rotten branch — a decayed portion of the church ? or was she unlawfully and schismatically excluded by Rome? Who is to understand all these matters without examination ? And thus the in- quirer is immersed, as we just now remarked, in all the depths of the ancient church controversies. Tet Dr. Wisemants scheme requires it. He tells us that a[ny one who takes the Bible as his rule, ' must satisfy himself that no genuine work has been excluded, so that the rule be perfect and entire.' It therefore fol- Iqws of necessity, that if the church, rather than the Bible, be taken as the rule, the same necessity exists, of seeing *• that no genuine apostolical chol'ches are
;
THE TWO RULES COMPARED. 305
ded/ * so that the rule be perfect and entire.' hether this will be an easy task, or whether JLU be the course marked out by God * for the St, the most illiterate, and the simplest of his ires/ let any reasonable man decide. At all i, the Romish rule is not, in this respect, at all easy of application than that adopted by the stants; on the contrary, much and laborious ig IS necessary, before we can possibly learn, — I Dr. W.'s plan, we must learn, — * whether no if the genuine church has been excluded, so be Rule be perfect and entire.' us proceed, then, to the third point insisted on, is, that the student is also bound to satisfy If, ' whether it be beyond doubt, that these were not only the real productions of their al- authors, but were actually given by Divine in- ion.'
! have so lately reviewed this part of the subject, t can only be necessary to re-state, as briefly as >le, the argument ; which goes to prove, if it hfi any thing, that until this point be settled, and the inspiration of the scriptures be firmly esta- ;d, it is impossible for the Romish clergy to have asis for that church authority to which they lay *
i mission of the apostles, and the commission LUthority conferred on them by Christ, is re- d only in certain passages, not exceeding three ir in number, which occur in the gospels. In thirty or forty words, — for in so small a com- ics the whole proof, — the least error, omission, isconstruction, would make a vital difference. until we are satisfied that these books were
X
906 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
given by inspiration of God, and are therefore wholly free from error, we cannot possibly feel tbe least cer- tainty that some mistake may not have crept in,— that some little omission or insertion, trivial in ap- pearance, but making a mighty difference in the tenor of tbe whole, may not have occarred. Conse- quently, so long as we have any doubt whether these records are the works of fallible men, or of the in- fallible Spirit of God, so long must we hesitate to admit, upon a doubtful foundation, so vast a matter as the supreme authority claimed by Rome. And tbas we see, that the Romish church itself cannot even find ground whereon to stand, until the inspiration of the scriptures has first been proved ; and thus tbe very same difficulty which Dr. W. objects to us, be- longs quite as much to his own scheme.
Rather more, indeed, we ought to say ; for Pro- testants have found and established their Rule of Faith, as soon as the divine inspiration of the scrip- tores is proved ; whereas that is only the first point in the inquiry with the Romanist; who, when be gains this first position, has in the next place to prove from scripture, the authority of his church ; a task which is certainly not an easy one. But it is time to draw to a close ; we will therefore endeavour to state in a few words, the remaining three of Dr. W.'s alleged difficulties? They are,— the difficulty of bringing the Protestant rule of faith, the Bible, into general use, by translating the scriptures into all languages ; — the difficulty of providing, especially before the invention of printing, a sufficient number of copies ;— and the difficulty of making the book intelligible to all, even when so dispersed.
Dr. Wiseman seriously alleges these as reasons,
THE TWO RULES COMPARED. 307
why the scriptures coald not have been intended by God to be the Rale of Faith for all mankind. Ob- serve, the Rule of Faith ; the standard held up ; not the chief or the only means of bringing sinners to the knowledge of the troth. We are not arguing i against that great institution of Christ, the preaching f of the gospel. The question is not, whether preachers \ as well as bibles shall be sent throughout the world :~ the question is. What is to be the standard, — the Rule of Faith, — to which these preachers shall appeal ?
Now we say, Send the preacher, and with him send the word of God. Let him preach only what he finds in that word, and let him constantly appeal to that word for confirmation of every doctrine he advances. But the Romish church sends the preacher without his credentials, and without his proper commission. He may preach Jesuitism or Jansenism, the decrees of the council of Trent or the decrees of the council of Ephesus ; he may preach, in short, what he will, for no chart or compass will the church of Rome send with her pilots.
But it is said that translations are made with diffi- culty, and are often erroneous. Is it so much easier, then, to preach than to write, in an heathen tongue ? Do the Romish missionaries address the Hindoos or Japanese in Latin ? If not, — if they can preach to them in their own languages without liability to any serious blunders, what should prevent them from providing for them the gospel of St. Matthew or the New Testament itself? The objection of the diffi- culty of making translations, when advanced by those who boast of their missions to the heathen, is per- fectly frivolous.
X 2
908 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
And equally absurd is that of the cost and trooble of procuring a suflScient number of copies. It is not seriously proposed by Dr. Wiseman, that men shall be left without any rule, or any instruction in dlYine things. He would send preachers. Now we are not objecting to the use of living missionaries : but when the point mooted as a serious objection to the nse of the Bible as a rule, is, the cost and trouble of pro- curing copies, the obvious answer is, that a single living preacher mast cost from £100. to £SO0. a-year; and that for that sum you might supply, every yeoTy from five hundred to a thousand Bibles !
The last point mooted is that of the difficulty of understanding the scriptures. Now no Protestant will attempt to deny that there are deep and holy mysteries in the word of God. We could hardly sap- pose it to be a Revelation from heaven if it were without them. Bat we do mean to assert that by far the greater portion of the scripture is plain and level to every man's capacity, and full of every necessary instruction. Nor, when David declares it to be '* a lamp unto his feet, and a light unto his path/' is it either decent or eomely for Dr. Wiseman to represent it as unintelligible and bewildering.
But the real question is, Is it the Rule prescribed by God himself? The existence of some lofty and still obscure prophecies in its pages is nothing to the purpose in this question. Here is a book, given by inspiration of God, for the use of man. It is, by the admission of all parties, wholly free from error or obliquity. It declares itself, again and again, to be sent to mankind as their infallible guide. And where is there any other ? Those who tell us that the scrip- tures are not to be understood, ought to shew us ' the
'i
THE TWO RULES COMPARED. 309
oice of the'chorcb ;' and let as see if that be more iicid and intelligible. Bat this ' voice of the charch ' i no where to be foand, save in some threescore vo- ames of records of cooncils, or writings of fathera, Fhich the great mass of the people coald never pos- ess, nor anderstand, if they were even to obtain them. >r. Wiseman asks, * Who ever heard of the propriety tnd wisdom of placing in men's hands a code or rale, nrhich it was impossible for the greater portion of Lhem to comprehend/ But we demand, in reply, Who ever heard of the propriety or wisdom of placing in men's hands no code or rale whatever ; of leaving them without any other g^ide or director than a fal- lible man like themselves ; and of taking away from them that which is not denied to be God*s own word, merely because there are some passages in it which are too high for most men's comprehension !
We trust, then, that we have succeeded in shew- ing, that in every point suggested by Dr. Wiseman, as a ground for disbelieving that God intended the scriptures as a rule of faith to man, — the rival rule, pat forward by Dr. W. himself, — to wit, the church, is open to far greater objection. There must be a greater difficulty in establishing the authority of such a Rule, and a greater difficulty in applying it, if it could be established.
XIV, INFALLIBILITY.
ON THE ALLEGED NECESSITY FOR AN INFALLIBLE
CHURCH.
It now seems advisable, and, in fact, almost neces- sary, before proceeding farther, to take a brief re- trospect of the course of argument through which we have passed, and to gain, as far as may be, a correct idea of our present position.
The discussion has hitherto turned almost exclu- sively on the rule of faith. We have endeavoured to maintain the Protestant doctrine ; that holy scrip- ture was the one, sole, and sufficient rule, furnished and set forth by God himself; — and to shew the untenable nature of the opposite principle, — that the Catholic church is the true depository and only authorized expositor of Christian doctrine ; dispens- ing from her ample stores, and with divine authority, both holy scripture and Catholic tradition, as in her wisdom she sees fit. In arguing the question, we have endeavoured both to establish the Protestant
I
NECESSITY FOR AN INFALLIBLE CHURCH. 311
principle, by showing the scriptures to be incontro- i^ertibly genuine, true, and divinely inspired ; and i\so to overthrow the contrary doctrine, by exhibit- ing the unfounded character of the pretensions of the Romish church. With the latter view we have in- ve8tigated the claims of the church of Rome to her assumed title of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apos- tolic church; and also the pretensions of her bishops to be considered the successors and representatives of St. Peter. Both these assumptions we found to be utterly untenable. And we are now in a position to demand, on behalf of the Protestant churches, a decision in their favour, on this great fundamental point.
In this stage of the argument, however, another view of the question is often raised, and one which it seems necessary here to meet.
It is asked, whether we can conceive it possible for the Lord Jesus, when he left for a time this earth, upon which he was shortly to number thousands of faithful followers, to have determined to leave all those followers destitute of guidance, subject to no authority, included within no pale, but wandering about in their isolated and individual characters, free to choose or to form a church for themselves, or to continue in a state of independence of all churches ? Can you believe, it is demanded, for an instant, that he did not, most deliberately, fully, and of set pur- pose, constitute and appoint a church, in which, and by which, his gospel was to be preserved and preached; and within whose pale all his true dis- ciples were bound to range themselves ? This, it is assumed, can hardly be doubted. But if the fact be admitted, then we are asked, where can that church.
312 BS8AYS ON ROMANISM:
80 founded and constitated, be found, except in that body of which the sovereign pontiff is the head?
In her, it is said, yoo find a clear and anqiieitioii- able succession, from the tery days of the apostles. You find her also, eter admitted to stand as the akme centre of unity and fountain of authority ; while all other churches, or rather pseudo-churches, are nothiog else than so many irregular off-shoots, or run-away children, who claim to share in, or to vie with her authority, although they lose e^ery vestige of right to assume such a position, the moment they rebel against her unquestionable rule. We ask, therefore, — it is said,— where, admitting, as yon must, that Christ founded a visible church — where can that church be discerned, except in the communion of which the successors of St. Peter are the head? A church of Christ, established by himself, there surely must be ; and where, except here, can it be found ?
This is a favourite position with the Romish advo- cates in the present day, and we shall not attempt to evade or shrink from its force ; but will endeavour carefully and deliberately to weigh its value.
We remark, then, first, that as we have an inspired record of the words and actions of the Lord Jesus, we have no occasion to imagine for ourselves what it was ' likely ' that he would do, or leave undone. His commands, as they are recorded by his apostles and evangelists, we are to observe ; his institutions we are to reverence ; but the greatest regard and reverence we can possibly shew to his memory and his injunctions, will be exhibited by a careful guarding of those in- junctions from all admixture and alloy ; and a deter- mination to allow no ' commandments of men ' to be
NECESSITY FOR AN INFALLIBLE CHURCH. 813
placed on a level with his own provisions, or to rank with the institutions established by himself.
Instead, therefore, of argoing that he must have established a visible charch: and tliat thai church must be the charch of Rome ; it will be far wiser and better to go at once to the record, and to ascertain beyond the possibility of mistake, what kind or de- scription of body it was that he actually did consti- tate, and by what coarse of reasoning it is that Rome assumes to occupy this place.
Now such a reference as this will satisfy us at once, that not a single word did Christ ever utter touching the Roman see ; or the successors of St. Peter ; nor a syllable pointing at the supremacy of any one church or any portion of the church, whether a larger or a smaller section. His latest injunctions and de- legation of authority were given at Jerusalem, where unquestionably the first Christian church was founded. As for the church and see of Rome, we have the best ground for asserting that neither the one nor the other had any existence for at least thirty years after. If, consequently, it was intended by Christ that his authority should devolve, on his departure, on the see of Rome, it was most wonderful that he should have left Rome without any church or any bishop for more than a quarter of a century. One thing, however, is clear, that if, at any time during thirty years after the Saviour's death, any one had asked. Where the charch established by Christ was to be met with? — it would have been instantly replied. At Jerusalem, where the college of apostles generally meet, and from whence all decrees touching the government of the church do issue. (Acts xvi.4.)
But how, then, let us ask, did it ever come to pass.
314 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
tbat the charch of Rome assumed to herself this rank and character.
Unquestionably the basis of the power and autho- rity of Rome must besought for, not in divine, bat in human decrees. Not a syllable is found in holy writ, having even the least tendency that way. Nor had the Roman bishop, while the days of persecutisa lasted, any such rank or authority in the church il large. But, when the empire became Christian, wd emperors began to bow down before the prelales if the church, then it soon, and very oaturally occurred, that the bishop of the imperial city assumed a perp^ taally-aogmenting power. And this assumption fall- ing in with popular fancies and prejudices, the Ronwi bishop, when the imperial throne itself was removed from that city, became the leading person in tbtt great metropolis. Then were the pretensions of that see daily enlarged, and as a basis for its vast assump- tions, the fiction of St. Peter's primacy was invented, a fiction of which the Christian world, during the first three centuries after Christ's ascension, had nevef heard a syllable. Such are the simple facts of the case. And if the question is again put, whether Christ did not himself constitute and establish a visible church? we must of necessity reply, that if he did so, it must have been the church of Jerusalem, for, unquestion- ably, of the church of Rome he never uttered a single word.
The Romanist, however, will perhaps tell us that we have not grappled with the main feature of the case. The locality^ the seat of authority and of unity, — ^he will say, — may never have been denoted or fixed by Christ ; but can it be denied that he left behind him, as his representative on earth, a church, a body of
r
L
KECBSSITT FOR AN INFALLIBLE CHURCH. 315
men having authority hoth to teach and to decide doubtful points, and around which body it was the doty of all his faithful followers to collect them- selves ?
Again, then, let us rather refer to the facts of the case, than to a theory constructed by our own ima- l^ations. It is unquestionably true, that when Christ left this earth, he did bequeath a certain au- thority, to a body of men whom he had himself selected and sent forth to preach his gospel, and whom he had also endowed with supernatural gifts md fMFiren.
I At this crisis, too, of the charah, the existence of i raeh a living and speaking authority , evidently clothed with a divine power and commission, was indispens- ably necessary, for this obvious reason — that the books &fike New Testament were not then written. Not pos- > sessing, therefore, that rule of faith, by which the chnrch is now safely guided and governed, — the \. Christians of those incipient days would have been, *■ without some living and applicable source of au- * thority, evidently open to every temptation of false doctrine that could be brought to bear upon them. We see, therefore, at once, why the existence of a body of men divinely commissioned, and bearing the visible tokens of such authority, was absolutely es- sential to the church's establishment.
But the lapse of thirty or forty years worked a vast alteration. These divinely-inspired and immedi- ately-commissioned servants of Christ were taught by the Spirit to commit to writing the wisdom which they had received from above. It was as much a part of their mission to form a fixed code and rule of £aith for future ages, as it was to govern the churches
316 B88AT8 ON ROMANISM:
which they themseWes had gathered and oonstitnted. They wrote, therefore, the New TestamcDt, and thea departed to their rest, leaving, as is by noiyerssl con- sent admitted, no sueeusors invested with eqail powers or eqaal authority.
It follows, then, that if we woald hear the apostles actually speaking, not through the cloaded medium or in the doubtful and diluted language of tradition, » or of erring human interpreters, but in their own written works ; we must take up the N ew Testament itself, and govern our faith and conduct by its deci- sions. And may we not ask, whicb of the two classes are really paying the most genuine respect to the mission and the appointment of Christ ; — we, who, acknowledging his authority, speaking through hii own selected servants, accept their writings as our rule; or they who prefer to lay aside or ovenole these inspired records, in favour of certain fallible human beings, bishops and cardinals, and the like, merely because these men claim to be lineally in succession to the apostles, although wholly destitute of all these qualifications which commanded our re- verence in Christ's own selected messengers.
Try this by an illustration. The writings of the apostles are called, ' The New Testament of ouf Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ/ Now let us ask, what, in common usage, is the power of a will or testament, and what the power of the executors of that will ? Does not every one know that the rule ia every such case most be the will itself, not the no- tions of the executors. And if any question arises, that question can only concern this one point. What says the will— what is its intent and meaning? Nor is such question left to the executors themselves, bat
NECESSITY FOR AN INFALLIBLE CHURCH. 317
is always referred to a third party. The office of the sxecator is merely ministerial ; he is not to add to, ir take from, the original testament, even in the least point or fraction. The will itself is the rale, which goTems and decides eterything. Jast so is it in the present case. The ministers of the New Testament have ne power to alter or amend that document ; they are to take it as it stands, without cavil or ex- ception.
But, — the Romanist will say, — yoa admit that when any passage or direction appears doabtful, the appointed coart mast be resorted to for an authorita- tive interpretation. Now that is all that we claim in the case of the sacred scriptures. We say that the church is that court, and that it was founded and empowered to act in that capacity by Christ himself.
This, however, is not a correct representation of the claims of the Romish priesthood. They claim more than a mere power to interpret : they claim a further and much greater power, namely, to add to the document itself. This is a power never yet granted to any executor, and it is a power which, if conceded, necessarily makes the testament itself just what the executor chooses.
But the assumption of a right to interpret authori- tatively is in itself objectionable. And the objection lies here — that the same party claims to be both exe- cutor and judge. The church of Rome assumes that the Testament of Christ gives her very great powers and privileges. This, to many eyes, is not apparent on the face of the document. Aye, but, says this same church of Rome, 1 am appointed by that same Testament, the authoritativo interpreter of its own
318 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
meaning, and / pronounce that sach is the trae intent of the passages in question*
What should we say of a judge in equity, who first claimed a certain property under a will, which will, to other people's eyes, made no such bequest ; and then sat in his court to decide this very questioo, and to give judgment in his own favour?
But it will probably next be asked, where we would propose to lodge this power of interpretation, sap- posing questions of diflSculty to arise in the perusal of the document ?
We can only reply to this by marking the distinc- tion between the two cases, and the impossibility of reaching, by any human illustration, the height and depth of divine things.
Human beings, men and women, make wills and testaments. They are all of them poor fallible crea- tures, often unfit for the duty, and not unseldom at- tempting it when disabled by disease. It follows of necessity that such documents are frequently found to be full of errors and faults ; and thus a court of appeal becomes necessary, in order to instruct and authorize executors how to proceed.
But the New Testament is the work of an omni- scient mind : and it was designed, as we are plainly told, for the instruction of all mankind. It ap- proaches to blasphemy, therefore, to compare it with human and fallible productions, or to speak of it as not intelligible to those for whose use it is written. A ministerial duty, it is true, there is ; but that duty consists in the large and liberal j>ubIication of its contents, and the explanation of its meaning by the studied comparison of one part with another ; never by fastening upon it meanings of an arbitrary and
NECESSITY FOR AN INFALLIBLE CHURCH. 319
foreig^n character, imported into it, and not belonging^ to it. Never mast it be forgotten, that perfection is its attribate, and that all addition to it is expressly, and under the highest penalties, forbidden.
But let as return to the question. It was de- manded of us, whether Christ did not establish a visible church, to which perpetaity was to belong ; and where that church was to be found, if not in the Roman communion ?
We may, perhaps, have seemed to digress, bat our argument was to this purport : that Christ did indeed give to his apostles certain extraordinary powers ; a special commission ; and supernatural gifts, as a sign of that commission : that during their lifetime these men wrote and spoke with divine authority, manifestly appearing in their works ; and by virtue of that authority they founded many churches, and wrote certain books, which collectively form the New Testament.
Our reasonings then went to this point — that as it is admitted on all hands that their miraculous powers ceased with them ; and as no successors, manifesting a similar commission by similar gifts, have ever ap- peared, it follows that the unerring guidance which they were enabled to give, during their lives, by their personal instructions, must now be sought in their inspired writings ; — writings, in fact, which we know to have been intended for this very purpose. *' / will endeavoury* says St. Peter, " that ye may he able, after my decease, to have these things always in remembrance," (2 Peter i. 15.) Thus we have, in these writings, an infallible guide, especially provided for our use ; while in the mere fallible human beings, who, whether at Rome or elsewhere, stand where the apostles have
320 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
Stood before them, we have, as we well know, do- thing bat weak and erring men, often misled tnd misleading ; sometimes even wicked and hating God and his charch.
Bat probably the question may be repeated in its shortest form — Did Christ constitate a chaieh or not ?
We will reply with eqaal expllcitness. He or- dained and sent forth his apostles to preach the gospel in all lands, and to form churches in various kingdoms ; which are so spoken of in the epistles, as "the charch at Corinth ; " — " the churches of Gs- latia ; " — ** the charch of the Thessaloniaos," and sun* dry others. These were all visible churches, known by territorial designations, and including within them- selves all sorts of characters, genuine and counterfeit. There is, however, a general and universal church spoken of in various places in the New Testament, as the " body'* of Christ, (Ephes. i. 22.) as that for which Christ " gave himself*' (Ephes. v. 25.) and as " a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or ani/ such thing" (Ephes. v. 27.) a description which cer- tainly has never belonged to any visible church that the world has yet seen, least of all to that of which Cardinal Baronius, referring to a. d. 912, says, ' What was then the face of the holy Roman church? How exceedingly foul was it, when most powerful, and sordid, and abandoned women ruled at Rome,' &c. It is clear, therefore, that those expressions in scripture which refer to a general or universal church, the spouse of Christ, speak of an invisible church, consisting of all those who sincerely believe in him, and cling to him, whether in Tartary, in Britain, in Taheite, or in any other part of the world.
NECESSITY FOE AN INFALLIBLE CHUECH, 921
fiot lastly we sball be referred to the xYth of Acts, in which, we shall be told, there is most clearly a central body, an admitted and acknowledged aatho- rity, knitting together in union and oneness of feeling and principle, all the various scattered provincial churches of the apostolic days.
That chapter, however, is perfectly consistent with the view we have already given. The college of apostles being then at Jerusalem (not at Rome)^ and there being no New Testament to guide the infant churches, those churches naturally and necessarily sent up to Jerusalem, to the apostles, whenever any doubt arose. But the apostles died, and left no successors in their apostolic authority ; but they left the New Testament in their stead. Consequently the churches ceased to send to Jerusalem for decisions; as for sending to Romcy such a course was never thought of for at least a century after this.
As to one, sole, visible church, then, we see it no- where in the New Testament ; and we find it nowhere in ecclesiastical history. In the apostolical writings, we merely meet with a great number of churches in various lands and kingdoms, and we find also that to the decrees and orders of the apostles, all these churches were obedient. But we hear nothing of their subjection even to the church of Jerusalem, much less to that of Rome, which was not so much as founded until many years after. And in ecclesias- tical history, we find, indeed, that about the year 193, Victor, then bishop of Rome, assumed to him- self the power of fixing the period of Easter, but in- stead of any such authority being conceded to him, be was sharply reprehended by the brightest light of that time, Irenseus; and his decree set at nought
Y
922 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
throagh the greater part of Christendom. Not in scripture then, nor yet in what is called ' Antiqiuty/ in its purest and best days, do we find any trace of this one, universal, and visible church.
We shall probably, however, be told that this hypo- thesis leaves the church at large in a hapless and forlon predicament. How unlikely, — it will be said,— that Christ should have deliberately left his disciples, io all after ages, destitute of authoritative guidance and direction ; when it was so easy, as in the Romish church has been shown, to establish a centre of unity and authority in that apostolic college, of which we find such clear traces in the Acts of the Apostles.
We have before observed, that it is useless, and therefore idle and almost criminal, to indulge io speculations of this kind, when we ha^e both God's own word, and the records of antiquity to boot, to instruct us as to what he was actually pleased to de- cide upon doing in this matter. Let us again glance at these two sources of truth, not so much for what we shall there find, as for the fullest evidence of the want of all support for the Romish hypothesis. Our opponents must certainly admit, that if one visible church, ruled over by one central authority, had been established by Christ, there must have been some dis- tinct and visible traces of it, both in the writings of the apostles, and in the records of their Acts ; and also in the history of the church during the first two centuries. And it is on the utter silence of both these sources of information that we rely, as esta- blishing our conclusion, that this visible church, and this central authority, are nothing better than mere human inventions, constructed in some later period.
NECESSITY FOR AN INFALLIBLE CHURCH. 323
Had we, indeed, a college of apostles, or any other body of men who could raise the dead to life, or give sight to the blind, — sitting on earth at the present moment, we should not for an instant hesitate to admit their authority. But between a college of in- spired men, selected and sent forth by Christ himself, and evidencing their divine commission by their mi- raculous power ; and a college of cardinals, named by court intrigues, characterized by every shade of folly and of crime, and possessing neither infallibility in their decisions, nor power in their actions, there is a difference as wide as between heaven and earth.
But we must protest against being supposed to admit the church of Christ to be left in a desolate and helpless condition. We are not arguing against the authority of the apostles of Christ, but for it. All that they were inspired to teach men, they have left us in the New Testament ; and in the study of that unerring guide, we have also the promise of the Holy Spirit's teaching. What we protest against, is the desertion of this, the only really apostolic authority, for human decisions and opinions, whether of fathers, or councils, or popes, or bishops. We cling to that apostolic code, touching the character of which there is no doubt, and refuse to admit the jarring and con- troverted claims of men, to be placed in any kind of competition with it.
Y 2
XV.
THE IDOLATRY OF ROMANISM.
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS.
Thus far have we gone, without being able to get beyond the first, grand, fundamental question^ of the Rule of Faith. Our time, however, has not been wasted, nor has our progress been tardy ; for that single point comprises more than one half the con- troversy. In fact, it involves the whole. The enmity so generally exhibited by the leaders of the Romish church towards the holy scriptures, sufficiently proves that, in their view, the admission of the word of God, as the rule of Christian faith and practice, must be fatal to their cause. And we are equally ready to admit, on the part of Protestants, that if the Bible be not our sole and sufficient rule — if we are under the necessity of having recourse to tradition, or the writings of the fathers, or the decisions of the church, in any matter essentially connected with the soul's salvation, — then there is little prospect of our being able to resist the establishment of the greater part of popery.'
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 325
The Romanist, however, assures us that we must have recourse, at last, to the traditions of the church, for naany doctrines and practices which are generally held among Protestants. How, he asks, can we pos- sibly establish the doctrine of the Trinity, or the sa- cred ness of the Sabbath, or the lawfulness of infant baptism, or the apostolic institution of episcopacy, without having recourse to the writings of the fathers, and the decisions of the church ?
Now the first two of these points are of far greater moment and importance than the other two. The doctrine of the Trinity, in our view, can be abun- dantly established by the words of scripture; and, in fact, so high and vast is its dignity and its weight, that if it were not found in God's own word, we could never venture to press it upon any one's belief, OD the mere ground that some ancient fathers held such a view. 2. The divine institution of the Sab- bath is upheld throughout the whole Bible ; and in the New Testament we have the clearest proofs that the day set apart, as the Sabbath, by the earliest Christians, under the sanction of the apostles, was the Jirst day of the week, to which we now adhere. 3. Infant baptism is notessential to salvation ; though it is clearly deducible, by way of inference, from the tenor of the Old and New Testaments, gathering from the first the practice relative to circumcision ; and from the second, the substitution, in the Christian charch, of baptism in its room. 4. Episcopacy stands in nearly the same position. It is not commanded in the New Testament, but we may learn from various passages that it was instituted by the apostles. But neither in the case of infant baptism, nor of episco- pacy, nor in any other, do we wish to throw the history
326 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
of the early cliarch out of view. We admit the valae and importance of such records as remain to as : we can even ascribe macb, though not infallible, autho- rity to them, when they harmonize with scriptnie; but we cannot accept such records as of equal autho- rity with the word of God ; nor can we consent to be absolutely bound by the opinions and practices of men who were as fallible and errinf^ sub ourselfes. However, let us now briefly review our former argu- ments, and endeavour to take up the question at the point at which we last left it.
It was our chief object, in all our past discussions, to ascertain the true standard or rule of faith, by which all questions of doctrine and practice were to be tried. On the Protestant side, we asserted the Bible to be this rule ; the Romanist arguing that the Bible formed, at most, only a part of the rule, and that the teaching of the church was a necessary adjunct; or rather, that the latter was the practical rule, or standard for daily use; while the scriptures were rather to be looked upon as the fountain or soarce from whence the church drew her instructions.
After a large and rather discursive review of the whole argument, we came, at last, to this conclusion: that the Protestant rule, the written word of God, was abundantly established, as to its authority; and was both available and suflScient, in its intrin- sic character. On the other hand, the main ob- jection to the rule of the Romish church was not answered ; to wit, that it was not available ; that it could not be taken hold of and applied by a hesitat- ing inquirer. For, on a close investigation, the mat- ter was brought to this, — either that such an inquirer must accept ' the teaching of the church ' at the
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 327
mds of an individual priest, whom he knew to be llible and liable to error, and in whom he there- re could not, with any satisfaction of mind, repose ich implicit confidence ; or else, if he hesitated to take ich an individoal's declaration as to what the church Ksided or held, he was left to wander in almost iter darkness, amidst a maze of church controver- es, to find out, first, where the Catholic church was iaily to be seen and heard ; and then, what she had lid and done on all the controverted points. In this fficulty, then, we contended that the Protestant lie was, beyond all comparison, the preferable one ; >r here, in the Bible, we possess it, and we can con- lit it, with perfect ease, whenever we need its guid- ice ; and with a feeling of perfect security that what e are reading is, truly and certainly, the unerring ord of the most high God.
The Romanist, however, asks if we can really feel, ithout having first submitted ourselves to the judgr ent and instruction of the church, that we have anyt ifficient grounds for our certainty that that book is :ally what we suppose it to be, a collection of the ritings of the inspired apostles and prophets, con- ining the whole of such inspired writings, and con- lining none other?
In answer to this, we demand in return, what is > be done with the full and satisfactory arguments * Bossuet, Bellarmine, Huet, La Mennais, and [vers others of the Romish communion, in proof of le genuineness, authenticity, and divine inspiration : scripture, against infidels and sceptical objectors ? These controversialists and theologians must not M one language at one time, and a totally different me at another. They have satisfactorily shewn,
d28 ESSAYS Oy ROMANISM:
while combating the infidels and sceptics, tkatAe right ase of our reason, without sabmittini^ it to the arbitrary dictation of any human being, or bomui authority, conducts us inevitably to the concliision, that the book called the Bible is a divine revelation; or a collection of writings inspired by the Holy Spirit Consequently, having thus argued, and having sao cessfolly established this point, they are not now at liberty to turn round and espouse the contrary view; namely, that it is only by the authority of the church that we can learn the divine character of the books of scripture.
For nothing can be more clear than that if they adhere to this assertion,— that it is only by the testi- mony of the church that we can know the scriptures to be inspired, — then, with an infidel, who takes their church to be nothing else than a system of fraud and priestcraft, they have not even a word to say. They cannot even begin an argument; for if they admit the external evidences of the authenticity and inspi- ration of the scriptures to be insufiScient, the question between them and the sceptic is wholly at an end. They retire, defeated, even before the combat has well begun.
But let us now endeavour to advance another step. Let us assume, as we are entitled to do, that the divine inspiration of scripture is abundantly esta- blished. In the Bible, therefore, we have a standard, and it is clear that the Romish church can offer us no further or better rule. Let us proceed, then, on this basis, that the Bible is to be judge and arbiter of this controversy. And let us now proceed to take up in succession, the various points of difference her tween tlie Romish and Protestant churches. That which will first demand our attention, is the main
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. S29
accasatioor brought against the Romish charch^ aamely, that she is an Idolatrous church : or a com- mnnity which having once been a trne church of Christ, has apostatized, and fallen into the practice of worshipping and serving other gods. This is the view presented of her by the apostle John, in the book of Revelation, chap. xvii. xviii. and though it may not be expedient, at present, to open the dis- cussion as to the interpretation of unfulfilled pro- phecy, there can be no impropriety in our gravely and calmly bringing the same accusation against the Romish church, upon the evidence of facts, which is here stated, in figurative language, by the inspired apos- tle. We charge, therefore, the church of Rome with the practice of open, flagrant, and unblushing idolatry.
But Dr. Wiseman starts back with indignation, and exclaims, * Idolaters ! know ye, my brethren^ the import of this name ? That it is the most fright- fal charge that can be laid to the score of any Chris- tian ? Then, gracious God ! what must it be, when flnngas an accusation upon those who have been bap- tized in the name of Christ, who have tasted the sacred gift of his body, and received the Holy Ghost ? ' >
Now we are quite aware that the charge we make is a most serious one, and one which ought not to be lightly hazarded. But when Dr. Wise- man affects to recoil back with surprise and in- dignation at so * frightful ' an accusation, he should remember the real nature of the separation which exists between the church of Rome and the Protes- tant churches. Those who, in the sixteenth century, at the hazard of their lives and of all they held dear, threw off their allegiance to Rome, never dreamed of
1 WUman*9 Thirteenth Lecture, p. 93: '
390 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM:
treating^ the differences which existed, as aittm of mt\\ light and trifling moment If thej had notbetiend |i^t the grounds of their protest to be both solid uiotr the most vital nature, they would not have caued I Inr \ separation, which if made without suflBcientgioiiii|.lic*: must have been a schism. They jeoparded euif k^r thing that life could offer. Hundreds, even in Eof- It I land, and thousands in France and Germany, p^] the forfeit of their decision with their lives ; andisl now to be made matter of surprize that the chaig** brought by them and by us against Rome, and tkoi belief in the truth of which they sealed with thdr blood — should be serious and weighty ! If the groQudi of that separation were not of a deep and feaifid nature, would not the Romanists themselves be justi- fied in asking, * Wherefore, for such light and triiiiS causes, have ye broken the unity of the church!' We admit, then, that the charge we bring against the Roniish church is a most fearful one. We admit that we charge that church with depriving God of his honour, and transfering the worship and adoration which should be paid to Him alone, to divers of his creatures, who were and are nothing but poor human beings like ourselves.
We commence the inquiry, then, by first lodging our formal accasation, that the church of Rome, by her worship and adoration of the Virgin Mary, and of sundry dead men and women, called * saints,' does, in effect, rob Christ of his peculiar glory ; af- front the God and Father of our Lord, who hath *' given him for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles,*' and set at nought the Holy Ghost, whose office it is to glorify Christ, and to shed abroad his love in our hearts. In short, that another
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 331
worship, distinct from, and opposed to, the worship of the blessed Trinity, is set np; a worship of entirely distinct from, and opposed to, the worship of the only true God, as was the worship of the heroes and demigods of ancient Greece and Rome. But having thus opened our accusation, let us at once hear Dr. Wiseman's defence ; feeling assured that that lucid writer has, in his well-considered argn* BDont, done more justice to the cause of his church, than we should be likely to do by any imaginings of our own. The Doctor says : —
* What is the Catholic belief on the subject of giving worship or veneration to the saints or their emblems? You will not open a single Catholic work, from the folio decrees of councils, down to the smallest catechism placed in the hands of the young- est children, in which you will not find it expressly taught; — that it is sinful to pay the same homage or worship to the saints, or the greatest of the saints, or the highest of the angels in heaven, which we pay to God ; that supreme honour and worship are reserved exclusively to him ; that from him alone can any blessing possibly come ; that he is the sole fountain of salvation and grace, and all spiritual, or even earthly gifts, — and that no one created being can have any power, energy, or influence of its own, in carrying into effect our wishes or desires. No one surely will say, that there is no distinction between one species of homage and reverence, and another ; no one will assert that when we honour the king or his representatives, or our parents, or others in lawful authority over us, we are hereby derogating from the supreme honour due to God. Would not any one smile, if he did not give way to a harsher feeling,
332 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
were he taxed with defraading God of hu tnie hoDoar, because he paid reverence or esteem to others, or soaght their intercession or assistaneel It is wasting time to prove that there may be honour and worship, — for, as I will shew yoo presently, this word is ambiguoas, — that there may be reverence or esteem demonstrated, so subservient to God, as in no way to interfere with what is dae to him.
' What I have cursorily stated, is precisely the Catholic belief regarding the saints: that they have no power of themselves, and that they are not to be honoured and respected as though they possessed it; but at the same time that they are intercessors for ns with God, praying for us to him, and that it is right to address ourselves to them, and obtain the co-oper- ation of this, their powerful intercession, in our he- half. The very distinction here made excludes the odious charge to which I have alluded with consid- erable pain. For the very idea that yoo call on any being to pray to God, is surely making an abyss, a gulf, between him and God ; it is making him a sup- pliant, a dependant on the will of the Almighty: and surely these terms and these ideas are in exact con- tradiction to all we can possibly conceive of the at- tributes and qualities of God.
' But I go further still. Instead of taking any thing from God, it is adding immensely to his glory: by thus calling on the saints to pray for os, instead of robbing him of a particle of the honour which be- longs to him, we believe him to be served in a much nobler way than any other. For we thereby raise ourselves in imagination to heaven ; we see the saints prostrate before him in our behalf, offering their golden crowns and palms before his foot-
THB mVOCATIOK OF SAINTS. 333
stool, pouring oat before him the odoars of their golden vials, which are the prayers of their bre- thren on earth, and interceding through the death and the passion of his Son. And surely, if this be so, we are paying to God the highest homage, which his apostle describes as paid in heaven ; for we give occasion, by every prayer, for this prostration of his saints, and this outpouring of the fragrance of their supplications. Such being the Catholic belief re- garding the saints, we must be further convinced that it is, and can be, no way displeasing to God, that we should shew a respect and honour to their remains on earth, or to those images and representa-> tions which recal them to our remembrance. Nay, we believe more than this : for we believe that God is pleased with tl)is respect we shew them, insomuch as it is all ultimately directed to honour him in them. We doubt not that he may be pleased to make use of sach outward and visible instruments, to excite the faith of his people, and to bring them to a disposition of fervour, which may produce salutary effects.' ^
Such is the Doctor's statement of the doctrine. Let us now turn to his proofs from scripture : —
' In the book of Daniel, for instance, we read of angels sent to instruct him, and we have mention made of the princes, meaning the angels of different kingdoms. In the book of Tobias, which, whatever any one present may think of its canonicity, as I said on a former occasion of the book of Maccabees, must be considered at least as a strong testimonial of the belief of the Jews, — we find these words ex-
^ FFuemofi'f Thirteenth iMSture, p. 93—05.
334 ESSAYS oy romanism:
pressly put into the month of an angel : * When thoa didst pray with tears, and didst bary the dead, and didst leave thy dinner and hide the dead by day in thy house, and bnry them by night, I offered thy prayers to the Lord.' In the book of Maccabees we have the same doctrine repeated. It is there said, that Onias, who had been high priest, appeared to Judas Maccabeus, * holding up his arms, and pray- ing for the people of the Jews.' After this, there ap- peared also another man, admirable for age and glory, and environed with great beauty and majesty. Then Onias said, * This is a lover of his brethren, and of the people of Israel : this is he that prayetb much for the people, and for all the holy city, Jere- mias the prophet of God.' Such, then, was the belief of the Jews, and such it is at the present day.
* Bat is there any thing in the New Testament to contradict it, and give reason to suspect for a mo- ment, that our blessed Saviour rejected and repro- bated this conviction ? Does he not, on the contrary, speak of it as a thing well understood, and in terms which, so far from reproving, must have gone far to confirm his hearers in this belief? " Even so,'' says our Saviour, ** there shall be joy in heaven upon one sinner that doth penance, more than upon ninety- nine just that need not penance." What is here sig- nified, but that communion of which I spoke, whereby a sinner*s repenting here below is matter of joy and gladness to the angels? And we are elsewhere taught that the saints of God shall be like his angels. We have also the angels of individuals spoken of: and we are told not to offend any of Christ's little ones, or make them fall, because their angels always stH" (he face of their Father who is in heaven. Why,
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 335
this to all appearance goes as much as the Catholic belief, and more, to affect the saperlntendence and guidance, and general providence of God. That we are to take care to avoid sin, because it offends the angels — that we are to avoid being the cause of these little ones' fall, because their angels see the face of God! What does this mean^ but that they have an influence with God, and will use it to bring down judgment on the offender? For, in fact, where- fore is the connexion between the angels and men alluded to, except to shew that the former, enjoying the divine presence, have a powerful advantage over us, which they will use to bring signal judgment down on the heads of the offenders ? And what is that but establishing a communion and connexion between them and their little charge in the way of intercession ?
' But in the Apocalypse we have still stronger au- thority, for we there read of our prayers being as perfumes in the hands of angels and saints. One blessed spirit stood before a mystical altar in heaven, *' having a golden censer, and there was given to him much incense, that he should offer the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar, which is before the throne of God. And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God, from the hand of the angel.'' And not only the angels, but the twenty-four elders, cast themselves before the throne of God, and, as I before remarked, pour out vials of sweet odours, which are the prayers of the saints. What does all this signify, but that they do present our prayers to God, and become in- tercessors with him ? ' '
* WUenuxni's Thirteenth Lecture, p. 101—103.
336 ESSAYS OK romakism:
Sach, then, is the whole that the learned Doctor can offer, in the way of proof from scriptare. So signal a failure ought of itself to decide the whole question. Prayer is the one grand topic of the Bible. Every saint therein described was eminently a man of prayer. Not less than five hundred times do we find prayer, and the act of praying, distinctly spoken of. And yet, with all Dr. Wiseman's research and in- genuity, he is only able to find four passages in the Old Testament, and four in the New, from which he can possibly draw an inference suited to his views ! And on even a very cursory examination, we shall find that not one of these lends the least countenance to the practice of the Romish church.
Besides these, indeed, the Doctor quotes two verses from the Apocryphal books, but they can have no authority in the matter. The care of the books of the Old Testament was committed by God to the Jewish church : ** Unto them," says St. Paul, " were committed the oracles of GodJ^ (Rom. iii. 2.) Now the Jewish church never acknowledged the books of Tobit or the Maccabees as inspired writ- ings. We can have nothing, therefore, to do with them in this matter. And, in fact, it is sufficient to ob- serve, that the council of Laodicea, held in a.d. 367, and that of Chalcedon, held in a.d. 451, and at- tended by 630 bishops, while settling the canon of scripture as then held, say nothing of these books of Tobit and Maccabees. Equally unknown were they to Origen, to Eosebius, to Atbanasius, and to Hilary. It was reserved for the Romish church of a later age, — finding that a few passages like those which Dr. Wiseman has quoted, told in favour of their awful fictions of purgatory and prayer to the
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. S37
saints, — to s^ther ap and adopt these forgeries which had Iain unheeded and disregarded for many hundred years.
Dr. Wiseman^ however, feeling the weakness of this part of his case, proposes to use them * as a strong testimonial of the belief of the Jews.'
Nothing can be more irrational. Here are two old books, one of which, Tobit, is a mass of childish absurdities, sach as the story of a man's losing his eye-sight by the muting of a sparrow, and recover- ing it by the use of a fish's liver, with various others of a similar kind. And of the other, it is sufficient to say, that it approves and lauds an act of suicide ! Neither of these books was ever admitted by the Jews into the canon of the scriptures, nor yet by the early Christian church. What are they, then? Simply two old books, representing the opinions of none but their writers. How can books that were refected from the first, by the whole body of Jewish rabbis, furnish any * testimonial of the belief of the Jews ? ' Perhaps, however, it is but consistent, that the worship of false and spurious mediators should be supported by the authority of false and spurious books of scripture !
Let us pass on, then, to the other eight passages, which Dr. Wiseman quotes from the sacred writings. These will occupy us but a very short time. The first four are taken from Daniel, and are as fol- lows : —
** / heard a man's voice between the banks of Ulai, which called and said, Gabriel, make this man to under- stand the vision,*' (chap. viii. 16.)
** Yea, while I was speaking in prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning,
z
338 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM:
being cawed to fly siciftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation**' (chap. ix. 21.)
**• Then he said unto tncf Fear not, Daniel^ for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to under- standf and to chasten thyself before God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words," (chapter X. 12.)
'* And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people J* (chap. xii. 1.)
Now we beg to ask, what more does anyone of these texts tell as, than what is declared of the angels in Heb. i. 14. *^ Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation ! "
But on this point there is no controversy. No Protestant denies the ministry of angels. The ques- tion is, who is to be addressed in prayer, the angels or saints, or their Lord and Master? Now on this point we have scripture examples. In 2 Kings vi. 17, Elisha prays, " O Lord, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the Lord opened the eyes of the young man, and he saw, and behold the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha," Here, then, were the ministering spirits. But with them close at hand, Elisha thinks not of them, ad- dresses them not, but thrice within four verses, " PRAYS UNTO THE LoRD." In like manner said Jesus himself, '* Thinhest thou that I cannot NOW PRAY TO MY Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels ? " (Matt. xxvi. 53.) All these four passages from Daniel, then, which merely speak of the angels as *' ministering spirits," prove nothing whatever in this question, except per-
THB INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 339
baps that 1>r. Wiseman 'was sadly at a loss for a few authorities from scriptare.
But are the other foqr texts which he cites of any hig^her valae? Let as see.
The first is from Luke xv. 7, 10. '' Likewise I gay vnto youy there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth,** This goes no further than the passages in Daniel. That the angels are *' ministering spirits,*' we admit. They must often be spectators of the recovery of a sinner unto God, and must spread the intelligence among their companions. And that Intel Hgence, we are told, produces universal joy among these bright spirits. But what is there in all this, to justify or encourage our addressing prayers to them ? Clearly nothing.
The next passage (Matt. xxii. 30.) merely asserts, that the saints shall be as the angels. But as we have not yet found a single authority for praying to the angels, of course we have none for praying to the saints. We come next to Matt, xviii. 10. '* Take heed that ye offend not one of these little ones, for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.*' Still not one word authorizing prayer to them. Last of all, we are referred to Rev. viii. 3, 4. '* And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer ; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throneJ^ This passage is highly figurative. No one, of course, imagines the existence of a material altar, or a golden censer, or earthly incense. Upon such a passage, unsupported by any other in the whole scripture, it is impossible to
Z2
340 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM:
rest an important doctrine. The very interpretatiOD of it, in the writings of the leading Romish commeotitors, is wholly inconsistent with Dr. W/s view. Tkomat Aquinas declares the angel to be none other than the Lord Jesus Christ : and the Jesuit Yiegas says : ' All interpreters do confess, that by the angel is meant our Lord Christ, because of none other can it be said, that he offers up to the Father, after so glorioos and majestic a manner, the incense, that is the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar.' ■ And of the accuracy of this interpretation there can be no doubt; for the golden censer, bOrne by the angel, pertained only to the High Priest.* And '* the High Priest of our profession '' is Christ Jesus. Whether, however, the angel be Christ or not, there is nothing said in this place of any prayers addressed to the imgel by the saints on earth. And that -is the only point for which we are in search. Not one of all Dr. Wise- man's texts reaches this point, or even approaches to it.
But there is another passage in the Revelation which the Romanists are accustomed to quote in this argument : it is only adduced, however, by less wary advocates than Dr. Wiseman. It occurs at the tenth verse of the nineteenth chapter. The angel there spoken of had been instructing the apostle in many things, and the apostle adds, *' And I feU ut his feet to worship him," Thus far is the text nsnally quoted by Romanists. But Dr. Wiseman was too cautious to meddle with this passage, for he well knew that the very next words are, '' And he said unto me, See thou do it not, / am thy fellow'ser-
Apoc. chap. Tiii. sect. 8. ^ Hebrew* iz. 3, 4, 7.
THB INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 341
vantj and of thf kretkrem that kave the testimwmy of Jesus, WORSHIP God/' This is, in fact, the only pas- sage in the whole Bible that, taken imperfectly, might seem to lend countenance to the worship of saints and angels. Bat the Holy Spirit, foreseeing this great e?ii, instantly adds the most decisiYC con- demnation, and thus leaves no opening whatever for the error to creep in.
And now let ns review the whole tenor of scripture as to this question. Dr. Wiseman has ransacked the Bible ; he has passed over more than five hundred passages in which prayer and worship and supplica- tion is named, and not a single text can he find, which lends the least colour to the worship of saints ! This, of itself, ought to decide the whole question.
For remember what is the inevitable inference: We have the annals of the Jewish church through fifteen centuries ; that church possessed as eminent saints as any that subsequent ages have seen ; Abra- ham, '' the friend of God : " Moses, with whom God '* talked face to face, as a man talked with his friend:" Jacob, who ''had power with God, and prevailed:'' David, ''the man after God's own heart : " Elijah, who only, besides Enoch, " was not, for God took him:" Daniel, the " man greatly be- loved." All these we read of in their turn ; but not one prayer or invocation do we find, addressed to them by the Jewish church, throughout all these fifteen hundred years!
And then, coming down to the apostles' times, we find John the Baptist; Stephen, the first martyr; and James the brother of John, all sent to their hea- venly home by martyrdom in the course of a few years. And we have St. Paul writing epistles to
342 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
various cbarcbes for more than twenty yean, and St* John for more than fifty j^ears, after the departaie of these three martyrs. How, then, let as ask, came it, that if the invocation of departed saints was so right, and fit, and proper, as Dr. Wiseman repre- sents it, — that no one of all the prophets, no one among all the apostles, once coansels it, or so much as mentions it, as an usual and laudable practice in the church ? Prayer, as we have seen, was among their most constant topics. How, then, is it, that prayer to Abraham, or to Elijah, or to Stephen, is never once mentioned in all their writings ? Negative proof, stronger than this, it is, we conceive, scarcely possible to imagine.
But Dr. Wiseman goes on to adduce a variety of instances from the writings of Irenaeus, Origen, Cyprian, Eusebius, Basil, Athanasius, -and other fathers, in which the practice of the early church is alluded to, and in which the invocation of the saints is constantly taught.
Not questioning the truth of these quotations, we may yet refuse the inference, that the practice of the church in the second, third, fourth, and subsequent centuries, is at all binding upon us. We reject it, first, because St. Paul, in writing to the Thessa- lonians, had warned them that ** a falling away/' or apostacy, was at hand ; and that " the mystery of iniquity *' was already, in his, the apostle's time, at work. (2 Thess. ii. 3, 7.) It is clear, therefore, that when we find new practices and new doctrines creep- ing into the church, subsequently to the apostle's days, we ought at least to suspect, that these were some of the manifestations of that ^' mystery of ini- quity" which he had declared to be already at
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 343
work, and which was .to prodace a great *' falling away."
Bat, secoodlj, we refuse to be governed by quota- tions from Cyprian, Origen, Basil, or Gregory Nazi- anzen, for another very sufScient reason ; that these eminent men, great and honourable as most of them were, were still, like ourseWes, fallible and variable ; and did, in fact, continually chance their opinions, and confess their errors, from time to time. And thus it comes to pass, that while the advocate of one. view can always replenish his quiver from the ar- moury of the fathers, with arguments for the affirma- tive of any question, the opponent finds it equally easy to gather from them reasons on the negative side in the same controTcrsy. And what can be the end of such contention, but either a weariness and disgust at such senseless proceedings, or a sceptical doubt whether such a thing as truth is possibly to be discovered ?
In the present case it is just as easy to find pas- sages in the writing^ of the fathers against the wor- ship of the saints, as in favour of such a practice. For instance, Origen says, < We most pray to him ahne who is God over all ; and we must pray to> the only-begotten Son of God, the first-born of every creature; and we must entreat him, as our High Priest, to present our prayers when they come to him — ^to his God and our God, to his Father and ours.' ^
Athanasitu tells us : 'It appertains to Gad only to be worshipped, and the angels themselves are aware of this ; for although they surpass others in glory,
. 1 Orii^agaiiut Celtu$, Ub. viii.
344 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
they are all creatures, and not beings to ^ wor- shipped, bat beings who worship the Lord. The angel, therefore, admonished Manoaby the father of Sampson, saying, *' Oifer not to me, but to God."^
Gregory Nazumzen says : * The word of God baa ordained that none of those things which hsTe their being by creation shall be worshipped by nen. Moses, the law, the prophets, the gospels, and all the apostles, forbid our looking to the creature/ *
And Epiphanius is still more decided, warning u that * Neither Elias is to be worshipped, nor yet John. Nor is Thecla, nor any of the saints to be worshipped. For that ancient error shall not pre?ail over as, to forsake the living God, and to worship the things that are made by him. For they wor- shipped and served the creature more than the Creator, and thus became fools. And if an angel will not be worshipped, how much more will not she who was born of Anna.' ' Let Mary be had in honour, but let the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost be worshipped. Let no man worship Mary.''
I'hese few passages, which might be indefinitely increased, shew that if we were to go to the fathers for a decision of the question, we should merely in- volve ourselves in an inextricable maze of conflict- ing opinions. But we have already decided, that the Bible, and the Bible only, is to be the standard to which appeal is to be made. And never, assur- edly, did advocate more entirely fail, than has Dr. Wiseman, in the attempt to support saint-worship by scripture authorities.
1 AthaneuUUf T^ird Oration against Ariatu. Paris, 1627.
' OrtigoTy Naxianzen, Fourth Oration againat Eunom, torn. ii. p. 144.
' £iPiphanim againtt Heretic$, sec. 79* PP* 448, 449.
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 845
Bat we shall probably be told, that we confound two things whieb Dr. Wiseman jastly discriminates, namely, that highest worship which is doe only to God, and that minor degree which may blamelessly he paid to his creatures. We shall be reminded, that the words ' worship,' ' worshipful,' * your wor- ships,' are constantly applied by Protestants, both to the wife in the marriage service, and to magistrates and other authorities, when invested with the in- signia of their office. Our argument, however, does not turn upon the mere use of the word . worship, but upon the very nature of the homage and adora- tion paid by Romanists to the saints, as in itself un- lawful and idolatrous. And we will now take up the solemn question, put in such indignant terms by Dr. Wiseman, Wby we venture to charge the Romish cfatircb with idolatry ? — and in answering this inter- rogation, we shall endeavour to shew three things : — 1. That the doctrines and practices of the Romish charch, touching the adoration and invocation of the saints, are opposed to the spirit and tenor of the gospel :
^ 2. That they are also opposed to the plain injunc- tions of Scripture :
8. That they do amount, in the generality of cases, to absolute and very gross idolatry.
First, then, we propose to show that these doc- trines and practices oppose and counteract the main object and intent of the gospel That intent we shall not venture to describe in our own words, but shall adduce the descriptions of the apostles them- selves. St. Paul tells the Ephesians, *' But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far
346 ESSAYS OK ROMAKISM : ^
off art made nigh hy the blood of Ckrut* For hi it our petic€f who hath made both ose, and katk brohm down the middle wall of partiHon between us: Haoingebo- lished in hi* fieeh the enmity^ even the law of eowmaad- menti contained in ordinances ; for to mahe in hiaudf of twain one new man, so mahing peace ; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one bodg by the enut, having slain the enmity thereby: And came and preaeked peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. For through him we both have access by am Spirit unto the Father." (Epb. ii. 13—18.)
To the Corinthians he writes,
*' All things are of God, who hath reconciled w to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the snsiitf- try of reconciliation ; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing tkar trespasses unto them ; and hath committed unto us the wofd of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.*' (2 Cor. V. 18-20.)
To the Colossians,
'' For it pleased the Father that in him should aH fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself: by him, I say, whether they be things on earth, or things in heaven* And you, that were sometimet alienated and enemies in your mind by wiched worhs, yet fUfw hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight.*' (Col. i. 19—22.)
And so writes St. Peter :
* * Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God." (1 Pet iii. 18.)
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 347
And St. John,
** That which we have seen and heard declare we unto yoUf that ye also may have fellowship with us ; and truly our fellowship is with the Father^ and with his Son Jesus Christ." (1 John i. 3.)
*' Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God* And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.'* (1 John lii. 21, 22.)
*' God is love ; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. Herein is our love made per- fect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment : because as he is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love ; but perfect love casteth out fear : because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in lover (1 John iv. 16—18.)
'' These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God, that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. And this is the confidence that we have in him, that if we ask any thing according to his will he heareth us.** (1 John t. 13—15.)
These passages, to which many others might he added, will exhibit better than any language of oars coold do, the great end and object of the gospel, which is, TO bring men nigh unto God. By the fall, a '' great golf was fixed " between man and his Creator. As a sinner, man, until a reconciliation is effected, dares not lift up his eyes to heaven* His mind is always averted with dread, from a view of his angry Judge ; and this fear, and dread, and alien- atioui it is Satan's chief object to keep up. So long,
348 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
be well knows, as this alienation exists, man must remain entirely in his power*
But this enmity and distance it was the gpreat ob- ject of the gospel to remoTe. Man could not ap- proach God ; Gody therefore, by the wonderfal eon* trivance of Redemption, approached man, in order to draw man to Himself. " Christ/' says St Peter, '* hath once suffered for our sins, the just for the unjusU
THAT HE MIGHT BRING US TO GOD/' (1 Peter ill.
18.) And " therefore," sstys St. Paul, '< being jiuHJkd hyfoith we have PEACE WITH GoD through our Lord Jesus Christ ; by whom also we have ACCESS by foith unto this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope rf the glory of God." (Rom. v. 1, 2.)
Now all this beautiful plan of the divine wisdom, it is the endeavour of Satan, by every possible device, to counteract. His constant labour is, to persuade man that there is not this perfect reconciliation; that he must not dare to approach God with filial confidence ; that there is some degree of terror and austerity yet remaining, which makes it far wiser and more desirable to use the intercession of others, rather than to throw himself before the divine foot- stool. And having succeeded in creating this feeling of dread and distance, the next attempt is to throw a similar degree of awfnlness and terror around the character of Christ ; and to argue that human beings like ourselves, would be more likely to listen with sympathy, and to plead our cause with earnestness, than so great a person as the only begotten Son of God.
And in inculcating this false view, he is mainly aided by the church of Rome, whose theologians constantly assert it.
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 349
* Too lament,' says Dr. Milner, ' that your prayers to God are not heard ; — continae to pray to bim with Eill the fervour of your sool ; bat why not engage bis friends and ooortiers to add the weight of their prayers to your own ? Perhaps his Divine Majesty nay hear the prayers of the Jobs; when he will not listen to those of an Eliphaz^' &€•■ ' Beg of her, then, [the Virgin) with affection and confidence, to inter- cede with Jesus for yon.'* ' The saints,' says Dr. Wiseman, * look down upon ns with sympathy, talee an interest in all that we do and suffer, and make use of the influence they necessarily -possess with God, towards assisting their frail and tempted brethren on earth.' ^ ' We may tarn to them in the confidence of brethren, and ask them to use their influence with their Lord and Master, which their charity and goodness neces- sarily move them to exert.' ^
Now what* is the drift and inevitable effect of all this ;— bat to convey an impression to the penitent and praying mind, that there are others in heaven whose ears are more open to his prayers, and whose hearts more readily sympathize with his griefs and necessities, than either the *' Father of mercies," or '' the Good Shepherd, who bears the lambs in his arms and carries them in his bosom, and gently leads those that are with young." The whole tenor of this system, then, is to augment the distance between Christ and the sinner; to separate and drive apart those whom the gospel was intended to re-unite and make one; and to hinder men from seeking help where alone it is to be found, in their almighty and all-merciful God and Saviour. And thus it is that it
» Milner'8 End of Controvergy, l8mo. p. 870. ' Ibid. p. 371 .
3 f1'iaeman*9 Thirteenth Lecture, p. 98. * Ibid^ p. gs.
350 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
shews itself clearly opposed to the whole tenor mid pur- port of the gospel dispensation.
Bat farther, or rather as a necessary conseqaence, — It contradicts the plain declarations of scripture.
Most explicitly does Christ declare of himself, *' / am the way, the truth, and the life ; no man cometh unto the Father but by me." (John xiv. 6.) '' If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it J' (yet, 14.) " Verily, verily, 1 say unto you. Whatsoever ye shuU ask the Father in my name, he will give it you*" (chap, xvi. 23.)
St. Paal is equally clear on this point: ^* It is Christ tliat died, yea, rather that is ri^en again ; Mo is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh interces- sion for us," (Rom. viii. 34.)
*' There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Chi'ist Jesus* (1 Tim. ii. 5.)
'* Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people : For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.*' (Heb. ii. 17, 18.)
** We have not an High Priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities ; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need**' (chap. iv. 15, 16.)
** Wherefore he is able also to save them to the utter- most that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercessionfor them,*' (chap. vii. 26.)
** And for this cause he is THE Mediator of the New Testament." (chap, ix, 15.)
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 351
'^ For Christ is not entered into the holy places made oith hands, which are the figures of the true ; but into ieaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for IS.'' (ch, ix. 24.)
St. John follows in the same strain : —
^* If any nutn sin, we have an advocate with the Fa- ^hery Jesus Christ the righteous: and he is the propitia- Hon for our sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins if the whole world.** (1 John ii. 1, 2.)
'' And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth ru : And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him.*' (1 John V. 14, 15.)
Now we would holdly ask, whether language could possibly be more distinct and full on this point, that Christ is our one mediator ; that he ever heareth the prayer of the penitent ; and that by him no one is ever sent empty away? What folly, then, or rather, what Satanic delusion is it, to turn away from this great High Priest, the appointed channel of commu- nication between God and man, and to prefer our petitions to Gregory, or Januarius, or Mary, rather than unto him !
Bat although the apostles chiefly dwell on the truth in this matter, and seem not to have had much presage of the false doctrine that should arise, tbey do once or twice allude to this subject, and with the strongest abhorrence. Writing to the Colossians, St. Paul counsels them —
'* Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.*' (Col. ii. 18.)
352 ESSAYS ON ROHftANISM:
And to Timothy he writes, —
*' Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the Uittt tinus some shall depart from the faith, giving heed seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils (or demigods) (ITim.iv.l.)
Sach, then, is the clear and broad testimony scripture on this point ; and let it be remembere that on the other side not a word can be found, as \ have already seen, which gives the least countenan to the notion of the propriety of seeking other int( cessors or mediators, than *' the one mediator I
9
tween God and man, the man Christ Jesas/'
But we mast now proceed, in the last place, shew that ' this practice, a tendency to which i admit to have shewn itself in the church as early the third and fourth centuries, but which was fix and consolidated by the Romish ecclesiastical pow* — we must now go on, we repeat, to shew that tl practice, when carried to the extent to which Roi has carried it, amounts to nothing less than absolc and positive Idolatry.
For what is idolatry ? It is the setting up a stran god ; the giving to some creature of God's hand, some invention of our own fancy, the place and t rightful dominion of God himself.
Now this worship of '* demons," or dead men, chargeable with this guilt, in two particulars : ~
1. That it ascribes to human beings the incomm nicable attributes of God ; and,
2. That it devolves upon the same human bein the peculiar offices and honours of Christ.
It ascribes to *' demons,'* or dead men, the incoi municable attributes of God. Among these we may chiefly name his omnipresen
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 353
and omniseienee. These are constantly spoken of in scripture as God's own peculiar and distinguishing attribates*
** Then hear tkou in heaven thy dwelling-place, and forgive, and do, and give to every nwn according to his ways, whose heart thou hnowest ; {for thou, even THOU ONI^T, knmoest the hearts of all the children of men**) (1 Kings viii. 39.)
'* Shall not God search this out ? for he hnoweth the secrets of the heart.*' (Psalm xliv. 21.)
^* Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways. For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O Lord, thou hnowest it alto^ gether. Whither shall I go from thy Spirit ? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?" (Ps. cxxxix. 3, 4, 7.)
*' Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him ? saith the Lord. Do not I fill heaven and earth ? saith the Lord,' (Jer. xxiii. 24.)
" Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight; hut all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do." (Heb. iv. 13.)
And it is the persuasion of this peculiar and all- important fact, which draws forth man's faith and prayer. It is because '' tit Him we live, and move, and have our being,** that '* the eyes of all wait upon Him, and He giveth them their meat in due season." And thus it is that the Psalmist addresses God, by an allusion to this attribute, as essentially His own : ** O THOU THAT HEAREST PRAYER, unto thee shall all flesh come"
We might proceed to argue, next, upon the abso- late impossibility of this attribute being communi- cated to, or conferred upon, any mere creatore^
There is nothing irreverent in saying, that there are
s A
354 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
attributes which God himself conid not confer upon another. A creature, for instance, who was formed only yesterday, cannot be made to be eternal, or from before all time. But we forbear urging this point, not to plunge into metaphysical discussions. We prefer to press this plain doctrine, — that to ascribe one of these great and peculiar attributes of God to a mere human being, without the least ground for so doing, either in scripture or in common sense, is to be guilty of an act in the highest degree dishonour- able to God, and partaking largely of blasphemy.
To come to particulars : The church of Rome causes perpetual supplications to be sent up, from every corner of the globe, and from the secret of the heart, as well as by audible voices, to the virgin Mary : Now, we beg to know what ground any one can have for supposing that any one of these suppli- cations are really heard by the virgin ?
We have a right to ask this question ; for he who teaches a worship no where commanded in scripture, is clearly bound to shew that it is grounded on some principle reconcileable with common sense. Where- as, every man's own knowledge and experience is opposed, at first sight, to this theory. We know that a creature, a human soul, cannot be in two places at once. And even if we were to imagine it possible for the soul of the virgin to be conscious of a whis- pered prayer breathed forth by a nun in Sicily, we should still find it diflScult to conceive the possibility of her being also aware, at the same instant of time, of other prayers offered up in Canada or in Tranque- bar. Now, we admit, willingly, that all such diffi- culties as these must be surrendered the moment the words of inspiration are heard. But we cannot sub-
TH£ INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 855
mit to any thing less autboritati?e. We cannot ^ve up the conclasions of ovr own reason merely oat of deference to the opinions of Bernard or of Hilary. We ask, therefore, is it meant to ascribe to the vir^n the language ased only by God himself, ** Do I not JUl up heaven and earth ? saith the Lord," Or are we to alter the words of the Psalmist, and to say, *' The eyes of Mary are in every place , beholding the evil and the pood?" What, in short, are we to understand to be the actual belief, touching the mode in which these *< saints*' are made acquainted with the peti- tions of their worshippers ?
This question i» answered by Bellarmine in the following terms : —
* Concerning the manner in which they know what IS said to them, there are four opinions among the doctors, —
' 1. Some say that they know it from the relation of the angels, who at one time ascend to heaven, and at another time descend thence to us.
* 2. Others say that the souls of the saints, as also the angels, by a certain wonderful swiftness which is natural to them, are in some measure every where, and themselves hear the prayers of the supplicants.
* 3. Others, that the saints see in God all things, from the beginning of their beatitude, which in any way appertain to themselves ; and hence even our prayers which are directed to them.
' 4. Others, lastly, that the saints do not see in the Word our prayers from the beginning of their blessed- ness, but that our prayers are only then revealed to them by God, when we t>our them forth.' ^
Now if one of their greatest men, as Bellarmine is
1 BeUamutm. De Sanct Beat. U. L c. 90. S AS
356 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
accoanted to have been, could give do more rational accoant of the matter than this, it looks as if their case were indeed a bad one. Christ says, in one of the texts we heard >4ist now, ^* Whatsoever ye shall ash the Father in my name, he will give it ytnu** In- stead of which, according to the first of these imagi- nations, the angels are employed in carrying oar prayers to the saints, who in their tarn carry them either to Christ or to the Father ! Is this circaitoiu course to be preferred to the plain path described by Christ, without the clearest necessity, or the most distinct injunctions ? As to the second fancy, quick- ness of motion is not omnipresence, nor can it e?er answer the same end. But the third and fourth are still more preposterous. God, it is supposed, hears our prayers, and reveals them to the saints, that they may repeat them to him ! Why, a system is self- condemned at once that is only to be defended by such hypotheses as these !
The simple truth is, that there is no middle course. Either the virgin Mary, and not the virgin only, bat all the Ursulas, and Benedicts, and Dunstans, and Gregorys in the Romish calendar, are absolutely omni- present, and are, therefore, so many Gods ; or else, if they remain creatures, confined to one place at a time, and knowing only what is communicated to them by such channels as are consistent with their finite and created state and character, then there must ever remain the utmost uncertainty, and in fact improbability, as to the safe passage or conveyance of each prayer we offer up to them. In a word, if they hear all the prayers addressed to them, then they are Gods, and not creatures : but if they are not Gods, but finite and imperfect creatures, then they
THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 857
cannot bear all the breathed or whispered aspirations which ascend towards them, from twenty nations of the earth at the same moment of time. If the Ro- manist embraces the latter supposition, then he should gi?e op saint- worship. But if he will not do this, then must he admit that he makes to him- self new Gods !
God is dishonoured, then, by our ascribing his essential and incommunicable attributes to divers of his creatures. But still more is his displeasure excited when His own way of saWation is set at nought, and the offices and honoui's which He has conferred upon Christ are attributed to some of those poor sinners whom Christ came to save. Now this is constantly done by those who pray to the saints in- stead of praying to Christ, and ask of them those very blessings which it is his peculiar pleasure and glory to bestow. '* Come unto me,'' says Jesus himself, '* all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest** Rather turn, says Dr. Wiseman, to the saints, and 'ask them to use their influence' with Christ. No, says St. Paul, ** there is one God and one Mediator between God and man^ the man Christ Jesus*' But, rejoins Dr. Wiseman, * it adds immensely to His glory, it is paying him the highest homage, when we thus give occasion for the prostration of the saints before him on our behalf.' On the contrary, we reply, what greater disrespect can we show, than by neglecting the course prescribed, and choosing other ways of approach unto God. '* I am the way, the truthy and the life,** saith Christ, ** no man cometh unto the Father,* BUT BY BIE." '* I am the door ; by me if any man enter, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, andjind pasture,*' And St. Paul declares, again and
858 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
again, and in the strongest and clearest terms^ that be is our great High Priest, our only Intercessor, and that he ** has entered into heaven itself ^ now to appear in the presence of God for' us" And he therefore argues, " Let us come boldly unto the throne of graeef that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need*'
Dr. Wiseman, however, argaes that ^the saints look down upon us with sympathy ; and that we maj turn to them with the confidence of brethren,' and ask them to use their influence with their Master.
This is indeed one of the greatest affronts that can possibly be offered to Christ. ** Greater love/* said the compassionate Saviour, *Via/A no man than thisy that a man lay down his life for his friends.** '* / am the good shepherd, and hnow my sheep, and am hnown of mine,"
It is little to say, that no human records have pour- trayed, nor has the mind of man conceived, a cha* racter of such exceeding love and sympathy, as is that of Christ. The truth is, that even the outlines and rapid lineaments of that character which are afforded us in the brief narratives of the evangelists, are beyond the reach of our minds and souls. The tenderness and compassion of that heart, which yearned, even to weeping, over a city whose inhabit- ants, he well knew, were in a few short hours, to raven like wolves for his blood ;— nay, which, even when actually suffering intolerable agonies of their infliction, cried out, not for himself, bat for them, Father^ forgive them, for they hnow not what they do ! — the unutterable love of that heart, who can attempt to fathom ! Yet it is from this compassionate Sa- viour that we are taught to turn, with doubt and
THB INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 859
prehension, and to ' beg of Mary to intercede with li on our behalf ! ' And we are to ask such a being Danstan, or Dominic, or Joseph, 'to asehis infla- ce * with Jesus, to induce him to listen to our poti- ons ! Intolerably insult ! horrible blasphemy ! )d-dishonouring profanity ! What words shall we e, rightly to describe this awful system of deln- m!
XVI. THE IDOLATRY OF ROMANISM.
IDOLATROUS WORSHIP.
Our last essay, though somewhat prolonged, was still necessarily limited to a consideration of the principle discussed. Little was said of the practice which grows out of that principle. We endeavoured to shew that, even as described by the Romish casuists, the doctrine of the Invocation of Saints was in theory indefensible, and opposed to the whole spirit of Christianity. But we cannot stop here. We are compelled, if we would do justice to the subject, and to this inquiry, to consider also that doctrine as it is practically known among us. And this will be, in truth, the test to which the matter must be brought We have alleged that the system of worship in the Romish church is idolatrous in its character and tendency. If we are right, we shall be sure to find the manifestation of that tendency, in the worship of those who adhere to that church. This, therefore, will naturally offer itself as the subject for our pre- sent consideration ; namely, to shew that the worship
IDOLATROUS WORSHIP. 861
of the church of Rome is Dot only founded on prin- ciples which lead to idolatry ; but is actually seen, in the conduct of its adherents, to produce that result.
With this view, we must consider the real nature of the worship which is corrent in the charch of Rome ; as a system idolatrous throughout ; a system which, from the one end to the other, constantly in- terposes some other object of worship between the creature and the Creator, and thus effectually pre- cludes that intercourse and converse between God and man, which at first existed in Eden, — which Adam lost by transgression, — and which it is the main object of the gospel to restore.
In Dr. Milner's xxth letter, he loudly vaunts the ▼ast advantage possessed by his church, in the greater means of sanctity provided, in her sacraments, public SMvices, confession, and prescribed private devo- tions. But there is one important distinction which he seems to have forgotten; to wit, that between worship of a laborious, costly, and splendid char- acter, and worship rightly offered. We readily admit that the Romish church furnishes her votaries with many and most elaborate forms ; with more sacra- ments than the apostles ever knew; with penances, and processions, and pilgrimages, which the apostles would have abhorred; but all this is nothing to the purpose, or rather it only the more proves our posi- tion. We do not charge the Romish church with abolishing, or discontinuing, or neglecting the ser- vices of the sanctuary, but with perverting them* And let us remember that the cautions given in scripture are more frequently directed against super- stitious, Pharisaical, or ill-directed worship, than
362 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
against the neglect of worship altogether. The pro- phets were frequent in sach warnings — " To what purpose,' says Isaiah, i. 11. '< if the multitude of your iacrifices unto me? saith the Lord: I am full of the bumt'offerinffs of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; attd J delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he-goats. When ye come to appear before me, who hatk required this at your hand to tread my courts ? Briii§ no more vain oblations ; incense is an abomination unts me ; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assem- blies, I cannot away with ; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts mjf soul Iiateth ; they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them,"
In the same strain follows Amos : '' I hate, I de- spise your feast'days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies. Though ye offer me burnt-offerings and your meat-offerings, I will not accept them : neither wiU I regard the peace-offerings of your fat beasts.** (chap. ▼. 21.)
But St. Paul most he our chief authority in this matter, as one who was especially *' the apostle of the Gentiles,^' and who was inspired to write no fewer than fourteen different epistles, filled with instrac- tions and warnings to the early Christian churches. And those instructions and warnings are most fall and explicit against every one of those things in which Rome chiefly prides herself. We will just ran over a short list of them.
1. Rome lays great stress on her multitude of holi« days, most of which she makes positively obligatory. St. Paul dismisses the matter thus — '* One num esteemeth one day above another ; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own
IDOLATROUS WORSHIP. 863
mmd. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lard; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it-*' (Rom. xiv. 5, 6.)
2. Rome is most particular io forbidding meat on certain days in every week. St. Paul, on the con- trary, leaves eVery man to his own mind and con- science, '* For one believeth that he may eat all things ; mnother, who is weah, eateth herbs* Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not ; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth," (Rom. xiv. 2, 3.) And in another place he says —
** For meat commendeth us not to God: for neither if we eat are we the better ; neither if we eat not are we the worse." (1 Cor. viii. 8.)
8. Rome makes celibacy a duty appertaining to the (Christian ministry. St. Paul says —
'' Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas V* (1 Cor. ix. 5.) In another place, he
^ A bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife,** (1 Tim. iii. 2.)
And with reference to both this and the last point, he warns Timothy, that ** in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils ; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth," (1 Timothy iv. 1—3.)
4. Rome encourages the practice of following, as devotees, some particular saint, as leader or head ; as St. Francis, St. Dominic, St. Benedict^ and many
864 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
Others. Whereas St. Paal Tehemently contends against this very practice.-
*' For while one saith, I am of Paul, and another, lam ofApollos, are ye not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is ApolloSf but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man ? I have planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase* So then neither is he that pldnteth any thing, neither he that watereth ; but God that giveth the increase" (1 Cor. iii. 4-7.)
5. And, while Rome prides herself on her *memu of sanctity/ as she denominates her elaborate ritaal, her multitude of holidays, her holy water and conse- crated oil, her various fastings and penances, and all the rest of her burdensome observances, St. Paul sums up the whole in one general condemnation.
*^ Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drinh, or in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days : which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Let no man beguiU you of your reward in a voluntary humility and wor- shipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
Wherefore, if ye be dead with Christ from the
rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not, taste not, handle not ; which all are to perish with the using?) after the commandments and doctrines of men. fFAtcA things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship and humility, and neglecting of the body ; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh/* (Col. ii. 16—23.)
The great thing to be borne in mind is, that all these forms and modes of worship, which the church of Rome makes all-important, are, after all, mere
IDOLATROUS WORSHIP. 365
circamstaDces ; and the essence, the reality of the worship, is in noway identified with any one of them. Oar Lord directed the mind of the woman of Sa- maria to this fact, when she began to demand of him, ' Is it here^ or is it there ^ — is it according to thit form, or to that, that we ooght to worship 1 ' He instantly tarned her mind from t)laces and forms, telling her that the time was at hand when " ye shall neither at Jerusalem, nor in this mountainy worship the Father ; ** for that " the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeheth such to worship him. God is a Spirit ; and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.*' (John iv. 23, 24.)
Now the main charge we bring against the Romish charch is, that it hinders, as far as possible, this spi- ritaal adoration ; by interposing visible and present objects of worship : by interposing also invisible and absent, bat false, mediators; and by elevating the priesthood itself into the Savioar's place. Let us consider these three particulars.
Let us fix the mind on the worship of the early Christian churches, as we find it described in scrip- tore, and in the earliest records, and on that of the Protestant churches, — and then contrast this sim- ple worship with the ritual and ceremonies of the Komish church. In the writings of the apostles, in the practice of the early church, and in that of the Protestant churches of our own time, we constantly observe but one object of worship, the Triune Je- hovah, who is invisible ; who is a Spirit; and who therefore must be approached by an effort of the mind, and soul, and spirit. The business of the worshipper is with Him alone. This business can
366 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
only be carried on, really, by the heart and mind, and only to any good purpose, by the assistance of the Holy Spirit. All other helps will prove only hindrances. Place what you will between the soul and God, as an imaginary ladder or stepping-stone, the heart instantly rests on that, and ascends no higher. This Satan well knows, and therefore it is that he has so artfully provided, in the Romish ritual, —
1. A present God to be worshipped and adored, in the form of a piece of wafer :
2. Images of Christ and the saints ; in the varioas representations of the cross, on which oar salvation was wrought out; of the Virgin, and of various real or supposed saints :
3. A whole army of mediators and intercessors, in heaven, or in the upper regions of the air, who are to be prayed to, in the belief that they are more ac- cessible, and have a readier sympathy with our wants and miseries, than either Christ or the Father:
4. A priesthood endowed with miraculous powers! — who can create God himself out of a piece of wafer — who can endow water or oil with medicinal or restorative or protective power by a word ; and at whose sentence the sins of their yotaries depart, and souls spring up out of purgatory into heaven.
Now all these inventions of Popery have a direct tendency to intercept and break off the spiritual in- tercourse which ought to be carried on between man and God. They all present to man other refuges, other reliances, other Saviours, than Him ** whom God hath exalted ; ** and therefore they are all, in- trinsically and practically, in nature and in effect, positively idolatrous.
roOLATROUS WORSHIP. 367
Bat we shall be reminded, that we dwelt on this topic in our last essay. ' Let as, then, pass from oar own Tiews and opinions, to the recent confessions of a Roman Catholic priest, the Rev. Dayid O'Croly, of Cork, who, in bis late work on the differences be- tween Protestantism and Popery, thus laments the weight of superstition which has encumbered the worship of his own charch : —
* Nothing can be more complicated than the Roman Catholic ceremonial. Simplicity, the ori- ginal characteristic of Christianity, has been aban- doned. The Roman pontifical, containing the va- rious ceremonies to be performed by bishops, is a Tolume of considerable balk, larger by far than the New Testament. Catholic divines admit that this pontifical contains a great quantity of superfluous matter, which, however, is not to be passed over, so long as it remains on the statute-book. The council of Trent has even gone so far as to anathematize all such as should presume, of their own private autho- rity, to retrench or to alter any portion of it. Bi- shops themselves, much less the clergy of the second order, have no choice or jurisdiction in such things. This law, however, is sometimes disregarded by re- fractory individuals, who, pressed by time or actu- ated by carelessness, or for other reasons best known to themselves, skip over many of the prescribed cere- monies, and hasten to the conclusion of their work.
' The ceremonies of the mass, how multifarious ! Genuflections and crosses vnthont number ; compli- cated movements; the quarter- wheel, the semicir- cular, and the circular, as the case may require; the repeated shifting of the book from side to side, and the blaze of candles amid the glare of the meridian
368 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
sun. Boabtless the generality of priests attach little importance to these matters; not so the congrega- tion, who would be highly scandalized if the mass suffered any defalcation in this respect.
' The devotional exercises of the mnltitade in general are of a very odd description ; scarcely a hoase without a consecrated bead, a religions piece of furniture supposed to possess extraordinary vir- tue, particularly if consecrated by the pope. This guides them in the arrangement of their prayers, most of which are addressed to the blessed Virgin, whom the bead-gentry invoke ten times for once they invoke the Almighty. Nor is this mode of praying confined to the vulgar and illiterate. It is prescribed in the common prayer-books, is repeated by priests publicly at the altar, and is practised in all the nun- neries and religious communities. The costameof a nun is incomplete unless a consecrated bead hangs dangling from her girdle. In the chair of confes- sion, the satisfactory works imposed generally con- sist of so many rosaries to be repeated on the five decad or fifteen decad bead within a certain limited time. At the mass, especially in country chapels, you will scarcely hear anything but rosaries — Ave Maria ten times, and Pater Noster once. This dis- proportionate alternation is kept up, without inter- mission, from the beginning to the end of mass, from the ' Introibo* to the gospel of St. John. If they stay at home from mass on a Sunday or holiday, they repeat a rosary or two on their bead as a set-off against the omission. In short, the rosary, which should be called their devotion to the Virgin, forms the sum total of their religious worship. The Virgin is transformed into a divinity, of whom her female
roOLATBOUS WOBSHIF. 369
ies constantly craye pardon for their transgres- 1. The Colliridiani, as we learn from Epipha- were condemned as idolaters in the primitive sh, for a custom they observed, of offering a as a sort of sacrifice, in honour of the Virgin, ould not be easy to shew that the cake of the ridiani was more opposed to the purity of divine hip than this perpetual rosary. It is, indeed^ I certain, that the Virgin never enjoyed higher urs or prerogatives than she does among her le votaries now-a-days, at least in old Ireland, late Dr. Moylan, Roman Catholic bishop in , ordered the litany of the blessed Virgin, or itany of our Lady of Loretto, (a place cele- d in the annals of sacrilegious romance,) to be id always before mass, throughout his diocese ; h odd practice is still observed under his en- sned successor. He also instituted monthly ;ssions, at which this litany is chanted in her ur.
he litany in question is nothing but a formid- series of adulatory epithets bestowed on the n, for the purpose of procaring her favour and session. It is of general use, and is reckoned me indispensable. It is, however, more com- in some places than in others, more used by in than by men, and more by the ignorant than e well-informed. The priest recites the litany is bended knees ; but, when the mass com- es, he stands erect. This is odd enough. He ;sses the Virgin on his knees, and he addresses ilmighty in a standing posture ! He shews more ct to the creature than to the Creator. Much same happens when the hymn, " Ave maris
2 B
3rS ESSATS ON ROMANISM :
kappeas to suWn dceomposilion, is acknowledged to W Bochia; More tkaa decayed bread, unfit to doo- liak etiher bodj or soal.
" Nochia; can exceed the complication and mvHi- tade of the cereMoaies obserred in the conferring of holy orders: which, thoogh reckoned one indifidsil sacrameaU aad of a spirit aal natare, is, like matter, di%is(Me md tM/tMitrnm. Yoa have particular cere- BOiiies fix- the coasecration of a pope, for the ctHue- cracitfB oi a patriarch, for the consecration of as archbishop^ for the consecration of a bishop, for the c^Mwecratioa of aa abbot, for the ordination of t priest, lior the ordiaatioB of a deacon, for the ordias- txoa of a »b-deairoB. for the collation of the foar Buaor of^fs of reader, of porter, of acolite, of exor- eiiiC imi. tiaall^. for ci^iac the pHmm tomsurm. What A QXMBetnloiis cefemoaial ! What a cambrons mschi- Ber« n reii^toa ! .' aail froai sach simple beginnings.
* Rt^it^iuo. uiKieed. was overloaded with extraTs- <;uH:itrs ic m eiiH^ period. Sl Aagastine complains Of t'te «-.id« :;tcreitse of w&iinsical ceremonies in his vimr. H<r »v!}s. ' thiaacs ia this respect had arriTed 4;. Mcii A ^u:6 oc ji^tfitr^CT. t^it ChristianitT, which ^*» 'V^MU rhint :he 5eni:a»ie of the ceremonial law, )iM Stvoom 3mre <i»i;tv«c thj^a Jadaism itself— that, \it »iK/r^ ;;3< $im:^iici;v ^^ :iie p^pel had been forgot- a«r. If ii;* «fjic wenr sJi^e at the preseat daj, ke W'/tt.Vi 3.ivv t3ifxu.^fi> iwre reiLKa :o ci^ep!ain 00 ta» sct/ce. MuT Cau^cc tie^'Svxiaas are of the same opciji/a with tie is%7 riuer ; bet hi^e not tbe sane a-.-aesftr orocnjie to it^e r«V!:«n^ ti} their seatmeats* Tha» it i$ tw^:. 5«{w«ea tie cooatruce or timfsf i:T of soae and tie iateresseii isrvscare of <>thers. the errors of the iciwraai are
IDOLATROUS WORSHIP. 371
Testament the apostles were called the salt of the earth. It is blessed for a variety of purposes. After being, first of all, daly exorcised itself, it is made Qse of in the administration of baptism and in the manufactare of holy water.
' The ceremonial of blessing the oils— the oleum infirmoi'um, the oil for the sick, the oleum catechume- norum, the oil of catechamens, and the chrisma or chrism, is complicated beyond measure, and magni- ficent withal. On Maundy Thursday it is conse- crated by the bishop, robed in his pontificals, in the presence of the diocesan clergy, robed in their vest- ments ; who all, at the appointed times, while it is in progress of consecration, worship it by triple genuflection, salutation, and psalmody ! The holy oil is adored on Maundy Thursday, just as the cross is on Good Friday ; on which latter occasion also, a multiplicity of odd ceremonies takes place.
' The worship of inanimate things is justified on the score of its being merely relative ; that is, refer- able to something really entitled to our adoration. There may be some reason in this. But what object of this kind is there to which the adoration of the oils may be referred ?
' The efficacy of this benediction lasts but for one year; at the expiration of which, it is understood that the holy oil becomes unfit to communicate grace, and should be committed for combustion to the de- vouring element of fire. The solemn consecration by the bishop, backed by a multitude of crosses and insufflations, &c. performed by the body of priests in attendance, proves insufficient to protect it from the injuries of time and the decay of nature ; just as happens to the consecrated host, which, when it
2 B 3
372 ESSAYS ON B0MANI8M :
happens to saffer decomposition, is acknowledged to be nothing more than decayed bread, unfit to noa- fish either body or sonh
* Nothing can exceed the complication and mnlti- tade of the ceremonies observed in the conferring of holy orders : which, though reckoned one indindaai sacrament, and of a spiritaal nature, ia, like matter, divisible ad infinitum. You have particular cere- monies for the consecration of a pope, for the conse- cration of a patriarch, for the consecration of as archbishop, for the consecration of a bishop, for the consecration of an abbot, for the ordination of a priest, for the ordination of a deacon, for the ordina- tion of a sub-deacon, for the collation of the fear minor orders of reader, of porter, of acolite, of exor- cist, and, finally, for giving the prima tonsura. What a tremendous ceremonial ! What a cumbrous machi- nery of religion ! ! and from such simple beginnings.
' Religion, indeed, was overloaded with extrava- gancies at an early period. St. Augustine complains of the vast increase of whimsical ceremonies in his time. He says, ' things in this respect had arrived at such a pitch of absurdity, that Christianity, which was freed from the servitude of the ceremonial law, had become more enslaved than Judaism itself— that, in short, the simplicity of the gospel had been forgot- ten.' If this saint were alive at the present day, he would have infinitely more reason to complain on this score. Many Catholic theologians are of the same opinion with the holy father ; but have not the same honesty or courage to' give publicity to their sentiments. Thus it is that, between the connivance or timidity of some and the interested imposture of others, the errors of the ignorant are confirmed, and
mOLATBOUS WORSHIP. 873
true religion lies buried beneath an accnmalated weight of extravagance, absurdity, and supersti- Uon/ «
Such is the account of the matter given by a priest of the Romish church. It is true, he is at present under suspension, but not for ill conduct or false doctrine ; but merely, or chiefly because, as may be perceived in this extract, his eyes have been partly opened to the errors and superstitions of the Romish church. Let us, however, return to the subject. We take up alittle book, purchased the other day at the chief Roman Catholic bookseller*s in London, called 'The Daily Compa- nion ; or. Little Pocket Manual.' And here, in it, > we find the rosary, exactly as Mr. O'Croly has de- scribed it. It is given as * ordered by his holiness Pope Pius y. ; ' and it is so contrived as to be suited, by a succession of changes, for every day in the year. Each day's service contains five ' mysteries,' as they are called ; and after every * mystery ' follows,
* Our Father,' &c. once*
* Hail, Mary,' &c. ten times.
So that, in the morning's devotion, the little prayer beginning * Hail, Mary,' would be repeated no fewer than fifty times. And this is, we have no doubt, actually performed, day by day, by hundreds of mis- erable devotees, even in this metropolis, in which we are now residing.
Fifty prayers to the virgin ; and only ten to God ; — and this is by no means an exaggerated proportion. So ready is the human mind to run to any refuge rather than that salvation which God has provided, and to cling to any intercessor rather than to Him who is
1 O'Chi^f Inquiry, 8vo. pp. 199—140,
874 BSSAYS ON ROMANISM:
** exalted to give repentance and remission of sins ; '' that it is open record that in the cathedral of Canter- bary, in the days of England's darkness, * Whereas there ased to be three offerings made by the people in that church : one to Christ, another to the virgin Mary, and another to Thomas k Becket, the oblations made at the altar of Thomas k Becket did generally amonnt to eight hundred or a thoasand pounds, those to our Lady's to two hundred pounds ; while those to Christ's would be Jive marks, and sometimes ' hoc anno nihil / " So certain is it, that if other interces- sors or objects of worship are allowed at all, they will immediately draw away our hearts from Him who ought to be the great object of worship, and , thus work our infinite loss and hazard. From which we see at once the wisdom and the necessity of that rule which puts down at once all other or subsidiary worship, and declares, that ** to us there is but one God, and one Mediator between God and man, the nutn Christ Jesus" (1 Tim. ii. 5.)
The Romanist, however, exclaims loudly that he holds, as firmly as we can do, one sole Mediator of salvation; but that this does not prevent his recogniz- ing many mediators of intercession.
These subterfuges may delude the more simple. But let any man of common sense judge whether the great mass of mankind, — for whom, as much as for the intelligent and the learned, Christianity is in- tended,— whether such can be expected to under- stand these nice distinctions, or the other degrees and gradations, as of worship of dulia, and worship of latria, and the like. We met with an anecdote the other day, the truth of which is so internally
IDOLATROUS WORSHIP. 875
apparent, that we offer no excuse for at once adopt- ing it. The narrator says,
' A Protestant clergyman, personally l^nown to the writer, once entered into conversation with a Romish priest in the gaol of Carrick. ^s religion was the subject, they did not speak much before controversy was introdaced. The priest accused Protestants of want of candour in charging Roman Catholics with praying to the blessed virgin. * We don't pray to her, sir,' said he ; ' 'tis a calumny to assert it ; we only ask her intercemon,' * But,' replied the minister calmly, *the Council of Trent decreed that even the saints, whom it regards as entitled to a degree of worship inferior to that which is due to the blessed virgin, are to be suppliantly invoked (suppliciter invocai-i) and it teaches, too, that this invocation may be mental : now to me it seems that the man who kneels to an invisible being, and presents his suppli- cations to that being, in thought, may, without any abuse of language, be said to pray to him : but even were I to admit that the difference which you wish to establish really exists, still I cannot but fear that the common people are incapable of making such nice distinctions.' ' I tell you,' rejoined the priest, ' it is not the case ; they can understand this matter ^as well as I do/ ' I should like,' said the minister, 'to be assured of this ; however, I shall put it to the proof. Come here, my man,' addressing himself to one of the turnkeys who happened to cross the hall in which they stood. ' You are a Roman Catholic ? ' ' I am, your reverence,' said the turnkey respectfully, while he touched his forelock with his thumb and fore-finger. ' And tell me now' continued the minis- ter, ' Do you pray to the blessed virgin ? ' ' Oh, to be
376 ESSAYS ON B0MANI8M :
sore I do, please yoar reverence/ replied the man promptly. The priest's coaDtenance and tone ex- pressed anything bat that gentleness with which St Paol commanded Timothy to administer reproof, as he vociferated, 'Yon lie, yon don't — ^yoa rascal!' This ended the controversy; for the poor tnmkey sneaked ofif as fast as he could, observing, in a sab- doed tone, ' Snre your reverence knows best." ^
We adduce this anecdote chiefly to illustrate the readiness with which the mind of the ignorant wor- shipper seizes hold of the object presented to it by the Romish church, and thus avoids the necessity which the Bible lays upon him, of seeking God, who is a Spirit, and must be worshipped in spirit and in truth, through the alone mediation and intercession of Christ. The Romish controversialist may define what he calls latria and what he calls dulia ; but the poor mechanic or the simple child knows only one thing, which is worship. This worship he pays to a piece of wafer, when uplifted by the priest at what he calls ' the altar.' He pays it again before the image of the virgin, so soon as the ' mass ' is oven He then returns home, and before he sleeps, he says his rosary, which includes a vain and senseless repe- tion of the Lord's Prayer ten times ; but a still more senseless address to the virgin of Jifty prsiy era. All that is really accomplished by this idle ceremony, is the offering an insult to God, by elevating Mary to greater honour than her Creator and Redeemer ! But ask this poor deluded votary touching the difference between his prayers to God and to the virgin. What can he tell yon, beyond the verbal distinction, that
* Protetitmi MaffaMkie» vol. i. p. 150.
IDOLATROUS WORSHIP. 377
one is latria and the other dulia ? Practically, how- erer, there is no real difference ; or if there be any, it consists in a greater degree of faith and hope, ex- ercised with respect to his addresses to Mary, than with reference to those to God or to Christ. He be- lieves, he is taught to believe, that Mary's ears are more open to his cry, that her heart more readily sympathizes with his wants and his sorrows, than does the heart of his Saviour. And therefore it is that this idol-worship is so universally a favoarite among these poor people. ' The rosary,' says Mr. O'Croly, ' which shoald be called their devotion to the virgin, forms the sam total of their religious wor- ship.' And, placed in this elevated rank, as hiding the Saviour almost wholly from the sinner's view, it could not be otherwise than dreadfully offensive to God, even were it less sinful and unscriptural in itself. But when we remember that this worship, which, it is thus . admitted, absorbs and swallows up the whole soul of devotion among the people, is in itself altogether opposed to the word of God, to rea- son, and to common sense, and can rank no higher, iHth any rightly-judging man, than the worship of Juno or of Minerva among the ancient heathen, how frightful does the view become ! The whole church, falsely called ** Catholic," bowing down with one consent before the eflSgy of a poor human creature ! Men and women, called Christians, addressing, from the four quarters of the globe, prayers to one who cannot hear them ! Priests and laity, in all parts of the world, calling upon her as ' the Queen of heaven,' * the Empress of the universe ; ' their Life, their Hope, ' the great Mediator between Christ and sinners 1 ' And as the result of the whole, that result which is
378 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM.
Satan's grand aim, the Savioar disregarded ; scarcel; ever addressed in prayer, or when so addressed, in salted with the petition, that he will do so and so in respect to the merits of St. Clementina, or Si Carlino, or some other poor creature, whose salva tion, if achieved at all, Y^as solely his own work, am the reward of his own snfferings ! No ! it is impos sible for any calm and unbiassed mind, to conten plate seriously the habitual worship of the poc Romanist, without being convinced, that the woi ship of God has been superseded and pushed asid among them ; and that it is replaced by anothc worship, the worship of dead men and women, whic is neither more or less than idolatry.
XVII. ROMISH DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES.
TRANSUBSTANTIATION.
We have now arrived at the consideration of that grand corruption of the Romish church which closed and completed her career of apostacy ; which gave the last and finishing stroke to the work of Satan ; and which constituted the chief ground of contest throughout all the struggles of the church's regenera- tion. The simple rite of the Lord's Supper, the canon and order of which is comprehended, in scrip- ture, in three or four verses in each gospel, and as many in one of St. Paul's epistles, is to be considered on the one hand ; and on the other, that immense mass of ceremonial, and that alleged awful import and value, which is assigned in the Romish church, to what is termed * the Sacrifice of the Mass.'
But as this seems rather a large subject, — in what form or order shall we conduct the inquiry ?
Probably the natural order will be this : — first, to deal with the main question of Transubstantiation, or
380 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
the alleged change Id the sacramental elements ; ud then to pass on to the remaining qaestion, the saeri- ficial nature of the rite, and its alleged worth and power.
Now in dealing with the first of these questions, it may seem that it is only necessary for any one to take the plain text of either of the evangelists, and if he does hot address himself to the investigation with a hnmhle and submissive mind, he cannot be long at a loss as to a doctrine so clearly and so positive^ stated.
Bnt do not let as anticipate the argument, or ima- gine that we can dispose of a qaestion in half a sen- tence, which has occupied the minds of some of our greatest theologians for their whole lives. Let ns begin the subject with method and order ; and these will be best consulted by comparing authoritative statements of the opposing churches, on both sides of the question.
In the first place, let us notice the solemn decree or canon of the Council of Trent, on this subject. ' If any shall deny, that in the sacrament of the holy eucha- rist, there is contained, truly, really^ and substarUiaUyt the blood, together with the soul and body of our Lord Jesus Christ, and so whole Christ ; but shall say that he is only in it in siyn, or figure, or power — let him be
ACCURSED.'
* If any shall say, that in the holy sacrament of the encharist there remains the substance of bread and wine, together with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ; and shall deny that wonderful and remarkable conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood, while only the appearance of
TAANSUBSTANTIATION. 381
bread and wine remain ; which conversion the Ca- tholic charch most aptly styles transnbstantiation ; let him be accursed/
Such is the doctrine of the charch of Rome on this subject. Now let as look at tlie decision of the charch of England : —
' Transubstantiation (or the change of the sub- stance of the bread and wine) in the sapper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy writ ; bat is repug- nant to the plain words of scripture, overthroweth the nature of a sacrament, and hath given occasion to many superstitions/
' The body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the supper, only after a heavenly and spiritual man- ner. And the mean whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the supper, is Faith.'
Thus is the issue joined. Now let us inquire into the grounds on which the church of Rome has adopted her view of the matter.
We have already remarked that the scriptural proofs on this subject are very limited* The whole number of passages of scripture which bear on this question are only three or four, and about twenty verses comprehend the whole. The Romanist, how- ever, asserts that his case finds its strength in its simplicity. He rests the whole on the plain words of the Lord himself, '' Take, eat, this is my body. Drink ye*all oftkis, for THIS IS MY blood of the New Testament f which shall he shed for many.** (Matthew xxvi. 26.)
'To construct an argument on these words,' says Dr. Wiseman, Ms difficult; simply and solely for this reason, that it is impossible to add strength or clearness to the expressions themselves. It is im-
382 BSSAYS ON ROMANISM:
possible forme, by any commentary or parapbrase that I can make, to render oar Savioar's words more explicit, or redace them to a form more completely expressing the Catholic doctrine than they do of themselves. ** This is my body — this is my blood.'' The Catholic doctrine teaches that it was Christ's body and that it was his blood. It would conse- qaently appear as thoagh all we had here to do, were simply and exclusively to rest at once on these words, and leave to others to shew reason why we should depart from the literal interpretation which we give them.' »
Now this is certainly a very simple and easy way of conducting the argument. But it can hardly be imagined that this superficial view of the question will suffice, when addressed to those who have the Bible in their hands. Such will be sure to recollect the frequent use of figurative language in the New Testament, and to the consequent uncertainty that must exist, until a careful consideration has been had, whether these words of Christ are to be taken in a literal or in a figurative sense.
Dr. Wiseman had before remarked, that ' the ground-work of all the science of interpretation is exceedingly simple, if we consider the object to be at- tained. Every one will agree, that when we read \ any book, or hear any discourse, our object is to un- derstand what was passing in the author's mind when he wrote or spoke those passages, — that is to say, what was the meaning he himself wished to give to the expressions he then wrote or uttered.'* Now the best way of ascertaining this point, most be, to
* W'iiieman.— Lect xv. p. 174. 2 fVUeman.—Lect. xiv. p, 137-
TRAKSUBSTANTIATION. 883
examine carefally the other writings or sayings of the same author, and thas to gain an insight into his mode of expressing his thoughts.
With this ?iew let us talce the simplest possible course : let us open the New Testament at its very commencement, and pass our eye over the dis- courses of Christ ; and endeavour to learn what were the prominent features of his ordinary style or mode of expression.
We open at St. Matthew, but we see nothing what- ever of our Saviour's words in either of the first four chapters. At the fifth chapter Jesus begins to speak.
In the 13th verse, Christ tells his disciples that they are ** the salt of the earth.'' In the 14th, that they are *' the light of the world." And in the 15th and 16th, the same figure is maintained.
In the next chapter, and at the 20th verse, we are there exhorted to '^ lay up treasures in heaven," — which of course is a figure.
In the 7th chapter, at verse 6, we are taught not to '^cast pearls before swine," which, literally, no man would ever think of doing. At the 13th verse we are exhorted to " enter in at the strait gate,^* which is clearly another figure. In the fifteenth, the false prophets are said to come '' in sheep's clothing, but inwardly to be ravening wolves.** We then pass on to chapter viii. where, at the 23d verse, Christ tells one of his disciples to *' let the dead bury their dead," which, taken literally, would be a mere absurdity. In the ninth chapter he calls, himself, (verse 15.) a ** bridegroom," and his disciples '* children of the bridech amber." And at the 37th and 38th verses, he speaks of the *' harvest," and of *' labourers in the harvest," with reference to the preaching of the gos-
884 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
pel. In the tenth chapter he sends forth his disci- ples, and tells them to " go onto the last sheep of the house of Israel. '^
Bat we need scarcely proceed farther. It is al- ready sufficiently clear that as Jesus " spake always unto the multitude in parables/' so to his own disci- ples he constantly used figurative language. So con- stantly, indeed, that wherever we have found his words, in all these chapters, we have immediately lighted upon a figure. Now let us ask, whether it is a just or reasonable way of treating the subject, to take up an isolated expression of our Lord's, after seeing that he never speaks without using figurative language, and to demand, as a matter of course, that that isolated expression shall instantly and implicitly be taken in its literal sense ?
Assuredly not. The fact being beyond dispute, that our Lord was in the habit of continually using figures, it is surely only reasonable, to suspend our interpretation for a moment, until we can gather, from the chief features of the case, whether the pas- sage in question ought to be taken literally ov figura- tively.
We conclude, then, that the common arguments of the Romanists, that the bread in the Lord*s Sapper must be actually our Lord's flesh, merely because be himself said, *' This is my body," is of no force or value.
We proceed, then, to apply to the passage in ques- tion, the usual test of a comparison with like pas- sages. This is, beyond doubt, the surest way of discovering the sense in which our Lord used these words.
Now there is nothing more clear, or better known
TRANSUBSTANTIATIOK. 385
to a stadent of the Bible, than the constant use of figurative langaage implying hanger and thirst, food and water, when nothing else than spiritual wants and spiritual supplies are really intended. The whole scripture abounds with sach passages. *< Thy wards are sweeter than honey and the honey-comh,** (Ps. xviii. 2.) ** Thy words were found and I did eat them** ( Jer. X?. 16.) " They shall eat of the fruit of their own way** (Prov. i. 31.) " The soul of the transgresses shall eat violence.'* (Prov. xiii. 2.) *' Come ye, buy and eat, yeOf come, buy wine and milh, without money and without price/* (Isaiah Iv. 1.) ** They did all eat the same spiritual meat ; and did all drink the same spirt" tool drink ; for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.*' (1 Cor. x. 3.) *' Thou shah make them drink of the rivers of thy pleasures." (Psalm xxxvi. 8.) ** Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of? " (Matt. xx. 23.) " If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, give me to drink, thou wouldest have asked of him, atid he would have given thee living water.'* (John iv. 10.) ''/ am the bread of life; he tliat cometh to me shall never hunger ; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst." (John vi. 35.) Now with these pas- sages before us, it seems quite impossible to take for granted, as the Romanists require us to do, that when the disciples heard our Lord say, ** 'this cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you,^* (Luke xxii. 20.) they must necessarily have under- stood him in the naked and literal sense, and must have believed that it was a real stream from his veins that they were drinking ! It is, we repeat, im- possible to imagine for a moment that such was their impression of the meaning of his words, or that they
3C
386 SSSAT8 ON ROMANISM:
coald belieire that it was human hlood that they were drinking^, without uttering exclamations of horror and astonishment.
But we sometimes hear a protest against any at- tempt to lower this great mystery to human appre- hensions, or any application of arbitrary rules of what we may think probable, or possible, or reason- able, as a criterion of the real facts ! In answer to which, we observe that we have not proposed any thing of the kind. We are yet on the threshold of the argument, and have not yet proceeded farther than the question. In what sense are our Lord's words, in the institution of the sacrament, to be taken ? Dr. Wiseman himself declares the best rule of interpretation to be the ascertaining in what sense the language in question must have been understood by those to whom it was addressed. We have fol- lowed this method, and have shewn, that the ase of figurative language, applying to spiritual things the terms commonly used for hunger and thirst, food and water, was general with the sacred writers, and more especially, was repeatedly adopted by our Lord himself. With this fact before us, and with the cer- tainty, also, that so appalling a command as that of eating, really and literally, human flesh and blood, could not have failed to call forth expressions of hor- ror from the disciples,— of which we hear not one syllable, — we feel that Dr. Wiseman's own canon conducts us inevitably to the conclusion, that when the disciples heard these words, they could, and did apply no other meaning to them than that to which they had been accustomed, namely, a figurati?e and symbolical one.
Thus much of the supposed necessity of accepting
TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 387
oar Lord's words in a simple and literal sense. Bat do the other scriptures which toach apon this sabject, throw no additional light upon the question ?
Assuredly they do. The Romanist may select a single passage, and pride himself on his readiness and willingness to sabmit his mind wholly to its literal sense; bat we find no difficulty in adducing a passage of equal clearness, the whole force of which is undeniably on our side. If the words, '* Take, eat, this is my body," may seem at first sight to support the view of the church of Rome, the plain declara- tions of St. Paul go to establish, with far less doubt, the Protestant doctrine of a spiritual participation only. His words are, '* As oft as ye eat this bread and drink this CUP, ye do shew the Lord*s death till he come.** (1 Cor. xi. 26.) Here is a distinct declara- tion that the bread, when eaten^ is still bread ; and yet the Council of Trent, in the face of this plain text, has dared to decree, that ' if any shall say that in the eucbarist there remains the substance of bread and wine, together with the body and blood, let him be accursed r
Now not once only, bat three times in as many verses, does St. Paul expressly call the bread, — not before consecration merely, — but at the time of eat- ing, still BREAD ; in what way, then, did the framers of the Trent decree propose to exempt the apostle from their deliberate anathema ?
Dr. Wiseman attempts to meet this objection. He
refers to the case of the blind man restored to sight,
(John ix.) who, after his recovery is still called, " the
blind man ; ^' to the rod of Moses, which, after it was
changed into a serpent, is still called a rod ; and to
the water at the marriage feast, which is called ** the
2 c 2
888 BSSAT8 ON ROMANISM :
water that was made wiDe/' From these cases be argnes that it is by no means uncommon to find a thing upon which a change has been wrought, still called by its former name. Hence it follows, in his opinion, that no stress ought to be laid upon the trivial circumstance of St. Paul's calling tAat bread, after consecration, which had been bread just before.
But none of these instances, will bear out his infer- ence, that things are sometimes called by a false name. The rod of Moses, after it was changed into a serpent, was reconverted into its former condition, and is rightly spoken of as a rod. The changed liquid at the marriage-feast is most accurately called ** the water that was made wine.** And in like manner the blind man is first called, (John ix. 13.) '' him that aforetime was blinds** and then, in a few lines after, for brevity, " the blind man.'' In each case there is nothing doubtful, nothing from which any occasion of mistake can possibly flow. And yet from these instances we are required to infer, that St. Paul might easily be guilty of calling that, repeatedly, bread, and without any explanation or reservation, — of which it is declared by the Trentine council, to be the highest heresy to affirm that any substance of bread remains in it. This argument of Dr. Wise- man's is a most presumptuous and criminal one ; for if it could be admitted, the result would be, that the plainest declarations of scripture would possess no sort of weight or authority, but all would be un- certain and undefined.
Here, then, we may consider the argument from scripture as concluded. So entirely dififerent a view do the sacred writers take of this subject, from that of the Romanists, that a matter which is almost the
TRANSUBSTAirriATION. 389
san and centre of the Romish system, the chief glory of their ritaal, and the most essentia] point in their belief, occupies, in all the writings of the apostles and evangelists, merely some twenty or thirty lines. The strength of the Romish argument lies in one short sentence, '' This u my body" which, though surrounded by figurative expressions, it is insisted must be taken literally. On our side^ we adduce St. Paul's language, *^ As often as ye eat this bread; '' and here, though nothing can be clearer or more ex- plicit, and though thrice repeated, we are immedi- ately told that the words must not be taken literally. Thus is scripture itself twisted and distorted, just as it suits the purpose of the ' infallible church.'
We may now proceed to say something on the nature and tendency of the doctrine propounded by the church of Rome. We shall not offend the timid mind by starting any doubts as to the possibility or impossibility, the absurdity or reasonableness, of the doctrine of transubstantiation ; but there are several theological considerations which may be adduced ai^inst its reception, without entering upon arguments which might seem to savour too much of rationalism.
Let us consider, first, then, the prodigious nature of that thing which we are called on to believe. It has been rightly named, if true, * the greatest mi- racle of omnipotence.'
^Our Lord,' says one writer, ' according to this doctrine, is not only whole in the whole, but also whole in every part. The whole God and man is comprehended in every crumb of the bread, and in every drop of the wine. He is entire in the bread, and entire in the wine, and in every particle of each element. He is entire without division, in countless
390 ESSAYS ON romakism:
hosts and namberless altars. He is entire in heaven, and at the same time entire on the earth. The whole is eqaal to a part, and a part equal to the whole. The same substance may, at the same time, he in many places, and many substances in the same place.' ' The species exists without a subject. The substance is transformed into flesh and blood, while the accidents, such as colour, taste, touch, smell, and quantity, still remain. The taste and smell continae without anything tasted or smelled. Colour remains : but nothing to which it belongs, and, of course, ii the external show of nonentity. Quantity is onl; the hollow shadow of emptiness. Bat these appeai- ances, notwithstanding their want of substance, cai, it seems, be eaten, and afford sustenance to man and nourish the human body.'
' Such is the usual outline of transubstantiatioi* The absurdity resembles the production of some satirist, who wished to ridicule the mystery, or some Tisionary, who had laboured to bring forth nonsense. A person feels humbled in having to oppose such in- consistency, and scarcely knows whether to weep over the imbecility of his own species, or to vent his bursting indignation against the impostors, who, lost to all sense of shame, obtruded this mass of contra- dictions on man. History, in all its ample folios, displays, in the deceiving and the deceived, no equal instance of assurance and credulity.' ^
Observe, too, the enormous power thus assumed to exist in every priest. < The hands of the pontiff/ said Urban in a Roman council, ' are raised to an eminence granted to none of the angels, of creating God the Creator of all things, and of offering him
. i Edgar'9 Variationt qf Popery, p. 346, 347.
TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 391
up for the saWation of the whole world/ ' He that created me/ says Cardinal Biel, ' gave me, if it be lawfal to tell, power to create himself/
Odcc more, remark the peculiarity of this alleged miracle, which distinguishes it from all others, that instead of appealing, as they do, to the senses of men, it sets them wholly at nought, and demands our implicit belief of a fact wliich our own sight and touch, assure us to be utterly untrue.
But we shall be told that we are now wandering into the rationalist difficulties, and that if this kind >f reasoning is allowed, the Trinity, the Incarnation, md in fact every mystery in the Bible, must be sur- jendered ; for none of these can be brought down to te level of mere human reason, or made evident to he perception of the senses.
This objection, however, will only be made by ftose who overlook an important distinction. We propose not to require that either this or any other nystery should be brought strictly within the com- ^s of the human understanding. We only wished t discriminate between things that differ, and to giard against the inference, that because in things ^ich are above the province of reason, the declara- fDus of scripture must be humbly received ; therefore u a case in which the sense of scripture is disputed snd disputable, we are at once to submit to a propo- sition which is not merely above, but clearly contrary to our reason and to the evidence of our senses.
This distinction is most important. We find it repeatedly and most explicitly declared in scripture, that the Father is God, the Son God, and the Holy Ghost God ; and yet there is but one God. Now we know that three men cannot be one man ; but we
892 B88ATS ON R01EAKI8M:
bare no right to arg^e from that which we do know of finite beings, that which we cannot know of in- finite. The matter is above our reason's proTince; bat it is not ecntrmry to it. To refuse, therefore, to believe God's own testimony as to his own mode of existence, merely because it is too high for oar com- prehension, would be mere arrogant presumption and ignorant conceit It would be not a whit more rational, whatever we might choose to call it, than the determination of a rustic not to believe that the e'^rth was round, becaase he saw a flat surface be- fore him ; nor to admit its motion round the sun, be- cause he supposed he saw the sun, day by day, movi round it. In all these cases scepticism is not thi right exercise of roason, but the mere ebullition o ignorant pride.
But in the matter of the alleged miracle of tran substantiation, the case is wholly different. * Man sabjects,' says an acute writer, < such as the Trinit and the Incarnation, are beyond the grasp of ou bodily senses, and indeed of human reason. Thes are to be judged of by the testimony of Revelatioi But bread and wine are material substances, an level with the view of our organs of perceptioi The sacramental elements can be seen, smelle< touched, and tasted. Our external organs, say th advocates of transubstantiation, are in this instita tion, deceived, in all men, at all times, and on ah occasions.' ^
' The patrons of this dogma;' continues the same writer, < driven from all other positions, have re- course to the omnipotence of God. Almighty power
1 Edgar'i Varidiimi, p. 388.
TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 893
18 a very comrenient resource; but incompreheDsi- bility is to be distingaisbed from impossibility, and mystery from contradiction. God works many things incomprehensible to man, but nothing which in itself is contradictory. Omnipotence extends only to pos- sibility, and not to inconsistency; to things above, not contrary to reason/
* Some miracles,' says another writer, ^ are evi* dent to sense ; some are not eyident to sense ; bat this is absolutely contrary to sense ; and it implies, that our senses may be so far deceived as to destroy all dependence on them.' * It would follow, that we oould judge of nothing by our senses ; and that he who swears to the identity of any object, runs the risk of perjury. Either, then, our senses, aided by each other, are sufiScient for the examination of every object of sense, or they are not. If they are^ suffi- cient, transubstantiation is false. If they are not sufficient, there is an end at once of evidence and of argument.<
This alleged miracle, then, is prodigious in its nature, beyond all example : it is still more extraor- dinary as being performable by all priests, of all de- scription and character, and in thousands of places at the same time; and it is further incredible as being not merely above the perception of our senses iuid our reason, but absolutely contrary, and opposed to all such evidence. But we come now to observe, that this most wonderful of all wonders, this most miraculous of all miracles, is actually performed, and that not once, but millions of times, in fact, per- petually, for no imaginable end or object whatever* This is the most startling feature of the whole affair.
But here the Romanist starts back, and protests
394 ESSAYS ON ROMANISX:
that we are going quite too far! It is the next step, he tells us, to blasphemy, to assert that God does anything in vain. And in this case our allegation is quite in the teeth of our Lord's own words, '* The hread that I will give is my fleshy which I will give for the life of the world*'* (John vi. 51.)
But again we are misrepresented. We would not harbour, even for an instant, the thought, that God ever works without necessity or without result. Bat the question we are now considering is, whether He really does, or has ever promised to do, this thing vhich the Romanist ascribes to him. It is alleged, that the material substance, bread, is changed, in every Eucharist, into another substance, flesh. Wt can discern no such change with our bodily eyes; but we are referred to one passage of scripture, (Matt. xxvi. 26.) while we find a directly opposile sense in another (1 Cor. xi. 26). Our inquiry, there- fore, is, which of these two senses is the true one. And into this inquiry we bring the observation, that an actual change of the one substance, bread, into the other substance, flesh, can hardly be meant in any passage of scripture, inasmuch as this would be a most extraordinary miracle performed without any end or object whatever. We do not, therefore, sup- pose that God does anything in vain ; on the con- trary, we are contending that no such miracle as h alleged, is in fact wrought, chiefly because if so wrought, it would be altogether in vain, without end, and without utility.
But we are told, that nothing can be more opposed to the truth. So far from being useless or unproduc- tive, this great truth is the very sun and centre of the Catholic system. ' Ton have seen,' says Dr.
TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 395
Wiseman, ' how this most adorable sacrament con- tains the real body and blood of our Lord and Savioar Jesus Christ, who is consequently therein present, so as to be the real food of the soul ; and necessarily the source and means of conveying to it that grace whereof he is the author/ And thus is supplied, * the want felt by the human soul, of some regene- rating, invigorating principle, of some living and quickening food, fraught with grace from above, which could bring it into communion with the God that gave it/ ' How, then, we are asked, can we venture to call this great doctrine an useless and un- prodactive fancy !
Let us, however, calmly consider this matter. In the passages just quoted from Dr. Wiseman, the real end and object of the sacrament is expressly ad- mitted. It is ' to be the food of the soul; to convey to it grace ; to apply to the soul a Yegenerating, invigo" rating principle* by means of ' living and quickening foody fraught with grace from above/ Now if we reflect for a moment on the real meaning of these ex- pressions, they must convey to the mind a conviction of the grossness and unsoundness of the Romish theory.
The object is, to feed, to invigorate, to enliven the soul. We are compelled, by the gross and unspiri- tual nature of the dogma, to go into matters on which we would gladly be excused touching. But the theory is, that by the reception of a certain kind of material food into the bodily system, the soul is in some way fed and invigorated. We must ask, then, when it was discovered that any connection
> WUeman, Lecture XVI. p. 235, S36.
896 ESSAYS ON ROKANISM:
existed between the soul and the stomach ; or how it eirer occarred to any one to deal with our spiritual part through the medium of oar digestiye organs?
Bat we shall be told, that we are now absolalely attacking the sacrament itself! We shall be re- minded, that it was oar Lord's own command, to take bread as his body, and wine as his blood ; and it will be asked, whether we mean to call an ordi- nance so institated a vain or useless ceremony 1
But we have not uttered one word against the or- dinance; and if our expressions offend, we will merely repeat the words of St Augustine : * Why do you prepare your teeth and your stomach ? Believe only, and you will have eaten/ ^
It is absolutely necessary, if we would under- stand this question, to examine it very closely* It is easy enough, we grant, to catch up some glowing passage from one of the early fathers, such as Dr. Wiseman has adduced, from Gregory of Nyssa: ' And therefore does the divine word commix itself with the weak nature of man, that, by partaking of the divinity, our humanity may be exalted.' ^ But when such passages as these have been applaudingly quoted, and eagerly received, the question yet re- mains. Does either he who quotes them or he who receives them, really attach any definite or intelli- gible meaning to these high-sounding phrases ?
One grand error pervades all these statements — namely, a supposition that, by some means or other, which no one can understand or explain, a connec- tion exists between the stomach and the soul ! Our
1 /» JohaimU Evang. c. 6. Tract 25. 9 Wiaemtm, Lect XVI, p. aS7.
TRAN8UBSTANTIATI0N. 897
Lord himself had expressly warned his disciples against this error, telling them that *' The Spirit it is that quickenethy the flesh profiteth nothing ;** but this caution is wholly disregarded by the Romish writers on this subject. They persevere in contending, equally against our Lord's plain declarations, and against the dictates of common sense, that it is pos- sible that by some material substance eaten, swal- lowed, and digested, a man's heart may be cleansed, his soul renewed to holiness, and his spirit quick- ened in the divine life ! Would there be anything more contrary to'^reason in believing it possible to teach a youth arithmetic by a lotion poured into his ears, or the art of painting by an eye-water ?
If we are asked, whether we mean to go the length of asserting that it is not in God's power, if he so pleases, to act upon the soul through the medium of the internal organs of the body ? we answer, that we certainly do not propose to place any limits to the divine power in this matter ; but that the question brings us to the very point which we wish now to press upon the attention. It is suggested, that it may be God's will to act upon the soul through this medium. We believe, and imagine, that we could easily shew, that there is abundant evidence of his intentions being totally different ; and that the de- sign of this sacrament was, by periodically and fre- quently placing before our bodily eyes, signs and emblems of Christ's broken body and shed blood, to help our souls to go out towards him in frequent acts of faith in his atonement, and thus to become more and more united to him by the attachments of love and gratitude. But suppose we admit for a momebt the supposition, that the very substance swallowed
398 ESSAYS ON romakism:
and digested is meant to have, tbroogh the bodily organs, a beneficial operation on the soal, it must at least be admitted, that this beneficial operatioh is altogether sapemataral and miracaloas ?
This being granted, as it mast be, — we come to the next question, which is this, — Bread, eaten and di- gested, has no sort of effect apon the soal, in the or- dinary coarse of nature. Flesh, whether of man or of beast, is equally without power in this respect. It will not be supposed that, had Christ's human body been actually resigned to be eaten by the disciples, instead of being rapt into heaven, it cannot be sop- posed, we repeat, that that human body, irrespective of all supernatural influence, would have exerted any beneficial influence upon their souls through that eating. In fact no kind of substance, be it what it may, can operate through the stomach upon the soul, except by a direct miracle. This all must admit.
We proceed, therefore, to contend, that the alleged spiritual influence being wholly miraculous ; and the substance eaten being a mere vehicle, having no ne- cessary or natural connection with the miracle to be performed, — it follows plainly that it must be wholly immaterial of what that yehicle consisted ; and that whether it were mere bread, used as a symbol of Christ's broken body, or, by some miraculous in- crease and multiplication, the very body itself, the spiritual benefit, the grand thing to be considered, must remain the same. Hence it clearly follows, that this alleged miraculous transubstantiation, by which thousands of wafers are said to be changed every Sun- day, into thousands of Christ's entire body, is wholly unnecessary, without object, and without utility !
TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 399
To pat the argument in another light ; — as when Christ, on one occasion, chose to remove blindness by the application of clay, formed by spitting upon the earth; he might, if he had chosen, have tran- substantiated that clay into the finest oil. But nei- ther the oil nor the clay could cure the want of eye- sight, without the exertion of his almighty power. Each must remain a mere vehicle, an instrument, arbitrarily selected by Him who could work with equal ease by any means he chose, or without the intervention of means at all. In this case he de- termined, for wise ends, known only to himself, to use the visible medium of clay, a vehicle as simple as the bread in the last supper. And just as the clay and the oil were alike without virtue in themselves, in the one case, so are the bread and the flesh in the other. The whole efficacy, in each case, depends entirely in the virtue supernaturally conveyed. And just as, in the one case, Christ did not change the clay into a medicinal drug, so, in the other, he does not change the bread into the flesh. In one case, the clay was just as good a vehicle of miraculous .power as oil would have been ; in the other, bread is as good a vehicle as flesh ; and therefore a miracle which,»on the one hand, we cannot perceive, and which, on the other, would answer no assignable end, must be rejected by us until some clear scriptural proof can be adduced in its support.
Nor can we be unconscious of the fact, that even the Romish priest himself must be troubled, at times, with doubts on this subject. The anecdote is a well- known one, of a lady who, having some suspicions of the soundness of the Romish creed, addressed a priest one day in the following tenor: ' You have
400 E88AT8 ON R01CANI8M :
now consecrated the bread and Uie wine ; and yoi are sure that the snbstanoe of the bread is eonveitBd into oar Lord's body, and the sabstanoe of the wiM into his blood ? ' * Certainly/ was the reply. ' No- thing, then, remains, except the appearances «f bread and wine ; the former substances having bees entirely converted into a totally different thing t' * Of that there can be no doubt/ * I am glad «f that/ was her reply, * for before I gave you the wine, I mingled with it an infusion of a tasteless, W most deadly poison/ The story goes on to say, that the priest dared not prove his own belief in the doc- trine he had enunciated, by drinking that which he had just declared to be nothing else than the blood of Christ.
Now, it matters little whether this story be a fiction or a narrative of a real occurrence. The difficaltj which it presents, in the embracing the Romish doc- trine, is just the same, and can only be removed bj a prompt submission to that test from which the priest is said to have shrank. Let the same difficalty be stated in another form. Suppose that a priest were to receive information, that one of the journey- men employed in the manufacture of his wafers, harassed with doubts as to this disputed doctrine, bad determined, for his own satisfaction, to try the question in this practical way, and had mingled some noxious or poisonous ingredients in the wafers be was about to use. Suppose, too, that this circum- stance only came to the priest's knowledge after he had duly consecrated the wafer, elevated it to God as the actual body of his Son, and was on the point of taking it himself, and of distributing it to the con- gregation : must we not doubt, whether his own be-
TRAKSVBSTANTIATION. 401
lief in the doetrine of bis church would «tand thiii trial? Could he quietly proceed in the lervici;, firmly reposing in the assurance that * the whole aobstauce of the bread had been converted ' into a different substance, and that merely the appearance of it remained ?
If this question cannot be answered in the aflirnia- tive, it is thereby tacitly admitted that the priests do, in fact, demand of their people an universal and entire belief in a miraculous change, the truth of which they find it impossible to realize in their own minds.
There is one other remark which demands consid- eration : Dr. Wiseman closes his review of the ques- tion, by charging upon Protestants * the ne^^lect of a sovereign command, a neglect to which is attached ^ f^orful penalty, ^' Unless ye eat the jUth of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you*"' Now he here clearly implies, that to take this sacra- ment rightly, the miracle of transubstantiation having been duly performed, is '* to eat the flesh of the Son of man,'' and thus '* to have life ; " while to be with- out it, is to be without Christ.
The Romanist will admit that he does not imagine that Christ condescends to pass into every eueharistic sacrifice, without thereby conveying any certain ben- efit. He entertains no doubt that he who partakes of that awful sacrifice, is a partaker of Christ, and is mystically joined to him.
Such an one, then, is, at least for the time, in a state of safety, while all who are destitute of this great gift, are in a state of reprobation ? Now let us remark, in disproof of this notion, the striking fact^ that Judas, the betrayer of Christ, was one of those who took from the Saviour's own hand the first eu-
2 D
402 ESSAYS ON rohavism:
cbarist, over which the Lord himself had jast pro- noanced the awfal words, ^* Take^ eat, this it my body." Yet Jadas, only a few hoars before, had coYenanted to betray Christ, and within a few honrs after, he actaally perpetrated that crime ! Nay, he must have actually closed his awful career by an act of desperate saicide, while the body of his Lord was still one with his body, — according to the Romish theory, in actaal physical anion. What benefit, then, shall we be told, that his soul had received by that eating ? Again, the dying thief, we know, had never participated in this or any other sacrament ; yet he WBS a saved man, and was removed from the cross to paradise, — into the immediate presence of his Sa- viour,— unbaptized, unanointed, without having eaten of this bread, or drank of this cop, which is made, in the Romish church, the very palladium of salvation! The difference must surely have been, that the one merely, in form and without any faith, or spiritual intention, ate the bread and drank the cup, — while the other, wanting the external observance, exer- cised that spiritual affiance which is the essence of the real communion. Faith, clearly, in the one, and the absence of it in the other, constituted the grand difference; as Augustine's words, which we have already quoted, declare. * Why do you prepare,' says he, * your teeth and your stomach ? Believe only, and you will have eaten.' And in strict ac- cordance with this statement, are the decisions of the English church. ' To such,^ says the xxviiith Ar- ticle, * as rightly, worthily, and with faith, receive the same, the bread which we break is a partaking of the body of Christ ; and the cup of blessing a par- taking of the blood of Christ.' But < the body of
TSANSUBSTANTIATION. 403
Christ is ^ven^ taken, aod eaten in the Sapper, only after a keawewijf mmd spiritual manner. And the mean whereby it is so received and eaten in the Sapper, is Faith/ Therefore, * sach as be Toid of a lively faith, although they do carnally and visibly press with their teeth, as Augustine saith, the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, yet in no wise are they par- talkers of Christ, bat rather to their condemnation do eat and drink the siffn or sacrament of so great a thing.'
Here, then, lies the distinction between tbo Pro- testant and the Romish doctrines. Wo hold, that after a heavenly and spiritaal manner, the body and blood of Christ are received by the real Christian in the sacrament, through the medium of faith. But we deny that the ungodly receive Christ in any wise in that sacrament. Consequently we deny that when the consecrated breftd and wine lie upon the table, there exists, under the appearance of broad, the actual body and blood of Christ. The Romish church, on the other band, declares every one ' accursed/ ' who denies that a whole and entire Christ is contained in ever^ particle o( wh^t appears to be bread, and also in every particle of what appears to be wine.' In this view, both Judas and every other traitor to Christ who has partaken of this sacrament since his time, must have actually received Christ himself, as certainly as the thief on the cross was left without the power of receiving him. We leave this reflection on the reader's mind, and shall now proceed to consider the testimony of the fathers.
Here the Romanist imagines his great strength to
lie. He tells us, that in almost every period of the
church, he finds the most illustrious witnesses, who
testify that in successive ages this great doctrine was
a D 2
40
c^ ' -^ ^^^ ^^^y^^,/ diarchy as it is now
*" ,71 ..■•■•'''*• ■ ',„ the communion of the sove-
t ;„ /;/./>c' ■* yy/sewan refers to tlic writings
"'''!* Ci •^^'^''' ^'^''^^'''' ^^'"^' Gregory of ,,/ ^''\ jiusostine^ Isaac of Antioch, and
.\i>Ai. , ^g might have quoted many
., I ifisspic^ allowed. We have no desire
''. or evade this fact; for although they make
' V Xii»' tfp^'* P^P®*^' ^^^^ least examination shews uotationa to be quite beside the argument. .... ./vaflv of them do more than merely paraphrase art' oor Lord's own expression, *' Tw/ie, 6^^, this J kidv.** When, therefore, we have satisfied unit'/ves that our Lord's own words were merely tfryrarive. ^'^'^^ difficulty can we find in classing the l^gjnp^ language of the Fathers under the same head ? In fact, so overladen wilh figure and hyperbole did the theology of the Fathers become, that it is almost wonderful that we can at all see our way through the mazes of their exaggerations. A care- ful t'xaniination, however, of their usual modes of ex- pression, will soon remo\e all danger of a too literal interpretation of their terms.
Cyril, tor instance, who is greatly relied upon as a witne.<!s for transubstantiation, thus si)eaks of another rite. He represents * the oil of baptism, after consc- eration.not as mere oil, but as the grace of Jesus : as the bread is not mere bread, but the body of our Lord.'* Tims we have transubstantiated oil, as well as transubstantiated bread and w ine !
Man\ oi the Fathers declare the water of baptism to be ChrWs blood. Chrysostom describes the bap- tised as * clothed in purple garments dyed in the
\ Chrywst.^t^^^tad iUumtn. Cater. 1.
TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 405
Lord's blood." ^ Jerome describes Christ as saying to all Christians, 'Ye are baptized in ray blood.' ^ Augustine represents the faithful ' as participating in oar Lord's flesh and blood in baptism.' ^
A sort of transubstantiation is also described as taking place in men themselves at baptism. * I am changed/ says Gregory, ' into Christ in baptism.'^ * The faithful,' says Bede, * are transformed into our Lord's members, and become his body.' * Man, in baptism,' says Leo, *is made the body of Christ.' Now this sort of language, which abounds through- oat the writings of the Fathers, should render us caatious how we catch at their exaggerated phrases, and turn them into theological dogmas. Happily, howcTer, in the present case, we have not only reflex and inferential evidence, but the most express declar- ations, in their own writings, that in calling the con- secrated elements ' the body and blood of Christ,' they meant nothing approaching to transubstantia-> tioo. Augustine says, * Christ delivered to his dis- ciples the figure of his body and blood.' (Enarrat. in Psal. iii.) He adds, that * he who does not abide in Christ, and in whom Christ does not abide, undoubt- edly neither eats his flesh nor drinks his blood.' (In Job. Ev. c. vi. Tract xxvi.) Chrysostom asks, ' If Jesus did not die, of what are the things which we perform, the symbols?' (Serm. on Matt.) He also says, that the sacrament ' is esteemed worthy to be called the Lord's body, although the nature of the bread re- maineth in it.' Origen asks, * If Christ had neither flesb or blood, as some heretics affirm, of what body ^nd what blood are the bread and cup which he de-
> Cyrilf 2d2. 2 Jerom. 3, l6. in laai. i.
' Augmt. Tract. 11, * Gregory. Orat. 40.
406 BSSAT8 ON ROMANISM.
livered the images ? By these tymbolt be commended his memory to his disciples/ (Dial. iii. cent. Marcion.) Clemens Alexandrinus says, ' Such food' (for faith) oar Lord elsewhere sets forth in the gospel of John by symbols, saying, * Eat my flesh, and drink my blood.' (Paed. c. 6. 1. 1. p. 100.) Cyril of Jerusalem says, * In the type of the bread is given to yon the body, and in the type of the wine the blood.* (Cat. Myst. iv. 1. p. 292.) Easebius of Cesarea says,
* Christ appointed them to use bread as a symbol of his own body.' (Dem. Evan. lib. 8. c. 1.) Tertullian speaks of * the bread by which Christ represents his body.' (Adv. Marcion. lib. 1. p. 372.) Ambrose says, ' You receive the sacrament as a similitude ; it is the figure of the body and blood of the Lord. Ton drink the likeness of his precious blood.' (De Sacram. lib. iv. c. 4.) Cyprian says, ' The blood of Christ is shewn by the wine.' (Cecil, patri. epis. 65. p. 153.) and pope Gelasius (a. d. 492,) plainly declares that
* the substance or nature of the bread and wine ceases not to exist y and assuredly the image and similitude oi the body and blood of Christ are celebrated in these mysteries. (Contra Eutychen.)
Here are ten of the leading fathers of the church, and if time permitted we might refer to forty more, who all explicitly tell us, that in calling the sacra- mental elements the body and blood of Christ, they mean no more than they apprehend Christ himself to have meant, namely, that the bread and wine were the types, the symbols, the figures, the representations, of his body and blood ; but that they continued to be bread and wine still. And so mucK for all the boasted evidence from antiquity, in favour of Transubstan-
TIATION.
XVIII. ROMISH DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES.
THE MASS.
Having now considered, at some length, the doctrine of transubstantiation, the subject which comes next in order, in the present discassion, is its twin cor- roption. The Mass.
These two great inventions of the church of Rome, may, indeed, be considered rather as two branches of the same sabject. Transubstantiation declares that ** the bread which we break** is not only *^ the communion of the body, of Christ,'* bat is that very material body itself ! The Mass goes one step fur- ther, and tells us that the same body, thus miracu- lously and multitudinously and perpetually repro- duced, is not so reproduced for our own comfort and edification merely, but for the purpose of being of- fered up daily, in every communion, to God the Father, as a propitiatory sacrifice for sin. Each of these dogmas is alike in plain opposition to the text of scripture, and to the dictates of common sense.
408 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
Of the first we have already treated : let us now pass on to the second.
What is called in the Romish charch ' The Mass/ is among all Protestants called ' the commanion of Christ's body and blood.' The institution of this ser- vice or celebration is plainly and explicitly described in scripture; — let us, then, first tarn to that narrative.
Matthew, the first evangelist, informs us, that at or after our Lord's passover, *' Jesus took bread, and blessed ity and brake, and gave it to ike disciples, and said. Take, eat ; tkis is my body. And he took the cup^ and gave tkanks, and gave it to tkem, saying. Drink ye all of it ; for tkis is my blood of the New Testament, wkick is shed for many for the remission of sins" (oh. xxvi. 26 — 28.) Mark repeats the fact in almost the very same words. Luke says, '* And he took bread, and gave tkanks, and brake it, and gave u7ito them, say- ing, Tkis is my body wkick is given for you : this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also tke cup after supper, saying, Tkis cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you," (ch. xxii. 12—20.) John, the be- loved disciple, though present at the institution, does not even record the fact in his gospel. But Paul, writing to the Corinthian church, and giving them large instructions as to their religious observ- ances, says, ** / have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you : That tke Lord Jesus, the same night in wkick ke was betrayed, took bread: and wken ke kad given tkanks, ke brake it and said. Take, eat : tkis is my body, wkick is broken for you : tkis do in remembrance of me. After tke same manner also he took tke cup, wken ke kad supped, saying. This cup is the new testament in my blood : t?iis do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat
THE MASS. 409
this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.** (1 Cor. xi. 23—26.)
Sach is the whole instmction afforded by the in- spired writers in this matter. Now let us see where- unto this short and simple obserTance, upon which no one of the apostles has dwelt for more than a few lines, — let us see to what it has grown. The follow- ing is a description of the Roman ritual of the mass.
' The mass, as viewed by a spectator, may be said to consist of ^^e divisions. The £rst we may call the robing of the bishop in his pontificals, which must afford a highly intellectual and spiritual feast of soul to the spectators, and worshippers — shall I call them? The bishop enters the chapel in a woollen pontifical cope, which has its tail borne up by a chaplain ; and going to the altar, he kneels down and says the '^ Introibo, I will go in,'' &c. He then goes to the place where the paramenia, or robes and ornaments, are placed, and seats himself, sur- rounded by the proper quota of chaplains and dea- cons, one of whom acts as his prompter, to tell him what to say, and to point with his finger to the place in the book where he is to read ; near them lie the various paraphernalia and sacred vessels. The at- tendants having duly put on their sanctified robes and surplices, the bishop rises, and turning towards the altar, says the Lord's prayer secretly ; then cross- ing himself from his brow to his breast, he says, " God be my helper." And while the choir re- sponds, he turns towards the altar, between two bearers of wax candles, and says, *' The Lord be with you," and other prayers. Then gravely laying aside his pluvial, or cope, he takes the ornament called his planet, and approaches the altar, and sits
410 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
down, while the psalm of the boars is being MMig. Daring the singing, the holy sandals are brought oat, one deacon lifts op tbe comer of bis cope, while an- other takes off the bishop's shoes ; then ottering cer- tain prayers, he at last says, ** Shoe me with the sandals of gladness." The dotifai deacon theii pots on the consecrated sandals ; and thus answers his prayer. Then standing ap he says, ** O Lord ! strip tbe old man off me." The scotiferas, or shield- bearer, answers this prayer by stripping him of his flowing cope. Then looking at his hands, be says, *' O Lord, give virtae to my hands." This prayer is answered by another, bringing a basin of water to wash his hands while he sits. The towel and basis are held by the most honourable and exalted layman, who, throwing himself on his knees, and pouring oat a little water into the basin, sips and tastes it Meanwhile, another of the attendants is taking the consecrated rings off the bishop's fingers ; and then the distinguished layman, with the aid of a deacon, washes the bishop's hands, and dries them, and then carries back the basin and towel to the credentia. The bishop's feet being shod with the gospel prepa- ration, by putting on sandals, and the old man being put off by pulling off his old woollen cope, and hav- ing washed bis hands in virtue and innocence, bj getting them washed in water, he approaches the robes, and says, '* O Lord, put on me the helmet of salvation." At this signal the paramenta, or robes and ornaments, are all brought forward — fifteen in number. The bishop approaches, bows, and kisses ^\e of them, viz. the amictus, the pectoral, the eroif, the stole, and the palL All these the deacons receive from tbe chaplains, one by one, and put upon the
THE MASS. 411
bishop. And first, with great solemnity, they take the amictas, and having all kissed it, they pat it over the bishop's head, and fix it on him. His head being thus armed with the helmet of salvation, he stands op and says, '' O Lord, clothe me in white.'' Upon this they pat on the white surplice. Then he ntters another prayer, saying, '* O Lord, gird me with the girdle of faith.*' On this, in answer to his hamble and devoat prayer, the ghostly menials take bis girdle, and place it round him, and buckle it in front. Then addressing the cross, the bishop thus prays, *^ Deign, O Lord, to fortify me.*' On this, the deacon, in his sacred functions, takes the cross, and holding it ap to the bishop to be kissed, hangs itronnd his neck, so as to make it rest upon his breast. Next the bishop says to the stole, ** O Lord, give me the robe of immortality.'' The deacon, whose office it is to answer this solemn prayer, now puts on the robe, nicely adjusting it to his body. Next the prelate prays, as he looks on the tunicella, or little coat, ** Put me in the coat of jocundity, and clothe me, O Lord, with the garment of joy." This being put on him, he* next prays thus : ** O Lord, clothe me with the garments of salvation." Here they put on him the dalmatic, or episcopal vestment, • and he next fixes his eyes on the gloves, and prays, '* Clothe my hands, O Lord, with the purity of the new man." On this the deacon, whose office it is to answer all these devout prayers, first kisses his right hand, and then puts a glove on it ; then kisses the left, and puts a gloTC on it ; and so clothes his hands with heavenly purity. This being over, the bishop prays another prayer, saying, '^ O Lord, thy yoke is easy." On this, the attendants take the bishop's or-
412 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
nament, called the planet, and swing it back so as to give his arms fall exercise. The pall is next brought ; the deacon takes a hold of it by the cross on the right side, and the sab-deacon by the cross on the left side, and hold forth the cross io the middle, that the bishop may kiss it. Then the7pat it roand his neck, making that part on his left shoulder to lie double, and the whole is so pot round his neck, that his arms are not hindered. Then comes the patting on the three thorns with their jewels. This, none but the initiated can well understand. The first thorn goes into the breast of the pall, the second into the cross on the left sboal- der, and the third into the cross behind. And these thorns mast not go quite through the cross. After this, the good bishop, speaking to the mitre, says, by way of prayer, " Put on me, O Lord, the mitre and the helmet of saWation.'' Here he sits down, and the deacon devoutly puts the mitre on the bishop's head, the sub-dean as devoutly holding up the ribbons that hang from it. The bishop sitting, then prays, " Decorate with virtue, O Lord, the fingers of my hand and body." Here the deacons, in consummating his devout prayer, pat the rings on his fingers. Next the gremial, a rich piece of silk to be held by two priests between the bishop and the people, when he says mass, is laid on his lap. This done, he prays to the manipuJum. Then the cloth called by this name is laid across his arm.
* At this stage of the business, the incense is pre- pared in the proper vessel, with many gesticulations and contortions. Then, with a nicely-arranged pro- cession, the bishop comes to the steps of the altar and makes a full halt. Here the deacon takes off
THE MASS. 413
his mitre, and combs and smooths down his hair. Then follows the confession of each of this holy con- fraternity. The bishop, bowing reverentially to the altar, begins the confession of his sins. The dea- con, kissing the bishop's left hand, goes ap to the altar with the manipulam and the gospel open in his right hand. The bishop next, with suitable prayers, goes up to the altar and kisses it with deep solem- nity, and also the book of the gospels. Having next approached the horn of the epistle, he takes the in- cense pot, pats incense in it, and causes the cloud of smoke to cover the altar. This holy and edifying service is done thus : having adored with profound reverence the image on the cross, he whirls the pot of incense three times round it, then he whirls the pot twice round the image and sacred relics on the right, and then around those on the left as often. Next he gives three swingings of the pot round the image and relics near the coi-ner of the epistle ; and as many he gives to the comer of the gospel. He then delivers the pot to the deacon, who swings it round the bishop himself, and smokes him effectu- ally. After a number of other edifying gestures and motions, the bishop is helped up by the arms as if be were suddenly become paralytic, and being on his legs, he says, *' Glory to God ! '^ taking care to join his hands on his breast at the word God. While the choir sings a hymn, he has his mitre and gremial brought to him ; they are again taken off him as the hymn ends. He is again helped on his legs by the deacons, and he cries out unto the people, *' Peace he unto you,' and he keeps his hands before his breast, until the ediGed and devout audience reply, " and with thy spirit." He then says, *' Let us
414 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
pray : '* and then goes on with the prayer in Latio, to the edification of those who do not understand one word of what is so said. After an incredible nnmber of similar gestures, and the burning of in- cense, and kissing of the bishop's hands, and bow- ing, and reading what they call the gospel, and after the bishop has been again perfumed with incense smoke, and has stood up without mitre and gremial, he sits down to listen to a sermon. The preacher comes up, and on his knees adores the bishop, kisses his hand and asks a blessing. This he freely gives by making the sign of the cross over him. That finished, with much gesture and bowing the preacher gives the bishop his absolution.
' Second. The bishop, or priest, sings five psalms, then uncovers, combs down his hair, and washes his hands. Next comes the sprinkling of holy water, and singing of the introitus, as the bishop ap- proaches the altar. After a great many gestures, there is much chanting. A linen cloth, full of pic- tures, is carried as a canopy over the bishop, by four ecclesiastics. Here again follow incense and chant- ing. There is the gradual and the hallelujah^ and the tractus, so called from the long drawling tone, and nasal twanging of the priests, affecting much sorrow as they sing it.
' The third part is the consecration, more properly so called. The gestures, and particularly the bow- ings and adoration here are not easily recounted. The sub-deacon puts on a long veil, takes the patina, with two c^hoice hosts or wafers, and the chalice, and covering them with the veil, goes up with them to the altar, following the bishop. Another brings the wine and water. The bishop now puts on his
THE MASS. 415
episcopal ring and mitre, and comes to the altar. At the altar his mitre is taken off, and he adores with lowly bowing to the altar. The deacon now takes -one of the hosts, and touching the patina and chalice with it, inside and ontside, makes the sab-deacon taste of it. The other host he offers to the bishop, who takes it with both hands, and holding it up be- fore bis breast, repeats th^ prayer, ** O Lord, accept it,'' &c. This is called the offertory, from its being offered to God. The priest, before he offers the host, washes his hands a second time. In the in- terim the deacon throws over the altar a clean linen cloth, called a corporate, or palla, because they say it covers Christ's body. The chalice is also covered with another palla. The deacon having pre- sented the patina, with the host upon it, to the bishop, also presents the chalice, in which the priest mixes wine and water, and consecrates it. In the consecra- tion the water is blessed by the priest when mixed, not the wine, because the wine, they say, represents Christy who needs no blessing. The priest again perfumes the altar and sacrifice three times in the manner of a cross, bows himself, and kisses the altar, and repeats very softly the prayer which they call secreta. Though this prayer is said in silence, yet the conclusion of it is uttered in a loud voice ' per omnia secula seculorum* Then follows what they call prefatio, which begins with thanksgiving, and ends vdth the confession of God's majesty. The minds of the people are prepared with these words, *' Lift up your hearts" The answer to which is, " We lift them up unto the Lord." Then is sung the hymn, " Holy, holy, holy, Lord God," &c. " Heaven and earth is full of thy glory.'' Then follows the hymn
416 ESSAYS ON robunism:
Hotanna, and the canon, which is also called aetiOf becaase it is giving of thanks, which is uttered with a load voice. The canon, besides thanksgiving, con- sists of various prayers for the pope, cardinals, bish- ops, kings, all orthodox Christians, Gentiles and Jews. Those also are particnlarly remembered for whom the sacrifice is to be oflfered, and their names rehearsed. Prayer is also made for those that be present at the mass, and for the bishop himself. Then mention is made of the virgin, the aposttes, the evan- gelists, and martyrs, and many crossings follow; then the solemoity of the consecration of the host, by pronouncing aloud these words, * Hoc est corpus meum* To this the people answer, ' Amen* The priest now falls down on his knees before the consecrated host, and worships it, offers prayers to it, and rising up, he elevates it, that it may be worshipped by all the people. Then after several crossings of the host and chalice, this part of the mass is concluded with prayers for the dead, and the people's offerings of money to the priest, as a reward for praying in behalf of their dead friends, for their deliverance out of purgatory. ' The fourth part of the mass begins with the pater- noster, and some other prayers. The sub-deacon delivers the patina, covered, to the deacon, who un- covers it, and delivers it to the priest, and kisses his right hand. The priest kisses the patina, breaks the host over the chalice, and puts a piece of it in the wine, to show that Christ's body is not without blood. Then the bishop pronounces a solemn benediction. Next is sung the hymn, *' O Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world." Then the kiss of peace is given, according, as they allege, to the apostolic command.
IRE MASS. 417
< The fifth aM last part of the mass eovtains theii e9mmunian» The priest', or hisbop, comaanicates first himself. He takes the ooe-hatf of the host for hfnself, the other half he divides into two parts, one for the deaeoD, and the other fbr the swb-deaeon. Next the e^ergy and monks eoutmanieate, and after thett the peeplCf hat the latter have 9aly the conse- crated wafer (or bread) allowed them, aadt put in their m«Hiths, the cap being withheM from them, and dnntk by the priests or etevgy only. The priest holds the ehaHce (or cop) with both bands, and drinks three times, pretending thereby to signify the Trinity. The whole is conehided with what they call post-ceramanion, which consists in thanksgiving and singing of Antipksnies, The priesi then kisses the aitar, and removes again to the right side of it, where, having offered some prayers for the people and blessed thefl», the deacon with a Kind voice cries, * €ro in peace; the host is sent te God the Father, to pacify bis anger.'
Now, after cahnly considering these two pictures, the Savkmr sitting at table with his disciples, and commanding them, after his death, sometimes to break bread and taste wine, '^ in remembrance of him;'* and on the other side the Romish bishop, with his host of attendant priests, deacons, sab- deacons, acolytes, &c., with his bowings, crosses, kneelings, sittings, standings,. incei>se, bcN -ringing, and what not, — Ictus seriously ask ourselves whether it is possible to find another ease of so entire a de- parture firom the whole character, iaternal and exter- nal!, o^ the original institution ? The nmss instituted in the upper chamber in Jerusalem! Yes, much in the same manner in which the massacre of St. Bar-
2 E
t
418 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
tholomew was sanctioned by oar Lord's saying to Peter, *' Put up thy sword into its sheath^ for aU they that tahe the sword, shall perish with the sword/'
Bat we are not left to the bare words of the insti- tation, safficient as these woald be, to decide for as the qaestion, whether the Romish mass, or the Pro- testant Lord's Supper, is the most faithful obsenrance of our Lord's command. Further light is thrown upon the matter, by the recorded facts as to the main features of this sacrament, as used in the early church.
What was the irregularity rebuked by St. Paul, in his instruction to the Corinthians. It was just this, that they had confounded the Lord's Supper with their ordinary meals, and ate merely to satisfy their hunger and thirst, without *< discerning," or dis- tinguishing the peculiarities of that observance, as a " shewing forth of the Lord's death,"
Now this was a circumstance which might easily happen to such as merely took the narratives of the evangelists, and hastily, and without proper rever- ence, acted upon the words of the original institution. The sitting round a table, and breaking bread and drinking wine in an evening assembly, might easily be converted, by careless or irreverent disciples, into an ordinary supper. But then the very circumstance of the gradual and easy declension from the sacred feast into a sensual one, shews at once how near the one was, in outward appearance, to the other. How would it have been possible for the Corinthians to have fallen into such an abuse, if what they had been accustomed to, had been, not the Lord's Supper, hot the Mass ? Had any thing in the least resembling the Romish ceremonial been then in existence, how could the Corinthians ever have given the apostle the
THE MASS. 419
least cause for his rebake ? *' For in eating, every one taketh before another his own supper ; and one is hungry, and another is drunhen.** It is impossible even to read these words, without seeing, that that which the Corinthians had corrupted, was not the Mass, but the Lord's Sapper.
Perhaps the reader may be momentarily tempted to think, * Then surely it would have been better if the Lord had instituted the mass instead of the Lord's Sapper ; if it be trae that the supper was so quickly corrupted, while the mass could not have been/ But the humble believer will instantly recal this thought, when he reflects that the real drift of it is, that sinful men could have contrived better ordi* nances and observances for Christ's church, than he himself, her Saviour and her God, was able to supply !
But we may pass on to an uninspired but most competent witness, Justin Martyr, who lived about half a century after the death of the last of the apos* ties. He, in writing an apology for the Christians, thus describes the practice of the church in his own time :
' On the day which is called Sunday, there is an assembling together in one place, of those who live in towns, or in the country around ; and the histories and writings of the prophets and apostles are read, as time may permit. Then the reader ceasing, the president (or elder) exhorts all to the imitation of those good things. Then we all rise and offer prayers, and when the service is finished, bread and wine and water are offered, and the president again offers prayers and thanksgivings, and the people say, 'Amen/ And the communication and distribution is to each of those who have returned thanks.' ^
1 ApologUi, ii. p. 97* 3 E 2
420 ESSAYS ox ROMANISM:
II«re again we haive the sioipie cemmBnioaL ci the Lord's Supper. Not a woid of the gorgeous ^maas^' or of a sacrifioe iMr the sins of the living and the dead. Bat this laet conaideffation brings oft to the seooad feature of the case ; which is thet asoat impo^ tant part by far of the whole qaestion.
The church of Rome makes of tibia simple oomme- moratiTe feast, not only a gorgeous ceremony, hat something far higher ; — a sacrifce for the remissioa of sins. Nay, when eiioe it is admitted, or assumed, that in this celebration there is a veal offering op of the actual body and blood of Immanuel, there is no end of the uses to which so great a thing may be applied. A mass remoyes the sins of the living. A mass relieves, or enticely ends th» sufferings of the unpardoned dead. But these are but a few of the purposes to which so powerful a remedy can.be ap- plied. Mr. O'Croly, himself a Romish priest, in- forms us, that —
' Masses are offered for a variety of purposes, at least in the minds of the multitude — for brute beasts as well as for human beings. A farmer, who hap- pens to have his cattle disordered, the rot among his sheep,* or the murrain among his cows, will have masses said for their recovery. The fishermen of Duogarvon, and elsewhere, regularly get naasses said that they may hook the more fish. It is quite com- mon among the ignorant to be under the persuasion that worldly calamities result from the agency of evil spirits ; which opinion, indeed, receives some coun- tenance from the book of Job. To counteract this malignant influence, they fly to. the priest to have masses said. The priest takes no pains to remove the error, but accepts the pecuniary offering. Friars
i
THE MASS. 421
•carry this matter to tbe last extremity. There is a general impressioD, as we have said elsewhere, that the masses of friars are more efficacious than those of the secaiar clergy. This impression answers the in- tended purpose ; it brings more money into the coffers of the friars, who, however, are not at a loss to assign a theological reason for the snper-excellence of their masses — namely, that their state of life is more per- fect than that of seculars — rather a knotty point to <establish-^as they make vows of poverty, at the same time that, like Dives in the gospel, they are clothed in parple and fine linen, and fare samptaously every day. The friars drive a considerable trade in masses. If a habit is to be Messed or consecrated, money must be given for masses, in order, of course, to en- sure fall efficacy to the benediction. These conse- crated babits are supposed to be worn in the other world. It would be accounted a great misfortune for a poor person residing in the neighbourhood of a friar to die without one. The blessittg of the scapu- lar, of which more hereafter, must hare the same accompaniment as the blessing of the habit ; and the ceremony of indflction, or reception, or enrolment among the various confraternities and sisterhoods of Carmelites, of St. Francis, of St. Augustine and St. Dominick, ever super-induces a grateful commission for saying masses, which are offered up at once for the benefit of the individuals contributing, and for the cdnfraternities at large^ of which they then be- come members. This they call the communion of saints. The friar is the certain gainer in all these pious transactions.
* The doctrine of purgatory has an intimate connec- tion with the traffic in masses^ whiek, in the church
422 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
language, are offered ap for the qaick and forthedead. The piety of the Ihring seeks to mitigate the suffer- ings of their departed friends. This piety is carefully nurtured by the interested clergy. The feast of All Souls, or the beginning of November, as we have said elsewhere, is the critical period for the performance of this neighbourly and philanthropic duty. Nothing then is left untried to interest the faithful in behalf of the suffering souls in purgatory, who, it is said, can be most efficaciously relieved or extricated alto- gether, by the aid of masses, which are at once im- petratory, propitiatory, and expiatory. This is a portion of the second of November doctrine, which is inculcated by every means that avaricious ingen- uity can devise. Money was formerly raised by the sale of indulgences, and it used to be said, that the deposit of the money in the holy box, or on the holy plate, suddenly threw open the gates of purgatory for the enlargement or escape of the poor suffering inmates. 'It was this and other ridiculous doctrines that first provoked the zeal of Luther, and prepared the way for the Reformation. Substitute for the old indulgences masses for the dead, and you have the same solemn farce acted over again. So much for the theory and practice of masses.' *
Now all this is very lamentable, as well as very absurd ; for it is impossible to imagine that one priest out of a hundred can be so senseless as to imagine that any of these wonderful effects will really follow from the repeating of a parcel of Latin prayers, — although the whole hundred are constantly taking money for all these false cures ! The whole system,
1 0*Croly*» Inquiry t^Svo,p,lii7-^llO,
THE MASS. 423
therefore, is, from beginning ta end, a system of fraad, chicanery, and plunder^ and all ander the garb of religion !
Bat let as take the best possible view of the qaes-. tioQ. Let us only investigate the most plansible point in the papisfs case, namely, the sapposition that the mass is a real offering ap of Christ's body, for the appeasing the wrath of the Father, and that by the application of one of these sacrifices to a be- liever's own individaal case, his sins will be blotted oat. This is the least oflfensive view of the question ; and yet, even in this mild and moderated form, we shall be obliged to denoance it — 1st, as utterly desti- tute of all foundation in scripture ; and 2ndly, as directly opposed to many plain declarations in tiie inspired word.
1. We turn over all the statements of the sacred writers, which refer to this observance ; and we find not one single word to support the assumption, that our Lord intended herein to institute a perpetual sacrifice for the remission of sins. In the Romish church, this one fact is made, in truth, the very centre of their system. If their representations might be taken, it would almost seem that the whole Bible was written to establish the mass ! — that Christ, in fact, died, chiefly to establish the mass;— and that the mass is the very alpha and omega of all true Christianity. And yet, strange to say, you may read the whole New Testament straight through ; and neither in prophet, apostle, evangelist, or even in the injunctions of our Lord himself, can a single outline or feature of the mass be found !
' In the divine sacrifice,' says the council of Trent, ' which is performed in the mass, that same Christ is
424 ESSAYS OH ROMAKISM:
contained and offeied ia as aobloody manaer, who, OB the altar of the cress offered himself with blood once for all.' And, * the Lord beings appeased by the offering of this, aod fraating grace and the gift of repentattce, remits crimes and sias, e¥ett great ones.'
' I profess likewise,' says the creed of Pope JPins the Foorth, *tbat in the mass there is offered unto God a tme, proper, and propitiatoiy sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead/
Now, where is a single word of all this to be foand in the scripture account of the institation of this sacrament? Jesus, sitting at table after sapper, *' i9ok hready mid gtwt titMk$j mid hrmke t>, 4md^€9e unt9 them, laying, Tkis is my body, wkieh is given for you: this do in bembmbrancb of meJ* The sasM words are repeated twice by St. Paul, who then adds, *'*' As often as ye eat this bread and dHnk this
eup, YE DO SHEW THE LOBD'S DEATH till he COns"
In the plainest possible language, therefore, the in- stitution is declared to be a ' commemorative festival,^ but not a single syllable is said, of any ' sacrifice* being so much as thought of.
2. The idea, however, of a perpetual sacrifice, is not only not countenanced by scripture, but it is utterly opposed to its plainest declarations.
It has been well observed, that if the 7th, Stfa, 9th, and 10th chapters of the epistle to the Hebrews had been expressly written against the mass, supposing it to have been then invented and palmed upon the church, they could not possibly have been more ex- plicit or emphatic in their language. In fact we cannot doubt that the Divine Author had a doable object in view — the denouncing the false doctrine then maintained by the Jewish teachers in the chorch.
THE MASS. 425
^t and the equally fmise doctrine which He foreknew ^f woald be introdaoed by the Romish teachers some
1 eentaries afterwards.
^ The assumption of these latter, is, that the work of
rr a sinner's salration is aot completely effected, even
_> ^y the one offering amde on Calvary, the application
^ ^ of that hk)Od to the soal by the Holy Spirit, and the
perpetaal intercession and mediation of the Savioar
hi heaven on its behalf. All this is not enough.
2^ The Father yet remains anpropitiated, until nnotker
^ Sacrifice is offered up on earth, by a priest of the
? ftoraish (^nrch, who takes a piece of wafer, pro-
^ tiounces aome Latin words over it, declares it to be
i thus changed into Christ's own body and blood, ami
f liolds it up to God the Father, at the sight of which
^ that wrath is appeased which not all the pains of
Calvary, nor the personal intercessions of the Savioar
himself at the right hand of the throne, had been able
entirely to abate !
The blasphemy of all this is shocking; bat we must not permit our disgust to turn us away fmm the calm consideration of the truth of the case. It is not the tone of our feelings, but the declarations of scripture, that must decide the whole question. Now these declarations are such, as to render it scarcely possible to doubt, that they were chiefly intended to apply to this great abomination.
** For mch an High Priest heeame usy wie is kofyy harmless, wadefiled, separate from sinners, and wnmtk higher than the heavens ; who nbedeth kot daily, as those high priests, to offer up satrifiee, first for his own tins, and then for the people* s : for this he did once, when he offered up himself*' (Heb. vii. 26, 27.)
^* Nor yet (was it necessary) tliat he should offer JbW
426 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
ielf OFTEN, as the high priest entereth into the holy plaet every year with blood of others ; for then must he often, have suffered since the foundation of the toorld: but nam ONCE in the end of the world hath he appeared, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself* And as it is ap- pointed unto men ONCE to die, but after this the judg- ment ; so Christ was ONCE offered to bear the sins of many ; and unto them that loohfor him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation*'* (Heb. ix* 26-28.)
Read also the first ten verses of the 10th chapter, the whole argument of which is, that the Leyitical sacrifices were often offered, simply because they were shadows, and had no innate value ; but that if any one of them could have put away sin, the repeti- tion would at once have ' ceased,' The apostle then proceeds —
'' And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins : but this man, after he had offered OXE SACRIFICE ybr sins, for ever sat down on the tnght hand of God ; from henceforth expecting till his enemies he made his footstooL For by ONE OFFERING he hath perfectedfor ever them that are sanctified. Whereof tkt Holy Ghost also is a witness to us : for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will mahe witi them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws in their hearts, and in their minds will I write them; and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more* Now where remission of these is, there is NO MORE of- fering FOR SIN. (Heb. X. 11—18.)
Is it possible for language to go beyond this ? Had the mass existed in the apostle's days, and bad be wished to denounce it, could he possibly have found
THE MASS. 427
langaage more clear or decisive ? In fact, the mass eaD only be. defended at all, by directly denying the troth of all the apostle's statements. The Romanist mast assert^ plainly, that ** by one offering *' Christ hath not ** perfected for ever them that are sancti- fied ; " that *' the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all'' does not sanctify the believer in him; and that it u necessary that Christ '' shoald offer himself often,'' for that he hath not ** put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." All this must the defender of the mass affirm, and when he has gone thus far, it is certainly by no means surprising that he should wish to have the Bible put out of sight. It is impos- sible for him not to be conscious that to a plain honest student of God's word, the opposition between his statements and those of St. Panl must appear alto- gether total.
Such, then, is the scriptural view of this question. In conclusion, we have wished and endeavoured testate as fairly as we could, such proofs and arguments as we could find in any Romish writers, in defence of their view. But in truth, their array is so scanty as to be almost invisible. They quote Malachi i. 11 : ** In every place incense shall be offered unto thy name, and a pure offering,*^ They also quote the case of Mel- chizedec, who offered bread and wine, and who is said to be a type of Christ.
Nothing, however, can be clearer than that the use of these texts in such a case is a reversal of the true laws of interpretation. We ought to interpret figurative and obscure passages by such as are plain and beyond doubt But in this case the Romanists require us to interpret the plain and explicit lan- guage of our Lord, and of St. Paul, by reference to
426 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
the fipuratiTe langmige of Malachi, and the typical language applied to Melcfaizedec ! lato Mtch an ai^ garoent it woald be a waste of time to ^nter*
Their only remainini^ prop is foand in their nsnal resort to the fathers. Several of these have calM the Lord's Suppeir ' a sacrifice.' We admit it ; bet in what sense do they use the term? Clemens. Alei- aodrinos sajrs, * oar earthly altar is the assembly of soch as join together in prayer, having as it weie a common voice and mind. For the sacrifiet of the chorch is the word ascending as incense from ho4j son Is, their sacrifice and their whole minds htvik% open to God.' ^ And Tertnllian interprets the very passage in Malachi, on which the Romanists lo greatly rely, thos : ' Here spiritaal sacrifices are meant, and a contrite heart is shewn to be an ac- ceptable sacrifice to God.' '
Never, thon, sorely, was so strong a case on the one side, opposed by so weak an one, on the other. Take the plain narrative of scriptare, and it exhibits to us ' the Lord's Sapper ' of the Protestants ; but nothing in the least resembling 'the mass' of the Papists. Torn to the records of the early church, and again we find a simple commemorative festival, without tiM least trace of the gorgeous ceremony in which incense, and bell-ringing, and lighted candles, and genuflections without number» deck out a service, wherein the laity, in place of bread and wine, re- ceive a fragment of a wafer, — while the priests pro- fess to be offering * a sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead.' Look, then^ to the doctrine of the apostles touching sacrifices, and we find that ** ky ONE OFFEtiiNO " Christ " hath perfected fw ever
1 StrwMtat Lib. rii. p. 71^* ' Advenm Judesot, Gh. v. p. 188.
THE MASS. 429
them that are sanctified/* No refage remains, then, for the doctrine of the mass, save in the last resort of the Romanists, the grand magazine of all kinds of opinions, the coantless tomes of the fathers, whence sentences of every hue, and proving or disproving, in turn, every doctrine and every practice of the chnrch, may at any time be found. The main argu- ment, however, derived from this soarce, is, that the Snpper is often called a sacrifice. We admit this without hesitation ; but we shew, in reply, that the term ' sacrifice ' is so vaguely and indiscriminately used in their writings, as to render it absurd to base any doctrine on this siKgle expressiioBv And so ends the discussion, which surely terminates, however imperfectly eondueted on our part, in favoar of that mode of observing •ui Lord's last command, which approaches the nearest to his own practice and example.
XIX.
ROMISH DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES.
THE PARDON OF SIN ; PURGATORY ; AND
INDULGENCES.
A FEW sabjects yet remain, which demand a carefal and patient inyestigation. One of these is the Pardon of Sin, as preached by the charch of Rome ; with its two branches, Purgatory and Indulgences. Let asde-« vote a few moments to a serious consideration of these doctrines.
In bringing the mind to these topics, it will be im- possible to forget that remarkable circamstance, which stands recorded as giving rise to the German Reformation. There is no reason to suppose that in other respects it differed from the usual practice of the Romish see; but as having caused so great a revolution in the state of the visible charch, it will ever remain peculiarly distinguished in the page of history.
In the year a.d. 1514, and even under the direc- tion of one of the most acute and intelligent of all
THE MASS. 429
; that are sanctified** No refage remains, then, he doctrine of the mass, save in the last resort le Romanists, the grand magazine of all kinds of ions, the countless tomes of the fathers, whence ences of every hue, and proving or disproving, urn, every doctrine and every practice of the ch, may at any time be foand. The main argn- t, however, derived from this source, is, that the per is often called a sacrifice. We admit this out hesitation ; but we shew, in reply, that the I ' sacrifice ' is so vaguely and indiscriminately I in their writings, as to render it absurd to base doctrine on this siKgte expressioBk And so ends discussion, which surely terminates, however srfectly condmeted on our part, in favovr of mode of observing wa Lord's last command, zh approaches the nearest to his own practice example.
OBOt EMATS ON ROilANISK :
and the i^atea of the fttiadkn of delight shall be opened ; and if yoo aball nat die al preaeot, tbk g^race shall renuun in foM force wha» yoa aiie at the point of death. In the nane of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost' And has harasgaei, in poshing the sale ef these thiags, are thos de- seribed by LonicenM : ' He impadentiy pre^efaes op the pope's dignity and power,, and the virtae aad ettcacy of indalgenees, bawHag eot^ that there eoaki be no wickedness committed so great, hat that might thereby be fbrgiyen; and that those soob which are tomentcd ia purgatory^ aa soon as th« money was floog into the basin, skipped for joy, and, betag released froafc their paioa, flew right to heaven.' ^
Such was the doctrine, sach the practice of the chaieh of Rome, a» to the pardon of sin, np to the very moment of the Reformation. Now, however, is the broad face of day, and in coontries like this, re- joicing in the free ctrcajation of the word of God, and an open proclamation of pardon by the blood of Christ alone, these monstroQ» follies and frauds ae longer venture to shew themselves. The greatest care and ingenuity is used to cloak and eover the doctrine preached ; but still that doctrine is essea* tially the same as in the days when Leo and Tetael carried it to its full and legiftimAte results. Let us now see in what caatiott» and insidious phrases it is cloaked and covered by Dr. Wiseman.. The following are his words : —
' The Catholic church teaches, tSUat Christ did establish on earth a meant whereby forgiveness should
1 Theair, HUtor fo. Ml.
THE PARDON OF SIN. 433
be imparted to wretched sinners ; — whereby, on the performance of certain actSt all who have offended God may obtain authoritative forgiveness.' * The Catholic church believes that the institution thus left by 'our Saviour was the sacrament of penance.' ^
* Sin is forgiven by a sacrament instituted by Christ for that purpose, for which the power of pro- nouncing judicial sentence of remission was commu- nicated to the pastors of the church.' ^
' We believe that upon this forgiveness of sins, that is, after the remission of that eternal debt, which God in his justice awards to transgressions against his law, he has been pleased to reserve a certain degree of inferior or temporary punishment, appropriate to the guilt which had been incurred ; and it is on this part of the punishment alone, that accord- ing to the Catholic doctrine, satisfaction can be made to God.' »
* The doctrine of purgatory follows as a conse- quence or corollary from that of which I haye just treated ; so much so, that the Catholic doctrine of satisfaction would be incomplete without it. The idea that God requires satisfaction, and will punish sin, would not go to its fullest and necessary conse- quence, if we did not believe that the sinner may be so punished in another world, as not to be wholly and eternally cast away from God. *
* Prayer for the dead is essentially based on the belief in purgatory, and the principles of both are consequently intimately connected together. Why does the Catholic pray for his departed friend, but
"* WUenum*g Tenth Lecture, p. 8, 9.
3 Wiaeman^e Eleventh Lecture, p. 41.
*Jbid»p.il. 4/frMLp.58.
3 F
434 ESSAYS ON roiianism:
that he fears, lest not having died in so pare a state as to have been immediately admitted to the sight of God, he may be enduring that panishment which God has awarded after the forgiveness of his sins; and believes, that, through the intercession of bis brethren, he may be released from that distressing situation/ ^
' What then is an indulgence ? It is no more than a remission by the church, in virtue of the keys, or the judicial authority committed to her, of a portion, or the entire, of the temporal punishment due to sin. The infinite merits of Christ form the fund whence this remission is derived; but besides, the churcb holds, that, by the communion of saints, penitential works performed by the just, beyond what their own sins might exact, are available to other members of Christ's body/
' It is evident that if the temporal punishment re- served to sin, was anciently believed to be remitted through the penitential acts which the sinner as- sumed, any other substitute for them, that the aatho- rity imposing or recommending them, received as an equivalent, must have been considered by it truly of equal value, and as acceptable before God. AAd so it must be now. If the duty of exacting such satisfaction devolves upon the church, — and it must be the same now as it formerly was, — she necessarily possesses at present the same power of substitution, with the same eflScacy, and consequently, with the same efiects. And such a substitution is what con- stitutes all that Catholics understand by the name of an indulgence,'^
1 WUeman^a Eleventh Lecture, p. 54. ' WiMeman*9 Twelfth Lecture,p,7h 7^'
i
THE PABDON OF SIN. 435
Sach then, is the present yersion of this doctriDe, as polished and trimmed and set off to the hest ad- vantage, so as to win, if it were possible, even the affections of British Protestants. Two remarks may be made, in the first place, and we will then pass on to the closer consideration of the opposing views of Protestantism and Popery in this matter.
The first remark is, that an important variation is apparent between the doctrine preached by Tetzel, in A. D. 1516, and that avowed by Dr. Wiseman in 1836. Tetzel says, * By the authority of Christ, and of the blessed apostle Peter and Paul, and of the most holy Pope, I absolve thee from all thy sitUf transgressions, and excesses, how enormous soever they may be.' Dr. W. says, ' An indulgence is nothing more than a remission by the church of a portion, or the whole, of the temporal punishment due to sin.' This is another proof, if any were needed, of the pli- ability with which this infallible and unchangeable church adapts her demands to the degree of credulity upon which she can venture to calculate.
The second point which seems to call for observa- tion, is the utter want of scripture authority for the whole of this system. Here is * a sacrament of penance.* Where, in the whole Bible, do we find a single word of, or even an allusion to, any such ' sa- crament?' The text, John xx. 23, is adduced:— *' Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whose soever sins ye remit f they are remitted unto them ; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained," But the true and the false application of this passage is suflSciently apparent. St. Peter retained the sins of Ananias and Sapphira, and remitted those of Ck)melius. When
any other minister can shew the like signs of divine
sFa
436 ESSAYS ON ROlfANISM:
antboiity, we will believe as readily in the certaiotj of a remission granted by bim. Bat wben those who call themselves ' the saccessors of St. Peter/ declare that the tins of our yoathfal Edward, of Cranmer, Ridley, and all the martyrs, are retained, we know of a trath that they speak falsely, and that what they retain are not retained.
Several texts are addaced, indeed, to prove that God chastises his children for their sins, even when he intends not to take away his love from them ; — but no Protestant questions this. The Popish infer- ence, however, — that the church has power to take off this * temporal punishment' on payment of a certain sum of money, — is not attempted to be proved, save by one passage, 2 Cor. ii. 5 — 10. But in this pas- sage again, as in the case of Peter, we have an in- spired apostle, speaking *' with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ : " and yet even there we see no- thing more than a mere matter of discipline, a tem- porary seclusion from the church, such as takes place among all Christian congregations, Romish or Pro- testant, established or dissenting, wherever any thing like discipline is professed to be kept up.
The only remaining appeal to scripture, is worth extracting, as a specimen of exceeding artfulness. It occurs in Dr. W.'s defence of Purgatory. He says,—
* But to begin with the word of God, — there is a passage with which, probably, most who have looked into this subject are well acquainted. It is in the second book of Maccabees, (chapter xii.) where we are told how Judas, the valiant commander, made a collection, and " sent 12,000 drachmas of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice, to be offered for the sins of
THE PARDON OF SIN. 437
the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resarrection. For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead. It is, therefore, a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from their sins/' (yer. 43—46.) Many will say that the second book of Maccabees is not part of the scripture ; that it is not included in its canon. I will waive that ques- tion for the present, although it would not be diflScult to prove that it has the same right to be in the canon as many books in the Old, and still more in the New Testament : for it is quoted by the fathers as scrip- ture, and enumerated in its canon hy councils which have drawn up catalogues of its hooks. But let us abstract from this consideration, which would lead us into too long a discussion. It is allowed, at any rate, by all, to contain sound edifying doctrines : for even the church of England allows, and even directs it to be read for instruction ; whence one may con- clude that she does not suppose it to contain doctrines opposed to the religion of Christ/ ^
Dr. Wiseman should have taken care to he correct in such assertions as these. The church of England does, indeed, ' allow or even direct' some hooks of the Apocrypha to be read in her week-day services, but the books of Maccabees she carefully excludes ; and with abundant reason. In the 12th chapter of the second hook stands that verse which Dr. W. quotes, maintaining, in opposition to the whole of God's word, the expediency and duty of prayer for the dead. In the 14 tb chapter, we find a narrative
I WkmmU Ekoenth Lectwre^ p. M, fiS«
438 BSSAT8 OK ROMANISM:
of an act of mtcufo, which is giTon with approbation ! And at the dose, the author says, ^* If I have done welly and as is fitting the story, it is that which I desired : but if slenderly and meanly , it is that wbidi I coald attain unto.' Here is a plain admission of his fallible and aninspired character ; and we know from the Jews themselves, that these books were not by them received. To elevate them, therefore, as Dr. Wiseman and his church persist in doing, to the rank of ' the word of God,' is to expose themselves to the curses denounced in scripture, upon those who shall add unto, or take from, the insinred woni. Most craftily, too, does Dr. W. endeavour to evade this question. He adduces the passage as ' the word . of Crod,' and then he avoids the question of its ao- I thenticity, upon which its value must entirely de- pend, as likely to ' lead to too long discussion.' But he must remember, that until this book of Mac- cabees can be proved to be part of the canon of scripture, which it never can he, its value in a contro- versy of this kind is no more than that of any other old Jewish fable.
But it is time we approached the main question: which is, in what manner sin is dealt with under the gospel dispensation. The Protestant churches an- swer this in one way, the church of Rome in another. Let us take a calm and dispassionate view of the dif- ference between them.
The Protestant churches, taking scripture solely as their guide, declare the doctrine of the gospel to be this —
That ' the offering of Christ once made' upon the cross, is a * perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaotion for all the sins of the whole world,' and
THE PABOON OF SIN. 439
that ^ there is none other satisfaction for sin bat that alone/ (Art xxxi.)
That the doctrine of works of sapererogation, or works done by the Virgin Mary or the saints, over and above their several duties and obligations, ' can- not be taaght without arrogancy and impiety ; for by them men do declare, that they do not only render onto God as much as they are boand to do, but they do more for his sake than of bounden daty is re- quired:— whereas Christ saith plainly, when you have done all that are commanded to you, say, ' We are unprofitable servants/ {Art. xiv.)
' Thus Christ is now the righteousness of all them that truly do believe in him. He for them paid their ransom by his death. He for them fulfilled the law in his life/ ' Justification is the oflSce of God only, and is not a thing which we render unto him, but which we receive of him ; not which we give to him, but which we take of him, by his free mercy, and by the only merits of his most dearly beloved Son, our only Redeemer, Saviour, and Justifier, Jesus Christ : so that the true understanding of this doctrine, we be justified freely by faith without works, or that we be justified by faith in Christ only, is not, that this our own act to believe in Christ, or this our faith in Christ, which is within us, doth justify us, and de- serve our justification unto us,' (for that were to count ourselves to be justified by some act or virtue that is within ourselves ;) but the true understanding and meaning thereof is, that although we hear God's word, and believe it ; although we have faith, hope, charity, repentance, dread, and fear of God within OS, and do never so many good works thereunto; yet we must renounce the merit of all our said vir-
440 ESSAYS OK ROXAKISM:
taes, of fftithy hope, charity, and all our oilier Turtaes and good deeds, which we either haTe done, shall do, pr can do, as things that he far too weak and insoffi- cient, and imperfect, to deserve remission of oar sins, and oar justification ; and therefore wo must trast only in God's mercy, and that sacrifice whieli onr High Priest and Saviour Jesas Christ, the Son of God, once offered up for os. (Homify III.)
' Those whom God effectually calleth he also freely justifieth, not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accoanting aod accepting their persons as righteous, not for anything wrought in them, or done by them, but for Chrises sake alone : not by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them as their righteousness : but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them, they receiving and resting on him and his righteonsneM by faith ; which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God/ {Weslm. Confess, ch. xi.)
Such is the Protestant doctrine of the pardon of sin. The main objection ignorantly taken against it by some is, that it tends to licentiousness, by re- moving all necessity for good works. The answer to which is, that this notion springs out of an utter mis- taking of the real character and true source of all good works. For that, instead of the motive to good works being taken away, by the gift of a finee pardon to the sinner, it is only b^ such a gift that he will be quickened to do good works at all. Christ asks, concerning the two debtors, '^ Tell me, wkiek of them will love him most ? Simon answered, I su/h pose that he to whom he forgave most. And Jesus saH Thou hast rightly judged,^* (Luke viL 43.) And the
I
THE PARDON OF SIK. 441
beloTed disciple saith, '' Every man that hath this hope in him fmri/ieth himself, even as He ii pure*** (1 John ill'. 3.) The principle of this doctrine is, — *' Mahe the tree good and the fruit shall be good also.** And therefore declareth the charch of England, that
* Albeit that good works, which are the fraits of faith, and follow after justification, cannot pot away car sins, and endure the severity of God's judgment: yet are they pleasing and acceptable to God in Christ, and do spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith ; insomuch that by them a lively faith may be as evidently known, as a tree discerned by the fruit' (^rf. XII.)
Such, we repeat, is the Protestant doctrine, as gath- ered from the word of God. The system of the church of Rome, however, is wholly opposed to it. Some doc- trine of Justification that church most needs admit; but it has cunningly contrived, that, while making use of the name, the thing itself should be wholly set aside. These are its definitions —
' Justification itself is not only the remission of sins, bat also sanctification, and the renewing of the inner man by the voluntary reception of grace.'
* The instrumental cause of justification is, the sacrament of baptism,' * the formal cause, the righte- ousness of God; not that whereby he himself is righteous, but that whereby he maketh us so ; with which being endued by him, we are renewed in the spirit of our mind, and not only accounted, but are truly called, and are, righteous; receiving in our- selves righteousness, according to the measure which the Holy Spirit distributeth to every one as he will, and according to each nuuCs disposition and co^opera" turn*
44S B88AT8 OK ROMANISM:
* If any sball say, that men are jestified only by the impotation of the righteousness of Christ, or only by the remission of sins, exclading grace and loTe, which is shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Spirit, and is inherent in them ; or also that the grace wherewith we are justified is only the faTOnr of God ; let him be accursed/
* If any shall say, that justification which has been received is not preserved, yea ako increased before God by good works ; bat that these works are merely the fmit and signs of justification, which has been obtained, but not the cause of the increase of it ; let kim he accursed,' (Counc» Trent, Sess* vi. c. 7. can. xL xxiv.)
Here, then, we see that in the church of Rome there is no such thing as a fall and free pardon of sin. The justification above described, is, in fact, no justification at all. It is something which is only begun by baptism, and to grow and increase * ac- cording to each man's disposition and co-operatUnu* It amounts, therefore, to nothing more than a sort of indefinite entrance into ^ a state of grace,' the abid-' ing in which, or the falling away from it, depends mainly on the individual himself.
But here, of course, there can be no spirit of Adoption,
The position of the individual is at best no higher than that of a servant. He is not a pardoned, ac- cepted, and beloved member of God's family ; he is but on trial, as to whether his exertions may be soch as to render him worthy of the favour of God. In other words, he is said to be a justified sinner, and yet is not held to be just in the sight of God. A jast man, one who is truly justified, is free from all im:
THE PABDOK OF SIN. 443
putatioD of pnlt. But this is not his case. In the i^orch of Rome, in fact, there is no trae justifica- tion. Not eren the purest and holiest member of that church can assure himself, according to her doc- trines, that his sins are pardoned and his guilt re- moTod.
Now which of these ^iews is the scriptural one ? Need we seisIl the question, at least of any one who has any acquaintance with the word of God ?
St Paul's description will instantly occur to such an one — ** To him that worheth not, but believeth on Mm thmi justifieth the ungodly, hit faith it counted for righteofumesu Even as David detcriheth the bleaedneu of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteoueneet without works, saying, Blessed are they whose iniquu- ties are forgiven, and whose sins are covered ; blessed is the man unto whom the Lord will not impute sin,*' (Rom. i?. 6—8.)
And again — *' Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christy by whom also we have access into this grace wherein we statid, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God»* (Rom. T« \, 2.) *' We joy in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement,*' (Rom. V. 11.) " There is therefore now no condemna- tion to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.** " The Spirit it- self beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God.*' (Rom. viii. 16.)
And, from these transporting motives, the Apostle proceeds to urge those to whom he wrote, to a corre- sponding work of holiness, '^ / beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your
444 BS8AT8.0N ROMANISM:
hodiei a living iaerifiet^ holy, meeeptabU vKto God, wkkk u your reasanabU serviee*'* (Rom. xii. 1.)
And sacb, through all the gospels, and all tiie epistles, is the soriptore system. First, pardon, foil and free, by the blood of Christ ; then adoption into God's family, as ** heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ:" then, constant exhortations to *^walkw9r' thy of the high vocation wherewith ye are caUed.*' It is in this way, and in this way only, that the apostles trained op their people for heaven.
But the Romish system is utterly opposed to this scheme of mercy, from its yery outset. It rejects the first step, of a full and free forgiveness, and pro: claims instead a spurious jasti6cation, by which a man is not justified. By this false simulation of the gospel doctrine, a man is offered a justification which consists in ' a renewing of the inner man,' * accord- ing to each man's own disposition and co-operation:*' and therefore differs little from the heathen principle of ' a gradual advancement in virtue, by means of self-denial, and the constant practice of good works/
The main and centriil doctrine of the Bible, that which constitutes the very essence of the gospel, or good news, is here silently omitted. Man's nataral inability is left to straggle with the impracticable task of saving his own soul ; and God's great gift of a Saviour, who became a substitute for man, and *' died, the just for the unjust, to bring us unto God," is dropped wholly out of view.
Justification, then, or the pardon of sin, is left, by the church of Rome, to man's own exertions ; and from this fandamental error spring various noxioas fancies and mischievous practices.
1. We have, as we have already seen, the mass^
THB PABDON OF SIN. 445
as a perpetaally renewed sacrifice, to make up what was left anfinisbed by Cbrisf s death upon the cross, and to appease the wrath of God, supposed to be still burning, even against justified and repentant sinners !
2. Next, we have the Sacrament of Penance, including Confession ; by which the poor Romanist, instead of daily flying to the blood of Christ, to be washed and sanctified and strengthened, throws himself at the feet of a priest; receives the false peace which flows from eight or ten words of Latin ; and undertakes certain penitential works, as a satis- faction to God, for that part of his sin which neither the blood of the cross, nor even the sacrifice of the mass, could quite wash away.
3. But this course of folly and impiety does not end here. The church having prescribed certain prayers and fastings, to the penitent, for the putting away the last remains of bis guilt, assumes to her* self, next, the farther power of compounding those exactions for money. And thus arises the Indul- gence, that grossest of all the deceits of the '* great whore," which is well described as making '* mer- chandize" of the *' souls of men." (Rev. xviii. 13.) And^ lastly,
4. Not to part with the poor sinner, so long as it is possible to squeeze any more money out of him, the apo^ate church tells him on his death-bed, and tells his l^eeping friends after his decease— that there is another place, after death, besides heaven and hell ; and that to that third or intermediate state, her power extends. And such is the weakness of the human mind, that for the exertion of this supposed autho- rity over the intermediate state of purgatory, treasures
446 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM :
beyond all count haye been paid by poor dying sin- ners, and their deluded relatives.
Tet is this fabrication both entirely opposed to scripture, and not less to common sense. Our Lord's own description of the future state may be found in Luke xvi. 20—81, where one whose only declared offence bad been that of luxury and carelessness, lifts up bis eyes *' in hell/' and is told, that betwees him and heayen there is a great gulf fixed« so that no way from the one to the other could possibly be found. And in Matt, xyiii. 9, Christ with equal plainness intimates that even a wandering eye or an erring foot may lead, not to purgatory, bat to hell. Many times, indeed, does Christ set before bis hear- ers the danger of hell-fire ; bat not once does he tell th^m of the flames of purgatory. This of itself stamps the whole invention as a fiction and a fraud.
But it is equally opposed to common sense. A place is declared to exist of which nothing whatever is known, either from divine or human testimony. Not one of the prophets or apostles even so much as alludes to it; the early fathers of the church knew nothing of it; nor have the later writers of the church of Rome one fact to offer us in proof of its bare existence. Mn O'Croly (himself a priest) ad- mits that * The holy fathers say not a word about the fire of purgatory. The fact is, they denied the exist- ence of any such place. St. John Chrysostom, in his fourteenth homily on St. Matthew, affirms that after death no mercy, but rigid justice is to be expected. There is no middle place (said he) between hell and heaven. This language cannot be misunderstood. Even in the beginning of the sixth century, the doc- trine of purgatory was little known. St. Fulgentias,
THE PABDON OF SIN. 447
in answer to a qaestion proposed by Eatbemias, namely, wbetber God remits in tbis life only ?— de- tslared in tbe affirmative. ' After tfais life, (be says,) there is no intermediate state between punishment and reward ; that rigid justice only will be exercised in tbe world to come.' He either rejected the doc- trine of purgatory, or be knew nothing of it, for be speaks without qualification or exception.' ^
The real character, however, of the whole inven- tion, is well described by this uoexceptionable wit- ness, in the following words : —
* However, the doctrine constantly preached by tbe priests and friars is, that the poor souls in purgatory are enveloped in flame, and suffer, like Dives, the most excruciating torture : and that to relieve them from this calamity, masses, for which money is paid, are most efficacious. This is not only to make the doctrine of purgatory an article of faith, but also an article of merchandize ; and, contrary to tbe admo- nition of St. Paul, to teach that which is unseemly, for the sake of filthy lucre.' ^
Such is the candid admission of one of the Romish priesthood! Nothing, however, can throw such a strong light on this fraudf ul system, as a circumstance adverted to by Mr. Nolan, who also was lately a priest of that church, though now escaped from its snares. He says,
' The Rev. Mr. Curran, lately parish priest of Eil- Incan^ Westmeath, with whom I was personally ac- quainted, bequeathed to the Rev. Dr. Cantwell, of Mullingar, £300. to be expended on masses (at2s«6d. each) for such intentions as be (Mr. Curran) bad
1 0*Croly*9 Inquiry, p. 1(13. > Ibid. p. Itfl, ItfS.
448 ES8ATS ON ROMANISM:
neglected to discharge. From this it appears by arithmetical compatation, that the Rev. Mr. Carraa died owing two thousand foar hundred masses, moit of which (as must necessarily be presumed,) were to be offered for the souls in purgatory. Now, gentle rea- der, allow me to tell you, that had the Rev. Mr. Curran survived, he would require more than twenty yean to discharge the last of his intentions ; for as priests are allowed to offer only two masses on each Sunday and holiday, and, but one on week-days, and as the masses offered by the parish priest on those festival- days must be offered for the general benefit of the congregation, and as the masses at stations (which engross a great portion of the priest's services through- out the year) must be offered for the particular bene- fit of the family at whose house the stations are held; it would therefore follow, that the Rev. Mr. Curran would require a period of at least twenty years to discharge his debt of masses. O, abominable notion, to suppose that the Lord Jesus Christ would institute a doctrine whose rigour or relaxation of punishment to a soul, was to depend upon the whim or caprice of the Rev. John Curran ! ! '
Is there any thing in the most senseless follies of the darkest heathenism, to exceed the absurdity and delnsion of sach hopes as these? A widow carries her little mite to a priest, hoping and believing, that by the power of the intercessions of this holy man, her departed husband may be released from his doleful prison in purgatory, and translated at once into the joys of paradise. But if she had the ill luck to select a priest who has much business in this way,
1 See. L. J. Nolan^B Third Letter, p. 39. The will here alluded to was proved in the Prerog;atiye Court of Dublio, on the 6th of Jan. 1838.
THB PARDON OF SIN. 449
her money may be taken, but the prayers may not be said for some twenty or thirty years. And all this time the poor soul is said to be immersed in boiling oil, or freezing in prisons of ice, in that dreadful place !
What a picture does this present, of the God of the Popish system. '' If I ascend up into heaven,'* says the Psalmist, '* thou art there : if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there also," Sorely this is a troth which even a Papist will not venture to deny. Bat will he serioasly assare us, that Christ, who, in his omnipresence, must pervade pargatory as well as all other places, will yet calmly witness hnndreds or thousands of souls whom he has redeemed, and who are left to be tortured in that frightful place for scores of years, merely because certain priests on earth, who have been paid to say some Latin prayers for their release, ha^enotyet found time to repeat them ?
But if this blasphemous doctrine dishonours God, it may also fairly be asked, in what sort of light does it place the priesthood ?
* They believe, or at least they teach, that the friends of their flock are lying weltering in a lake of fire, from which they could deliver them, by saying masses for them, and recommending them to the prayers of the congregation ; and yet they will not say these masses, nor so recommend them, unless they be regularly paid for it ! How can a man repre- sent himself as such a monster, and yet hold up his head in civilized society? What! shall I believe that a single soul is suffering torments so dreadful ; that it may continue to suffer them for ages ; that I have the means in my power of relieving it ; and yet
2 6
450 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
shall I coolly wait till I be paid, before I use these means ? By what process of reasoning can men be brought to believe that this is the religion given to us for oar salvation, by oor kind and mercifal father in heaven ? By what arguments can the poor be convinced that a system of extortion, which gives so manifest a preference to the rich, can be that gospel which was to be preached peculiarly to the poor?'
* Survey the whole transaction. A self-elected incorporated body declare, that they alone are com- missioned by God, to teach what he chooses should be known, respecting eternity and the world of spi- rits ; and that the truth of what they teach, nay, and the reality of their commission, are not to be exa- mined, farther than they themselves think fit to sub- mit them to examination. Among many other doctrines equally profitable to themselves, they teach that the souls, even of those who listen to them im- plicitly, must go to a place of torment for a time, to be purified, before they enter on the infinite rewards of their implicit faith and obedience : that they, by performing certain mystical ceremonies and incanta- tions, which they call * Mass,' can shorten this tortur- ing purgation, or release the soul from it altogether; that they are warranted, nay, for aught I know, com- manded by God, to exact money for performing these masses, which money is to be appropriated to their own use ; and they countenance their people in forming societies to raise money for the purpose of purchasing masses from the most necessitous among themselves. I appeal to any man of common discernment, if he ever met with a transaction, that bore fraud and imposture so legibly written on the face of it, as this does ! '
THE PARDON OF SIN. 451
But does not tfae ' holy father/ as be is impioasly called, himself occapy rather an unenviable eminence in this matter?
The proclamation of the indulgence granted at the jubilee of 1825, commences thas :
' Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, To all the faithful of Christ who shall see these presents, health and apostolical benediction.
* We have resolved, in virtue of the authority given to us by heaven, fully to unlock that sacred treasure, composed of the merits, sufferings and virtues of Christ, our Lord, and of his virgin-mother, and of all the saints, which the author of human salvation has intrusted to our dispensation. . .
' We proclaim that the year of atonement and par- don, of redemption and grace, of remission and indul- gences is arrived . . . during which year of the jubilee, we mercifully give and grant in the Lord a plenary indulgence.'
Thus does this potentate boldly assume the entire power to open, or to keep closed, the prison-doors of purgatory. It is at his behest alone, (or at least it is assumed to be altogether in his power to grant release,) that so many thousands or millions of wretched beings are there suffering excruciating torments, which one word from him would terminate. Is this a distinction which a good man would covet? Is it not a responsibility from which any man, know- ing his own sinfulness, would revolt with horror?
But the word of God at once sweeps away all these refuges of lies. '* No man can by any means redeem his brother, or give to God a ransom for himJ* Psalm xlix. 7. The salvation proclaimed in the scriptures is not a scheme devised for the special use and relief
2GS
452 ESSAYS OK ROMANISM.
of the pronperoQs and the wealthy. On the contrary, it is again and aji^n offered, and in the most explicit terms, to the poor and the needy. *' Ho! everyone that thintetk, came ye to the waters, and he that hath no money ; come ye^ buy and eat ; yea, come buy wine and milh, without money and without price,** Isaiah It. 1. Is it possible for words to be devised more decidedly condemnatory of the Romish system? ** To the POOR the yospel is preached" Bat Rome offers no gospel, for to the poor she has nothing to say. The old proverb which described her rule in her most palmy days, describes her practice still, * No Penny, no Paternoster.*
XX.
ROMISH DOCTRINES AND PRACTICES.
PERSECUTION.
There is no topic in the whole course of this en- quiry, on which the falsehood of the Romish contro- versialists has been so largely displayed as this ; and the reason is sufficiently obvious. The broad and no- torious facts of the case are such, as to require the most reckless and unblushing disregard of truth to evade their force. The general voice of history de- clares, that the believers in Jesus, the adherents to the faith of the Bible, have been persecuted to the death, and destroyed by myriads, alike by Heathens, Mahometans, Romanists, and Infidels ; while on the other band, with the slight exceptions to which we shall presently allude, these Christians, when them- selves possessed of power, have not used the sword or the faggot, either to Pagan, Infidel, Mahomedan, or Romanist. The inference is unavoidable : as cruelty and persecution are from beneath, and not from above, it follows that Heathenism, Mahomedanism, Roman- ism, and Infidelity are all devices of Satan ; and that
454 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM.
Bible Christianity, or Protestantism, is that truth of God which all Satan's servants ananimoasly detest and abhor, and with which alone, true charity and forbearance are indissolubly connected.
Bat here we are sometimes met by a reference to the ' intolerance ' of Moses and the prophets under the Old Testament ; and by the question of the Ro- mish annotator, *If God gave such power to the church guides of the Old Testament dispensation, can He have given less to the church guides of the New?' Let us, therefore, meet this diificalty without hesita- tion.
The main feature in this part of the case, which ought never to be lost sight of, is this : — The Jews, in the times of the Old Testament, lived under a The- ocracy. Jehovah actually walked among them. The people heard and saw the thunder and lightning which heralded his steps ; they heard both the awful trumpet of the archangel, and God's more awful voice ; and they felt the everlasting hills quake at his terrible presence. And when, after all this, and after hear- ing the Almighty's voice expressly forbidding any manner of work to be done on the Sabbath-day, a reckless transgressor was found openly breaking this command, and in God's immediate presence pouring contempt upon His express injunctions ; what re- mained to be done, but to ** stone him with stones that he died.*' So obvious is the fitness and propriety of this proceeding, that one really feels at a loss to ima- gine what objection can be framed to it. If the supreme Lord and Governor condescends to speak, audibly to a body of his creatures, after shewing them the most wonderful mercies and kindnesses ; and if he prescribe certain rules of living ; and they, im-
PERSECUTION. 455
mediately after, openly violate and pour contempt upon his cominands, even within the immediate pre- cincts of his visible throne, — it seems difficult to say what else coold be done, but to put the delinquents to that death which they had braved.
And the like may be said of the various acts of ido- latry committed by the Israelites. Even within sight of the lightnings of Sinai, and with its thunders echoing in their ears, they rush to disobey one of the most explicit of Jehovah's commands ! His forbear- ance IS such, that he does not ** consume them as in a moment,'' as might well have been anticipated : when, however, Moses sends the sons of Levi through the camp, and slays at once three thousand men, who shall say that his wrath is other than a holy and a righteous indignation ?
And the same remark applies to the acts of Samuel, of £Iijah, and of others of the prophets. Wherever God is visibly present in his miraculous power, dwell- ing in one of his commissioned servants, he who de- spises and opposes that Almighty power, does so at his own most obvious peril ; and the consequences are not to be attributed to the mere human.agent in the least degree.
But there is a vast change in the dispensation un- der which we live. God has withdrawn himself from the view of man, except as seen through the media of his word, his works, and his providence. And by the common feeling of mankind, it will be at once perceived to be far less openly insulting, merely to disregard the message of a king, — perhaps obscurely or doubtfully delivered, — than to violate his pei*sonal commands in his very presence. Both deserve, and will receive, their just punishment; but the instant
456 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
death belongs to the personal insult ; to the disobedi- ence of an immediate command.
Still greater difierence, however, is there, between a disregard of the commands of God, wliether con- veyed immediately, or through the medium of one of his servants ; — and disobedience to what is, after all, nothing more than human assumption, and unwar- ranted pretension. Not one syllable is there, in any part of God's word, touching obedience due to the bishop of Rome. But that bishop and bis followers interpret certain words addressed to Peter by Christ, as conveying to him a supreme authority: they then assume that Peter was bishop of Rome : next, that his authority, whatever it was, descended plenarily to his successors in that see ; and thus, by three steps, every one of which is disputed, they arrive at the conclusion, that *^it is altogether necessary to salva- tion for every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff.'' ^ Now nothing can be clearer than that this assumption rests upon a series of inferences and interpretations and historical deductions, the erroneousness of any one of which would destroy the entire fabric. The doctrine is of human, not divine origin, for not one word of scripture can be shewn which even alludes to a bishop of Rome. To demand, then, for such an hypothesis, the sanctions which belong only to a law of God, is to confound heaven and earth, things human with things divine. Yet how many myriads of God's sincere worshippers have been immolated, because they could not see in the Bible any command which enjoined upon them, to be " subject to the Roman pontiff !"
1 Decree qf Boniface, a.o. 1294.
PERSECUTION. 457
Thas much of the difTerence between the position of men under the Old Testament dispensation, and aoder the New. Bat in the next place we shall be treated with an attempt to confuse the question of the claim of the Church of Rome to exclusive salvation. Dr. Wiseman's entanglement of this matter is as fol- lows:
' This is considered the harshest, the most intole- rable point of the Catholic creed, touching its rule of faith; that we hold ourselves to have so exclu- sively possession of God's truth, as to consider all others essentially in error, and not to allow that through their belief salvation is to be obtained.
' Upon this matter, allow me to observe, in the first place, that you will find it difficult to analyze, to its extreme consequences, the principle of any church professing to have a code or rule of faith, without finding yourselves led to the implicit maintenance of some such doctrine as this. When a church draws up a confession of faith, and commands all to sub- mit to it, and proclaims that eternal punishment will reach all who refuse, assuredly it supposes that the teaching of such doctrines is essentially necessary to salvation. If not, what constitutes the necessity of doctrine in reference to the revelation from God ? Our Saviour comes down from heaven, on purpose to teach mankind ; does he propose his doctrines under a penalty or not ? Does he say, you may receive or reject these as you please ? If not, is there not some- thing incurred by refusing to accept them ? Is there not the displeasure and indignation of God ? Conse- quently, a penalty is necessarily affixed to the refusal of those obligations, which Christ considered essen- tial to faith. And the church proceeds upon the prin-
458 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
ciple, that these doctrines are so essential, that a violation of God*s precepts and laws is involved in the rejection of them, and makes every one who cal- pably— mind, culpably — rejects, and does not believe them, g^oilty of refusing^ what Christ died to accom- plish and propose. This is the necessary conseqacDce to which every formula of faith leads ; it is essential to the existence of every confession of faith, unlets a different view is expressly and definitively given/*
Now nothing can be plainer than that it is here at- tempted to represent the Church of Rome as merely holding the same doctrine of exclusiveness as other churches. But there are two most important differ- ences between the Romish doctrine of exclusive sal- vation, and the Protestant doctrine.
In the first place, there is no Protestant church which has attempted or desired to say, that salva- tion is only to be found within its pale. Sach churches merely account themselves to be visible churches of Christ, constituting portions of that great catholic or universal church which is invisible. Just so was it in the times of Irenaeus and of Augustine. The French churches or the African, in those days, coald break off all communication with Rome, and con- tinue alienated for years, and almost centuries, and yet never entertain the least idea that their salvation in any degree depended upon their union with the Italian see. But Rome plainly declares, that solely within her pale is safety to be found ; an assertion which she could only be justified in making, by an express declaration of scripture to that effect ; a de- claration which she cannot produce. But,
1 WUeman*8 Ninth Lecture, p. 32?.
PERSECUTION. 459
Secondly, she differs from the Protestant churcbes in this, that while Mey merely limit salvation to those who listen to God, speaking in his word, and who obey his voice ; she makes it absolutely essential to believe a multitode of things which she has added to God's word, and which are mere human inventions.
This distinction is most important, and accordingly Dr. Wiseman does his best to confuse the point. He says, * Our Saviour comes down froni heaven, on purpose to teach mankind ; does he propose his doctrines under a penalty or not? Does he say, Yoa may receive or reject these as you please ? If not, is there not something incurred by refusing to accept them ? '
Unquestionably there is. But then we must ask another question ; namely. When our Saviour came down from heaven, and proposed certain doctrines, under the most awful penalty ; did he leave any au- .thority behind him, on his departure, to add other doc- trines under the same penalty ? Even were we to con- cede to Dr. Wiseman as much as this,— more indeed, than he could ever prove, — that Christ left an execu- tive authority behind him, deposited with the bishop and church of Rome, — still it would remain to be proved that he left any legislative power. Or were we even to go still further, and to suppose a legisla- tive power, vested in the church, in matters of form and discipline, with the right of adding the penalty of excommunication, — there would yet remain to be shewn, where or when a right was given, to set forth new doctrines, unheard of by the apostles ; and to a$x to those doctrines, so invented hymen, the awful penalties of death in this world, and eternal fire in the next.
460 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM :
The practical difference, tben, between the ProlM- taDt and the Romanist, in the matter of exclunve td- vation^ is this; that the Protestant holds just the exclusive salvation which he finds in the Bible, and no more : to wit, that " he that believeth the gospel shall be saved, and he believeth not shall be con- demned." He does not give way for an instant to the * liberal notions ' of modern times, ' that the sin- cere and honest man, whatever his creed may be, will be sure to be safe at last/. He knows that it was He who will one day be the Judge of all inen, wiio declared, that '* strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life, And few there be thmt Jmi it," And in another place, that *' He that believeth m the Son hath everlasting life ; and he that believeth not the Son^ shall not see life : but the wrath of God ahidttk on himJ^ (John iii. 36.) The Protestant, therefore, following the only unerring guide, the word of God, holds that salvation is only to be obtained by a belief in the gospel. This is his * exclusive salvation;' and he holds no other. No Protestant imagines, that this salvation is only to be found within the external pale of this or that visible church. Such an assumption is the distinguishing mark of Ro- manism.
For the church of Rome, on the other hand, has added to the simple terms of the gospel, '' Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt he saved,*' a mal- titude of other demands. She declares that whoso- ever does not believe that God is the author of the books of Tobit, Judith, and Maccabees, with all their falsehood and absurdity, is accursed. She declares, that whosoever does not believe extreme qnction, orders, and matrimony, to be sacraments, is accursei
(
PERSECUTION. 461
She declares, that any one who shall deny, that the eucbarist contains, really and substantially^ the body and blood of Christ, is accursed. She declares that any one who shall say, that in the eocharist there re- mains the sabstance of bread and wine, is accurssd. She declares, that any one who shall say, that the anointing of the sick does not confer grace, or remit sin, IS accursed* She declares that any one who shall say, that Christ's faithful people ought to receiire both species in the sacrament of the eucharist, is accursed. She declares, that any one who shall say, that in the mass there is not offered to God a true and proper sacrifice, is accursed. She declares, that any one who shall say, that mass ought to be celebrated in the vulgar tongue, is accursed. She declares, that any one who shall say, that the clergy can lawfully contract marriages, is accursed.
These, and a multitude of other matters of greater or less importance, has the church of Rome chosen to .add to its list of essential truths, and so absolutely to insist on implicit belief, as to send men to the stake in this world, and to threaten them with eternal fire in the next, for the slightest failure in the required faith. This, then, is the ' exclusive salvation' of the church of Rome. Dr. Wiseman asks very properly, whether Christ did not propose his doctrines under a penalty; and whether that penalty is not incurred by a rejection of those doc- trines? But he carefully forgets that all these fearful demands of his church are not among the doctrines which Christ proposed; but are human inventions, to which an Italian council has chosen blasphem- ously to annex the awful sanctions of the Almighty power !
462 ESSAYS ON komanism:
So much for the real position of ProtestaDts and Romanists, on this question of exclusive salvatitnu Both Dr. Milner and Dr. Wiseman would fain make it appear that there is no real difference between the parties, in this matter. But there is a difference, and a very great one. The Protestant system is that of a governor, acting for his sovereign, who, with the laws of the realm in his hand, carefully and strictly ad« ministers his trust ; not relaxing those laws, not adding to them ; but punishing the guilty when ne- cessary, yet always in strict obedience to the laws by which he rules. The Romish church, on the other hand, resembles a very different sort of governor, who, in his sovereign's absence, is not content with the laws of the realm, but makes a number of new, arbitrary, and severe rules, simply on some imaginary power in- herent in himself. Now the first of these two would be a constitutional ruler; the second would be a tyrant.
But this brings us to the second part of the subject, which concerns the arbitrary and cruel adoiinistratioQ of this illegal authority by Rome. She first fabricates a heap of oppressive laws ; and then punishes with death all who do not yield to those laws the most implicit submission.
Here, however, we are met by a positive denial on the part of the Romanists. They tell us, without reserve or hesitation, that persecution was a practice of the middle ages, which has gradually given way before advancing civilization ; — that in those days Protestants persecuted as well as Papists ; Calvin and Cranmer as well as Bonner and Gardiner ; and that if Mary put nearly three hundred persons to death for Protestantism, Elizabeth executed almost as many for Popery.
PERSECUTION. 453
Let as address oorseUes to the consideration of these rejoinders, taking each bj itself,— and it will probably be the best coarse to commence with the last.
Elizabeth came to the crown with an evident de- sire to reign in peace. ' She received/ says a late historian, * all who approached her with perfect frankness, and refused her coantenance, even among the bishops, to Bonner alone.' So far from esta- blishing, like her predecessor, an inqnisition into re- ligions opinions, she would gladly have onited, if it had been in her power, both Romanist and Protes- tant into one harmonious commonwealth. Her ftndt lay in too great a desire to eoneiliate the Papists.
She began no persecution, but she herself was quickly persecuted from without. She was made the subject of no fewer than four bulls of excommunica- tion,— by Pius V. in 1569; by Gregory XIIL in 1580 ; by Sixtus V . in 1587 ; and by Clement Y III. in 1600. And when, bo recently as 1712, Pope Pius V. was received to the honour of saintship ; the bull of canonization sets forth as one of his chief glories, ' his unhesitating zeal in striking with his dread anathema the impious heretic Elizabeth, the pre- tended queen of England, as a heretic, and the fa- vourer of heretics ; absolving her subjects from their allegiance, and depriving herself of her pretended right to the throne of England/
The fruit of these powerful missives was soon seen, in a constant succession of plots against Eli^ zabetb's throne and against her life. Most of these plots were forged in the Vatican ; and nearly all bad a priest or priests as their prime agent ot ageoti* One of these conspiracies swelled into the lor
404 ESSAYS ON R09IAK1SM:
Armada ; an armament which bore the ball of the pope, and was proYided with a plentiful supply of the instruments of torture.
This continual warfare, directed against Elizabetli, the main support of Protestantism, by the court of Rome, folly accounts for the execution, daring bcr long reign of more than forty years, of about two hundred persons for treason, of whom not quite thirty were priests. Bat the proceedings againat them aie extant, and it is clear that in every case it was for state crimes, and not for religious opinions, that they were called to an account
Now turn to her predecessor, Mary. In her short reign of little more than five years, one archbishop, four bishops, twenty-one clergymen, fifty-fivt women, four children, and above two hundred other persons, were burned to death in the face of day, for their religioue opinions.
This is the grand distinction. The sufferers under Elizabeth were men who went to the gallows as the natural and ordinary punishment, by the laws of God and man, of detected treason. They died for their deeds of wickedness. But the venerable bishops, and poor females and children, who were put to the most cruel of all deaths by Mary, died solely for their religious belief. ' What say you to the sacrament of the altar?' was the most usual interrogation. And if a poor woman replied that she believed the bread to be still bread, the instant sentence was, to be burned to death !
So much for the parallel attempted to be estab- lished, between the executions for treason in the reign of Elizabeth, and the burnings for * heresy ' in the reign of Mary. The two series have no more con-
PERSECUTION. 465
nection or similarity than exists between the laws of England and those of Algiers.
Bat we are next referred, more at length, to vt^ri- oas execations which unquestionably did take place, for religious opinions, in different countries, daring the earlier days of the Reformation. Such occar- rences were not frequent, but for the first generation or two, the annals of the Reformation are unquesti- onably disfigured by them.
Our answer is, briefly, that we do not represent the • reformers as faaltless or infallible men; and that we freely admit that they often fell into errors ; of which the occurrences now adverted to form only one class. In fact, it would have been a stupendoas mi- racle if a great number of leaders, in varioas coun- tries, and under a great diversity of circumstances, had never committed an error or a crime. And this of persecution for religious opinions, was just one of those ipto which they were obviously the most liable to foil.
Brought up, as all of them had been, in the bosom of the Romish church, ideas of intolerance had been implanted in their minds daring all their earliest yeai^s. Quickly, indeed, did these ideas disappear, bat not so instantly as to prevent their producing some fruit. Before the true principle of responsibi- lity for religious opinions was generally understood and received, some executions had taken place. But this circumstance is not to make us blind to the fact, that it was to the Reformation, and to the Re- , formation alone, under God, that the rise and spread ^ of truer views on this matter must be traced. Ro- ,; manism, for eight or ten centuries, had been uni- I formly intolerant and persecuting. She was so to
2H
466 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM
the refonners themselves, and even lon^ after the establishment of the Reformation and the general spread of religions liberty, she continued to perse- cote. Nay, centuries after the Reformation, she was still a persecuting church, and a persecuting church she remains to this hour ; only checked in her mo- tions by the consciousness that the times forbid tke open exercise of those principles of intoleranoe, which, in her cloisters, she still cherishes.
Protestantism has now been rooted in Europe for three centuries. Its real principles and practices ait therefore fully known. And it will not be denied, that wherever the Reformation has planted itself, there penal inflictions for religious opinions have almost entirely vanished away.
By 'penal inflictions' we mean those which are correctly so called. An infidel spirit has lately | arisen, which demands that rulers and legislators j shall make no distinction between truth and false- hood ; and asserts, onblushingly, that * preference is persecution/ But this was not the doctrine of the Reformation, any more than it is the doctrine of the Bible. In England, especially, our sovereign is a Protestant by public profession, and so, by the laws of the land, must her principal advisers be. But a Protestant is one who protests against popery. To be consistent, therefore, he must be one who discwok- tenances popery. But while this is, or ought to be, the case, the Protestant will not even wish to dis- turb or harm his Romanist fellow-subject, by the I infliction of positive chastisement for his theological I opinions. I
On the other hand, Popery, from the iirst day of I her fuU ea\.^\)\\%\i\xi«\it^ has been intolerant : she god- I
PERSECUTION. 467
thmed intolerant for ten centuries : and she is, ap to this moment, intolerant wherever she can venture with safetj to follow her own inclinations.
The Romish see began to wield a positive sove- ireignty over the Christian world about the sixth or seventh centuries. But it was not till some time after, that her dominion was folly established, and her iron yoke sensibly felt.
Yet her first advance upon Britain was marked by a circumstance which shewed very distinctly what kind of rule it was that Augustine and his followers came to establish. The slaughter of the monks of Bangor gave sofilcient proof that ' unqualified sub- mission' was already demanded, and that the penalty of disobedience would be fearful.
During the darkest ages of all, the ninth and tenth centuries, the records which remain furnish little in- formation as to religious opinions, or their progress, or repression. The Romish see itself being in the lowest state of degradation, when, as Cardinal Ba- ronius tells us, ' sordid and abandoned women ruled at Rome, and false pontiff's, their lovers, intruded into the chair of Peter,' we can look for little else than mere wickedness and confusion in that quarter. But in the eleventh century Hildebrand restored the popedom to independence and power, and from that period we find it exerting that power in the most ter- rific persecutions.
That the doctrine and the practice of Papists had previously been that of entire intolerance, may be gathered from such facts as history furnishes. We find a burning of thirteen persons at one time, for their religious opinions, at Orleans, in 1017. More than a century previous, for holding the doctrine of
2 H2
468 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
predestination, Godeschalcas had been sentenced to public flagellation and imprisonment for life.
In 1140, Evervinus of Steinfeld, writing to Bernard, g^ives an account of the burning of some heretics at Cologne, whose chief crime was, that * all thingi observed in the church, which have not been estab- lished by Christ himself, they call saperstitioiilk They do not admit of any purgatory after death, and therefore make void all prayers and oblations for tke deceased/
In 1160 the council of Oxford condemned mo^ than thirty of the Waldenses, who had emigratid from Gascony, ' consigning them,' as it was hypocriti- cally termed, ' to the secular arm.' Henry II. was lenient to them, and only ordered them to be pnbliely whipped, branded with a red-hot iron, and driven out of the city. As all persons were forbidden to receive or assist them, and it was in the winter, they soon perished with cold and hunger.
About the same time Pierre de Bruys was bonit alive in Languedoc ; and Fleury, in the south of France, was imprisoned, and died in confinement
But it was now, about the close of the twelfth cen- tury, that, under the blessing of God, the spread of scriptural truth among the Albigeois, in the south of France, and the Yaudois of Piedmont, became so considerable as to attract the notice of the hofy see. Councils were held, in 1163, and 1179, which levelled anathemas against this ' damnable heresy/ and de- nounced the heretics to the especial hatred and ab- horrence of the faithful. And, properly to cany these Eliminations into execution, Innocent III. ad- dressed himself to Philip Augustus of France, ex- hoTting him to a crusade of extermination against
I
PERSECUTION. 469
the heretics. He promised to all who shoald engage in this religious war, the pardon of all their sios, and, in case of death, the glory of martyrdom, and the immediate possession of heaven.
In this ' holy war/ which raged for nearly forty years, about a million of human lives were sacrificed, amidst circumstances of greater horror and barbarity than any other annals since the beginning of the world can furnish.
Beziers was taken by storm in 1209. When the 4oubt occurred to the besiegers, how they should %now the papists in the town from the heretics, — Arnold, the papal missionary, exclaimed, ' Kill them all ; God will know his own.' The counsel was em- braced. Every soul was put to the sword. The blood ran in torrents down the streets. Mezerai estimates the slain at sixty thousand.
Lavaur was stormed in 1211. The governor was banged on a gibbet, his body thrown into a well, and covered with stones. Eighty gentlemen, who had sarrendered, were put to death in cold blood. Four hundred of the inhabitants, who had escaped the general carnage, were afterwards burned alive.
Under these inflictions, Languedoc became a desert. Its cities were burned, its inhabitants swept away with fire and sword. An hundred thousand Albigeois were computed to have fallen in one mas- sacre.
At a later day the Vaudois shared the same fate. Oppeda ravaged their country with unsparing fero- city. Twenty-four towns were ruined, and the inha- bitants massacred. Every variety of cruelty was prac- tised against these unhappy people. Yet Pope Paul IV. conferred on the monster who had perpetrated
470 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
these atrocities, the rank of Coant Palatiney and fhe koigbthood of St. John ; ' reckoning/ says Gaofrid, the papal historian, 'the fire and sword well em- ployed which extingnished Waldenstanism/
Spain followed in the same coarse. The inqoki- tion, in that country, effectnally kept down the growtl of heresy. Philip II. snperintended the baming of as many as twenty-eight of the Spanish nobility al one auto dafe, Torquemada, on being made in* <|aisitor-general, signalized his entrance on theo^ fice, by burning in one day no less than two thoosani persons ! And Mr. Blanco White informs ns, tbsf 'from the most moderate calculations, founded oil authentic papers and sure data, it appears that is Spain, between 1481 and 1809, no fewer than tkirtf- one thousand nine hundred and twelve persons had bea burned at the stake ; while two hundred and ninetT- one thousand, four hundred and fifty, having re- canted, were condemned to lesser punishment*, involving, however, utter ruin and destitution ! '
In Belgium, the Duke of Alva boasted of having put to death eighteen thousand Protestants in six weeks, and Grotius reckons the whole number of martyrs at a hundred thousand.
At Paris, in 1572, on St. Bartholemew's day, the toscin tolled, at midnight, the signal of destruction. The carnage continued seven days. The Seine was covered with dead bodies, floating down its stream. Bossoet reckons the victims at six thousand ; Davila at ten thousand. The king and queen personally superintended the massacre with great delight. Spe- cial messengers were despatched through the pro* vinces, and forty thousand more were added to the list of tbe ^lain. The news was received at Rome
PERSECUTION. 47 1
With unspeakable joy. The pope went in procession to the church of St. Louis, to return thanks ; and in- structed his leg^ate to congratulate the king on the success of a scheme, 'so long meditated, and so liappily executed, for the good of religion/
In England, in 1605, a considerable body of Pap- iits, of rank and education, acting under the advice ff a Jesuit, and in obedience to the Papal bulls, de- 1 berately planned the massacre of the king, the royal fimily, and the whole of the nobility, at one blow, forty years after, in Ireland, about fifty thousand irotestants were massacred in the course of a few veeks.
Thus we see, that from the first moment of the con-
^didation of the power of the Roman see, after emerg-
lig from the confusion of the dark ages, the apostate
fiorch has fully maintained its character, as *'drunk-
ei with the blood of the saints, and with the blood
ff the martyrs of Jesus." So horrible a picture of
Jiuman nature ; so dreadful a specimen of something
almost resembling demoniacal possession, is not to
be found in the whole history of man, as is furnished
by the wars, termed 'religious,' instigated by the ' Holy
see/ But we are sometimes told, that aH this has
passed away ; that religious persecution was merely
the common error of a half-enlightened age ; and that
now, amid the light and moden^tion of the nineteenth
century, no one, whether Protestant or Papist, would
ever dream of reviving it.
This is a deceit ; and it can scarcely ever happen that the party offering such an argument, does not know it to be a deceit.
Popery is now checked in her career of persecu- tion by a variety of causes whiol^. deprive her of her
472 ESSAYS ON K0MAKI8M:
former power. One of these is the prevalence of lo- fidelity on the continent The indifference and soep- ticism which so generally prevails on the contiDeDt, permits popery to exist in a moderated form ; but it would not bear the revival of active persecation. Perhaps we might more correctly say, that the terms of agreement between popery and infidelity, fortb< extirpation of Christianity, are not yet finally agreei apon, and that, till that treaty is concladed, infidelit; will not permit religions persecution.
But the main hindrance to the exertion of Papa power in the suppression of heresy is, ander God, th strength and power with which he has been please to endow Protestantism in the world.
In the days of Elizabeth, her life alone seemed t constitute the obstacle to the complete revival < Papal power. Hence the rage shewn, and the plot perpetually formed, against her.
Yet France and Spain believed that she must sooi fall. Hence they delayed not the massacre of St Bartholomew, or the persecution of the Protestants in France, and Belgium, and Spain, on her account. But now the case is entirely altered. England is the greatest power in Europe, and offers a refuge to the persecuted, wherever they may be. To attempt another crusade against religious liberty on the cod- tinent now, would only be to call forth the Protestant feeling of England, and to drive a body of valuable citizens to our shores. Hence it is that religions persecution is now both inexpedient and impractic- able*
But all that Popery can do, it does. Whenever it can venture to do so without fear of consequences, it sheds blood. An auto dafe, in which a poor man was
PEBSBCUTIOK. 473
burned to death, took place at Valencia in Spain, no longer back than the 31st of Jaly, 1826. And when Dr. Bnchanan was at Goa, about the year 1808, the inqnisition in that country was in fall activity*
And what is the present state of things in Ireland, but a religious persecution? Do we not see the insurances offices of Dublin refusing to effect a policy •n the life of a Protestant clergyman, on any terms -whatever ! And is not this proceeding a very natural one, when they see the clergy, one after another, shot down from behind hedges and walls, without remedy and without detection ?
Nor let it be said that these are mere tithe disputes. There is no man who has been more virulently as- sailed than Mr. Nangle of Achill, who claims no tithes, nor any other impost. But why is he at- tacked ? Just because the priests, and even the bishops of the Romish church, denounce him from their altars as an enemy of the faith. The pitchfork Is openly and explicitly called into action by minis- ters of a church calling itself Christian, and from pulpits which are said to be raised to proclaim the gospel of peace. What better proof can be given, that the spirit of Popery is inherently persecuting, and that were the power it formerly possessed once more in its hands, the use made of it would be es- sentially the same, as in the days of Dominic and of Mary.
Neither should our view be confined to Ireland ; when half the globe is at this moment exhibiting tokens of the same unchangeable spirit. In Austria, the ruling powers are with the Romish priesthood, and accordingly we see a whole village suffering one sentence of exile and expatriation, on no other score
474 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM.
than adherence to Protestanlifiii. Bat the aaae spirit which, in monarchs, refases to tolerate Pro- testantism in their safajeetSy^iB sobjects, reckons Protestantism sufficient groand for conspiracy and roTolt Of this let Bel^pon, let Canada, let New- foundland speak, — three coantries far remoTed, each from the other, bat all saffering ander the same evil, — the onappeasable enmity of Papists towards Pro- testantism. In sovereigns this feeling shews itself, so far as the times will permit, in perseootion ; in sabjects it manifests itself more readily, as more cod* sonant with the temper of the age, in secret plottii^ and open rebellion. Bat the root of the evil is the same in both. Between Protestantism and Popery, where both are genaine and sincere, there most ever subsist an irreconcileable fead. The only difference is, that the Protestant will mingle his hatred to the idolatry with love to the soal of the deluded idolater, and will not even wish his bodily injary. Whereas the Romanist will combine his bitter detestation of heresy with an equal abhorrence of ^ the heretic;' and will shew that abhorrence, whether by the faggot or the pitch-fork, whenever he can find a convenient opportunity.
XXI.
DESTINY OF ROMANISM.
THB PBOPHECIES CONCERNING THE PAPACY.
Wb haye heretofore dealt with the Papal system in detail, discussing point by point of the maltifarious aggregate, and disproving the nnscriptnral and un- reasonable assumptions of that domineering charch. We have reserved to the close one g^reat argument, both because to have adduced it at the opening of the discussion might have seemed to betoken a wish to close up the question, and to avoid the considera- tion of the several points therein contained ; and also because, from its awful and momentous cha- racter, it leaves nothing to be said in addition*
Comb out of heb, mt people, that ye be not partakers of heb sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
She shall be utterly bubned with fibe: for stbong is thb lobd god who judobth hbb. (Rev. xviil. 4, 8.)
Protestants hold that these words refer to the church of Rome. If they are right in this view, then not another word ne^ be said. Bat if they are
476 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
wrong; or eveD if they ha^e taken up this idea on insafficient groands, then it is high time that their error should be admitted, and repented of. Let os, then, with all seriousness, and looking op for divine direction, enter npon the consideration of this most solemn question.
A most clear and emphatic exhortation is here given to God's people, to come out from some citj called *' Babylon," and thus to save themselves from the terrible judgments which God purposes to bring upon her. The main question then is. What is denoted or set forth by this ' city,' typically called Babylon!
Some superficial or cursory readers of the pro- phetical parts of God's word, have supposed that the term ' Babylon' is synonimons with 'the world,' against which our Lord often warned his disciples. So that when Christ says, " If ye were of the worlds the world would love its own ; hut because ye are not of the world J hut I have chosen you out of the world, there' fore the world hateth you;" (John xv. 19.) — he ex- presses very nearly the same kind of separation and deadness to temporal things, which is enjoined in the call, " Come out of her, my people."
But the least consideration of the context puts an end to this supposition. The preceding chapter, the xyiith, gives a particular description of Babylon, which proves beyond all question, that under this name is described, not the general mass of mankind, but a particular state, or power, either civil or ecclesias- tical, which should be situated in a particular part of the earth, and should rule over other and subordi- nate dominions.
'' T saw a woman sit on a scarlet-coloured beati, fuU ofnames of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns***
i
PROPHECIES CONCEBKIKG THE PAPACY. 477
'^ And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth : and there are seven kings ; five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come,*' (Rev. xvii. 3, 9, 10.)
** And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast," (Rev. xvii. 12.)
These few passages, selected out of many, at once dispose of the supposition, that * Babylon' in this place means only the same with ' the world ' in our Lord's own discourses.
Babylon, then, denotes a power, civil or ecclesi- astical ; visible in some particular part of the globe, and exercisiug there, according to the description given, very great and extraordinary authority. The first question that occurs is, whether there is here described a civil, or an ecclesiastical power?
The answer to this will immediately occur to all students of prophecy. Xn the language of the pro- phetical parts of holy scripture, an earthly kingdom is usually typified by a beast ; a church, or ecclesias- tical dominion, by a woman.
Daniel, in his seventh chapter, sees the rise of the four great universal empires. They appear in the forms of four beasts. In his eighth chapter he has a particular vision of the events concerning Persia and Greece. Two beasts, again, — a ram, and an he- goat, — are the symbols presented to his mind. And in like manner, in the chapter now under considera- tion, the 17th of Revelations, we find a beast, which, upon examination, we find to be the same as Daniel's fourth beast; but it is not this beast that is called ' Babylon,' but a woman who is seen riding upon it. ** I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet-coloured beast,"
478 BS8AY8 OK BOMAKISII :
Now a tooNMni, u we joit bow obserwedf If tke type oonstantly ased to denote a chnreh, or ecden- astioal state. Perhaps it woald be more cotreet ts say, that while nations, or bodies of men in their natoral state, destitute of the trae knowledge of God, are typiied under the symbols of brute beasti, or creatares with whom angelie beings, and the Lord of angels, can have no converse,, or union, or con- nection ; those commanities to whom God has made himself known, and has graciously revealed his cha- racter and purposes in the gospel, are described . nnder the form of reasonable beings, human beings, and female beings, becaase, as a man is the head of his wife, so Christ is the head of his church.
Thus, throughout the prophecies, is this symbol always adopted. Judab, faithful to God under He- zekiah, is called, *' the virgin, the daughter of Zion," (Isa. xxxvii. 22.) The church, in her future glories, is described as '^ Zion travailing.'* And it is said, ** Rejoice with Jerusalem, and be glad with her,** " / will extend peace to her like a river, and the glory of the gentiles like a /lowing stream : then shall ye suck : ye shall be borne upon her sides, and be dandled on her knees.** (Isa. Ixvi. 8, 10, 12.) Again it is said, " Thy maker is thine husband ; the Lord of Hosts is his name : The Lord hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit,'* (Isa. liv. 5, 6.)
In strict consistency, when Judab fell into idolatry she is addressed under tbe figure of an adultress, aud God says, " / will judge thee as women that break wedlock are judged,'' (Ezek. xvi. 38.) And this is the figure adopted in tbe passage before us. Upon the beast, which symbolizes a mere earthly power, there rides an harlot,—" the mother of harlots and abomina-
PROPHECIES CONCERNING THE PAPACY. 479
tions of the earth." The object hereby set forth evi- dently is, a church, or ecclesiastical body, in a state of apostacy, but governing, or directing, or exercising authority, over theoarthly power denoted by the beast. Having arrived at this conclusion, — from premises which no student of the prophetical parts of God's, word will dispute, the next point is to ascertain, what particular ecclesiastical body it is that is thus pointed out?
Now the last verse of the xviith chapter seems \o decide this: for the interpreting angel informs St. John, that ^* the woman which thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the eartliJ^
Now to these words the apfostle obviously could at- tach but one meaning, — namely, that RoBiE was the city or power spoken of.
So' indisputable is this, that even the chief com- mentators of the church of Rome have all admitted, that the Babylon of the Apocalypse can mean no- thing else than Rome, This is explicitly conceded by Baronius, Bellarmine, Ribera, Malvenda, Lessins, Cornelius a Lapide, Alcason, and Vega.* Dr. Walm- sley, also, the Romish bishop, who wrote a few years back under the name of Pastorini, at once admits the same thing. These writers, however, strive to evade the awful conclusion; as it respects their own church, by arguing, that it is Rome Pagan, not Rome Papal, that is thus pointed out.
Bishop Walmsley {Pastorini) says, * Thus fell an- cient Rome like Babylon, but with this di£ference, that Babylon was never to rise again, whereas Rome, when the anger of God was satisfied, was designed
1 fVhi8ton*» Essay on ReteUxtkm, P. ii. p. ill, 1 12.
480 BSSAYS OK ROMANISM:
to emerge from her ashes. And, thoagh not allowed to recover her former temporal dominion^ and splen- door, and riches, nor to rise in her oatward appear- ance scarce above the condition of a Yillage, whea compared with her former extent and multitade of people ; yet, in her depressed state, she is priTileged with a higher dignity of another kind; of being not only a Christian city, bat the appointed bead and centre of spiritaal dominion/
Dr. Walmsley's interpretation, then, is, — that the apocalyptic Babylon is Rome Pagan; that the judg- ments denounced ag^ainst her were folfilled by the sacking of Rome by the Goths and Vandals ; and that after that infliction she was to rise from her ashes, ia the new form of a Christian bishopric, and the head of spiritaal dominion.
We accept the Dr.'s admission, that Rome, and no- thing bat Rome, can be denoted by the '* Babylon '' of the Revelation ; bat his supposed fulfilment of the prediction is altogether inadmissible.
Rome Pagan, the Doctor says, was a bloody per- secutor of the saints. By this guilt she incurred the judgments of God, and was delivered over to the ravages of the Goths ; but afterwards, having passed through this punishment, she rose to greater honour than before, as no longer Pagan but Christian.
Now there never was an hypothesis which more completely disregarded the facts of the case. Rome Pagan was not sacked or ravaged by the Goths at all. It was not until nearly a century after she had become Christian, that the foot of the invader tra- versed her streets ; and her final fall took place when she had been, for nearly an hundred and fifty years, a professedly Christian city !
PROPHECIES CONCERNING THE PAPACY. 481
But there is another discrepancy between the fact and this interpretation. The woman is seen sitting on a beast with ten horns. These ten horns. Dr. Walmsley himself admits to be the ten Gothic king- doms which arose oat of the Roman empire* The woman rides upon, or rales over these. How, then, can she be Rome Pagan, which ceased to exist when Constantino made the empire Christian, in A. D. 321, — when those ten kingdoms apon which she rides, under the figare of a ten-homed beast, did not even exist antil more than two centaries after ? Clearly, in riding upon, or ruling over the beast with ten horns, she is shewn to be a governing power, direct- ing and animating those ten kingdoms, which arose between the years A. d. 497, and 606, and which haye continued to exist up to the present time.
Another fault which we might find with this inter- pretation is, that the symbol of a harlot is never applied in scripture to pimple Paganism ; but always to an apostate charch, — to a body which having been united to God by the profession and possessiofa of the true faith, afterwards falls away from him, and be- comes an adultress. This of itself is a fatal objec- tion to Dr. Walmsley's interpretation; but the re- maining one is still simpler and plainer, and therefore more convincing.
The Doctor says, that ' Rome, when the anger of God was satisfied, was designed to emerge from her ashes.' Now this is in direct opposition to the very words of the prophecy. The angel distinctly says, '' Thus with violence shall that great citg Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found NO MORE AT ALL.'' These words prove, beyond all possibility of doobt, both that the judgments spoken of iu the ^tQ^lk<(^^
482 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
were not realised in the sacking of Rome by the Goths, from which infliction that dty did in a mi- sare recover; and also that their fdlfilment is siSI future. On the whole, then, while we aoce|itthe id- mission of Dr. Wahnsley, with all the other oommea- Utofs of his ehnroh, that the '^ Babyloii" of the Apocalypse is nnqaestionably Rome; we most pro- nounce his endeavour to shew that Rome Pn^aii is intended, to hare wholly failed.
We have arrived then, at these oonclnsiotis ;—i That in the figure of a harlot, we must recognise t professing church, lapsed into idolatry. 2. That ii the beast upon which she rides, we trace a meie earthly empire, divided into ten diilweiit powen, typified by horns, and all ruled and guided alike by the governing harlot. 3. That the marks given de- note Rome. And, 4. That in the apostate and idol- atrous church of Rome, riding upon and ruling over, the ten kingdoms, (Rome, Ravenna, France, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Naples, Bavaria, &c.) the full re- ality of the prophetic picture is seen.
But it will probably be asked, Do you mean to decide a vast controversy like this, by yoicr interpre- tation of a single dark and mysterious prophecy ? We answer, certainly not.
What our conclusion might be, were this the only passage of holy writ, which seemed to threaten Rome with the judgments of Grod, we are not called upon to say, or even to decide for our own consciences. For it is not the only passage which bears this awful meaning, but only one out of several.
The roost highly^favoured of all the Old Testament prophets, had a parallel view of Ood's purposes in these laUer lvm&%, B^xai^V *«%& '^Haxued^ that when
PROPHECIES CONCERNING THE PAPACY. 488
the ten Gothic kingdoms had been formed oot of the Roman empire, another horn (or power) should arise after them, which should absorb three of their por- tions of territory, and should *' sp€(Ut great words against the Most High, and should wear out the saints d^the Most High, and thinh to change times and laws/' (Dan. vii. 25.) but who should be '* slain, and Aw&m^ ffwen to the kuming flame."
Here is a second witness, exactly corroboratiTe of St. John, and wholly unintelligible, except on the hypothesis, that this power that should arise, was to be that of the Roman see.
But even this is not all. The greatest of all the apostles, the apostle of the Gentiles, with still in- creasing explicitness confirms the same view. He tells the Thessalonians, (2 Thess. ii.) that a great apostacy, a ^' falling away '' was to be looked for ; and the manifestation of some dreadful apostacy, which he designates by the strongest terms of abhor- rence and dread, — '^ the man of sin,'' '* the son of perdition,'' '* that wicked one.''
He intimates that as soon as that which then hin- dered, (the imperial power,) was taken out of the way," then '* that wicked (one) should be revealed *' or manifested. And exactly as it was thus foretold do we find the fact recorded in history, that quiekly after the fall of the western empire, did the Romish see begin to assume a predominant power.
And the apostle most explicitly describes the cha- racter of this apostate power. It was to be distinctly ecclesiastical. '' He, as God, sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." And we know that the pope is himself bodily exalted, at least once every year, and placed on the high altariaSt,P«^\*%
2 I a
484 ESSAYS ON ROMANISM:
at Rome, for the adoration of the multitude. *' His comiDg is after the working of Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders/* And what impostare was ever more entirely supported than is that of Rome, by '' lying wonders ? "
The end, however, of this ''son of perdition'' is described in terms exactly agreeing with Daniel and St. John. *' The Lord shall consume (him) with the spirit of his mouth, and destroy (him) with the brightr ness of his coming." (2 Thess. ii. 8.)
Daniel had said of Christ, that ''a fiery stream issued forth before him : * and " the beast was slain, and his body given to the burning flame."
St John describes the Lord, when coming to judge the beast and the false prophets, thus : — *' Out of bis mouth goeth a sharp sword.'' '* And the beast was taken, and the false prophet that wrought miracles before him. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.'' (Rev. xix. 15, 20.)
Now let us endeavour to draw into our view, all the various prophetical marks or indications relative to the antichrist, the great apostacy of the latter days, and see what is their combined force and bearing.
First, then, we observe, alike in Daniel, St. Paul, and St. John, the clear and unequivocal prediction of an antichristian power, which should appear in the latter days.
**• And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws : and they shall be given into his hand." (Dan. vii. 25.)
'' There shall come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition ; who
PROPHECIES CONCERNING THE PAPACY. 485
opposetli and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped." (2 Thess. ii. 3, 4.)
'^ And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.'' (Rev. xiii. 6.)
2 ; As to the time of its appearance, and its geo- graphic position, we learn that it was to be in the waning or declension of the Roman empire.
*^ The fourth kingdom shall be divided ; as the toes of the feet were part of iron and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be. partly strong and partly broken.'^ (Dan. ii. 41, 42.)
*^ The ten horns are ten kings that shall arise ; and another shall arise after them, and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. And he shall speak great words against the most High.'* (Dan. vii. 24, 25.)
*' The mystery of iniquity doth already work ; only he (the imperial power,) who now letteth, will let, until he be taken out of the way ; and then shall that wicked be revealed." (2 Thess. ii. 7.)
3 ; As to the character of this enemy. It was not to be that of an open opposer, but of a traitor and deceiver.
** In this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things." (Dan. vii. 8.) ^* So that he is as God sitting in the temple of God, shew- ing himself that he is God." ^* Whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power and signs, and lying wonders.'' (2 Thess. ii. 4, 9.)
4 ; The spiritual dominion of this anti-christian power.
" He shall think to change times and laws ; and they shall be given into his hand." '' With all de- ceivableness of unrighteousness in thei!alUal^^t\&V.J'
lately PubHthed, Dedicated, by pennission, to the Archbishop of Annagh,
VARIATIONS OF POPERY;
BY THE REV. S. EDGAR.
S<»cond Edition, revised, octavo, price 12s. cloth.