tin INI 
 
 ■39 
 
CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME 
 OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT 
 FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY 
 
 HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE 
 
Cornell University Library 
 BX1765 .W94 
 
 Roman Catholicism, or. The doctrines of 
 
 olin 
 
 3 1924 029 407 081 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029407081 
 
ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 THE DOCTRINES OF THE CHURCH OF ROME 
 
 BRIEFLY EXAMINED 
 
 IN THE LIGHT OF SCRIPTURE 
 
 REV. CHARLES H. H. WRIGHT, D.D. 
 
 Trin. Coll., Dublin, M.A. Ex. Coll., Oxford, Ph.D. of Leipzig 
 
 Donnellan Lecturer (1880), Univ. of Dublin 
 
 Hampton Lecturer (1878), and Grinfield Lecturer on the Septua^int 
 
 University of Oxford, 1893-7 
 
 FOURTH EDITION— REVISED 
 
 Ecnticm 
 
 THE RELIGIOUS TRACT SOCIETY 
 4 Bouverie Street and 65 St Paul's Churchyard 
 
 Lo 
 
PREFACE 
 
 This little work is intended only as a Primer. Hence 
 the matters discussed have to be treated very briefly, 
 and therefore necessarily, to some extent, inadequately. 
 The subject has been as far as possible brought up to 
 date, although as it was necessary to bring the work 
 into an assigned number of pages, it was impossible to 
 attempt to trace the opinions of the Christian Fathers. 
 The writer trusts that this little work may be found 
 useful in the study of a subject of such vital import- 
 ance at the present day. Persons inclined to go further 
 may usefully read Dr. Blakeney's Manual of the Romish 
 Co?itroversy, originally published in 1851, the last edi- 
 tion of which has been issued since 1870. Dr. R. F. 
 Littledale's Plain Reasons Against Joining the Church 
 of Rome (S.P.C.K., 1880) is also of great importance, 
 though owing to his High Church views many points 
 are omitted in his work on which Protestants need in- 
 formation. Dr. Salmon's Infallibility of the Church is 
 one of the most recent and most valuable contributions 
 to the literature of the subject. 
 
 The writer, in citing texts of Scripture, has noted the 
 fact that some passages of our Authorized Version (A.V.) 
 have been modified in the Revised Version (R.V.) of the 
 English Bible. The Douay Version, the English trans- 
 lation of the Latin Vulgate accredited by Roman Catholic 
 authorities, has been always borne in mind, and in proof 
 passages where any real difference exists notice has been 
 called to its renderings. 
 
 The illustrations given in the work are all derived from 
 Roman Catholic sources. It is to be hoped the indexes 
 appended may be sufficient for ordinary use. 
 5 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER FAGB 
 
 i. The Role of Faith 7 
 
 ii. The Church : Its Authority and Organiza- 
 tion 22 
 
 in. The Two Sacraments of Christ, and the 
 
 Seven Sacraments of Rome ... 36 
 iv. The Sacrifice of the Mass .... 57 
 v. Roman Assumptions as to the Church, the 
 Priesthood, Headship of Peter, Penance, 
 Indulgences, and Persecutions . . .78 
 vi. False Teachings of the Church of Rome 
 on Points of Doctrine: Original Sin, 
 Justification, Immaculate Conception, 
 and Worship of the Virgin, Invocation 
 of Saints and Angels, etc. . . . 109 
 
 ILLUSTRATIONS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 1. The Tetzel Indulgence in British Museum Frontispiece 
 
 2. The Pope proceeding in State. (From an en- 
 
 graving printed at Rome) 7 
 
 3. Papal Medal struck by Martin V., 141 7, repre- 
 
 senting Adoration of the Pope. (From 
 Bonnani Numismata Pontificum) .... 36 
 
 4. Facsimile of Papal Indulgence. (From original 
 
 in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge. 
 Pontificate of Clement XII., 1730-40) ... 78 
 
 5. Medal struck at the Coronation of Leo X., 
 
 Leo represented as " The Lion of the 
 
 Tribe of Judah " 97 
 
 6 Measure of the Virgin Mary's Foot . . . 103 
 
 7. Papal Medal struck to commemorate the 
 
 Massacre of St. Bartholomew, 1572 . . 107 
 
 8. Papal Medal struck to commemorate the 
 
 Jubilee of 1525 . 137 
 
The Pope proceeding in State. (From an engraving published by 
 Papal authorities at Rome.) 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 THE RULE OF FAITH 
 
 § i. Canons and Decrees of the Council 
 of Trent, i. The peculiar doctrines of the Church of 
 Rome are summarised in the canons and decrees 
 of the Council of Trent. The Creed of Pope Pius IV., 
 which embodies these, was promulgated after the 
 close of that Council in a papal Bull, dated November, 
 and published December 9, 1564. 
 
 2. The General Council, long demanded by the 
 
8 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 Reformers, and insisted on by the Emperor Charles 
 V., was convened by a Bull of Pope Paul III., issued 
 June, 1542. 
 
 Its first session was held at Trent in the Tyrol, 
 December 13, 1545, the papal legate presiding. 
 The Council lasted eighteen years, its sessions having 
 been often interrupted. Henry VIII. was king of 
 England when the Council began ; Elizabeth had been 
 several years queen ere it terminated. The successive 
 popes of the period were : Paul III., Julius III. 
 (1549), Marcellus II. (iSSS). Paul IV - i^SS\ pius 
 
 IV. (1559). The Council held sessions in 1546 and 
 1547. Its place of meeting was transferred to Bologna, 
 where 3 sittings were held under Paul III. in March, 
 1547, the pope being then on bad terms with Charles 
 
 V. It was prorogued on September 14. It resumed 
 its sessions in 1551, Julius III. being pope, when it 
 was held at Trent; it was suspended on April 28, 
 1552, but resummoned by Pius IV. in 1560. It did 
 not however meet till January, 1562, nor begin serious 
 work till the July of that year. Nine sessions were 
 held during Pius IV. 's pontificate. The 25th ses- 
 sion, or last session, was held December 3, 1563. 
 The canons and decrees of the Council were confirmed 
 by a papal Bull issued February, 1564. 
 
 3. Many of the doctrines defined by the Council 
 of Trent had been taught in the Church of Rome for 
 centuries prior to that date, but were rejected as un- 
 scriptural additions to the ancient creeds by the re- 
 formers of the sixteenth century. Their protest was 
 embodied in various confessions, some issued before 
 the close of the Council. The Confession of Augsburg 
 {Confess. Augustand) was drawn up in 1530, and the 
 
THE RULE OF FAITH 9 
 
 Apology by Melanchthon, somewhat later; the Articles 
 of Smalcald were written by Luther in 1537, and 
 the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England 
 received their final shape in 1562. 
 
 4. The Catechism of the Council of Trent was issued 
 in 1566, by Pope Pius V. The drawing up of that 
 Catechism had been approved of in the 24th session 
 (cap. vii.), and in the 25th session (in the Continuatio) 
 is mentioned as committed to the care of certain 
 fathers. On some points the Catechism defines more 
 distinctly the doctrines set forth in general terms in 
 the decrees of the Council. For example, its language 
 is more decided on Limbus Patrum and the dignity 
 of the pope. That Catechism is an authoritative 
 exposition of the doctrines of the Roman Church. 
 Authorised translations have been published in many 
 vernacular languages of Europe. 
 
 § 2. Subsequent Additions to the Roman 
 Creed. Since the close of the Council of Trent 
 the Roman Catholic Church has accepted as an 
 article of faith the dogma of the Immaculate Con- 
 ception, decreed by Bull of Pius IX., December 8, 
 1854. The Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff was 
 decreed by the Vatican Council, April 24, 1870. 
 
 § 3. The Roman Rule of Faith — Scripture 
 and Tradition. 1. The first important question 
 in controversy with Rome is the rule of faith, or what 
 is the ultimate criterion by which doctrines should be 
 tested, in order that their truth or falsity may be fully 
 established. 
 
 2. The teaching of the Church of Rome on this 
 head is set forth in the Creed of Pope Pius IV. : 
 ' (i.) I most steadfastly admit and embrace the 
 
IO ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 apostolical and ecclesiastical traditions, and the other 
 observances and constitutions of the same Church, 
 (ii.) I also admit sacred Scripture, according to that 
 sense which Holy Mother Church has held and does 
 hold, whose right it is to judge of the true sense and 
 interpretation of the sacred Scriptures ; nor will I 
 ever take and interpret them, unless according to the 
 unanimous consent of the Fathers.' 1 
 
 3. Traditions are here divided into two classes : 
 first, apostolical, which mainly concern doctrine 
 asserted to be handed down from Christ and His 
 apostles ; and secondly, ecclesiastical traditions, which 
 relate to the rites and ceremonies of the Church. 2 
 
 ' Dr. Salmon, in his invaluable work on 'ITie Infallibility of 
 the Church, 2nd ed., London, Murray, 1890, chap. viii. p. 128, 
 observes that this is a ' monstrous distortion of the words of the 
 Council of Trent, and, if understood literally, amounts to a 
 promise not to interpret the Scriptures at all ; since, in the vast 
 majority of cases, where difference of opinion is possible, any one 
 who waits to interpret until he gets a unanimous consent of the 
 Fathers to guide him may wait till Doomsday. The Vatican 
 Council, to prevent misunderstanding of the meaning of this 
 decree of Trent, renewed it in nearly the same words as those 
 of the former Council.' 
 
 The decree of the Vatican Council (April 24, 1870) referred 
 to by Dr. Salmon, is : ' But since what the Holy Synod of Trent 
 wisely decreed concerning the interpretation of Holy Scripture 
 lor the purpose of restraining perverse intellects has been 
 wrongly expounded by some, we, renewing that decree, declare 
 that this is its meaning, that in matters of faith and morals 
 pertaining to the building up of Christian doctrine, that is to be 
 regarded as the true sense of sacred Scripture which Holy Mother 
 Church has held and holds (which has the right to judge about 
 the true sense and interpretation of the Holy Scriptures), and 
 therefore no one may interpret that Holy Scripture contrary to 
 that sense, or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the 
 Fathers.' 
 
 8 See note on p. 17. One saying of our Lord, quoted by 
 St. Paul (Acts xx. 35), must have been handed down by tradition. 
 St. John says that Christ did many things which are not re- 
 corded (John xxi. 25). The statements contained in John ii. 
 
THE RUI-E OF FAITH II 
 
 §4. The Scripture as the Sole Rule of 
 Faith. When it is affirmed that the Holy Scriptures 
 are the sole authoritative , rule of faith and practice 
 for Christians, by Christians are meant Christians in 
 times after the completion of the New Testament 
 canon. In apostolic days instruction in Christianity 
 was necessarily imparted by word of mouth. In 
 carrying on missionary work to-day among nations 
 into whose language the Bible has not been translated, 
 instruction must necessarily be oral, as well as when 
 teaching persons unacquainted with the Scriptures. 
 But those who listened to apostolic preaching were 
 not left without a test whereby they might 'try the 
 doctrine, whether it was of God or not.' God bore 
 witness to the apostles' teaching, 'both with signs, 
 and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of 
 the Holy Ghost, according to His own will ' (Heb. ii. 
 
 1 1 and iv. 54 exclude the possibility of miracles of our Lord 
 prior to His public ministry. The stories therefore recorded in 
 the apocryphal gospels are unworthy of credit. Isolated sayings 
 of our Lord may however have been preserved, although the 
 evidence of the Patristic writings in favour of any such sayings 
 is slight. Dr. Salmon states that, 'for any saying, or action, or 
 doctrine of our Lord, not contained in the Bible, there really is 
 not so much evidence as the editor of a respectable newspaper 
 requires before he admits an announcement info his columns' (in- 
 fallibility jyf the Church, p. 1351. The English reader who wishes 
 to satisfy his curiosity may consult a little work entitled Sayings 
 ascribed to our Lord by the Fathers and other Primitive Writers, 
 and Incidents in His Life narrated by them, otherwise than 
 found in Scripture. By John Theodore Dodd, B.A., late 
 Junior Student of Christ Church. Oxford and London: James 
 Parker & Co., 1874. The untrustworthy character of ' tradi- 
 tion,' and the truth of the old adage ' a story never loses in the 
 carrying,' is abundantly exemplified in the quotations given in 
 that little volume. The great work however on the subject 
 is Agrapha, aussercanonische Evangelienfragmente gesammelt 
 und untersucht von Alfred Resch, 1889, in the 5th vol. of von 
 Gebhardt and Adolf Harnack's Texte und Untersuchungcn. 
 
12 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 4). Notwithstanding those external signs and miracles 
 the apostles everywhere appealed in proof of their 
 doctrines to the Old Testament. The Jews were 
 able to consult those Scriptures in their original 
 language; while the Gentiles were acquainted with 
 the Greek translation known as the Septuagint (or 
 ' LXX.'). The people of Berea (in Macedonia) are 
 commended as 'more noble than those in Thessalo- 
 nica, in that they received the word (preached by 
 Paul and Silas) with all readiness of mind, and 
 searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things 
 were so' (Acts xvii. 11). 
 
 § 5. Our Lord's Appeal to the Old Testament 
 Scriptures. Our Lord repelled the temptations 
 of Satan by appeals to Scripture. When Satan 
 quoted Scripture against Him, He exposed the untruth 
 by an appeal to the written Word (Matt. iv. 1-10; 
 Luke iv. 1-12). He referred the Jews to the 
 Scriptures ; He reproved the Sadducees in the words : 
 ' Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures ' (Matt xxii. 
 29). After His resurrection, ' beginning at Moses and 
 all the prophets, He expounded unto them (Cleopas 
 and his fellow-disciple) in all the Scriptures the 
 things concerning Himself (Luke xxiv. 27). He 
 said : ' Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye 
 have eternal life' (John v. 39). The Revised Version 
 is substantially the same : ' Ye search the Scriptures 
 because ye think that in them ye have eternal life ; 
 and these are they which bear witness of Me.' 
 
 § 6. The Appeal to the Scriptures by the 
 Apostles and First Teachers. The apostles 
 and teachers mentioned in the Acts followed the 
 example of their Master. Peter cited Old Testament 
 
THE RULE OF FAITH 1 3 
 
 Scripture when urging the appointment of a successor 
 in place of Judas (Acts i. 20). He appealed to 
 Scripture in explanation of the signs on the Day of 
 Pentecost (Acts ii. 14 ff.), and in proof of our Lord's 
 resurrection (vv. 30-36), and in explaining Christ's 
 sufferings (Acts iii. 18). From Scripture he proved 
 that Christ was the Prophet predicted by Moses (v. 22), 
 and the source of blessing (vv. 25, 26). The prayer 
 of the apostles (Acts iv. 14 ff.) abounds with Old 
 Testament quotations. Stephen's defence is a sketch 
 of Old Testament history (Acts vii.). Philip ex- 
 pounded Isaiah liii. of the suffering Redeemer (Acts 
 viii. 32 ff.). Peter in the house of Cornelius appealed 
 to the Old Testament prophets (Acts x. 43). Paul 
 did the same when addressing the Jews in Antioch 
 in Pisidia. The latter affirmed that the Jews ' that 
 dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they 
 knew Him (Christ) not, nor yet the voices of the 
 prophets which are read every sabbath day, fulfilled 
 them by condemning Him ' (Acts xiii. 27). The Old 
 Testament Scriptures were constantly appealed to in 
 the Council at Jerusalem (Acts xv.) Paul reasoned 
 out of them at Thessalonica ( Acts xvii. 2, 3), at Corinth 
 (Acts xviii. 4, s), before Felix (Acts xxiv. 14), and 
 Agrippa (Acts xxvi. 22, 23, 27), and the Jews at 
 Rome (Acts xxviii. 23). 
 
 § 7. Apostolic Practice a continuation of 
 Old Testament Practice. Such was apostolic 
 practice. It was a continuation of the Old Testament 
 practice. God commanded Moses to teach His 
 statutes and judgments unto all the people of Israel. 
 There was much in those commandments not easy to 
 be understood, but all, young and old, were to hear 
 
14 kOMAM CATHOLICISM 
 
 the law. Though a priesthood appointed by Divine 
 authority was in existence, the priests were not the 
 sole interpreters of the Divine Law. The command- 
 ments which God revealed were to be made known 
 to all (Deut. vi. 7-9). The priests were to 'read 
 this law before all Israel.' ' Men, and women, and 
 children, and thy stranger that is within thy gates' 
 were to hear and learn (Deut xxxi. 12, 13). The 
 priests and Levites were to teach the people (Lev. 
 x. ir ; Mai. ii. 7, 8). Similar directions were given 
 to Joshua (Josh. i. 8), and obeyed by him (Josh. viii. 
 35). That commandment, however, was from time to 
 time forgotten or disobeyed. The priests and Levites 
 frequently departed from the faith, and led the people 
 into idolatry. But the prophets betimes recalled 
 the people ' to the law and to the testimony : if they 
 speak not according to this word, it is because 
 there is no light in them ' (Isa. viii. 20). Therefore 
 when the Jews returned from captivity, ' Ezra the 
 priest brought the law before the congregation both 
 of men and women,' and read it from the morning 
 until midday, ' and the ears of all the people were 
 attentive unto the book of the law ' (Neh. viii. 2, 3). 
 
 § 8. The Scriptures intended for the per- 
 usal of all. All the books of the New Testament 
 abound with references to the Old Testament. The 
 several books of the New Testament were written not 
 only to instruct teachers, but all believers (see John 
 xx. 31). See St. Luke's preface (Luke i. 4). Every 
 one of Paul's Epistles was intended for general 
 perusal (com p. also 1 Thess. v. 27; Col. iv. 16), 
 although containing 'things hard to be understood,' 
 which could be wrested to an individual's own de- 
 
THE RULE OF FAITH i5 
 
 struction (2 Pet. iii. 15, 16). A special blessing is 
 pronounced on students of the Revelation (Rev. i. 3 ; 
 comp. xxii. 10, 18, 19). Old Testament Scriptures 
 ' were written for our learning ' (Rom. xv. 4), given 
 'by inspiration of God ' (2 Tim. iii. 16), and intended 
 to be ' a light shining in a dark place ' (2 Pet. i. 19). 
 The Psalmists speak of the value of what they knew of 
 God's Word (see Ps. xix. 7, and specially Ps. cxix.). 
 Our Lord endorses the same truth (Luke xvi. 29, 31) 
 James speaks of ' the engrafted word, which is able 
 to save your souls' (Jas. i. 21). John warns believers 
 not to believe every spirit, but to 'try the spirits 
 whether they are of God : because many false 
 prophets are gone out into the world ' (1 John iv. 1) ; 
 while Paul affirms the gospel to be unchangeable ; and 
 'though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any 
 gospel other than that which we have preached unto 
 you, let him be accursed ' (Gal. i. 8, R.V.). 
 
 § 9. Tradition not a Co-ordinate Authority. 
 1. Our Lord reproved the Jews for 'transgressing the 
 commandments of God by their traditions,' and even 
 proper practices, such as washing before meat, were 
 condemned when followed superstitiously (Matt. xv. 
 3). 'In vain do they worship Me, teaching for 
 doctrines the commandments of men ' (Mark vii. 7 ; 
 see also w. 8, 9). They made ' the word of God of 
 none effect through their tradition' (Mark vii. 13). 
 Paul warned against 'the tradition of men' (Col. ii. 8), 
 as tending to spoil and damage the Church. He 
 exhorted Titus not to give heed to ' Jewish fables and 
 commandments of men ' (Titus i. 14). And although 
 he urged the Thessalonians to ' hold the traditions 
 which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our 
 
1 6 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 epistle ' (2 Thess. ii. 15), he there refers not to oral 
 traditions but to his own sermons (see 2 Thess. iii. 6). 
 
 2. Irenzeus, who lived in the second century 
 (Against Heresies, book iii. chap. iv. 1, and chap. v. 1), 
 calls the common doctrines of Christianity the apos- 
 tolical ' tradition.' Cyprian (Epist. lxii.), urging the 
 use of wine in the Lord's Supper, says he maintains 
 'the plan of evangelical truth and of the tradition of 
 the Lord.' And {Epist. lxxiii.) he asks about the 
 baptism of heretics: 'Whence is that tradition? 
 Whether does it descend from the authority of the 
 Lord and of the gospel, or does it come from the 
 commands and the Epistles of the apostles ? ' The 
 Fathers therefore understood by ' tradition ' whatever 
 was contained in the New Testament. The writings 
 of the New Testament contain the only authentic 
 traditions of the first century, and must be appealed to 
 in proof of the doctrines, teachings, and practices of 
 our Lord and His apostles. 
 
 § 10. Unreliability of Tradition. Of the 
 unreliability of tradition as a source of information, 
 whether as regards doctrine or fact, we may give the 
 following illustrations. Few will admit that the 
 following account of our Lord's teaching can be 
 correct, though handed down by Papias, a hearer 
 of St John: 'The days will come in which vines 
 shall grow, having each ten thousand branches, and 
 in each branch ten thousand twigs, and in each true 
 twig ten thousand shoots, and in every one of the 
 shoots ten thousand clusters, and on every one of the 
 clusters ten thousand grapes, and every grape, when 
 pressed, will give twenty-four measures of wine.' 
 Papias relates how Judas was crushed by a chariot, 
 
THE RULE OF FAITH 17 
 
 so that his bowels gushed out. Justin Martyr informs 
 us, on the authority of tradition, that when the Lord 
 stepped into the water of Jordan to be baptized by 
 John, a fire was kindled in the Jordan. The apocry- 
 phal gospels of a later age relate numerous miracles of 
 Christ in infancy and boyhood, contrary to John ii. n. 
 
 § 11. The Result of the Roman Rule of 
 Faith tends to make the people absolutely depen- 
 dent on the teaching of their priest. Her ' rule of 
 faith ' is enormous, embracing all the decrees of 
 church councils, papal Bulls, and writings of the 
 Fathers. 1 Consequently with such a rule people 
 must depend entirely on their priests, notwithstand- 
 ing St. Paul's warning concerning the clergy (Acts 
 xx. 30), and St. Peter's prophecy that false teachers 
 should bring in 'privily' damnable heresies (2 Pet. 
 ii. 1). The Church Fathers differed widely in opinion 
 even as to the meaning of Matthew xvi. 18, which 
 is believed by Rome to be of such vital importance. 
 (See p. 86 ff.). 
 
 § 12. The Apocryphal Books of the Old 
 Testament. 1. The following books, termed 
 Apocrypha, probably hidden, or concealed, were in- 
 cluded by the Council of Trent among the canonical 
 
 1 Dr. Salmon remarks : ' The Abbe Migne, in the prospectus 
 to his edition of the Fathers, tells us, in capital letters, that out 
 of the innumerable works which constitute the Catholic 
 Tradition, he has formed one unique and admirable work. 
 . . . And what is the size of this convenient compilation ? 
 The Latin Fathers form two hundred and twenty-two thick 
 volumes; the Greek, one hundred and sixty-seven. But this is 
 only Fathers. If you want the proceedings of Councils, the 
 decrees of Popes, etc., you must search for them elsewhere. 
 And then, when we search for apostolical traditions in the 
 writings of the Fathers, there is nothing to mark their apostolic 
 origin.' Infallibility of the Church, p. 131. 
 
 B 
 
1 8 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 books of the Old Testament : (i) Tobit, (t) Judith, 
 (3) Wisdom, (4) Jesus the Son of Sirach, or Ecclesi- 
 asticus, (5) Baruch, (6) 1 Maccabees, (7) 2 Maccabees, 
 
 (8) The additions to the Book of Esther, termed, in 
 the English editions of the Apocrypha, ' The rest of 
 the Book of Esther,' are found in the Vulgate and in 
 the Douay version incorporated in various places of 
 that book, as in the Greek LXX. version. Similarly 
 
 (9) the three small books in the English Apocrypha, 
 The Song of the Three Children, The Story of 
 Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon, are in the Vulgate 
 incorporated into Daniel. Three other books in the 
 English Apocrypha, namely, (1) The Prayer of Man- 
 asseh, (2) Third Esdras, and (3) Fourth Esdras, were 
 not regarded as canonical by the Council of Trent, but 
 were appended to the Latin Vulgate to prevent their 
 being lost, because they are cited by some of the 
 Fathers, and are to be found in some old Latin 
 printed Bibles and in some MSS. These three books 
 are not in the Douay version. 
 
 2. The books of Tobit, Judith, Jesus the Son of 
 Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus, 1 Maccabees, and possibly 
 Baruch, were probably composed in Hebrew or 
 Aramaic. Only fragments remain of such originals. 
 The books as a whole are only extant in Greek. All 
 the other books mentioned above were composed 
 originally in Greek. Not one of them was acknow- 
 ledged as canonical by the Jews, nor are they quoted 
 as Scripture in the writings of the New Testament, 
 although the Greek language of the New Testament 
 has been considerably influenced by them. 
 
 3. The apocryphal books are not of great impor- 
 tance in the Roman Catholic controversy. The Book 
 
THE RULE OF FAITH 1 9 
 
 of Tobit however supports the doctrine of justifi- 
 cation by works, and the intercession of angels. 
 2 Maccabees xii. contains the great proof passage in 
 favour of prayers for the dead. But see p. 144. 
 
 § 13. The Bible and the Authority of the 
 Church. The Bible does not rest upon the 
 authority of the Church as a Church. The testi- 
 mony of early writers is of importance to prove that 
 the books of the New Testament were in existence 
 in their day, and at an earlier period. The New 
 Testament books were the work of individuals moved 
 by the Spirit of the living God, and were written under 
 various circumstances and emergencies. They were 
 not written at the suggestion of ' the Church,' and do 
 not refer to any such body as having authority. The 
 corporate Church did not endorse by its acts those 
 books when written, nor separate books that were 
 inspired from those which were not. The books were 
 accepted by individuals and by individual churches 
 on the authority of their several writers. St. Luke 
 speaks in his preface Of other writings narrating our 
 Lord's acts (Lukei. 1), and mentions his special object 
 in writing (Luke i. 3, 4). But Luke does not speak 
 of his Gospel as set forth by Church authority. Itb 
 credibility was sufficiently established by having been 
 written by one who had received the Holy Spirit, and 
 who had been a chosen companion of St. Paul. 
 Some books of the New Testament are known as 
 antilegomena. Those books, namely, James, Jude, 
 2 and 3 John, and 2 Peter, were not for various causes 
 at first universally accepted. This is a proof that 
 the Church as a corporate body did not in the primi- 
 tive ages prononnce such decisions. It did not set 
 
20 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 forth a list of inspired books. Such a list was first 
 issued by the third Council of Carthage (which was 
 not a General Council) a.d. 397. Its decree was not 
 confirmed until the (Trullan) Council of Constanti- 
 nople (a.d. 692) accepted it in the name of the 
 Eastern Church, and the next Council which took up 
 the subject was that of Trent. 'The acceptance' 
 (as Prof. Charteris remarks in his work on Canonicity) 
 ' of a canon of the New Testament does not rest on 
 the authority of the corporate Church.' The books 
 of the Old Testament were endorsed by our Lord 
 and His apostles as inspired Scripture. It was not 
 until several centuries after the Christian era that even 
 the Jewish Church as a corporate body drew up any 
 canon of Scripture. 
 
 § 14. No Infallible Interpreter required. 
 There was no infallible interpreter of the Old Testa- 
 ment Scriptures. The Jewish Church never put 
 forward such a claim. The general teachings of the 
 Old Testament Scriptures were plain enough for 
 all who desired to know God's will. In New Testa- 
 ment times the help of the Holy Ghost is promised 
 to individuals to guide them into all necessary truth 
 (1 John ii. 27). No promise was specially given to 
 teachers, who in all ages have frequently been 
 unspiritual men (1 Cor. ii. 13-15). But God's Word 
 is a light which shineth in darkness, although 'the 
 darkness comprehendeth it not ' (John i. 5 ; comp. 
 2 Pet. i. 19). Prophecy of olden time did not come 
 through private interpretation of the prophets con- 
 cerning 'the signs of the times,' but 'holy men of 
 God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost' 
 (2 Pet. L 20, 21). 
 
THE RULE OF FAITH 21 
 
 'The Church of the living God' (composed of those 
 who truly follow God) is described by St. Paul as 
 'a pillar and ground of the truth' (i Tim. iii. 15), 
 because that Church maintains the truth in this world. 
 Wherever such followers of Christ exist, the truth has 
 a pillar to support it, and an assured position in a 
 world of sin. True Christians are soldiers who de- 
 fend God's cause and uphold His honour. 
 
 § 15. Truths common to the Church of 
 Rome and other Churches. The present work 
 professes to deal only with those doctrines on which 
 Rome differs from other Christian Churches. But it 
 should be noted that the Three Creeds, commonly 
 known as the Apostles', the Nicene and the Athan- 
 asian, which ' may be proved by most certain war- 
 rants of Holy Scripture,' contain a large body of 
 doctrine held both by Rome and the Reformed 
 Churches. Several important doctrines, not explicitly 
 taught in those Creeds, but deduced therefrom, are 
 also held by the Church of Rome : e.g., the doctrine 
 of the Atonement, and the Divine Inspiration of Holy 
 Scripture. On many points, however, truths set forth 
 in the ancient Creeds are much obscured, if not 
 wholly set aside, by the novel doctrines which Rome 
 has added to the ancient Catholic faith. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 THE CHURCH : ITS AUTHORITY AND ORGANIZATION 
 
 § I. What is the Church ? i. The Greek 
 word ecclesia, or cliurch, means an assembly called 
 together. Classical writers employ the word to 
 denote assemblies summoned by the public crier, 
 like those of the citizens of Athens. It is used in 
 the Acts both of a tumultuous * assembly ' (Acts 
 xix. 32-40) and of an 'assembly' lawfully convened 
 for public business (Acts xix. 39). The Old Testa- 
 ment equivalent is ' congregation,' and the Old 
 Testament Church is called the 'Church' in Acts 
 vii. 38, Hebrews ii. 12. The Church in its highest 
 conception is an ideal body (compare the common 
 expressions, the ' English nation,' the ' French 
 nation '). Although ever ideally complete, it is 
 constantly added to, and will not be complete until 
 the day of Christ. 
 
 2. The Church therefore, in its higher sense, 
 consists of persons who have accepted the Divine call 
 to repentance and faith. They are 'sanctified in 
 Christ Jesus, called to be saints ' (1 Cor. L 2), 'washed' 
 and 'justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by 
 the Spirit of our God' (1 Cor. vi. n). They are 
 members of the body of which Christ is the Head 
 (Col. i. 18 ; Eph. i. 22, 23 ; Rom. xii. 5 ; comp. 
 
THE CHURCH 23 
 
 Gal. iii. 26-29), the flock of Christ (John x.), 'the 
 Church of the firstborn which are written in heaven ' 
 (Heb. xii. 23). They are the ' children of God,' who 
 do not live in sin (1 John iii. 9, 10) although not 
 sinless (1 John i. 6-10), are 'born of God ' and 
 ' overcome the world ' (1 John v. 4), having been 
 ' born of incorruptible seed' (1 Pet. i. 23). 
 
 3. As men are classed according to profession, the 
 name Church signifies an assembly of persons who 
 profess faith in Christ, and walk according to the 
 gospel rule (Acts ii. 47, v. 11, xii. 1, xv. 3, 22, 
 xx. 28; 1 Cor. i. 2, x. 32). Individual churches 
 are mentioned, as the seven churches in Asia 
 (Rev. i. 4, 11, etc.), churches of Galatia and Asia 
 (1 Cor. xvi. 1, 19), and churches held in private 
 houses (Rom. xvi. 5 ; Col. iv. 15), etc. 
 
 4. In Old Testament times there was ' Israel after 
 the flesh' (1 Cor. x. 18), and ' Israel after the Spirit ' 
 (Rom. ix. 6-8 ; Gal. iv. 29, vi. 16) ; the outer Israel, 
 sometimes apostate, and the faithful few unknown 
 (comp. Rom. xi. 2-5). A visible Church of Christ is 
 like the 'net cast into the sea which gathered of every 
 kind' (Matt. xiii. 47-49), 'the field' in which both 
 good seed and tares are sown (Matt. xiii. 24-30). 
 The invisible Church is like leaven working till all be 
 leavened (Luke xiii. 20, 21). In Revelation xi. 1, 2 
 the Church in its highest sense is represented by the 
 inner parts of the temple (vaos) of God, while the outer 
 courts are trodden under foot of the Gentiles. The 
 expression va.6% is always used figuratively in the 
 New Testament, (a) of Christ's own human body 
 (John ii. 19, 21), (b) of the Church of Christ, visible 
 pr invisible (1 Cor. iii. 16, 17, vi. 19; 2 Cor. vi. 16 j 
 
24 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 Eph. ii. 2 1 ; 2 Thess. ii. 3, 4, the only disputed 
 passage; Rev. iii. 12, xi. 1, 2). The material temple 
 at Jerusalem is always termed by another word 
 (lepov). The Church is called ' the house of God ' 
 (1 Tim. iii. 15; 2 Tim. ii. 20; Heb. x. 21; 
 1 Pet iv. 17). 
 
 § 2. The Marks of the Church according to 
 the Roman theory. 1. The marks or notes of 
 the Church, according to the Roman theory, are four. 
 (1) Unity, under which head is meant unity ot faith 
 and worship, under one visible chief, the Pope of 
 Rome ; (2) holiness ; (3) catholicity ; (4) apostolicity. 
 
 2. Unity. The unity of the Church is mainly 
 invisible. True Christians must have ' repentance 
 toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ' 
 (Acts xx. 21). They are taught of the Spirit 
 (1 John ii. 20, 27), by which they are born again, 
 and led to strive after a likeness to Christ (1 John 
 ii. 13, 14). True believers are children of God, 'one 
 family,' though often ignorant of one another's adop- 
 tion into that family. They have one Father, one 
 way of salvation, and one eternal home. They have 
 connection with one another as parts of the same body 
 (1 Cor. xii.), and are united together by joints and 
 bands (Col. ii. 19), even though they know it not. 
 The weakness of any members, though unknown to 
 the rest, is a hindrance to the health and usefulness 
 of the general body. Such is the unity spoken of 
 Ephesians iv. 2-7. That unity Christ prayed for 
 (John xvii.), and, wherever and whenever it is ex- 
 hibited, it has an effect upon the world (John xvii. 
 21), in which Christians are seen as lights iu the 
 world (Phil. ii. 15, 16, R.V.). 
 
THE CHURCH 25 
 
 3. Holiness. The Roman theory ascribes holiness 
 to the Church as a corporation, asserting that it 
 teaches holy doctrine, offers the means of obtaining 
 holiness, and includes within its pale holy people. 
 But the doctrines of Rome are not holy ; she teaches 
 erroneous doctrines, which have been added one after 
 another to the creed of the primitive Church. The 
 unholy lives of many of her popes and clergy can be 
 abundantly proved by history. 1 And although there 
 have been holy people within her, the same can be 
 said of Israel in the darkest days of apostasy (1 Kings 
 xviii. 18 in the light of Rom. xi. 2-4). The holiness 
 spoken of in the New Testament is a real, not merely 
 an ideal holiness (Rom. viii. 5-9; 1 Cor. vi. 11; 
 Gal. v. 19-24). 
 
 4. Catholicity. The word ' catholic ' is found no- 
 where in Scripture. Roman theologians mean by the 
 term ' universal, spreading its jurisdiction throughout 
 
 1 It is sufficient to refer to the words of the Roman Catholic 
 historian Baronius, in his account of the tenth century : ' What 
 execrable and abominable things the sacred Apostolic See, upon 
 whose hinge the universal Catholic Church turns, has been 
 compelled to suffer 1 O shame 1 O grief ! how many monsters, 
 horrible to be seen, were intruded by secular princes into that 
 seat which is to be reverenced by angels ; how many tragedies 
 were consummated ; with what filth was it her fate to be 
 spattered, who was herself without spot or wrinkle ; with what 
 stench to be infected ; with what loathsome impurities to be 
 defiled, and by those to be blackened with perpetual infamy ! ' 
 The same historian writes (Ann. 912) : ' What was then the 
 face of the Holy Roman Church ! How most foul, when harlots, 
 at once most powerful and most base, ruled at Rome, at whose 
 will sees were changed, bishops were presented, and — what 
 is horrible to hear and unutterable— pseudo-bishops, their 
 paramours, were intruded into the See of St. Peter, who are 
 enrolled in the catalogue of Roman pontiffs only for the sake of 
 marking the times.' — Quoted by Dr. Salmon in his Infallibility 
 of the Church, p. 103. 
 
26 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 all nations.' But no such church is in existence. 
 The Russian, Greek, and Oriental Churches utterly 
 refuse the jurisdiction of Rome, as do all the Pro- 
 testant Churches. The commission given to the 
 Church, or believers in Christ, by the Lord Himself 
 was, that they should preach the gospel to all nations 
 (Matt, xxviii. 19, 20); and when the apostles tarried 
 too long in Jerusalem, persecution broke out in the 
 city, and ' they that were scattered abroad went 
 everywhere preaching the word ' (Acts viii. 4) without 
 any formal commission from the apostles (Acts xi. 
 19-21). The well-known maxim of Vincent of 
 Lirinum (a monk and priest who died a.d. 450), that 
 the orthodox and catholic faith is that which has 
 been ' everywhere, always, and. by all believed' ('quod 
 ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum 
 est'), is a delusion. The consent of all {consensus 
 omnium) is explained by Vincent of Lirinum to be 
 the consent of the majority of the clergy. But even 
 such a consent cannot be shown. On important 
 matters like free-will, the atonement, the authority of 
 the clergy, the sacraments, and the way of salvation, 
 great diversities of opinion have existed even among 
 the Fathers. The Catholic Church in the evangelical 
 sense is 'the general assembly and church of the 
 firstborn who are enrolled in heaven' (Heb. xii. 23). 
 
 5. Apostolicity. Roman Catholic theologians de- 
 fine ' apostolicity ' to mean a Church founded by 
 the apostles, possessing an unbroken succession of 
 pastors from apostolic times, rightly ordained, lawfully 
 sent, and teaching apostolic doctrine. This theory 
 of apostolic succession is historically invalidated by 
 the fact§ set forth (p. 32 ff.). It is invalidated too by 
 
THE CHURCH 27 
 
 the Roman doctrine concerning intention. For the 
 Council of Trent affirms under an anathema that in 
 the administration of any of the sacraments, which, 
 according to Roman theory, includes Orders, ' the 
 intention is required at least of doing that which 
 the Church does.' But it is impossible to prove in 
 every case that the priests who baptized, or the 
 bishops who ordained, had in every case such in- 
 tention. It is admitted that there were heretics and 
 unbelievers in their ranks, and any lapse of intention 
 anywhere would vitiate more or less the whole suc- 
 cession. The doctrine of intention (affirmed in Condi. 
 Trid., session vii. can. xi. de sacrameniis in genere) 
 renders every clerical act for past centuries uncertain, 
 and makes the salvation of Roman Catholics, accord- 
 ing to their own principles, a matter of doubt and 
 uncertainty. Who can be certain of the intentions of 
 the hundreds and thousands of priests who formed 
 the links in that long chain ? The apostolicity of a 
 church as regards doctrine can be easily tested by 
 an appeal to the apostolic writings, and no further 
 apostolicity can be affirmed on any evidence deserv- 
 ing of the name. Observe also that if the Church 
 be said to be built upon the foundation of the 
 apostles, it is equally built upon the foundation of 
 the prophets (Eph. ii. 20). But there was no pro- 
 phetic ' succession ' in the sense in which ' apostolical 
 succession ' is asserted. 
 
 § 3. The Church of Israel fallible though 
 Divinely organized. The Church of Israel con- 
 stantly fell into idolatry, the priests ever leading the 
 way. Yet that Old Testament Church was composed 
 of a nation specially called by God. Its high priest, 
 
2b ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 priests, and Levites were organized by God with a 
 regular succession, and with an authority to teach re- 
 cognised by Christ Himself (Matt, xxiii. 1-3). The 
 duties of each of its three orders were duly defined in 
 the Books of Moses, and none dared to intrude into 
 the other's office without peril. Israel had the law 
 of the Ten Commandments, given by God Himself 
 amid the thunders of Sinai, and the law of ceremonies, 
 given, probably through the intervention of angels, 
 to Moses when alone. That Church had again and 
 again to be corrected by prophets, sometimes, like 
 Elisha (1 Kings xix. 19) and Amos (Amos i. 1, vii. 
 '■14, 15), raised up from the common people. Thosei 
 prophets were often compelled to oppose the divinely- 
 appointed priesthood. By the solemn decision of 
 the Jewish Church Christ was condemned to death 
 for blasphemy. 
 
 § 4. The Church of Christ not constituted 
 like that of Israel. The Church of the New 
 Testament was not similarly constituted. It was 
 founded indeed on Christ. The stone which was set 
 at nought by the builders has been made the head 
 of the corner (Matt. xxi. 42; Acts iv. n, 12; 
 r Pet. ii. 8, 9), and placed as the foundation of 
 the Church (1 Cor. iii. 11). Apostles, by preaching 
 Christ and Him crucified, and prophets, by their 
 predictions, made Christ the foundation (Eph. ii. 
 19-22); and hence the apostles' names are mentioned 
 as in the twelve foundations (Rev. xxi. 14). But there 
 is no New Testament priesthood (save that of 
 Christ); no 'succession' is mentioned, there is no 
 book of the New Testament like Leviticus, in which 
 special duties are assigned to Church officers. The 
 
THE CHURCH 20, 
 
 importance of the apostles arose from their personal 
 connection with Christ (comp. Peter's words in Acts 
 i. 2i, 22). The Church's offices were derived from 
 the synagogue, and not from the Temple arrangements. 
 
 § 5. False Teachers Predicted. Christ pre- 
 dicted false teachers (Matt. vii. 15-20, xxiv. 23, 24). 
 St. Peter says that false teachers would arise in the 
 same way as the false prophets in Israel (2 Pet. 
 ii. 1, 2, iii. 1-4, 18). The Church of Rome was 
 specially warned against apostasy (Rom. xi. 20-22). 
 The Churches of Galatia apostatized for a season 
 (Gal. i. 6, 7). Jude gives similar warnings (vv. 3, 
 4, 5, 17, 18). Christ, in the visions of St. John, 
 warns the Church of Ephesus (Rev. ii. 5), of Per- 
 gamos (Rev. ii. 14-16), of Thyatira (Rev. ii. 21-23), 
 of Sardis (Rev. iii. 3), of Laodicea (Rev. iii. 16, 17). 
 Paul predicts the apostasy (Acts xx. 28-31 ; 2 Thess. 
 ii. 3-1 1). Warnings are addressed to the Church 
 of Corinth (1 Corinthians x. 1-13). Similar warnings 
 are found in 1 Timothy iv. 1-4 ; 2 Timothy iii. 
 1-9, iv. 1-5; Heb. vi. 5-8, xii. 4, 5. St. John re- 
 iterates the warning against false teachers, whom he 
 terms 'the antichrist' (1 John ii. 18-24, iv. 1-3; 
 2 John 7, see R.V.). In the Book of Revelation he 
 distinctly prophesies a general world-wide apostasy 
 (Rev. xi., xiii. 7, 8, 14, 16, xvii. 6, 8). 
 
 § 6. No Infallibility or Indefectibility pro- 
 mised to the Church. Though the apostasy of 
 the Christian Church is distinctly predicted, there are 
 many promises of final preservation given to true be- 
 lievers in Christ. Such, e.g., are the promise of our 
 Lord (John x. 27-29), the promises in John xiv.-xvi., 
 those in His prayer John xvii., and that in Matthew 
 
30 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 xxviii. 20; the statements of St. Paul (Rom. viii. 35-39; 
 Phil. i. 6), Jude 24, and many others. But no promise 
 is made to the Church as a visible society, nor any 
 assurance given that the teachers of that Church are 
 to be preserved from error. The passage Matthew xvi. 
 18 has been grossly misinterpreted. The 'gates of 
 hell,' or, in the original Greek, 'gates of Hades' [i.e., 
 the unseen-world] are the gates of the grave* and the 
 promise there is that every one of Christ's people will 
 share in the resurrection glory depicted in 1 Corin- 
 thians xv. 54-56. That phrase is never employed in 
 the sense of the powers of darkness. Hence the in- 
 fallibility or indefectibility of the Church is not taught 
 in that passage, however widely spread such an in- 
 terpretation may be. 
 
 § 7. The Authority of the Visible Church. 
 1. Every church, like any other human society, has 
 the right to make its own rules, provided ' all things 
 be done decently and in order ' (1 Cor. xiv. 40). 
 Men have in many things to submit to the de- 
 cisions of the majority. And so in the churches of 
 God, as long as nothing contrary to God's Word be 
 
 1 ' The gates of the grave 'or 'of death * are mentioned in 
 Psalm ix. 13, cvii. 18 ; Job xxxviii. 17 ; and in Isaiah 
 xxxviii. 10. In the last-mentioned passage the LXX., or old 
 Greek version, use the phrase 'the gates of Hades,' as in 
 Matthew xvi. 18. In the other three passages that version 
 translates the Hebrew literally, 'gates of death.' 
 
 The phrase ' the gates of Hades ' is not found in any other 
 passage of the New Testament than Matthew xvi. 18. But it 
 occurs in Wisdom xvi. 13, where it is said of God, ' Thou hast 
 the power of life and death : Thou leadest to the gates of hell 
 (Hades) and bringest up again ' (comp. 1 Sam. ii. 6). It is 
 found also in 3 Maccabees v. 51, in the sense of ' the gates of 
 the grave. ' The phrase is used in no other sense in Biblical 
 literature. 
 
THE CHURCH 3 1 
 
 required, or human ordinances be insisted upon as 
 of Divine authority. Our Lord's directions to the 
 people touching the scribes and Pharisees (Matt, 
 xxiii. 2, 3) were qualified by warnings against their 
 traditions (see p. 15). There is no command in the 
 New Testament to submit to the authority of the 
 Church. 
 
 2. In the case of personal quarrels our Lord did 
 enjoin the offended person to endeavour to bring an 
 erring brother to reason by private expostulation ; 
 and, if expostulation failed, to repeat the same efforts 
 'before two or three witnesses,' that the offended 
 person's willingness to settle the matter might be made 
 clear. But if the offender continued still obdurate, the 
 injured person was to tell the matter to ' the Church,' 
 or the assembly of Christians to whom he belonged, 
 and if their efforts to arrange the difficulty were 
 rejected, the injured brother might, without any vio- 
 lation of Christian charity, act towards the offender 
 as one would in case of a quarrel with a heathen or 
 an oppressive publican or tax-gatherer. This is the 
 meaning of the text in Matthew xviii. 15-17. On 
 the power of binding and loosing see p. 81. Verses 
 19 and 20 must not be left out of sight, as the- 
 directions there given accord with the parallel direc- 
 tions of St. Paul in 1 Corinthians vi. 1-8. 
 
 3. The apostles always urged Christians to test 
 the doctrines taught to them (1 Thess. v. 21 ; 1 John 
 iv. 1). Faithful teachers who died in the faith were 
 to be lovingly remembered (Heb. xiii. 7, which refers 
 to teachers who were gone, see R.V.), but all 
 doctrines were to be tested (Heb. xiii. 9), while the 
 exhortation of living teachers was to be followed 
 
32 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 (Heb. xiii. 17) only so far as they set forth the 
 truth as it is in Jesus. 
 
 § 8. The Organization of the Church in 
 New Testament Times. 1. Some offices which 
 existed in apostolic times ('set in the Church' by 
 God) were so soon done away with that their names 
 only are known. Eight offices are mentioned in 
 1 Corinthians xii. 28; five in Ephesians iv. 11, 12. 
 The names or duties of the better known offices in 
 the Church were derived from the Synagogue, not 
 from the Temple. 
 
 2. These were (1) apostles, i.e., sent or delegated. The 
 Jews styled by that name representatives of the con- 
 gregation who led the prayers in the synagogue. 1 
 The term apostle in the New Testament is not con- 
 fined to the Twelve whom Christ named ' apostles ' 
 (Luke vi. 13). Barnabas is termed an apostle (Acts 
 xiv. 14). So are Silas and Timothy (comp. 1 Thess. 
 ii. 6 with i. 1). Andronicus and Junias were 'of 
 note among the apostles ' (Rom. xvi. 7). Apostles 
 of the churches are spoken of (2 Cor. viii. 23). The 
 apostles mentioned in 1 Cor. xv. 8 are not identical 
 with 'the twelve' in v. 5. 'False apostles' are 
 spoken of in 2 Corinthians xi. 13, 14, Revelation ii. 2. 
 The lately discovered work of early sub-apostolic 
 times, known as the Didachk, has cast much light 
 upon this point. Itinerating missionaries are there 
 called apostles. The superiority of ' the Twelve ' 
 arose from their having been the companions of Jesus 
 on earth (Acts i. 21), and from having seen Christ 
 
 1 Namely, "1-13X 07^'. See Schiirer, History of Jewish 
 People, in his chapter on School and Synagogue. Germ. edit, 
 pp. 368, 378. 
 
THE CHURCH 33 
 
 after His resurrection. Hence Paul claimed equality 
 with the Twelve (i Cor. ix. 1-6 ; 2 Cor. xi. 5). 
 Extraordinary powers were imparted by the Holy 
 Spirit to those twelve or thirteen men, similar to the 
 powers bestowed upon some of the prophets of Israel, 
 as Elijah and Elisha. The apostles did not claim to 
 be princes and rulers of the Church (see 1 Peter v. 
 1), though they were ready (like the old prophets) to 
 oppose all gainsayers. Their disciples were to exercise 
 the like holy boldness (1 Tim. v. 20, 21 ; 2 Tim. iv. 
 
 1-4). 
 
 3. Bishop Lightfoot has proved the office of pres- 
 byters, or elders, of the Church to have been ' adopted 
 from the synagogue ' ( Commentary on Philippians, 
 pp. 192 ff.). The institution of elders among the 
 Jews dates back to Mosaic times ; and hence, when 
 synagogues were instituted, they were duly governed 
 by elders who were laymen. The Christian elders 
 were also originally laymen, although they soon de- 
 veloped into clergy. 
 
 4. The earliest name given to places for Christian 
 worship was also that of synagogue (Jas. ii. 2 ; see 
 marg. rend.). This was the common usage in Palestine, 
 and traces of it can be pointed out in the writings 
 of Hermas, Ignatius, and Justin Martyr. 1 
 
 5. Bishops (Greek Ima-Koiroi, overseers) and pres- 
 byters are synonymous names in the New Testament, 
 and even in Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians. 
 We cannot discuss whether St. John introduced 
 episcopal government into the Churches of Asia 
 subsequent to New Testament times, or whether 
 
 1 See F. H. Chase on The Lord's Prayer in the Early Church 
 in the Cambridge Texts and Studies, vol. i. 
 
 C 
 
34 ROMAN CATHOLICISM* 
 
 earlier traces of that office may be pointed out in the 
 Epistles of St. Paul. But it is generally acknowledged 
 that the bishops mentioned in St. Paul's pastoral 
 epistles were identical with presbyters. 
 
 6. The appointment of deacons (ministers or servants) 
 as a church office is usually traced to the appointment 
 of 'the seven' (Acts vi.). Those 'seven' however 
 are nowhere called deacons (Acts xxi. 8). The name 
 of deacon was not derived from the synagogue ; but 
 the duties assigned to ' the seven ' were identical with 
 those of the receivers of alms in the Jewish synagogue. 
 If 'the seven' were appointed by 'the laying on of 
 hands,' that form often indicated only a delegation 
 of authority, and the authority bestowed by the 
 apostles on ' the seven ' was distinctly the adminis- 
 tration jf alms. St. Paul had hands laid twice 
 on him (Acts ix. 17, xiii. 2, 3), and yet he denied 
 having received his apostleship through the instru- 
 mentality of men (Gal. i. 1). Stephen and Philip 
 were no doubt soon engaged in higher work, and 
 Philip is styled an ' evangelist ' (Acts xxi. 8). Deacons 
 are mentioned as officers of the Church in Philippians 
 i. 1, and in the pastoral epistles of- St. Paul, but are 
 not mentioned by name in the lists in 1 Corinthians xii. 
 28 and Ephesians iv. 11, 12. Paul speaks of himself 
 and other workers as ministers (deacons) in 1 Corin- 
 thians iii. s ; 2 Corinthians iii. 6, vi. 4. Deaconesses are 
 mentioned in Romans xvi. 1, and probably, but not 
 certainly, in 1 Timothy iii. n. 
 
 7. The administration of the sacraments is nowhere 
 stated in the New Testament to belong to these 
 several offices. When the clergy departed from apos- 
 tolical simplicity, and forgot that the Church's arrange- 
 
THE CHURCH 35 
 
 ments were derived from the synagogue, they claimed 
 that their three orders corresponded to those of high- 
 priest, priests, and Levites, and then that they were 
 the only lawful dispensers of the sacraments. 
 
 § 9. The Divine Institution and Rights of 
 the Christian Ministry. Although in organizing 
 the Christian Church as a visible body the apostles 
 followed the lines on which the Jewish synagogues 
 were organized, it must not be forgotten that our 
 Lord distinctly appointed a ministry in the visible 
 Church. Hence He nominated not only the apostles 
 CMatt. x. 1-5; Luke vi. 13 ff.), but also the seventy 
 (Luke x. 1). St. Paul therefore reminds the presbyters 
 ;it Miletus that the Holy Ghost had appointed them 
 to their office (Acts xx. 28). The same truth is set 
 forth in Ephesians iv. n, 12; in 1 Thessalonians v. 
 2, 13 ; 1 Timothy iii. 1-7 ; Titus i. 5-9. Ministers for 
 Christ are therefore also spoken of as stewards (1 Cor. 
 iv. 1, 2; see p. 55), as ambassadors {2 Cor. v. 20), 
 rulers (Heb. xiii. 7, 17 ; seep. 130), shepherds (1 Pet. v. 
 2-4). They ought to be esteemed for their work's 
 sake (1 Thess. v. 12, 13 ; 1 Tim. v. 17, 18), maintained 
 by the people among whom they labour (Matt. x. 9, 10; 
 Luke x. 7 ; 1 Cor. ix. 7-14 ; Gal. vi. 6, 7), and special 
 intercession should be made for them (Rom. xv. 
 30-32; 2 Cor. i. u ; Eph. vi. 18-20; Col. iii. 3, 4; 
 2 Thess. iii. 1, 2). 
 
Medal struck by Pope Martin V., 1417, representing the adoration of the 
 Pope. Latin device, ' Whom they create, they adore. 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 THE TWO SACRAMENTS OF CHRIST, AND THE SEVEN 
 SACRAMENTS OF ROME 
 
 § I. Christian Baptism. The first rite ordained 
 by Christ was Baptism. Baptism was common among 
 the Jews, and used under Divine direction by John 
 the Baptist (John i. 33). Christian Baptism was insti- 
 tuted after Christ's resurrection. For although the 
 disciples of Jesus baptized, they appear to have only 
 followed the Baptist's practice, some of them having 
 been his disciples. For Christ did not baptize (John 
 
SACRAMENTS 37 
 
 iv. 2). P«3ons_whoJiadj^(^iv^^hn^jMgtism were 
 re-baptized by Paul (Acts xix. 1-5). Christian bap^ 
 tism has been uniformly regarded as incomplete un- 
 less administered in .the name of the Trinity, as 
 commanded in Matthew xxviii. 19. 
 
 § 2. Christian Baptism symbolizes the 
 work of the Spirit. 1. Christian baptism sets 
 forth the anointing of the Holy Spirit, which is the 
 gift of New Testament times (John vii. 37-39). It 
 s) mbolizes regeneration, or the new birth. For Christ 
 says : ' Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, 
 he cannot enter into the kingdom of God' (John iii. 
 5), which is expounded by St. Paul in Romans vi. 
 4, 5. See Gal. iii. 27; Titus iii. 5, 6 ; 1 Pet. iii. 21. 
 
 2. It has been supposed that our Lord alluded to 
 baptism in His discourse with Nicodemus (John iii.); 
 but this is questionable, for the following reasons : 
 (1) Baptism as a Christian ordinance was not insti- 
 tuted until after the Lord's resurrection (Matt, xxviii. 
 19). No reference to it therefore could have been 
 understood by Nicodemus. (2) Nicodemus was ac- 
 tually blamed by Christ for his ignorance (John iii. 
 to), which proves that he might have known, from 
 a careful study of the Law and the Prophets, the 
 doctrine Christ taught. The Old Testament however 
 nowhere speaks of baptism in the time of the Mes- 
 siah. The mention of ivater and the Spirit seems 
 to have been designed to remind Nicodemus of Isaiah 
 xliv. 3, and of Ezekiel xxxvi. 25-27, where the gift of 
 the Spirit is spoken of as a pouring out of water. 
 (3) If our Lord spoke of baptism in John iii. 5, 
 baptism by water would be absolutely essential in all 
 cases for salvation. For our Lord did not there teach 
 
38 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 the necessity of baptism 'where it conveniently can 
 be had.' 'Born of water and of the Spirit' in v. 5 
 is proved by the words of verse 6, and by the Old 
 Testament passages referred to, to mean ' born of 
 water, that is, of the Spirit.' . Comp. Matt. iii. 11. 
 
 § 3. The Teaching of Scripture about those 
 ' Born of the Spirit.' 1. The difference between 
 those ' born of the Spirit ' and those who are not is 
 thus set forth by our Lord : ' That which is born of 
 the flesh is flesh; and that which is_ born of the Spirit 
 is spirit' (John iii. 6] ^ Similarly Paul says : ' They 
 that are_jLfter_the flesh do mind the things o f the 
 flesh; but J^hey that are after the Spirit the things of 
 the Spirit' (Rom. viii. 5 ff.). 'As man y as are led by 
 the Spirit of God, they are^ the sons of God' (Rom. 
 viii. 14). Those, therefore, who exhibit 'the works 
 of the flesh' (Gal. v. 19-21), and do not exhibit 'the 
 fruits of the Spirit' (Gal. v. 22-24) are not 'born 
 again of water and the Spirit.' See also 1 Pet. iii. 
 21. ' 
 
 2. The teaching of St. John concerning those who 
 are 'born of God' re-echoes our Lord's teaching: 
 ' Every one that doeth righteousness is born of Him ' 
 (1 John ii. 29). Believers are 'children of God.' 
 ' Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin ; for 
 His seed remaineth in him, and he cannot sin, because 
 he is born of God' (1 John iii. 9). 'Whosoever be- 
 lieveth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God : and 
 every one that loveth Him that begat loveth him also 
 that is begotten of Him' (r John v. 1). So also verses 
 4 and 18. 
 
 3. These passages speak of all the children of 
 God, and not of a few peculiarly pious individuals. 
 
SACRAMENTS 39 
 
 They plainly teach that the children of God do not 
 live a life of sin, and explain the expressions, ' born 
 again,' or ' born of water and of the Spirit,' found in 
 John iii. 
 
 § 4. Regeneration. See page 37. The word 
 translated ' regeneration ' (TraAiyyei/tcria) only occurs 
 twice in the New Testament : (1) in Matthew xix. 28, 
 where by 'the regeneration ' is meant the new birth of 
 the world, or its restitution to its original state of bles- 
 sedness ; (2) in Titus iii. 5, where ' the washing of 
 regeneration,' or 'the laver of regeneration,' i.e. the 
 laver of baptism, which symbolizes ' regeneration,' is 
 spoken of. The Old Testament speaks of men who 
 were the servants of the Lord by profession, as if 
 they were what they professed to be, thus using the 
 language of charity, as in Deuteronomy xxxiii. 29 ; 
 Psalm lxxxix. 15-19, lxiii. 8-18; Isaiah xxvi. 2, xli. 
 8-10, 14. Similarly, the New Testament speaks of 
 men who in baptism professed their faith in Christ as 
 transformed by that holy ordinance, in which they 
 solemnly professed to become Christ's servants (Rom. 
 vi. 3, 4; Gal. iii. 2751 Pet. iii. 21, etc.). 
 
 § 5. Baptism and the Gift of the Spirit. 
 The Holy Spirit may be given in baptism. Thus St. 
 Peter said to the multitudes on the day of Pentecost, 
 ' Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the 
 name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and 
 ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost' (Acts ii. 
 38). It may be given before baptism, as in the case 
 of Paul (Acts ix. 17, 18), and of the company bap- 
 tized in the house of Cornelius (Acts x. 44-48). It 
 may be given after baptism, as in the case of those 
 baptized by Philip (Acts viii. 16, 17). 
 
40 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 § 6. The Necessity of Baptism — Romish 
 Teachings, i. Mark xvi. 16 does not teach the 
 absolute necessity of baptism ; for the stress is there 
 laid upon faith, as is plain from the words following: 
 ' he that believeth not shall be damned ' (Mark xvL 
 16; comp. John vi. 35, 47). 
 
 2. The Church of Rome affirms the absolute ne- 
 cessity of baptism for the salvation of infants (Condi. 
 Trid., sess. vi. cap. iv.). Hence her theologians are 
 obliged to discuss the questions whether infants can 
 be baptized in their mothers' wombs, and whether 
 abortions should be baptized, and under what circum- 
 stances. These questions are answered in the affirm- 
 ative by Dens ( Theol. moral, et dogm., torn, v., de bap- 
 tismo), and by Pope Benedict XIV., etc. See Suppl. 
 to Dens' Theol., torn. viii. Many shameful practices 
 connected with this superstition are discussed in that 
 volume by Dens. 
 
 In the case of adults Thomas Aquinas and other 
 Roman theologians admit a triple baptism : (1) of 
 water; (2) of flame, i.e. intense earnest desire for 
 grace accompanied by full contrition ; (3) of blood, in 
 the case of martyrs put to death before baptism. See 
 Dens, Theol., torn. v. 
 
 The Council of Trent maintains (sess. viii. can. 4, 
 de bapt.) that baptism ' by heretics in the name of the 
 Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, with 
 the intention of doing what the Church does,' is 
 valid. From this it follows that ' Jews, infidels, and 
 heretics,' laymen or women, may in certain cases ad- 
 minister valid baptism (Cat. Condi. Trid., pars. ii. cap. 
 ii. xxii.). Converts from the Church of England are 
 re-baptized when received into the Church of Rome, 
 
SACRAMENTS 4 1 
 
 under the pretence that their re-baptism is only con- 
 ditional; the words, 'if thou art not already baptized' 
 being mentally intended, if not distinctly spoken by 
 the priest. 
 
 § 7. Opus Operatum. The Council of Trent 
 maintains (sess. vii. can. vi. and vii., de sacr. in gen.) 
 that the sacraments 'contain the grace which they 
 signify,' and 'confer that grace itself upon all those 
 who do not present a bar' (or, obstacle — non ponentibus 
 obicem). It anathematizes (car., viii.) those who say 
 that grace is not conferred £>y the sacramental act 
 (ex opere operate). Hence sacraments administered 
 to persons in a state of insensibility, when they 
 cannot present any obstacle, are supposed to confer 
 grace. Consequently Romish priests often baptize and 
 administer extreme unction to Protestants in that 
 state, in order to secure their salvation. 
 
 § 8. The Lord's Supper. 1. The Lord's 
 Supper is (1) mentioned in the following places: 
 Matthew xxvi. 26-29, Mark xiv. 22-25, and Luke xxii. 
 12-20. (2) St. Paul gives the account which he 
 'received of the Lord Jesus' in 1 Corinthians xi. 20- 
 34. (3) In two other passages (1 Cor. v. 7-8 and x. 
 14-22), especially the latter, reference is made to 
 what is taught by that ordinance. 
 
 2. The Lord's Supper is generally supposed to be 
 referred to in Acts ii. 42, where the converts are said 
 to have ' continued steadfastly in the apostles' doc- 
 trine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in 
 prayers.' The Revised Version more correctly trans- 
 lates : 'in the breaking of bread and the prayers.' Both 
 ' the breaking of bread ' and ' the prayers ' in the 
 Temple were Jewish usages, which were for a season 
 
42 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 continued by the early believers. The apostles, ' day 
 by day, continuing steadfastly with one accord in the 
 Temple' (see also Acts iii. i), 'and breaking bread at 
 home,' took their food with gladness and singleness of 
 heart (Acts ii. 46, R.V.). ' The breaking of bread ' 
 was a solemn family rite among the Jews, which 
 our Lord was careful to observe (Luke xxiv. 30, 35); 
 as also St. Paul, as appears from the account of the 
 shipwreck recorded in Acts xxvii. 35. The Lord's 
 Supper may be referred to in Acts xx. 7, n, under 
 the expression ' breaking of bread.' x 
 
 3. Consequently the apostles did not regard the 
 Lord's Supper as the chief act of Divine worship. 
 The preaching of the gospel is ever spoken of in the 
 
 1 The Lord's Supper is spoken of as a ' breaking of bread ' in 
 I Corinthians x. 16. The act of the * breaking of bread ' by our 
 Lord at the Last Supper, recorded in three of the Gospels, was 
 highly significant. Our Lord's ' breaking of bread ' on the other 
 recorded occasions was likewise accompanied with solemn 
 ' thanksgiving,' never to be forgotten. See Matt. xiv. 19, xv. 
 26 ; Mark viii. 6, 19 ; John vi. 11, 23. The ' breaking of bread ' 
 at Emmaus (Luke xxiv. 30) was not an administration of the Holy 
 Communion ; nor was St. Paul's ' breaking of bread ' during the 
 storm (Acts xxvii. 35). The expression ' breaking bread ' occurs 
 in Isaiah lviii. 7 (Heb.), in Jeremiah xvi. 7 (R.V. and marg. of 
 A. V.), Lamentations iv. 4, etc. The act of ' breaking of bread ' 
 by the father of the family among the Jews was considered of 
 peculiar importance, and always accompanied with 'thanksgiv- 
 ing.' ' Thanksgiving ' before ' the breaking of bread ' in all social 
 gatherings is strictly enjoined in the Talmuds. (See Berachoth 
 35a, 46a, etc.) It is exceedingly doubtful that immediately alter 
 Pentecost regular celebrations of the Lord's Supper took place 
 from ' house to house.' The Christian Giurch grew up by little 
 and little ; it did not start a full-grown Church, with clergy and 
 sacraments. It grew up from a band of ' witnesses,' who testified 
 to the facts of the resurrection, into a ' society,' which for a long 
 time was not separated from the Jewish Church, but finally 
 developed into a fully organized ' Church.' Like the Holy 
 Scriptures, the Church's growth was 'by divers portions and in 
 divers manners.' 
 
SACRAMENTS 43 
 
 Acts and Epistles as the chief and most important 
 duty of Christ's ministers. The New Testament gives 
 no directions as to the persons who ought to administer 
 the Lord's Supper. Nothing of the kind is mentioned 
 among the duties of the ministry in the pastoral 
 Epistles of Paul (i and 2 Timothy and Titus). 
 
 § 9. Our Lord's Discourse at Capernaum. 
 1. Some erroneously maintain that our Lord spoke of 
 the Eucharist in the synagogue of Capernaum (John 
 vi. 53-56). But the following considerations appear 
 conclusive against that view : (1) that discourse took 
 place long before the institution of the Lord's Supper. 
 (2) The statement, 'Except ye eat the flesh of the 
 Son of Man, and drink His blood, ye have no life 
 in you ' (v. 53), if referred to the Eucharist, would 
 teach that there can be no spiritual life in any person 
 who has not partaken of that ordinance ; in which case 
 all children who have not partaken of it must be in- 
 evitably lost. (3) The statement, ' Whoso eateth My 
 flesh, and drinketh My blood, hath eternal life ' (v. 54), 
 would further imply that all those who do partake 
 of that ordinance will be finally saved. Such conclu- 
 sions are admitted by Roman Catholic theologians to 
 be false. Baptized children dying in infancy and child- 
 hood are regarded as certainly saved ; while many 
 adult Christians who have partaken of the Eucharist 
 may die in mortal sin. The meaning of our Lord's 
 statements is plain from the context. There would 
 have been no life if Christ had not come in the flesh, 
 ' for the Bread of God is He which cometh down from 
 heaven, and giveth life unto the world ' (John vi. 33). 
 Christ's incarnation was necessary for the salvation of 
 mankind ; and His death was necessary in order to 
 
44 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 atone for the transgressions of men. Hence His 
 blood was shed to take away sin. And therefore : ' He 
 that believeth on Me hath everlasting life' (John 
 vi. 47). 
 
 2. The passage in John vi. is not however difficult 
 to understand. Whenever Christ compares Himself 
 to a vine, His people are said to be in Him like 
 branches (John xv. 1-7) ; when to a door, His people 
 enter through Him (John x. 9) ; when He compares 
 Himself to food, His people feed on Him (John vi. 
 32, 33) ; when to water, they drink Him (1 Cor. x. 4). 
 Christ took flesh to die for us (Heb. ii. 14 ; 1 Pet. iii. 
 18) ; His blood shed takes away sin (1 John i. 7). 
 The necessity of faith in His incarnation, and of faith 
 in the atonement made by His death, are the truths 
 pointed out under such parabolic language, which 
 Christ was wont to employ in addressing the people 
 (see Matt. xiii. 10-15). 1 In John vi. 52-56 Christ's 
 
 1 Dr. R. F. Littledale, in a leaflet on The Heal Presence 
 (London: G. J. Palmer, 32, Little Queen Street), asserts: 'It 
 is not true that the words, wherever else they occur in the Bible, 
 denote anything but their plain meaning. Here are all the texts 
 where they are found : Lev. xxvi. 29 ; Num. xxiii. 24 ; Deut. 
 xxviii. S3 ; Ps. xxvii. 2 ; Isa. ix. 20, xlix. 26 ; Jer. xix. 9 ; Rev. 
 xvi. 6, xvii. 6.' This catalogue of texts given by Dr. Littledale 
 is far from complete. Actual eating of human flesh in the famine 
 caused by close siege is spoken of in Leviticus xxvi. 29, Deuter- 
 onomy xxviii. 53, and Jeremiah xix. 9. But Balaam, in depict- 
 ing Israel as a lion in Numbers xxiii ., used language suitable to his 
 metaphor, and did not mean that the Israelites were to regale 
 themselves on cannibal feasts. Nor did the Psalmist (xxvii. 2) 
 dream of enemies wishing ' to eat up his flesh ' like African 
 cannibals. Nor are the words in Isaiah ix. 20 to be taken literally, 
 i.e., that Israel's foes were literally to eat their own flesh and drink 
 their own blood. The language in Revelation xvi. 6 and xvii. 6 
 is distinctly figurative. In Zechariah ix. 15, not referred to by 
 Dr. Littledale, Jehovah promises to give His people the blood 
 of their enemies to drink. In Micah iii. 3 similar figura- 
 
SACRAMENTS 45 
 
 flesh and blood are spoken of as separated, not united 
 — the separation took place at death. The doctrine 
 of the whole passage is that taught in Acts iv. 12 : 
 'Neither is there salvation in any other : for there is 
 none other name under heaven given among men 
 whereby we must be saved.' 
 
 § 10. The Roman Catholic Doctrine of 
 Transubstantiation. (a) Roman Catholic state- 
 ments of the doctrine. 1. The fifth article of the Creed 
 of Pope Pius IV. includes three distinct points : (a) the 
 sacrifice of the Mass, (i) the dogma of Transubstan- 
 tiation, and (c) communion in one kind. It is as 
 follows : — 
 
 ' I profess likewise that in the Mass there is offered 
 to God a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for J 
 the living and the dead. And that in the most holy/' 
 sacrament of the Eucharist there is truly, really, and 
 substantially the body and blood, together with the/ 
 soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ ; and that 
 there is made a conversion of the whole substance of 
 the bread into the body, and of the whole substancp 
 of the wine into the blood, which conversion the 
 Catholic Church calleth Transubstantiation. I also 
 
 five language is employed. (Comp. Zech. xi. 9, 16, etc. 
 Rationalists, like Ghillany and Daumer, have actually main- 
 tained from such passages that the Israelites at least originally 
 were cannibals ; Dr. Littledale unwittingly plays into their 
 'lands. See my Hampton LecHires on Zechariah, p. 259, and 
 articles on ' The Old Testament and Human Sacrifices ' in the 
 British and Foreign Evangelical Review for July, 1884, and 
 January, 1885. It is fully admitled that Christ's literal flesh 
 and blood are alluded to in the rites of the Lord's Supper. But 
 the literal eating and drinking of Christ's body and blood in that 
 Supper is an absurdity. The disciples could not have eaten 
 Christ literally at the First Supper ; and if they did not then do 
 so, there is no authority for the assertion at any other time. 
 
46 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 confess that under either kind alone Christ is received 
 whole and entire, and a true sacrament.' 
 
 2. The following canons were passed at the 13th 
 session of the Council of Trent : — 
 
 Can. I. — ' If any one shall deny that in the sacra- 
 ment of the most holy Eucharist are contained truly, 
 really, and substantially the body and blood, along 
 with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 and therefore whole Christ ; but shall say that He 
 is only in it as in a sign or figure, or virtually, let him 
 be anathema.' 
 
 Can. II. — 'If any one shall say that in the holy 
 sacrament of the Eucharist there remains the sub- 
 stance of bread and wine along with the body and 
 blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and shall deny that 
 wonderful and singular conversion of the whole sub- 
 stance of the bread into the body, and of the whole 
 substance of the wine into the blood, although the 
 appearances of bread and wine remain, which conver- 
 sion indeed the Catholic Church most fitly calls 
 transubstantiation, let him be anathema.' 
 
 Can. III. — ' If any one shall deny that in the 
 venerable sacrament of the Eucharist under each 
 kind, and under the several parts of each kind, when 
 a separation is made, whole Christ is contained, let 
 him be anathema.' 
 
 Can. IV. — ' If any one shall say that, when conse- 
 cration has taken place, the body and blood of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ is not present in the wonderful 
 sacrament of the Eucharist, but (is there) only in use, 
 while it is being taken, but not before or after, and 
 that in the hosts or consecrated particles which are 
 reserved or remain after communion there does not 
 
SACRAMENTS 47 
 
 remain the true body ot the Lord, let him bo 
 anathema.' 
 
 Can. VI. — ' If any one shall say that in the holy 
 sacramentof the Eucharist Christ, the only-begotten Son 
 of the Father, is not to be adored with the worship of 
 latria, even outward, and so is not to be venerated 
 with peculiar festal celebrity, nor to be solemnly 
 carried about in processions, according to the laudable 
 and universal rite and custom of Holy Church, nor to 
 be publicly placed before the people in order to be 
 adored, and that those who adore it are idolaters, let 
 him be anathema.' 
 
 (b) The Lutheran doctrine of Consubstantiation. 
 Great misconception prevails on the subject of the dif- 
 ference between the Romish doctrine of Transubstan- 
 tiation and the Lutheran doctrine of Consubstantiation, 
 at which canon iv. quoted above is aimed. For the 
 sacrificial character of the Lord's Supper is denied by 
 the Lutheran Confession. No change is supposed to 
 be made in the bread and wine themselves by virtue 
 of the words of consecration, nor is any ' presence ' of 
 our Lord's body and blood supposed to adhere in any 
 particles of the consecrated bread and wine remaining 
 after communion, or in any consecrated bread or 
 wine on the table of the Lord. The Lutheran Church 
 teaches that, when the bread and wine are administered, 
 Christ imparts therewith His real body and blood to 
 all 'in, with, and under' the bread and wine. 1 The 
 Lutheran Church teaches no ' Eucharistic adoration, 
 as is taught in canon vi. quoted above. 
 
 1 ' Extra usum, dum reponitur aut asservatur in pixide, aut 
 ostenditur in processionibus, ut fit apud Papistas, sentiunt non 
 adesse corpus Christi.' — Form. Concord., p. 729. 
 
48 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 (c) Texts quoted in proof of Transubstantiation. X. 
 In support of transubstantiation the Church of Rome 
 adduces the words of institution, ' Take eat • this is 
 My body' j which she interprets to mean, ' this is no 
 longer bread, though it may still appear so, but is My 
 body, changed and transubstantiated by Divine power. 
 Such is not the natural meaning of the words. It is 
 plain what is meant when we point to a picture and 
 say, ' That is so-and-so.' And when Christ, after 
 breaking the bread, pointed to it, and exclaimed, 
 ' This is My body,' the disciples must have understood 
 HirrTto mean that the bread represented His body, 
 and the breaking of the bread signified tha t violent 
 death of which He had just spoken (Luke xxii. 15). 
 Th~e~~discrples had often heard Christ use similar 
 language: 'I am the door' (John x. 9)j_' I am the 
 vine ' (John xv. 1). St. Paul says of the rock smitten 
 in the wilderness, 'That rock was Christ' (1 Cor. x. 
 4) ; and says of Sarah and Hagar, ' these' women (the 
 pronoun in Greek is feminine) ' are the two cove 
 nants ' (Gal. iv. 24 ; see also v. 25). 
 
 2. In the account of St. Luke (xxii. 19), and that of 
 St. Paul, 'received of the Lord Jesus' (1 Cor. xi. 23, 
 24), an important addition is made to the sentence 
 In St. Luke the words are added, 'which is given for 
 you,' the present participle used in the Greek intima- 
 ting that the event spoken of was certain to take place 
 in a short time. In t Corinthians xi. the words are 
 added, ' which is broken for you,' the word ' broken ' 
 (again pres. part.) is not found here in the best MSS., 
 although it is a correct interpretation of the elliptical 
 expression of our Lord. Both additions point dis- 
 tinctly to Christ's approaching death, when He gave 
 
SACRAMENTS 49 
 
 'His life_ajr ansom for m any' (Matt, xx. 28). Not 
 till then was_ Christ's body ' given ' or 'broken,' nor 
 Hu ^blo -d ^sheoTfor many for the remission of sins' 
 (Matt, xxvi 28 ; Mark xfv. 24 ; Luke xxii. 20 ] the 
 pres. part, is used in all three places). 
 
 3. No atonement was made until Christ had died. 
 ' Without shedding of blood there is no remission ' 
 (Heb. ix. 22). Consequently Christ spoke at the last 
 supper figuratively and prophetically. To imagine 
 t hat Christ _ gay£_JIis._body Jo__be_ eaten, jfndTHis 
 blood to be drunk, befor e He suffered, is virtually to 
 deny that He was Jesus Christ _' come in the flesh ' 
 (1 John iv. 2)~or 'coming in the flesh' (2 John 7 ; 
 comp. John vi. 14). 
 
 4. Lastly, considerable variation exists as to the 
 precise words spoken by our Lord in giving the 
 cup (1 Cor. xi. 15; Matt. xxvi. 28; Mark xiv. 
 24 ; Luke xxii. 20), and it is impossible to interpret 
 those expressions literally. Our Lord speaks of a 
 separation of His body and blood which occurred 
 when His blood was shed for sin and His body 
 was 'raised for our justification.' Rome makes the 
 body and blood one and the same thing, and_ yet 
 pretends to interpret jrar_L^rrrs_words_jn_a strictly 
 literal signification I 
 
 Our Lord termed the consecrated wine ' the fruit 
 of the vine ' (Matt. xxvi. 29), and St. Paul, after con- 
 secration, terms the bread ' bread' (1 Cor. xi. 16, 17). 
 
 5. Rome argues that a ' real presence ' of Christ's 
 body and blood exists in the consecrated bread and 
 wine, because St. Paul, in 1 Corinthians x. 16, speaks 
 of ' a communion of the blood of Christ,' and of 
 ' a communion of the body of Christ.' 
 
 D 
 
50 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 This objection is easily answered. The apostle 
 teaches that believers in Christ ought to realize at 
 the Lord's Supper the benefits of Christ's incarnation, 
 and should feed on the truth that ' He is the pro- 
 pitiation for our sins' (i John ii. 2 ; Rom. iii. 25). 
 
 It is further urged that St. Paul says that the 
 wicked 'discern not the Lord's body' (1 Cor, xi. 
 29), and consequently that His body must be present 
 in the bread and wine. 
 
 But St. Paul speaks of those who treated the bread 
 and wine at the Lord's table as common bread and 
 wine, and who forgot that the bread and wine in that 
 ordinance symbolically represented Christ. At every 
 celebration of the Lord's Supper we ' shew the 
 Lord's death ' ; we do not indeed theatrically repre- 
 sent it (which the Greek does not mean), but as the 
 R.V. better renders the word, ' we proclaim the Lord's 
 death till He come' (1 Cor. xi. 26). Every true 
 commemoration of the Lord's Supper is a sermon in 
 which Christ's atoning death is proclaimed. 
 
 When St. Paul writes of the Corinthians eating 
 the bread and drinking the cup unworthily, he refers 
 to the fact that many of the Corinthian converts 
 treated the Lord's Supper like the feasts held in their 
 idol temples, which feasts were often occasions for 
 drunkenness and sin. It was by so acting that the 
 Corinthians profaned the Lord's Supper, and God 
 accordingly sent sickness and death among them, to 
 show to them the sin of such profanation (1 Cor. xi. 
 
 3°-3 2 ) 
 
 (d) The testimony of the senses. 1. The arguments 
 against transubstantiation drawn from the testimony of 
 our senses need not be dwelt upon. Faith is, no 
 
SACRAMENTS 51 
 
 doubt, required for matters beyond human observ- 
 ation. But the testimony of the senses is appealed 
 to in Scripture in proof of the facts of Christianity 
 (see Luke xxiv. 38-43; John xx. 25-27; Acts i. 3; 
 1 John i. 1-3). In transubstantiation however men 
 are called upon to believe as a ' miracle ' that 
 which contradicts the senses of sight, smell, taste, 
 etc. The belief of such a doctrine is attended 
 with other difficulties. The consecrated bread and 
 wine corrupt like any other bread and wine (see 
 p. 53), and the consecrated wafers ('hosts,' i.e., 
 ' victims,' as they are called, see p. 60) may be eaten 
 by mice, etc. 
 
 2. The Catechism of the Council of Trent ex- 
 plains the reason of the ' miracle ' as follows :— 
 
 ' For since, from the common nature of men, it 
 is specially abhorrent to be fed with the food of 
 human flesh, or with a draught of blood, He most 
 wisely caused that the most holy body and blood 
 should be administered to us under the appearance 
 of those things, namely, of bread and of wine, 
 by the daily and common sustenance of which we 
 are specially gratified. And moreover there are 
 combined these two advantages: first, we are saved 
 from the calumnies of the infidels, which we could 
 not easily avoid, if we were seen to eat our Lord under 
 His proper appearance ; the other is that, while we 
 so partake of the body and blood of our Lord in 
 such a manner however that, though truly, it cannot be 
 perceived by the senses, this is of the greatest efficacy 
 in increasing faith in our souls' (Cat. Concil. Trid., 
 pars. ii. cap. iv. § xlvi.). 
 
 (e) Sundry ' defects of the Mass.' 1. The Roman 
 
52 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 Catholic Church regards it to be essential that the 
 wafers used in the Mass should be of wheaten bread 
 and the wine of pure grape. Otherwise there is 
 no transubstantiation and no sacrament. This is 
 expressly stated in ' the defects of the Mass ' pre- 
 fixed to the Latin Missale Romanum. Directions are 
 there given, Section iii. 7, as to what must be done in 
 case of the host disappearing after consecration, 
 either by accident, as by the wind, or by a miracle, 
 or seized by some animal {vel casu aliquo, utvento, aut 
 miraculo, vel ab aliquo animali acceptd). 
 
 In Sect. vii. ' de defectn inientionis ' the following are 
 mentioned : — ' If any one does not intend to con- 
 secrate, but to do something in mockery. Also, if 
 any hosts through the forgetfulness of the priest remain 
 on the altar, or any part of the wine, or any host 
 is hidden, when he intends to consecrate only those 
 that he sees. Also, if any one has before him eleven 
 hosts, and intends to consecrate only ten, not deter- 
 mining what ten he intends — in these cases he does 
 not consecrate, because intention is required. It is 
 otherwise if, thinking indeed there are ten, he 
 however has willed to consecrate what he has before 
 him ; for then all will be consecrated ; and therefore 
 every priest ought always to have such intention, 
 namely, of consecrating all those (wafers) which he 
 has placed before him for consecration.' Conse- 
 quently, if an infidel priest did not intend to con- 
 secrate, there would be no valid consecration, and the 
 people would worship bread and wine for God. 
 
 Section x. treats of 'the defects occurring in the 
 administration itself.' We quote Nos. 5, 12 and 14 
 of the section. 
 
SACRAMENTS 53 
 
 ' No. 5. If a fly, or a spider, or anything else may 
 have fallen into the chalice before consecration, he 
 shall throw the wine into a decent place, and put other 
 wine into the chalice, mix a little water, and offer as 
 above, and go on with the Mass ; if after conse- 
 cration a fly may have fallen in, or anything of that 
 kind, and nausea be caused to the priest, he shall 
 take it out, and wash it with wine, and burn it when 
 the Mass is over, and the burning and the washing of 
 this kind shall be thrown into the sacrarium. But if 
 he has no nausea, and does not fear any danger of it, 
 let him take them [the ashes and washing] with the 
 Blood.' 
 
 ' No. 12. If by negligence any portion of the Blood 
 of Christ shall have fallen, if indeed upon the earth, 
 or upon the boards, let it be licked up with the 
 tongue, and let the place itself be scraped as much 
 as is enough, and the scraping be burned, and the 
 ashes be thrown into the sacrarium] etc. 
 
 ' No. 14. If the priest vomits the Eucharist, if the 
 species \the appearances~\ appear whole, let them be 
 reverently taken, unless nausea is caused ; for then 
 the consecrated species should be cautiously separ- 
 ated, and placed in some sacred place until they are 
 corrupted ; and afterwards let them be thrown into 
 the sacrarium. But if the species do not appear, let 
 the vomit be burned, and the ashes be thrown into 
 the sacrarium.' 
 
 2. Such are a few of the consequences connected 
 with the doctrine of transubstantiation, and more or 
 less with any theory of the ' real presence ' of the 
 Lord's natural body and blood in the consecrated 
 bread and wine. No theories concerning the pro- 
 
54 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 perties of Christ's resurrection body have any real 
 bearing on the question of the so-called ' real 
 presence.' For if our Lord did not distribute His 
 natural body and blood to the apostles when He 
 instituted that sacrament, it was never imparted 
 afterwards. 
 
 The humiliation of the Saviour was completed 
 when He suffered death on the cross. His exaltation 
 (spoken of in Acts ii. 33, 36; Phil. ii. 9-1 1 ; Heb. 
 ii. 9) began with His resurrection. But Roman 
 Catholic divines speak of Christ in the Eucharist as 
 in a state of humiliation. St. Alphonsus Liguori, in 
 his Visits to the Blessed Sacrament (Visit xxv.), says : 
 ' St. Paul extols the obedience of Jesus Christ by 
 telling us that He obeyed His Eternal Father unto 
 death. " He became obedient unto death" (Phil. ii.). 
 But in this sacrament His obedience is still more 
 wonderful, since He is pleased not only to obey His 
 Eternal Father, but even man himself. . . . Yes, 
 the King of Heaven descends from His throne in 
 obedience to the voice of man, and remains upon 
 our altars, according to his pleasure. He is there 
 without motion, or apparent will, suffering Himself 
 to be carried about from place to place, and to be 
 given in communion, both to the just and to sinners. 
 Whilst He lived on earth He was obedient to His 
 blessed mother and St. Joseph ; but in this sacrament 
 He obeys as many creatures as there are priests upon 
 earth ' (English edit., p. 70). See (Euvres Comji/etes, 
 torn. iv. (Paris, 1842), p. 289. 
 
 § 11. The Sacraments not called ' Mys- 
 teries ' in Scripture. Some assert that the 
 sacraments are 'mysteries,' and that the apostle 
 
SACRAMENTS 55 
 
 therefore speaks of ministers being 'stewards of the 
 mysteries of God' (i Cor. iv. i). But 'the mys- 
 teries ' in that passage are ' the mysteries of the 
 kingdom of heaven,' which the Lord set before the 
 multitude in parables, but expounded to His disciples 
 (Matt. xiii. n ; Mark iv. n ; Luke viii. 10). The 
 admission of the Gentiles into the kingdom of God 
 on equal terms with the Jews is ' the revelation of 
 the mystery which was kept secret since the world 
 began' (Rom. xvi. 25), manifested by the preaching 
 of the apostles according to the Scriptures of the 
 prophets (Rom. xvi. 26; 1 Cor. ii. 7; Eph. i. 9, 10, 
 iii. 3, 9). 'The mystery of the gospel' (Eph. vi. 19 ; 
 Col. i. 26, 27) includes the union of Christ and His 
 people typified by marriage (Eph. v. 32), in which 
 text ' mystery ' is in the Roman Catholic version mis- 
 translated ' sacrament.' A secret revealed by God 
 is termed 'a mystery' in Romans xi. 26, 1 Corin- 
 thians xv. 51, and so is an allegorical representation 
 (Rev. i. 20, xvii. 5). 
 
 § 12. The Five Romish Sacraments. The 
 Church of Rome maintains that five other sacraments 
 were 'instituted by Jesus Christ/ viz., Confirmation, 
 Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders, and" Matrimony. 
 (T) But there is no proof that Confirmation was 
 instituted by Christ or by the apostles. The ex- 
 pression 'confirming the churches' (Acts xv. 41) 
 means the same as ' confirming the souls of the 
 disciples' (Acts xiv. 22). The 'laying on of hands' 
 in Acts viii. 15-17 and Acts xix. 6 was not for the 
 communication of the ordinary gift of the Spirit, but 
 for the bestowal of the extraordinary signs, such as 
 speaking with tongues. The ecclesiastical rite of 
 
56 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 confirmation was instituted in later times. It is mere 
 assumption to connect ' the laying on of hands ' 
 (Heb. vL 2) with the rite of confirmation. The 
 usefulness of confirmation cannot be discussed here. 
 (2) Penance includes auricular confession and 
 priestly absolution (see p. 89). It was not ' instituted 
 by Jesus Christ' or His apostles, and is opposed 
 to Scripture. (3) Extreme Unction (see p. 156). 
 These last two Roman sacraments are described in 
 Article XXV. of the Church of England as having 
 'grown partly of the corrupt following of the apostles.' 
 (4) Orders, or the offices of ' bishops, priests, and 
 deacons,' were not ' instituted by Christ ' (see p. 
 32 ff.). (5) Matrimony existed from ' the time of 
 man's innocency.' The expression, ' this is a great 
 sacrament,' found in the Douay version of Ephesians 
 v. 32, is incorrect. 'The mjstery' there spoken of 
 is the connection between Christ and His people 
 (see p. 55). 
 
 The Reformers refused to give the name of 
 ' sacraments ' to any ordinances which had not any 
 ' visible sign or ceremony ordained of God ' (Article 
 XXV.). 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 
 
 § i. The Teaching of the Creed of Pope 
 Pius IV. and the Council of Trent. See article 
 of Pope Pius IVth's Creed on p. 45. 
 
 The canons of the Council of Trent on this subject 
 passed in session xxii. cap. ii. are as follows : — 
 
 I ' If any one shall say that in the Mass there is 
 not offered to God a true and proper sacrifice, or 
 that what is offered is nothing else than Christ given 
 to be eaten, let him be anathema.' 
 
 II. ' If any one shall say that in those words, This 
 do in remembrance of Me, Christ did not make the 
 apostles priests, or did not ordain that they them- 
 selves and other priests should offer His body and 
 blood, let him be anathema.' 
 
 III. ' If any one shall say that the sacrifice of the 
 Mass is only of praise and thanksgiving, or a bare 
 commemoration of the sacrifice performed or. the 
 cross, but not propitiatory ; or that it is of benefit 
 only to the person who takes it, and ought not to 
 be offered for the living and the dead for sins, 
 punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities, let 
 him be accursed.' 
 
 IV. ' If any one shall say that a blasphemy is ascribed 
 to the most holy sacrifice of Christ performed on the 
 
58 SOMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 cross by the sacrifice of the Mass, or the latter 
 derogates from the former, let him be accursed.' 
 
 V. ' If any one shall say that it is an imposture to 
 celebrate Masses [nu'ssas, plur.] in honour of the 
 saints, and in order to obtain their intercession with 
 God, as the Church intends, let him be anathema.' 
 
 VI. ' If any one shall say that the canon of the 
 Mass contains errors, and therefore ought to be 
 abrogated, let him be anathema.' 
 
 VII. 'If any one shall say that the ceremonies, 
 vestments, and external signs which the Catholic 
 Church uses in the celebration of Masses [in missarum 
 celebratione] are incitements to impiety rather than 
 offices of piety, let him be accursed.' 
 
 VIII. ' If any one shall say that Masses in which 
 the priest alone communicates sacramentally are 
 unlawful, and therefore ought to be abolished, let 
 him be anathema.' 
 
 IX. ' If any one shall say that the practice of the 
 Roman Church is to be condemned, whereby part of 
 the canon and the words of consecration are pro- 
 nounced in a low voice ; or that the Mass ought to be 
 celebrated only in the vulgar tongue ; or that water 
 ought not to be mixed with the wine in offering the 
 chalice, because that is against the institution of 
 Christ, let him be anaihema.' 
 
 § 2. The Mass a Representation of the 
 Sacrifice of the Cross, i. In order to under- 
 stand the canons, especially those that refer to ' the 
 canon of the Mass' (vi., ix.), and the importance 
 attached to the ceremonies, vestments, etc, alluded 
 to in canon vii., it should be noted that in the 
 celebration of Mass the priest performs before the 
 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 59 
 
 people a representation of the events connected with 
 our Lord's sacrifice on the cross. 
 
 The Catechism of the Council of Trent affirms that 
 ' the sacrifice of the M ass and the sacrifice of the 
 cross are one and the same' {Cat. Concil. Trid., pars 
 ii. cap. iv. § Ixxxii.). 'Christ and_the_priest are one 
 priest.' Its^ words are : ' Christ the Lord is one and 
 the same priest, for the ministers who make the 
 sacrifice represent not their own, but the person of 
 Christ, when they make His body and blood, which 
 is shown in the words of the consecration itself. For 
 the priest does not say, " This is the body of Christ " ; 
 but, " This is My body " ; as it were taking upon him 
 the person of Christ the Lord, he converts the sub- 
 stauice- «fl_th^bread_and wine into the true substance 
 of His body^and blood.' (But see p. 71.) 
 
 2. Vestments and holy things. The vestments worn 
 at Mass are described in many popular Roman Catholic 
 catechisms as highly significant. They obtained that 
 character probably about the ninth century. Most of 
 them can be traced back to very simple beginnings. 
 See Wace and Cheetham's Dictionary of Christian 
 Antiquities, under their several names. Varieties of 
 interpretation exist in matters of detail. 
 
 The amice, or linen veil, which the priest puts on 
 first, is explained to signify the cloth with which the 
 Jews blindfolded our Lord in the palace of Caiaphas 
 (Luke xxii. 63, 64). It is however only momentarily 
 put over the priest's head, but is worn round his 
 neck. The alb, or white garment (distinct from the 
 surplice), represents the robe with which Herod 
 arrayed the Lord. The robe put on our Lord was 
 not a white one (Luke xxiii. 11). The girdle which 
 
60 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 fastens the alb represents the cord by which Christ 
 was bound in Gethsemane. The maniple, another 
 kind of cincture, the cord by which He was bound 
 when scourged. The stole, the cord by which the 
 Lord was led to be crucified. It is worn crossed in 
 front. The chasuble, worn above the alb and stole, 
 represents the seamless robe of Christ (John xix. 23, 
 24), or the purple robe put on Him in mockery 
 (John xix. 2, 5). All these vestments are put on 
 after a prescribed form with divers ceremonies. 
 
 Furthermore, the altar represents the cross. The 
 cup, or chalice, the grave in which Christ's body was 
 placed. The paten is the plate of silver or gold 
 on which the priest places the wafer, termed ' the 
 host' (hostia, victim). The paten placed over the 
 chalice represents the stone rolled to the door of the 
 sepulchre. The corporal, or linen cloth spread over 
 the altar, is so called because connected with the 
 corpui, or the body of the Lord. The pallium, or 
 pall, thrown over the cup or chalice, represents the 
 linen cloths in which the body of Jesus was wrapped 
 for burial. 
 
 3. The six parts of the Mass. The Mass is divided 
 into six parts. (1) The general Preparation. The 
 priest after approaching the altar recedes three steps 
 backwards, prostrating himself, to signify Christ's 
 prostration in the garden. (2) The Inlroit, which 
 includes the Epistle, Gospel, and Creed. (3) The 
 Offertory, with the preparation of the bread and the 
 wine. The Introit and Offertory are varied accord- 
 ing to the seasons. The third part closes with the 
 words : ' Holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Hosts, the 
 heavens and the earth are full of Thy glory. Hosanna 
 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 6 1 
 
 in the highest. Blessed is He that cometh in the 
 name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest.' A bell 
 is then rung, to indicate that the most solemn portion 
 of the service has begun. That part is (4) ' the 
 Canon of the Mass,' which is invariable, and includes 
 the consecration of the bread, to which the attention 
 of the people is called by the ringing of the bell 
 thrice, during which the consecrated host is elevated 
 and adored. Next follows the consecration of the 
 chalice ; the bell is again rung three times, while the 
 chalice is also elevated, and adored as Christ present 
 under the veil of the sacrament. (5) The Com- 
 munion, or the administration. (6) The Thanks- 
 giving, and close. 
 
 4. Postures and Acts. The postures and acts of 
 the priest and his attendants are more or less 
 significant. The chalice is uncovered to signify that 
 at the death of Christ the veil of the temple was rent 
 asunder. The sign of the cross made three times 
 over the chalice indicates that Christ hung dead three 
 hours on the cross. Two such signs made at the 
 brim of the chalice indicate the water and the blood 
 which flowed from the Saviour's side. The Pater 
 Noster is said with a loud voice, in order that its 
 seven petitions may shadow forth ' the seven cries 
 from the cross.' The ' host ' is broken to signify the 
 separation of Christ's soul and body. The chalice 
 is afterwards again signed three times with the sign 
 of the cross, made by the priest with a particle of the 
 host, and the words are repeated : Pax Domini, to 
 call to mind the words of Christ after His resurrec- 
 tion : ' Peace be unto you.' A particle of the ' host ' 
 is then finally put into the chalice to signify the 
 
62 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 reunion of Christ's body and blood and soul at His 
 resurrection. The concluding words of the service 
 ' Ite missa est,' ' Depart ye, the assembly is dismissed,' 
 are supposed to represent the words of the angels 
 dismissing the apostles and disciples at the ascension 
 of Christ (Acts i. n). The benediction follows, 
 which points to Christ's blessing pronounced in the 
 act of His ascension. At the close of the service a 
 portion of John L or of some other Gospel is read, to 
 indicate that the ascension of Christ was succeeded 
 by the apostles preaching the gospel to the nations. 
 
 § 3. Texts quoted by Romanists. The follow- 
 ing passages are adduced on the Romish side : 
 
 (1) Mai. L it, 'My name shall be great among 
 the Gentiles, and in every place incense shall be 
 offered unto My name, and a pure offering : for My 
 name shall be great among the heathen (the nations),' 
 etc. That text has indeed from early times been sup- 
 posed to refer to the Lord's Supper. In the Old Tes- 
 tament penitence, prayer and praise are spoken of as 
 sacrifices, and these are found in every true celebra- 
 tion of the Lord's Supper. Thus the Psalmist says : 
 'Thou desirest not sacrifice, else would I give it; 
 Thou delightest not [or ' hast no pleasure,' R.V.] 
 in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken 
 spirit ; a broken and a contrite heart, O God, Thou 
 wilt not despise ' (Ps. li. 17 ; so Ps. cxli. 1, 2). So in 
 the New Testament : ' By Him therefore let us offer 
 the sacrifice of praise [Lev. vii. 12] to God continu- 
 ally, the fruit of our lips — [this is the LXX. rendering 
 of Hosea xiv. 3, where the A.V. has ' the calves of 
 our lips.' The literal Hebrew is, ' our lips as bul- 
 locks '] — giving thanks to His name.' ' But to do 
 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 63 
 
 good and to communicate [/.*. give alms], forget not, 
 for with such sacrifices God is well pleased' (Heb. 
 xiii. 15, 16; comp. Rom. xii. 1). 
 
 Roman controversialists argue that in Malachi 
 i. 1 1 a literal sacrifice is meant, because the Hebrew 
 word mincha is there used. Mincha properly signified 
 a gift, and is employed sometimes in that sense (Gen. 
 xxxii. 14). It means also a tribute offering (Judges 
 iii. 15). Wiien used as a gift or offering to God, it 
 signifies an unbloody sacrifice, but not always (see 
 1 Sam. ii. 17). It is used figuratively of the Jews 
 who were to be brought back to their land by the 
 Gentiles (Isa. lxvi. 20). Hence the Roman Catholic 
 argument cannot stand investigation. 
 
 (2) The passage in Isaiah lxvi. 20 casts light upon 
 Romans xv. 16, which is also adduced in proof of 
 the Romish doctrine. Paul, alluding to his preaching, 
 describes himself figuratively as a minister in holy 
 things, offering up, through the gospel, the Gentiles to 
 God as a sacrifice, who were converted and sanctified 
 by the Holy Spirit. 1 
 
 The same truth is figuratively presented in 2 Corin- 
 
 1 The Greek word \eirovpy6s is in Romans xv. employed to 
 denote a minister discharging a priestly function. It is used 
 of secular rulers in Romans xiii. 6 (see p. 69). The priestly 
 function indicated is the setting forth of the gospel by preaching, 
 prayer, and praise. So Chrysostom explains it in commenting 
 on the passage. The word rendered ' ministering'' (Upovpyovvra.) 
 might also be rendered sacrificing, but such a rendering would 
 obscure the meaning of the passage in Romans. For the gospel 
 itself is not the sacrifice there signified, but the means whereby 
 that sacrifice was effected and the Gentiles turned to God. 
 Prof. Abbott has adduced a parallel for ' Upovpyetv with the ob- 
 ject rd eiayyiXiov,' namely, 4 Maccabees vii. 8, where rbv vo/wv 
 is the subject, and the figure is explained, as in Romans xv., by 
 the context. 
 
64 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 thians iii. 2, 4, where the apostle terms the converted 
 Corinthians ' the epistle of Christ,' known and read of 
 all men. Paul was the scribe employed to write the 
 letter, but Christ was the true writer, who wrote not 
 with ink, bu^with_the_Holy Spiritj not in tables of 
 stone, but inthejfleshy tables of the heart,' or 'in tables 
 that are hearts of flesh' (R.V.). Comp. also Phil. ii. 
 
 (3) The bread and wine brought forth by Melchi- 
 zedek to refresh Abram and his men returning^ from 
 'the slaughter of the kings' (Gen. xiv. 18) is de 
 scribed by Roman writers as a sacrifice offered to 
 God. This arose from a mistranslation in the Vulgate, 
 where the Hebrew and is translated for (' for he was 
 a priest of the Most High God'). But in Hebrews^ 
 vii. no allusion whatever is made to Melchizedek's 
 offering sacrifice. Cyprian is the earliest Father who 
 uses that language. 
 
 (4) In Hebrews xiii. 10, it is maintained that a 
 Christian altar is spoken of, and consequently a sacri- 
 fice. ' We have an altar whereof they have no right to 
 eat which serve the tabernacle'; but no contrast is 
 drawn there between the Christian and the Jewish 
 Church, for in that case the pronoun ' we ' would have 
 been expressed in the Greek. The pronoun is in- 
 cluded in the verb (Ex<>/*ev), and the position of that 
 verb is emphatic. The persons spoken of as having 
 no right to the 'altar' are the priests of the old 
 dispensation, ' those who serve the tabernacle.' We 
 maintain, with Biesenthal, that in that passage there 
 is no reference to the atonement, nor even to the altar 
 of the cross. The Jews had an extravagant idea of 
 the benefit obtained from the participation of meats 
 offered to God. The worshippers who walked 
 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 65 
 
 (7repi7raToSvTcs) in the enjoyment of such privileges 
 had not been profited thereby. Yet the Hebrew 
 Christians seem to feel keenly the fact that they were 
 shut out from the feasts held in connection with 
 the Jewish sacrifices. The writer of the epistle, 
 for their benefit, enlarges upon the heart being 
 established ' by grace.' He reminds his brethren 
 that even in the palmy days of Israel, ' while the 
 tabernacle was yet standing ' (Heb. ix. 9) — the taber- 
 nacle and not the temple being alluded to through- 
 out the epistle — there was a sacrifice, namely, that 
 offered on the Day of Atonement (Lev. xvi.), of 
 which not one atom was partaken even by the 
 priests. That sacrifice was regarded as so contamin- 
 ating in its nature that every portion of the animals 
 sacrificed, except the blood sprinkled on both mercy 
 seat and altar, and the fat burned on the altar, was to 
 be reduced to ashes, 'outside the camp,' on unholy 
 ground. Christ Himself, as the anti-type of that 
 sacrifice, suffered without the gate. His people ought, 
 therefore, to be willing to go forth with Him without 
 the gate, bearing His reproach, like men who had an 
 abiding city — not like Jerusalem (so soon to be de- 
 stroyed), but one which is to come. 
 
 Such appears to be the interpretation which 
 best suits the context. The 'altar' indeed has been 
 regarded by many critics as the cross on which Christ 
 suffered. It is however an unproved assertion to 
 suppose the text refers to any ' altar ' existing under 
 the new dispensation. No hint is given throughout 
 the epistle (in which the priesthood of Christ is so 
 fully explained) that the ministers of the New Testa- 
 ment are priests at all. The word priest (Upevs) is 
 
 E 
 
66 ROM AM CATHOLICISM 
 
 never employed in the New Testament of any minister 
 of the New Testament Church except Christ Himself. 
 (5) Some have endeavoured to extract an argument 
 from the words : ' This do in remembrance of Me.' 
 According to canon ii. sess. xxii. of the Council of 
 Trent (see p. 57), by those words the Lord Jesus 
 transformed the apostles into ' priests,' and gave them 
 authority 'to offer Mass.' Hence Bishop Jewel, in 
 his Controversy with Harding, speaks of the Roman 
 explanation ' do this' meaning ' sacrifice this,' as 
 common {Works, i. p. 456). The Greek word to do 
 may, like the English word, refer to any act men- 
 tioned in the context in which it is employed. 1 But 
 
 1 The word to do occurs in the New Testament several 
 hundred times. The following passages are commonly cited as 
 instances in which it means ' to sacrifice ' : — (1) Luke ii. 27, ' to do 
 for him [the child] after the custom of the law.' The reference 
 there is not to the sacrifice subsequently offered up, which, it 
 should be observed, was offered up for the purification of the 
 Virgin Mary, and not for the infant Christ — but to the usual 
 ceremonies, such as the presentation of the child before the Lord, 
 and the payment of the ransom money required by the Levitical 
 law to be paid for the first-born male child, etc. (2) Hebrews 
 xi. 28, ' He [Moses] kept (lit. ' did ') the passover and the 
 sprinkling of the blood,' etc. The expression 'to do the pass- 
 over ' means to keep the feast of the passover, which latter 
 expression occurs in Acts xviii. 21 (also cited erroneously as an 
 instance of the sacrificial sense of U do) ; the phrase is com- 
 mon in the Septuagint in that sense. In Hebrews xi. 28 the 
 combination of ' the sprinkling of the blood ' in connection 
 with the same verb proves that the sense ' sacrificed ' is inappro- 
 priate. The other instances cited are the passages in which 
 our Lord's words at the Last Supper are recorded. Prof. 
 Abbott has distinctly shown that the sacrificial interpretation of 
 toOto iroteire is contrary to Septuagint usage, contrary to New 
 Testament usage, and contrary to classical usage, not counte- 
 nanced by the Greek liturgies, and not mentioned by any Greek 
 Fathers, who must have known their own language, and whose 
 views on the Eucharist would have naturally inclined them to 
 adopt that meaning {Reply, p. 49). 
 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 67 
 
 it has no sacrificial meaning apart from that context. 
 Our Lord's words, do this, simply mean, break this 
 bread and partake thereof in remembrance of Me. 
 The subject has been thoroughly examined in an 
 article by the Rev. Prof. Abbott, D.Litt. of Trinity 
 College, Dublin, reprinted in Essays chiefly on 
 the Original Texts of the Old and New Testaments 
 (London : Longmans, 1891). An attempt to answer 
 Prof. Abbott was made by the Rev. W. Rathborne 
 Supple, B.D., in two pamphlets, published by J. 
 Masters & Co. in 1893. Prof. Abbott's reply to 
 the first of these pamphlets appeared in 1893, and 
 the second was finally dealt with in the preface 
 to the second edition of Prof. Abbott's Reply. 
 The Romish and Ritualistic interpretation has also 
 been refuted by Canon Ince, Regius Professor of 
 Divinity at Oxford, in Two Letters on the Patristic 
 and Liturgical Interpretation of Touto Poieite (James 
 Parker & Co.). 
 
 (6) A further attempt has recently been made in a 
 Ritualistic Manual to show that the word rendered 
 remembrance {avajj-v-qcn^) ' has a distinctly sacrificial 
 meaning' (V. Staley, Catholic Religion, 6th ed., 
 Mowbray & Co., p. 265). But that statement is 
 also incorrect. Prof. Abbott says, ' Most distinctly. 
 avafivrjcris is not a sacrificial term ; it never means, 01 
 can mean, "memorial offering"' (Reply, p. 41). Mr. 
 V. Staley affirms that the Greek word in question is 
 ' used but twice in the Old Testament, and but four 
 times in the New.' The disputed word occurs in 
 the New Testament only in Hebrews x. 3, and in the 
 three passages in which our Lord's words at the Lord's 
 Supper are recorded. But the word occurs in the 
 
68 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 Greek titles of Psalm xxxviii. (Ps. xxxvii. in LXX) and 
 of Psalm lxix. (Ps. Ixx. in LXX.) with no idea of sac- 
 rifice. It occurs also in Wisdom xvi. 6, ' for the 
 remembrance of the commandment of Thy law.' It is 
 found in Symmachus' translation of Psalm vi. 5, and 
 of Exodus iii. 15, and in another Greek version of 
 Psalm cxxxv. 13. In not one of these passages can 
 the word have any ' sacrificial meaning.' The Old 
 Testament passages Mr. Staley refers to are first 
 Leviticus xxiv. 5-7, where the shewbread is spoken of. 
 The frankincense placed on a bowl on the top of each 
 row of six cakes was burnt as a ' memorial ' of those 
 loaves, i.e. was burnt in their stead as a ' fire-portion' 
 to the Lord. In the second passage, Numbers x. io, 
 the sacrifices are not spoken of as a ' memorial be- 
 fore God,' but the blowing of the trumpets, which 
 trumpets were to be blown to call God to remem- 
 brance. Mr. Staley has in that passage incorrectly 
 rendered the Greek lorai (used by the LXX.), l they 
 may be' as if the sacrifices were referred to, but the 
 Greek verb is in the singular. In Hebrews x. 3 the 
 word is not used, as Mr. Staley asserts, ' of a remem- 
 brance before God,' but, as the context clearly shows, 
 of a ' remembrance before man ' and to men. The 
 context states that ' the worshippers once purged 
 should have had no more remembrance of sins.' Hence 
 that passage strongly supports the natural interpreta- 
 tion of our Lord's words : ' This do in remembrance 
 of Me ' — do this in order to keep Me and My work 
 in perpetual remembrance. The Old Testament 
 sacrifices were employed to keep men constantly in 
 remembrance of their sin, and that sin was not 
 really atoned for by the blood of bulls and of goats. 
 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 69 
 
 (7) Acts xiii. 2 : the Greek word rendered ' minis- 
 tering ' (Xeirovpyeiv) is often used to indicate any 
 service performed before the Lord. The persons 
 spoken of as ministering in Acts xiii. 2 were probably 
 those named in verse 1 as being with the Christian 
 community at Antioch. For the command follow- 
 ing was addressed to the Church as a whole. The 
 Church of Antioch having the unction of the Spirit, 
 was indeed 'a holy priesthood ' (1 Pet. ii. 5). More- 
 over if the expression be understood specially of the 
 five persons there mentioned by name, it is best inter- 
 preted to mean preaching the word, as in Romans xv. 16 
 (see p. 63). The Greek word is used of any kind of 
 ministering (Rom. xv. 27), it is used in Hebrews i. 14 
 of the services rendered by angels to men. It is also 
 employed in the LXX. of Abishag ministering to King 
 David (1 Kings i. 4). It is simply 'a begging of the 
 question ' to cite such a text in proof of Christian 
 clergy offering up the Mass. 
 
 § 4. Positive Scripture Proof against the 
 
 Mass. 1. Tne idea of any other sacrifice than that 
 
 of Christ's death upon the cross is negatived by the 
 
 [ argumen t in the Epistle to the Heb rews. .__ The writer 
 
 loTTEat epistle Tays it down as an indjibjtable fact 
 
 Ithat ChrlsTs^pTie^Ioocr'was^wKoIly unique, because 
 
 f it is said in Psalm ex. 4, ' Thou art a priest for ever 
 
 1 after the order of Melchizedek.' The peculiarity of 
 
 yie priesthood of Melchizedek compared with the 
 
 Aevitical priesthood lay in the following particulars : 
 
 (1) As nothing is known of Melchizedek's father or 
 
 mother, he was ' without father, without mother ' (Heb. 
 
 vii. 3). His genealogy was not preserved, as was done 
 
 carefully in the case of the Levitical priests (comp, 
 
70 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 Neh. vii. 63-65). Hence Melchizedek was ' without 
 descent? (2) In the portraiture of Melchizedek in 
 Genesis xiv. no account also is given of his birth or 
 death. In the picture gallery of Scripture ' he abideth 
 a priest continually.' Hence the Psalmist speaks of 
 Messiah as ' a Priest after the order of Melchizedek.' 
 Dr. Fak di Bruno, in his Catholic Belief, p. 76, asserts 
 that Christ was so ' called by the royal Psalmist ' be- 
 cause the sacrifice which Melchizedek offered as the 
 priest of the Most High God was then of bread and 
 wine (see p. 64). The Psalmist does not, however, refer 
 to any sacrifice offered by Melchizedek, but solely to 
 his priesthood. No sacrifice of Melchizedek is referred 
 to in the Epistle to the Hebrews (chap, vii.), although 
 the blessing which Melchizedek pronounced on 
 Abraham is several times dwelt on. Consequently 
 it is wrong to assert, with Dr. di Bruno (p. 77), 'It 
 is on account of this Sacrifice offered daily on our 
 altars that our Lord is called a Priest for ever ac- 
 cording to the order of Melchizedek.' 
 
 2. Christ's priesthood differed from the Levitical 
 priesthood in the following particulars : (1) The Levi- 
 tical priests were ' made after the law of a carnal com- 
 mandment,' that is (a) They had to belong by birth to 
 the tribe of Levi, (d) No one could be made a priest 
 unless his parents had married as laid down in the 
 Mosaic law. (c) The individual priest was required 
 to be free from bodily blemish. But Christ was made 
 priest ' after the power of an endless life.' He laid 
 down His life, and He took it up again, and ever 
 liveth (Heb. vii. 16, 25). (2) The Levitical priests 
 were made ' without an oath,' Christ ' by an oath' 
 (Heb. vii. 2o^jj^ (3) They were 'many priests,' 
 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 7 1 
 
 being mortal ; He ' ever liveth.' His priesthood is 
 unchangeable, inviolable, it ' doth not pass to 
 another ' (R.V. marg. in Heb. vii. 23, 24). * Christ's 
 priesthood is His alone, open to no rival claim, 
 liable to no invasion of its functions ' (Bishop West- 
 cott, Comm. in loc). (4) Christ was also holy, 
 sinless, and undefiled, separated from sinners by 
 being lifted up, withdrawn from them by His ascen- 
 sion, and made higher than the heavens (Heb. vii. 
 26), brought into the immediate presence-chamber of 
 God, glorified with the glory that He had before the 
 foundation of the world (John xvii. 5). 
 
 Rome asserts that her priests discharge Christ's 
 priesthood, and that He acts through them. Had 
 the apostle known of such a priesthood, he must 
 necessarily have mentioned it in the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews. The silence of that epistle is conclusive. 
 
 3. Rome maintains that Christ is offered daily in 
 the sacrifice of the Mass. But the apostle contrasts 
 (Heb. vii. 27) the daily sacrifices of the Levitical 
 priests with the single act of sacrifice performed by 
 Christ on Calvary. He does not utter a syllable about 
 a continuation of Christ's sacrifice in the Eucharist. 
 
 No distinction between a bloody and an unbloody 
 offering can explain away that text : Christ ' once ' 
 ' offered up Himself.' There can therefore be no 
 sacrifice of Christ, no 'immolation' whatever of 
 Christ in the Lord's Supper. 
 
 In Hebrews x. the truth is further insisted on. The 
 entrance of the high priest once every year on the 
 Day of Atonement (Lev. xvi.) is contrasted with the 
 one entrance of Christ into the holy place alone 
 (Heb, ix. 12). The offering was performed by Christ 
 
72 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 on the cross when His atoning blood was shed (Heb. 
 ix. 14). Heaven is the holy place into which He 
 entered, 'to appear in the presence of God for us' (Heb, 
 ix. 24), having previously purified even those holy 
 places, regarded as somehow connected with earth, 
 with His own sacrifice (v. 23). His entrance as our 
 High Priest and manifestation of Himself before God 
 for us after His death took place once (v. 24), just as 
 His manifestation to us by His incarnation at the end 
 of the world (the ages before Christ) occurred only 
 once (v. 26), when He came to put away sin by 
 the sacrifice of Himself {v. 26). The argument in 
 that chapter is summed up : ' And inasmuch as it is 
 appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh 
 judgment ; so Christ also, having been once offered 
 to bear the sins of many, shall appear a second time, 
 apart from sin, to them that wait for Him unto 
 salvation' (Heb. ix. 27, 28, R.V.). 
 
 In Hebrews x. the contrast with the continual or 
 the daily sacrifices and Christ's single act is again 
 insisted on. The constant repetition of the Jewish 
 sacrifices reminded men of sin (see p. 68) and of 
 the necessity of a real propitiation (Heb. x. 1-5). 
 The voluntary offering of Jesus is adduced with the 
 remark : ' By which will we have been sanctified 
 through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once 
 for all. And every priest [of the Jewish Church] 
 indeed standeth day by day ministering and offering 
 oftentimes the same sacrifices, the which can never 
 take away sins : but He, when 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 the footstool of His feet. For by one offering 
 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 73 
 
 He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified ' 
 (Heb. x. 10-14, R-V.). 
 
 These words decisively disprove 'the sacrifice of 
 the Mass,' as taught by the Church of Rome or by 
 kindred corrupt Churches. The reiteration of the 
 incarnation, of the atoning offering, of the resurrection 
 and ascension of Jesus, are all alike impossible. 
 Each of those acts was accomplished 'once for all.' 
 
 § 5. No ' Real Presence ' of Christ or. 
 Earthly ' Altars.' When Christ ascended into 
 heaven (Acts i.), the angels addressed the gazing 
 disciples in these words : 
 
 ' Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into 
 heaven ? This same Jesus which is taken up from 
 you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye 
 have seen Him go into heaven' (v. 11). 
 
 St. Peter likewise affirmed : ' And He shall send 
 Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you : 
 whom the heaven must receive until the times of 
 restitution of all things,' etc. (Acts ii. 20, 21). 
 
 How could this be true, if Christ be present in His 
 humanity as well as in His divinity in the so-called 
 ' sacrament of the altar ' ? (see p. 46). 
 
 The manner of Christ's second coming is set forth 
 in Revelation i. 7 and other passages ; and in 
 reference to it Christ warned His disciples not to 
 believe in any personal advent of Himself until the 
 great day when all should behold Him. 
 
 'Then [during the days prior to the second advent] 
 if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or 
 there ; believe it not. For there shall arise false 
 Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs 
 and wonders ; insomuch that, if it were possible, they 
 
74 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 shall deceive the very elect Behold, I have told 
 you before. Wherefore if they shall say unto you, 
 Behold, He is in the desert ; go not forth : behold, He 
 is in the secret chambers ; believe it not ' (Matt. xxiv. 
 23-26.) Christ cannot therefore be on this altar 
 or on that. He is not (ev ra/wuHs) in any secret 
 chambers, pyxes, or tabernacles. Men cannot bring 
 Him down from heaven, or inclose Him in a box or 
 tabernacle (see pp. 47, 64). 
 
 Roman Catholic authorities assert that the conse- 
 crated host has been miraculously seen to be alive. 
 The false prophet described in Revelation xiii. 15 
 claimed to have ' power to give life ' to the ' image of 
 the beast.' The consecrated host is the idol par 
 excellence of a fallen Christianity. Thus we read in 
 Biel's Expositio Canonis Missa, li., of a priest who 
 implored the Almighty to let him see and handle 
 Christ present in the Holy Eucharist. His prayer 
 was granted, and he saw upon the altar the infant 
 Christ He was bidden by an angel to take the 
 Child in his arms. He did so, fondly embraced Him, 
 and kissed His lips. He then replaced Him on the 
 altar, and implored the Lord to assume His former 
 shape. The prayer was answered, and the Child was 
 again transformed into the ordinary ' host.' In the 
 Acta Sanctorum numerous instances of similar visions 
 are recorded. Saints are reported to have seen the 
 host when elevated presenting the appearance of a 
 boy, shining like the sun, expressing approbation 
 with his looks, and speaking with his tongue, and 
 going into the mouths of communicants when they 
 were receiving the Eucharist 
 
 § 6. Half-Communion, or Communion in 
 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 75 
 
 One Kind. The Roman Catholic practice of with- 
 holding the cup from the laity, and permitting only 
 the officiating priest to partake thereof, is an outcome 
 of the belief in transubstantiation. The Catechism of 
 the Council of Trent gives the following reasons for 
 this practice (part ii. cap iv. lxxi.) : (i) to avoid ' the 
 blood of the Lord ' falling on the ground. (2) As the 
 Holy Eucharist ought always to be ready for the use 
 of the sick, if ' the species of the wine ' were kept too 
 long, it might become sour. (3) Many persons cannot 
 endure wine. (4) Wine might be injurious to the 
 recipient; or be (5) obtained with difficulty ; (6) That 
 the heresy of those persons should be rooted out ' who 
 denied that a whole Christ was under both species, 
 but asserted that only a bloodless body was contained 
 under the appearance of bread, but the blood under 
 the appearance of wine.' 
 
 Such are Rome's six reasons. On the first enough 
 has been said already. As to the second, (a) Scripture 
 says nothing about the necessity of sending the 
 Eucharist to the sick. (t>) Rome contradicts her own 
 doctrine concerning ' the species ' or ' appearances.' 
 For she maintains that the substance of the wine is 
 wholly and entirely changed, and yet she speaks of 
 the wine getting sour or corrupting. (c) ' The heretics ' 
 alluded to in No. 6 had at least the merit of taking 
 Christ's words in their baldly literal sense. Such 
 arguments, logically carried out, would justify the 
 abolition of the cup in the Lord's Supper. 
 
 The Catechism of the Council of Trent (part ii. cap. 
 iv. lxx.) quotes John vi. 51 as affirming that it is 
 sufficient to partake of the bread in order to live for 
 ever. But she forgets that in verse 53 of that chapter 
 
76 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 that the eating of the flesh and the drinking of the 
 blood are both stated to be essential (see p. 42 ff.). 
 
 The old Protestant argument derived from the use 
 of the word 'and' in place of 'or' in 1 Corinthians xi 
 27, as translated in the A.V., is no longer tenable. 
 The reading ' or ' is found in the best Greek MSS. and 
 accepted in the R.V. There is no doubt considerable 
 authority in favour of the A.V. reading, and that text 
 was not ' corrupted ' by the translators. The reading 
 which they followed is found in the edition of the 
 Vulgate put forth under the authority of Sixtus V. 
 But the alternative reading proves nothing. The 
 verse simply affirms that profanation may be offered 
 to the Lord's Supper under either kind. 
 
 When our Lord first instituted the communion, 
 He administered it only to the apostles, and if, as 
 Rome affirms, the words ' this do ' meant ' offer this ' 
 (see p. 66), and were addressed solely to them, there 
 is no direction whatever to the laity to partake of 
 that ordinance. 
 
 Transubstantiation was first defined as an article 
 of faith at the Lateran Council in 12 15, and the cup 
 was withheld from the laity by the decrees of the 
 Council of Constance, 1415, two hundred years after- 
 wards. 
 
 § 7. The Words of Consecration used in 
 the Mass. Great importance is attached to the 
 words spoken by our Lord in the institution of the 
 Lord's Supper. Hence let it be noted that His exact 
 words do not occur in ' the Canon of the Mass.' 
 
 The translation of the Latin words used at the con- 
 secration of the bread, with the rubrics for the direction 
 pf the priest (which we give in italics), is as follows : 
 
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS 77 
 
 ' Who the day before He suffered [lie takes the Host] 
 took bread into His holy and venerable hands [he 
 lifts his eyes to heaven], and having raised His eyes to 
 heaven, giving thanks to Thee, God, His almighty 
 Father [he makes the sign of the cross over the Host], 
 bles^lsed, broke, and gave to His disciples, saying, 
 Take, and eat ye all of this. [Holding the Host with 
 both his hands between the index-fingers and thumbs, 
 he utters the words of consecration secretly, distinctly, 
 and attentively over the Host, and also over all of them, 
 if there are mo?-e to be consecrated.] For this is My 
 Body.' 
 
 Thus the words ' this do in remembrance of Me ' 
 are omitted, on account of the false interpretation 
 assigned to those words (see p. 67). 
 
 The translation of the words used at the conse- 
 cration of the cup or chalice is as follows : 
 
 ' In like manner, after they had supped [he lakes 
 the chalice in both his hands], taking also this excellent 
 chalice into His holy and venerable hands, giving also 
 thanks to Thee [holding the chalice with his left hand, 
 with his right hand he makes the sign of the cross over 
 it], blesfjlsed, and gave to His disciples, saying, Take, 
 and drink ye all of it. [He utters the words oj 
 consecration over the chalice attentively, continuously, 
 and secretly, holding it a little elevated.] 
 
 ' For this is the chalice of My Blood, of the 
 New and eternal Testament ; the mystery of 
 faith : which shall be shed (ejfundetur) for you 
 and for many for the remission of sins.' 
 
 Rome thus uses in the consecration words never 
 uttered by the Saviour. 
 

 
 torn Orig^LIfi-thfl liCrary Of 
 Ton Col; CambridAo^ 
 
 A Roman Indulgence of the 18th century. 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 ROMISH ASSUMPTIONS AS TO THE CHURCH, PRIEST- 
 HOOD, HEADSHIP OF PETER, AUTHORITY, AND 
 RULE 
 
 § i. Rome's Assertions as to the Greatness 
 of the Priesthood. The Church of Rome assumes 
 that the Church is infallible. The laity must submit 
 to the priests, the priests to the bishops, the bishops 
 to the pope. Christ, according to Alphonsus Liguori, 
 obeys the priests (see p. 54), and His people must 
 therefore likewise obey them. The Catechism of the 
 Council of Trent on the ' sacrament of orders ' thus 
 sets forth 'the nobility and excellence of the priests ' : 
 
 ' Firstly : For since bishops and priests, as the inter- 
 preters of God, are both a kind of mediators (el inter- 
 nuntii quidam sinf) who in His name teach men the 
 
THE ROMAN PRIESTHOOD 79 
 
 Divine Law and the precepts of life, and sustain the 
 part of God Himself on earth (et ipsius Dei personam 
 in fern's gerunt), it is plain that no greater function 
 can be imagined than theirs ; wherefore they are 
 deservedly called not only Angels but even Gods, 
 since they have among us the power and the divinity 
 of the immortal God.' 
 
 ' Secondly : But although in every time they [priests] 
 obtained the highest dignity, the priests of the New 
 Testament far exceed all others in honour. For the 
 power which is conferred upon them of making (con- 
 ficiendi) as well the body and the blood of our Lord, 
 and of offering, also of remitting sins, also surpasses 
 human reason and intelligence, much less can any- 
 thing equal or like it be found on the earth.' 
 
 Here we have the picture drawn by St. Paul in 
 2 Thessalonians ii. of ' the man of sin, who sitteth in 
 the temple of God setting forth himself as God ' (R. V.). 
 
 § 2. Passages quoted in support of Priest- 
 ly Absolution, i. Rome asserts that Christ gave 
 such powers when He said : ' Receive ye the Holy 
 Ghost: whosesoever jins ye remit, they are remitted 
 unto them ; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are 
 retained ' (John xx.22, 23). That power was passed 
 on to their successors. But the power then given to 
 the Church was simply to declare forgiveness to all 
 who would believe in Christ. Our Lord's words were 
 not" addressed on that occasion solely to the apostles; 
 (r) because one apostle was not present, namely, 
 Thomas (John xx. 24); and (2) there were several 
 then present who were not apostles, such as Cleopas 
 and his companion (Luke xxiv. 33-36) ; moreover 
 (3) the holy women, last at the cross and first at the 
 
80 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 tomb, were also, in all probability, in the assembly, 
 for they belonged to the 'company' (Luke xxiv. 22). 
 They were wont to be present at such assemblies 
 (Acts i. 14), and had been commissioned by Christ 
 to announce His resurrection to the apostles. They 
 must therefore have been that evening with the dis- 
 ciples. Luke relates the substance of our Lord's 
 address and commission in these words (xxiv. 47) : 
 ' That repentance and remission of sins should be 
 preached in His name among all nations, beginning 
 at Jerusalem ' (see Mark xvi. 16). 
 
 If the words of our Lord be taken literally, an un- 
 conditional power of forgiving sins was then imparted. 
 But no one asserts that the apostles possessed any 
 such power. Our Lord's words must therefore be in- 
 terpreted in accordance with the usage of Scripture, 
 in which the prophets were sometimes said to do that 
 which they were only commanded to announce would 
 happen. Thus Elisha was said to slay those that 
 escaped the sword of Hazael (1 Kings xix. 17). 
 Jeremiah was 'set over the nations,' because he was 
 to predict their ruin or prosperity (Jer. i. 10). The 
 words of Jeremiah's commission, literally interpreted, 
 made him king of all kings and lord of all lords. 
 But they cannot be so interpreted. Furthermore, 
 God says in Hosea vi. 5 : 'I have hewed them [the 
 rebellious Israelites] by the prophets ; I have slain 
 them by the words of My mouth ' (Jer. v. 14) ; and 
 the two witnesses in Revelation xi. 5, 6 are repre- 
 sented as thus killing their enemies. Not one of the 
 passages cited can be taken in the baldly literal 
 sense; nor can our Lord's words in John xx. 22, 
 23 be interpreted in any such literal signification. 
 
PRIESTLY ABSOLUTION 8 1 
 
 2. It is further argued that Christ_^stawed_ugon 
 Peter (Matt. xvi. 19), and afterwards on the Church 
 in general (Matt. xviiL 18), the power of binding and 
 loosing. But the power of ' binding^ and loosing,' 
 given to Peter and to the other apostles asj^presenta- 
 tives of the Church, was not a power of forgiving sin, 
 but the power of declaring under special inspiration 
 of the Holy Ghost what ordinances of the law of 
 Moses were to remain binding on Christians, and 
 what had ceased to be binding^ In the ordinary 
 phraseology ofjhejews used both in the Talmud of 
 Je?ufaleJ2j__and in that__of_Babylon, to j£«jjnie~ ahs to 
 declare prohibited, and to loose is to declare lawful or 
 permitted. See Lightfoot's HorcB Hebraicce and others 
 on the above passages. The apostles exercised that 
 power, along with the Church (clergy and laity in 
 synod assembled), when they declared that circumci- 
 sion and other Jewish rites were not to be forced upon 
 the Gentiles, but commanded the Gentiles at the same 
 time to abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from 
 blood, and from things strangled (see Acts xv. 23-29). 
 Paul exercised the same power when, under Divine 
 inspiration, he declared the Jewish law of meats abro- 
 gated (Rom. xiv. ; see also 1 Cor. vjii. ; Gal. v. 1, 2; 
 CoL ii. 1 6, 17). On the special honour conferred 
 upon Peter, see p. 85. 
 
 God only can forgive jins. He jdone can read the 
 secret s of men's hearts. No human-priest or prophet 
 can do so, unless under some momentary inspiration. 
 Hence God speaks of ' forgiving iniquity and transgres- 
 sion and sin ' as His own prerogative (Exod. xxxiv. 7). 
 Similarly Isaiah xliii. 25; Daniel ix. 9; Micah vii. 19. 
 When Christ claimed the power of forgiving sin, He 
 
82 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 claimed to be Divine, and His enemies saw clearly 
 what was His meaning (Mark iv. 1-12). 
 
 All those who set forth the Gospel to sinners by 
 such preaching offer remission of sins ; and when they 
 further declare that there is no pardon which can be 
 obtained except through Christ's atonement (Acts 
 iv. 12), they 'retain' sins. In that way and in no 
 other the apostles discharged their great commission. 
 See Acts ii. 38, iv. 12, xiii. 38, xvi. 31 ; as well as 
 throughout the epistles. The apostles never pro- 
 nounced any priestly absolution. 
 
 3. In the case of the incestuous Corinthian (2 Cor. 
 ii. 6-10), St. Paul pronounced no absolution. When 
 Paul first wrote, the offender was cut off from com- 
 munion with the large majority of the Corinthian 
 Christians (vtto tS>v irXetovtov, v. 6). But, because that 
 man became truly penitent, the apostle in his second 
 letter asked the Corinthians to forgive him and receive 
 him back, expressing his own readiness to forgive him 
 also. That forgiveness was a remission of ecclesi- 
 astical censure. The expression 'in the person of 
 Christ ' is better translated ' in the presence of Christ ' 
 (see R.V. marg.), i.e., Christ is witness that this is 
 done in very deed and truth. 
 
 § 3. Auricular Confession. 1. This practice 
 is based upon the idea that the priests sit in the 
 confessional as judges in ' the tribunal of penance,' 
 compelled minutely to investigate sins (all thoughts of 
 shame being laid aside), and possess power from Christ, 
 according to their discretion, to grant or refuse 
 absolution. The penitent is to cast himself humbly 
 at the feet of the priest ' In the priest, who sits as 
 the lawful judge over him, he reverences the person 
 
AURICULAR CONFESSION 83 
 
 and power of the Lord Christ 1 (see p. 78). For 
 the priest, as in other things, so in administering the 
 sacrament of penance, discharges the office of Christ' 
 {Cat. Concil. Trid., pars ii. cap. v. xxii.). Hence in 
 § xlviii. the priest is styled ' the vicar (or representa- 
 tive) of Christ the Lord.' 
 
 2. The grounds on which such authority is claimed 
 are the texts already discussed. But, as a make- 
 weight, the Mosaic laws concerning leprosy (Lev. 
 xiii., xiv.) are thrown into the scale. The Levitical 
 piiests were sanitary officers. Their duty was to shut 
 out all afflicted with leprosy from intercourse with 
 other persons. If the disease departed, they read- 
 mitted the recovered leper to society after the per- 
 formance of certain rites. Hence the Lord com- 
 manded those whom He healed to ' go and shew 
 themselves to the priests' (Matt. viii. 4; Luke v. 14, 
 xvii. 14), that the reality of their cure might be at- 
 tested, and in proof that He ' walked orderly and kept 
 the law.' No Levitical priests pronounced any abso- 
 lution. In cases of failure to restore deposits, or theft, 
 and such transgressions, which were often accompanied 
 with false swearing, public confession of sin to the priest 
 was required, who had to exact restitution, and God's 
 forgiveness was then promised on the offering up of 
 the prescribed sacrifice (Lev. vi. 1-7). See Numbers 
 v. 6, 7, often quoted without reference to the parallel 
 passage. The ' trial of jealousy ' by ' the bitter water ' 
 (prescribed in Numbers v. n-31) has nothing in com- 
 mon with 'the tribunal of penance.' For the sins of 
 murder, adultery, fornication, and such like, no atone- 
 
 1 ' In sacerdote autem, qui in eum legitimus judex sedet, 
 Christi Domini personam et potestatem veneratur.' 
 
84 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 nient was provided under the Mosaic law ; and 
 private confession of sins to a priest with the object 
 of obtaining absolution was wholly unknown. 
 
 3. In all cases of transgression confession of sin 
 had to be made to God, and not to any earthly 
 priest. The Psalmist says : ' I acknowledged my 
 sin unto Thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I 
 said, I will confess my transgressions unto the Lord, 
 and Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin' (Ps. xxxii. 
 5). In case of national sins public confession was 
 made. Ezra thus confessed sins (Ezra x. 1-1 1 ; 
 Neh. ix. 2, 3, 6 ff.) ; so did Daniel (Dan. ix. 4, 5 ff.); 
 ami the people in the days of John the Baptist (Matt, 
 iii. 6); see also Romans xiv. n, and the quotation 
 there from Isaiah xlv. 23. Closely akin to this was the 
 public confession at Ephesus, recorded in Acts xix. 
 18-20, of sin and imposture in having deceived many 
 by so-called magical arts. When St. James said, ' Con- 
 fess your faults one to another, and pray one for another 
 that ye may be healed' (Jas. v. 16), he does not 
 urge confession to a priest, but the mutual acknow- 
 ledgment of sins between Christians. Among the 
 Jews of his day and later there was a practice, in case 
 of sickness, for the elders of the synagogue (not 
 priests) to visit the sick, to remind them that sickness 
 and death came from sin, and to exhort the sick man 
 to confession, if any sin preyed on his mind, and then 
 to pray for recovery. St. James's exhortations seem to 
 be based on that Jewish practice. At no time and under 
 no circumstances was the enumeration of all sins com- 
 mitted required under either the Old or New Testa- 
 ment. The confession of Achan (Josh. vii. 19-21) 
 was extorted that the justice of his punishment might 
 
THE SUPREMACY OF PETER 85 
 
 be apparent to all. No absolution was pronounced 
 in any such case. 
 
 4. The immoralities arising out of the confessional 
 cannot be here discussed. They are but natural results 
 of the practice. When enquiry is made in minute 
 detail into all the acts of married life, and into all 
 the thoughts and temptations that defile the hearts 
 of men and women ; when, as insisted upon in all 
 manuals for confessors, it is not enough to extract a 
 general confession, but the very details must be in- 
 quired into, and especially into the mental delight felt 
 in contemplation of sins, it is easy to see what awful 
 temptations beset the practice. These temp'ations 
 are fully admitted by Liguori. The confessional is 
 a school for training in sin rather than a means to get 
 rid of evil inclination ; and the secrecy enjoined alike 
 on the miserable victims and confessors makes the 
 practice all the more degrading. 
 
 § 4. The Romish Doctrine on the Supre- 
 macy of St. Peter. 1. The supremacy of St. 
 Peter a fiction. The Roman Catholic doctrine of the 
 supremacy of St. Peter over all the other apostles is 
 contrary to the Gospels. They mention the solemn 
 rebuke administered to Peter, ' Get thee behind 
 me, Satan' (Matt. xvi. 21-23; Mark viii. 33-37). 
 When James and John sought to obtain supremacy 
 over the other disciples, our Lord did not say that 
 He had appointed Peter to be the supreme head of 
 the Church (Mark x. 35-45). Nor did He teach 
 such a doctrine when there was l a strife' among the 
 apostles 'who should be accounted the greatest' 
 (Luke xxii. 24-26). Such would have been the 
 natural course if the Roaian Catholic view were 
 
86 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 correct. Pe ter's . sad jienial of the Master on three 
 occa^iojis-r^cmjred^jjjjj^ijdre^^ 
 St. John records the manner in which Christ restorea 
 him to the office of feeding His sheep and lambs 
 (John xxi. 15-17). Peter's fall and restoration were 
 predicted by Christ (Luke xxii. 31). In Peter's two 
 epistles he, did indeed, when converted, strengthen 
 his brethren. Peter and John were sent by the 
 apostles to the Samaritans (Acts viii.14), and will- 
 ingly accepted such a delegation ; but on Roman 
 Catholic principles Peter ought to have been the 
 sender, and not the sent Peter was obliged to de- 
 fend his conduct before the apostles and brethren in 
 baptizing Cornelius and his companions, as recorded 
 in Acts xi. 1-4. In the Council at Jerusalem the 
 chief place was occupied by St. James, who pro- 
 nounced the decision of that Council (Acts xv. 13- 
 19). Paul says that he himself ' was not a whit behind 
 the very chiefest apostles ' (2 Cor. xi. 5), which shows 
 he had no idea of Peter's supremacy ; and in Galatians 
 ii. 6, 9-1 1 Paul mentions how he rebuked Peter in the 
 face of the Church for inconsistency of conduct. Peter 
 never claimed such supremacy. He speaks of himself 
 as an ' elder and a witness to the sufferings of Christ ' 
 (1 Pet. v. 1). 
 
 2. The promise made to Peter. It is true that our 
 Lord said to Peter : ' Tho u art P eter ? and upon this 
 rock TwTirTTniid'MyChurch ; and the gates of ~ftell 
 shall not prevail against it. And I will give Thee the 
 keys" of the kingdom of heaven : and whatsoever thou 
 shalTbind' on earth shall be bound in Jieaven^ and 
 whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be lo osed 
 in heaven' (Matt. xvi. 18, 19). But those words do 
 
THE SUPREMACY OF PETER 87 
 
 not prove Peter's supremacy (see p. 81). They refer 
 to special honour conferred upon him for his confes- 
 sion of faith in the Messiaiiship and Divinity of Jesus. 1 
 That honour was that Peter should be the instrument 
 of opening the ' kingdom of heaven,' or the gospel 
 dispensation, to the Jews first, and then to the Gen- 
 tiles. He unlocked the gate of that kingdom with 
 the keys of preaching the gospel in the sermon 
 preached on the day of Pentecost, by which 3,000 
 Jews were converted (Acts ii. 14-41), and afterward* 
 by preaching the same glorious news to the Gentiles, 
 some of whom, in the house of Cornelius, he had 
 the honour of first admitting by baptism into the 
 Church of Christ (Acts x. 34-38). Those keys were 
 the only keys committed to Peter's care, and those 
 persons who entered ' the door ' thus opened found 
 entrance into the kingdom of heaven. 
 
 Christ alone possesses '„the keys of Hades (see p. 
 140) and of death ' (Rev. i. 18). He also has the 
 keys of heaven, for He says : ' These things saith 
 He that is holy, He that is true, He that hath the 
 key of David, He that openeth, and no man shutteth, 
 and shutteth, and no man openeth ' (Rev. iii. 7). He 
 is 'the Door of the sheep' (John x. 7), and 'the 
 Shepherd of the sheep. To Him the porter openeth ; 
 and the sheep hear His voice : and He calleth His 
 own sheep by name, and leadeth them out '(John x. 
 
 1 There is, no doubt, a play upon the name of Peter in verse 
 18, but the rock on which the Church is built is best explained, 
 with many of the Fathers, as referring to Peter's noble confes- 
 sion of faith in the Messiahship and Divinity of the Lord Jesus, 
 although it is a matter of doubt whether the contention of some 
 of those Fathers as to the distinction between Petrus and petra 
 can be sustained. (See Littledale's Plain Reasons Against Join- 
 ing the Church of Rome, p. 25.) 
 
88 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 2, 3). He it is who shall at last say to His people, 
 ' Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom 
 prepared for you from the foundation of the world ' 
 (Matt. xxv. 34). 
 
 3. Doctrines assumed by Rome as true. Concern- 
 ing the supremacy of Peter Rome takes for granted 
 a number of points which cannot be proved. (1) 
 The supremacy of St. Peter over the apostles ; (2) 
 That Peter was Bishop of Rome. Even it it were 
 admitted that Babylon meant Rome in 1 Peter v. 
 13, nothing further would be proved but that Peter 
 was at Rome when he wrote that letter. 
 
 4. The papal infallibility. The doctrine of the 
 infallibility of the Roman Pontiff was defined as an 
 article of faith in the following terms in cap. iv. of the 
 decrees of the Vatican Council : 
 
 ' We, faithfully adhering to the tradition received 
 from the beginning of the Christian faith, for the 
 glory of God our Saviour, the exaltation of the 
 Catholic religion and the salvation of Christian 
 peoples, with the approbation of the Holy Council, 
 teach and define that the dogma has been Divinely 
 revealed : — That the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks 
 ex cathedra, that is, when in the discharge of his 
 office as Pastor and Doctor of all Christians, he defines, 
 by his own supreme apostolic authority, a doctrine 
 concerning faith and morals to be held by the whole 
 Church, by that Divine assistance promised to himself 
 in the person of St. Peter, he possesses that infallibility 
 by which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to 
 be instructed in defining doctrine concerning faith 
 and morals ; and therefore the definitions of that same 
 Roman Pontiff are of themselves, but not by the con- 
 
PENANCE 89 
 
 sent of the Church, unalterable. But if any one shall 
 dare to contradict this Our definition, which may God 
 avert ! let him be anathema.' 
 
 The sole Scripture authority adduced in favour of 
 such pretensions are the texts Matthew xvi. 18, 19 
 and Luke xxii. 31, 32 (see p. 86). The warning 
 conve) ed in the latter passage, and virtually repeated 
 in Romans xi. 22, might well have been laid to 
 heart. 
 
 § 5. Penance, Pardons, and Indulgences. 
 1. Penance. Penance {pcenitentia) is one of Rome's 
 seven sacraments. The Latin word means properly 
 repentance, but is generally used by the Church of 
 Rome in the sense of ' penance.' The Council of 
 Trent, in its xivth session, speaks of pcenitentia as 
 necessary in all ages, and quotes Ezekiel xviii. 30, 
 Luke xiii. 3, and Acts ii. 38. It notes that ' before 
 the coming of Christ pcenitentia was not a sacrament, 
 nor is it a sacrament after His coming to any one 
 before baptism.' 
 
 The Council affirmed that our Lord instituted ' the 
 sacrament of penance' after His resurrection, when 
 He breathed upon His disciples, and said, ' Receive 
 ye the Holy Ghost. Whosesoever sins ye remit,' etc. 
 (John xx. 22). (See p. 79.) It maintains 'that the 
 form of the sacrament of penance, in which especially 
 its virtue is inherent, lies in those words, i I absolve 
 thee! The ' matter of this sacrament are supposed to 
 be the acts of the penitent himself, namely, contrition, 
 confession, and satisfaction ' (see p. 92). 
 
 It affirms that 'this sacrament ot penance is as 
 necessary for salvation to those who have fallen into 
 sin after baptism as baptism itself is to those who 
 
90 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 have not been regenerated.' Regenerated is here used 
 in the sense of the baptized. 
 
 (a) Priests as judges in a tribunal. The Council 
 affirmed that our Lord appointed ' the apostles and 
 their legitimate successors,' 'the bishops and priests,' 
 as sole ministers of this so-called sacrament. He left 
 1 priests as His vicars, as presidents and judges, to 
 whom all mortal crimes should be brought, into which 
 Christ's believing people may have fallen, in order 
 that they, by the power of the keys, may pronounce 
 sentence of the remission or of the retention of 
 sins' (see p. 82). Matthew xvi. 19 and John xx. 23 
 are the proofs assigned. See pp. 81 and 79. 
 
 (b) Full and minute confession, even of thoughts, 
 acts, and circumstances. The Council argues, logically 
 enough, that if the priests be 'judges ' sitting in ' the 
 tribunal of penance,' they cannot act as 'judges ' unless 
 they possess a full knowledge of each case. Hence 
 full confession of mortal sins must be made to them, 
 ' even those most secret things, and specially those 
 sins committed against the two last precepts of the 
 decalogue [for Rome's division of the Ten Com- 
 mandments, see p. 134], which sometimes more 
 grievously wound the mind, and are more dangerous 
 than those things that are openly admitted.' It 
 maintains that venial sins do not exclude from the 
 grace of God, and may therefore 'be kept silent 
 without fault,' and ' expiated by many other remedies.' 
 But, for all mortal sins, even of thought, men ' must 
 seek pardon by confession.' 
 
 One can easily understand how persons with 
 
 , tender consciences may be led to plead guilty to sins 
 
 never really committed- Into the demoralizing in- 
 
AURICULAR CONFESSION 0,1 
 
 terrogations in the confessional, authorized by these 
 principles, and set forth in all their filthy details in Dens' 
 Theologia Moralis, and Delahogue's Tract, de Matri- 
 monio, etc., we abstain from entering. The practice 
 of auricular confession has ever been a pregnant source 
 of iniquity, and is not only opposed to the Scriptures 
 (see pp. 83, 84), but also to the usages of the primitive 
 Church. 1 
 
 The Catechism of the Council of Trent, pars ii., 
 de PcenitenticB Sacramento, xxii., thus describes the 
 position of priest and penitent : ' For he who re- 
 pents of his sins casts himself down with a humble 
 and lowly mind at the feet of the priest. . . . 
 In the priest, who sits as a lawful judge upon him, 
 he venerates the person and authority of the Lord 
 Christ. For the priest, as in other matters, so in 
 administering the sacrament of penance, acts the 
 part of Christ' [Christi munus exequitur). See also 
 p. 82. 
 
 2. Contrition and attrition. The three things 
 affirmed by the Council of Trent as required 
 of a penitent are, contrition, confession, and satis- 
 faction. There is little to object to in the definition 
 of contrition as 'grief of mind and detestation of 
 the sin committed, with the resolve of not sinning 
 again,' if only the idea of its justifying virtue were 
 eliminated. The Council 'teaches that although 
 this contrition may sometimes be perfected by love, 
 and reconcile a man to God, before he has actually 
 partaken of the sacrament of penance, yet that 
 
 1 See The History and Claims of the Confessional. By the 
 late Most Rev. C. P. Reichel, D.D., Bishop of Meath. Lon- 
 don : Longmans & Co. 1884. 
 
92 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 reconciliation is not to be ascribed to contrition 
 itself without the wish for the sacrament, because 
 that is included in it' ' Imperfect contrition, which is 
 called attrition,' is explained to commonly arise ' either 
 from consideration of the disgrace of sin, or from the 
 fear of hell and punishments.' But even this is ' a 
 gift of God and an impulse of the Holy Spirit, not 
 as yet indeed dwelling in him, but only moving him, 
 in order that the penitent may prepare a way for 
 himself to justice (ad justitiatti) ' by being disposed 
 ' to obtain the grace of God in the sacrament of pen- 
 ance.' 
 
 The later developments of this doctrine concerning 
 ' attrition ' cannot be here discussed. But it should 
 be noted that attrition, or an incomplete contrition, 
 although unable to save a soul from perishing, may 
 secure salvation for that soul, if a priest be at hand to 
 hear the dying confession and to grant absolution ! 
 
 We pass over also the question of the reservation 
 of pardon of special sins, reserved exclusively to the 
 bishops or the pope, unless the penitent may happen 
 to be at the point of death. 
 
 3. Satisfaction. The Council of Trent (sess. xiv. 
 cap. viii.) declares it to be contrary to the Word of 
 God to maintain that where guilt is pardoned the 
 punishment is remitted. The proof texts cited are 
 Genesis iii. 16 ff. ; Numbers xii. 14 ff., xx. 11 ff. ; 
 2 Samuel xii. 13, on which see p. 94. 
 
 The Council teaches (cap. ix.) ' that so great is 
 the largeness of the Divine bounty, that we are able 
 to make satisfaction to God the Father through Jesus 
 Christ, not only by punishments undertaken volun- 
 tarily by us for the chastisement of sin, or imposed 
 
PENANCE AND SATISFACTION 93 
 
 by the judgment of the priest according to the 
 measure of the offence, but also, which is the greatest 
 proof of love, by temporal strokes inflicted by God, 
 and patiently borne by us.' 
 
 The following canons, passed by the Council in the 
 xivth session, will more fully explain this subject : 
 
 Canon XII. ' If any one shall say that the whole 
 punishment is always remitted by God along with the 
 guilt, and that satisfaction on the part of penitents is 
 nothing else than faith, whereby they apprehend that 
 Christ has made satisfaction for them, let him be 
 accursed.' 
 
 Canon XIII. ' If any one shall say that we can 
 by no means make satisfaction to God for sins, through 
 Christ's merits as far as temporal punishment is 
 concerned, by punishments inflicted by Him, and 
 patiently endured [by us], or by those enjoined by a 
 priest, but not undertaken of our own accord, as by 
 fastings, prayers, alms, or even other works of piety ; 
 and accordingly that the best penance is only a new 
 life, let him be accursed.' 
 
 Canon XIV. ' If any one shall say that the 
 satisfactions by which penitents through Jesus Christ 
 redeem sins {peccata redimnnf), are not the worship 
 (cultus) of God, but traditions of men, which obscure 
 the doctrine of grace, and the true worship of God, 
 and the benefit itself of Christ's death, let him be 
 accursed.' 
 
 Thus God is represented as keeping an account of 
 each sin, and though He may ultimately pardon the 
 sinner, exacting from him punishment either on earth 
 or in purgatory for every sin committed. Satisfaction, 
 according to Rome's teachings, may be given by endur- 
 
94 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 ing the temporal penalties inflicted by God in this life, 
 by sufferings voluntarily undergone by the penitent, 
 or by penances enjoined by the priest, or further by 
 application of the supererogatory merits of the saints, 
 Masses, and such like. 
 
 But the Christ of the Gospels freely forgave 
 sinners (Matt. ix. 2, xviii. 32 ; Luke xv.). Note too 
 Peter's sermon on the day of Pentecost ; Paul's de- 
 scription of grace in Romans iii. 24, viii. 1, xi. 6. The 
 Gospels and Epistles nowhere speak of such 'satis- 
 factions ' as Rome describes. 
 
 The Roman theory of satisfaction lies at the root 
 of the doctrines of indulgences and of purgatory. 
 
 4. Scripture texts adduced in proof. In proof of 
 the Scriptural character of the dogma, Roman theolo- 
 gians appeal to the following texts : 
 
 (a) Genesis iii. 16, where God pronounced tem- 
 poral punishment upon our first parents. No men- 
 tion is made there of pardon, although the hope of 
 final victory is held forth in verse 15. That text 
 is therefore not applicable to the subject. Some 
 sins may be punished in the body. Vicious conduct 
 is often followed by disease, and though the sin 
 be pardoned, the bodily disease remains. The Fall 
 involved consequences to the whole human race 
 which are still felt See p. no. 
 
 (S) The case of Miriam (Num. xii. 14 ff.) is simi- 
 lar. She was stricken with leprosy, and when healed 
 had to undergo the seven days' isolation required 
 from all recovered from that plague. See p. 83. 
 
 (c) The cases are similar of Moses being excluded 
 from the Promised Land on account of his public sin 
 committed (Num. xx. n ff.) ; and of the death of 
 
PENANCE AND SATISFACTION 95 
 
 David's child on account of David's adultery and 
 murder, and his long impenitence (2 Sam. xii.). 
 Both were offences in which it was necessary for God 
 publicly to vindicate His honour. Similar instances 
 have often occurred of retribution following in the 
 track of sin, evert after the sinner has been pardoned. 
 But such is not the ordinary plan of God's dealing 
 with men. Contrition, indeed, cannot bring back to 
 life a murdered man. God pardons freely the true 
 penitent, but His law requires the penalty. That 
 penalty however is not ' satisfaction.' 
 
 (d) The case of the Ninevites (Jonah iii. 10) is 
 often referred to, but their outward humiliation 
 exhibited did not procure them forgiveness, but was 
 expressive of repentance. God's pardon was free. 
 
 (<?) Colossians 1. 24 is often brought forward to 
 prove that the saints supply something wanting in 
 the sufferings of Christ. Paul speaks there of his 
 sufferings endured in preaching the gospel, which 
 he had undergone for the Church's sake. Those 
 sufferings were sufferings of Christ, on the principle 
 taught in Isaiah lxiii. 9, and illustrated by Jesus' words, 
 ' Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me ? ' (Acts ix. 4). 
 In enduring such Paul was daily filling up the number 
 of afflictions appointed to him according to Christ's 
 words (Acts ix. 16). Of works of supererogation he 
 had no conception. See 2 Tim. ii. 10. 
 
 5. Repentance or penance ? The Greek word 
 li.fxa.voia. is correctly rendered repentance in both the 
 Authorized and Revised Versions of the Holy 
 Scriptures. It means change of mind or regret of mind, 
 namely, the inward alteration of mind which is known 
 as repentance. It does not include the suffering of 
 
96 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 punishment implied by the translation penance given in 
 the Douay Version. The Douay Version is translated 
 from the Latin. Its translators rendered the phrase 
 ' agere pxnitentiam' ' do repentance? erroneously inter- 
 preted in mediaeval times, by ' do penance? The 
 Rev. J. T. Waller, M.A., of Kilcornan, Limerick, in a 
 tract On the Sacrament of Penance, 1887, states that 
 the Douay Version (or Rheims New Testament) is far 
 from consistent. The noun repentance occurs some 
 25 times in the New Testament, and the verb repent 
 34 times, making together 59 times. In 49 places, 
 to favour Roman Catholic doctrine, it is rendered 
 'do penance.' In Acts - iii. 19 it is translated 'be 
 penitent.' In two cases it is omitted (Matt. ix. 13; 
 Mark ii. 17); in seven it is rendered repent or re- 
 pentance — Mark i. 15, Luke xvii. 4, Acts v. 31, xi. 
 18, 2 Timothy ii. 25, Hebrews xii. 17, Revelation 
 ii. 21. The phrase is translated ' do penance] contrary 
 to Roman Catholic doctrine, in Matthew iv. 17, xi. 
 21, and Acts ii. 38, for penance is a sacrament only 
 for baptized persons (see p. 89), and such were not 
 addressed on those occasions. The Latin ' agere 
 pcenilentiam ' is rightly translated in Jeremiah xviii. 8, 
 ' I will repent of the evil,' and absurdly rendered 
 in Jeremiah viii. 6 by ' there is none that doth 
 penance,' unless penance be there explained to be 
 the same as repentance, in which case all the passages 
 cited as proofs of that imaginary sacrament fall to the 
 ground. 
 
 6. Indulgences. (1) Part of Article 8 of the Creed 
 of Pope Pius IV. runs : ' Also I affirm that the power 
 of [granting] indulgences was left by Christ in the 
 Church, and that the use of them is most wholesome 
 
ROMAN INDULGENCES 97 
 
 (maxime salutarem) to Christian people.' The 
 Council of Trent has nowhere defined in what 
 indulgences consist In session xxi. (cap. ix. de 
 Reformat.) Quasstors, agents connected with the sale 
 of indulgences, were abolished on account of ' abuses,' 
 but it was affirmed that ' indulgences ' are ' spiritual 
 graces, of which it is not right that the faithful in 
 Christ should be deprived.' In the xxvth session the 
 Council decreed : 
 
 'Whereas the power of granting indulgences has 
 
 Medal struck at coronation of Pope LeoX: 
 Leo X., 'the Lion ot the Tribe of Judah has prevailed !' (Rev. v. 5). 
 
 been conceded by Christ to the Church . . . 
 the use of indulgences is most wholesome to Christian 
 people.' The Council then condemns with an ana- 
 thema ' those who assert that they are useless, or 
 deny that the power of granting them exists in the 
 Church.' 
 
 Many high authorities of the Church of Rome in 
 that day, e.g. Cardinal Cajetan (de Indulg., cap. ii.), 
 maintained that no authority could be cited in favour 
 of indulgences ' in the Holy Scriptures or the ancient 
 Fathers, Greek or Latin.' The Council of Trent 
 
 G 
 
98 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 however appeals in its footnote to Matthew xvi. and 
 John xx. 23. See p. 81 and p. 79. 
 
 (2) The Church of England condemns 'indul- 
 gences ' in Article XXII. In the English version of 
 the Thirty-Nine Articles they are termed ' pardons,' 
 in the Latin version ' indulgences.' 
 
 The sale of indulgences ordered by the Bull of 
 Pope Leo X., in 15 14, to obtain funds for the 
 enlargement and repairs of St. Peter's Church at 
 Rome, was accompanied by such scandals as prepared 
 the way for the great Reformation of the sixteenth 
 century, which began with Luther's 95 theses, which 
 were nailed to the door of the Castle Church at 
 Wittenberg, October 31, 15 17. 
 
 (3) Dens writes thus : ' An indulgence is the 
 remission of the temporal punishment for sins re- 
 mitted as far as guilt is concerned, made by the 
 power of the keys, outside the Sacrament, by the 
 application of the satisfactions contained in the 
 treasury of the Church. Q. What is understood by 
 the treasury of the Church ? A. It is the accumu- 
 lation of spiritual goods remaining in the Divine 
 grant, and the disposal of which is committed to 
 the Church. Q. From what does that treasury exist ? 
 
 A. Primarily from the superabundant satisfactions of 
 Christ, then from the superfluous satisfactions of the 
 
 B. V. Mary, and of the other saints. This treasury 
 is the foundation or material of indulgences, and that 
 treasury is infinite because of the satisfactions of 
 Christ, and so never can be exhausted ; then from 
 day to day the superabundant satisfactions of pious 
 men are added ' (Tract, delndulg., torn. vi. p. 417). 
 
 Indulgences, says Dens, ' avail not only in foro 
 
ROMAN INDULGENCES 99 
 
 tccksitz [before the bar of the Church], but also inforo 
 Dei [before the bar of God] ; that is, they free from 
 punishments not only in so far as otherwise they 
 might be enjoined by the Church, but also in so far 
 as they may be due to God, and must otherwise be 
 paid either here or in purgatory ' (Id., p. 418). 
 
 (4) The theory of indulgences depends upon the 
 doctrine of 'satisfactions' (p. 92). The idea of the 
 superfluous merits of Christ is derived from a material- 
 istic view of the value of Christ's human blood. 
 Delahogue, a Romish theologian, affirms that ' one 
 drop of Christ's blood would have sufficed to redeem 
 the sins of the whole world.' But why then did 
 Christ suffer on the cross ? For at His circumcision, 
 and in the Garden of Gethsemane, more blood than 
 necessary was shed. The idea is directly opposed 
 to Christ's prayer, ' Father, if it be possible, let this 
 cup pass from Me' (Matt. xxvi. 39). 
 
 The notion of superfluous merits or works of 
 supererogation is contrary to Matthew xxv. 8, 9, Luke 
 xvii. 10, Luke xv. 20-22. The true believer is 
 'perfect in Christ Jesus ' (Col. i. 28 ; so Heb. x. 14); 
 ' who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteous- 
 ness, and sanctification, and redemption' (1 Cor. i. 
 30). ' For He hath made Him to be sin for us who 
 knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness 
 of God in Him' (2 Cor. v. 2r). 
 
 (5) Roman Catholics appeal to the case of the 
 incestuous Corinthian (1 Cor. v ), whom Paul forgave 
 on hearing of his true repentance (2 Cor. ii. 6-1 1 ; see 
 p. 82). It is absurd (with Dr. di Bruno) to represent 
 that incident as a case of the apostle's granting ' to 
 that repentant sinner an indulgence.' 
 
100 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 (6) On the effect of indulgences the note in the 
 Rheims New Testament on 2 Cor. ii. 1 1 affords instruc- 
 tive observations. It is omitted in the Douay Bible. 
 
 ' In some ages of the Church much discipline, great 
 penance, and satisfaction was both enjoined and also 
 willingly sustained; and then was the less pardoning 
 and fewer Indulgences, because in that voluntary use 
 and acceptation of punishment, and great zeal and 
 fervour of spirit, every man fulfilled his penance, and 
 few asked pardon. Now, in the fall of devotion and 
 loathsomeness that men commonly have to do great 
 penance, though the sins be far greater than ever 
 before, yet our holy mother the Church, knowing 
 with the Apostle the cogitations of Satan, how he 
 would, in this delicate age, drive men either to 
 desperation, or to forsake Christ and His Church and 
 all hope of salvation, rather than they would enter 
 into the course of canonical discipline, enjoineth small 
 penance, and seldom useth extremity with offenders, 
 as the bishops of the primitive Church did ; but, 
 condescending to the weakness of her children, 
 pardoneth exceeding often and much, not only all 
 enjoined penance, but also all or great parts of what 
 punishment soever is due or deserved in this world or 
 the next.' 
 
 (7) According to Roman theologians, indulgences 
 do not imply ' the forgiveness of a sin, nor a permis- 
 sion to commit sin.' But it is certain that indulgences 
 have often been purchased under that idea. Hence 
 the Roman Catholic princes of Germany, meeting in 
 Nuremberg in 1552, in a memorial of grievances 
 complained of: 
 
 'The increase of the intolerable burdens of in- 
 
ROMAN INDULGENCES 101 
 
 dulgences, when, under the show of piety, for the 
 building of churches, or an expedition against the 
 Turks, the Popes suck the marrow of their estates ; 
 and, which heightens the imposture, by their hireling 
 criers and preachers, Christian piety is banished ; 
 and while, to advance their market, they cry up their 
 wares, for the granting of wonderful, unheard-of peremp- 
 tory pardons, not only of sins already committed, but 
 of sins that shall be committed by those that are alive, 
 and also the sins of the dead. So that, by the sale of 
 these wares, besides being stripped of our money, 
 Christian piety is extinguished ; whilst any one may 
 promise himself impunity by paying the tax set on 
 the sin he has a mind to commit. Hence fornications, 
 incests, adulteries, perjuries, murders, thefts, and all 
 manner of crimes, are at once engendered. What 
 wickedness will mortals fear to commit when they 
 may promise themselves license and impunity ot 
 sinning while they live ; and, for a little more money, 
 indulgences may be bought for them after they die ? ' 
 (Dupin's Eccl. Hist., vol. iii. p. 182). 
 
 Mr. H. N. Moseley, late Fellow of Exeter College, 
 Oxford, in his Notes by a Naturalist, in connexion 
 with the Challenger expedition, 1879, 2nd Ed., 1892, 
 wrote thus : 
 
 ' Papal indulgences for sins and even crimes are 
 still sold in the Philippines by the Government at 
 its offices all over the country, and at the same 
 counters with tobacco, brandy, lottery tickets, and 
 other articles, of which the Government retains the 
 monopoly. The perpetual right to sell indulgences 
 in Spain and its colonies was granted to the Spanish 
 Crown by the pope in 1750. In 1844-5 tne Govern- 
 ment received from this source of revenue ^58,000.' 
 
102 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 The late Dean Alford, in his Letters from Abroad, 
 p. 104, notices among other the following at Rome. 
 
 'By visiting the Church at Santa Croce in 
 Gerusalemme, on the Second Sunday in Advent, may 
 be gained 11,000 years of indulgence and remission 
 of all one's sins. By visiting that of SS. Cosmas and 
 Damian in the Forum any day 1,000 years, and on 
 the day of the Stations, 10,000 years. By kissing the 
 foot of the idol in St Agostino once in every day, 100 
 years of indulgence may be gained : so that if a 
 devout Roman Catholic chose to pass in his walk 
 every day for a year these two last churches, he 
 might gain at St. Agostino 36,500, and at SS. Cosmas 
 and Damian 365,000 years remission from purgatory 
 — in all 401,500 years for every day of his life by 
 these two churches only. It is no exaggeration to 
 say that this number might easily be multiplied ten- 
 fold without entailing any onerous duty. Percy gives 
 an authorised true measure of the Virgin's foot from 
 her real shoe, on n hich is inscribed that Pope John 
 XXII. conceded 300 years 1 (in a German authorised 
 edition of the same it is 700) of indulgence to whoever 
 
 1 On the opposite page is a reduced copy, purchased at Rome 
 1836. The following is a translation. Similar measures are 
 still sold in Spain (see p. 157). 
 
 ' True measure of the foot of the Most Blessed Mother of 
 God, drawn from her true shoe, which is preserved with the 
 Inkiest devotion in a monastery of Spain. The Pontiff John 
 XXII. conceded 300 years of Indulgence to any person who 
 will kiss this measure three times and recite three Ave Marias, 
 and this was confirmed by Pope Clement VIII. in the year of 
 our redemption 1603. This Indulgence, not having prescrip- 
 tion of number, can be acquired as often as one may wish by 
 the devoted of the Most Holy Virgin. It can be applied to the 
 souls in Purgatory. It is permitted for the greater glory of the 
 Queen of Heaven to draw from this measure others similar 
 which will have the very same indulgence. ' 
 
 * Mary, Mother of Mercy, pray for us 1 ' 
 
triujta, mlstera- del Pind^. deda 
 BeatitsirnaJMatdra diDio covet, 
 /Z-i dadfci iftea. vera Scarpa, c/z&si. 
 con*icru&- consortium dit/oz-ionc* 
 rn un Monc&tZero dc Spaptna* . J 
 U Tontafice. Giovanni XXII co/?M 
 ccj-sc 300. ahitid' ' /ndutaa/iza. J 
 a c/ii ' oaccrcc frc vo'U&guej&z. I 
 /ncsitra d vi reciTcra- Zrc Ave I 
 jtyhiria^e cid fii confcrmafo II- 
 da/J-'a/ia. Cic/?zer?ra VIII. )( 
 \ aell'&nno dittos fro. Jtc. | 
 c/enzcone.lGo'5. 
 \Qu.esZa./ndldyc/zza: Tion 
 aucndo f>rcscriziofi£. aj> 
 numero JLpuo cutout tar a 
 c/aanlc. t vatt£ ji. vorrd da 
 I divoti; 'dc3fart'a. Veramc 
 I Ja/l£sstma sipuo appti 
 ( care aU& JLai'me dcfj'ur. 
 ) Oratorio ed '&■ -pcr/ficjjff a, 
 \ maggiore gloria de-Ma Jie-- 
 firnz. del Ciclo dZ Crarrd da, 
 aaesta, m-ifura- aitr a simile- 
 la quail avera-tiito la-Has 
 
 latn-eclcj 
 
 : i/idu 
 
 \ JUaria, Jilalcr yrazcaelj 
 orcipro nobis 
 
 The exact size of the original is 7$ inches by *\ at tile narrowest point. 
 The Spanish measure (p. 157) is only 7 inches by if wide Such is an 
 indulgence of the 19th cent. 
 
 103 
 
104 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 should kiss the measure and recite three Ave Marias. 
 This was confirmed by Pope Clement VIII. in 1603, 
 and was extended to any similar measures taken from 
 the original one ; adding also that it is applicable to 
 the souls in purgatory. So that any devout German, 
 without stirring from his chair, might, supposing three 
 Ave Marias to occupy five minutes, gain in one hour 
 of each day of his life 8,400 years of indulgence, or by 
 this means alone in each year upwards of three millions' 
 
 § 6. The Rule of the Church — Persecu- 
 tion. 1. The Creed of Pope Pius IV. closes as 
 follows : ' I condemn, reject, and anathematize all 
 things contrary thereto, and all heresies condemned 
 and rejected, and anathematized by the Church. 
 I also promise, vow, and swear (God helping me) 
 to retain and to confess this true Catholic faith, out of 
 which no one can be saved (which at this present 
 moment I freely profess, and sincerely hold), entire and 
 unstained even to the last breath of life, and as far as 
 in me lies will take care that it be held, taught, and 
 preached also by my subjects, or by those whose care 
 shall appertain to me in my office (or situation, in 
 inuntre meo). So help me God and these Holy 
 Gospels of God.' 
 
 The Church of Rome affirms the validity even of 
 heretical baptism (see p. 40), and claims authority 
 over all baptized persons. Canon 14 on baptism 
 anathematizes those who maintain that baptized persons 
 when grown up ' ought to be left to their own choice, 
 and not to be compelled by any other intermediary 
 punishment beside their exclusion from the reception 
 of the Eucharist and other sacraments.' Hence Dens, 
 in his Theol. Mor. et Dogm. (torn, ii., de Virtutibus, 
 
ROMAN PERSECUTIONS I05 
 
 No. 51), maintains that 'heretics and apostates and 
 baptized schismatics may be compelled even by 
 corporal punishments to return to the Catholic Faith 
 and the unity of the Church.' 
 
 2. In its xxvth session (cap. xx.), the Council 01 
 Trent expressed a desire of restoring again ecclesias- 
 tical discipline, and decreed that ' secular princes 
 should -also be admonished of their duty, trusting that 
 they as Catholics whom God hath willed to be pro- 
 tectors of the holy faith and of the Church, would 
 not only concede its own law to the Church, but also 
 call back all their own subjects to due reverence to- 
 wards the clergy, parish priests, and higher orders; nor 
 permit officials or inferior magistrates to violate the im- 
 munity of the Church and ecclesiastical persons, estab- 
 lished by the ordinance of God and by canonical 
 sanctions, by any desire of greed or any want of 
 thought ; but that along with the princes themselves 
 they would render due obedience to the sacred con- 
 stitutions of the supreme Pontiffs and Councils.' And 
 it further admonished all those in authority, that 
 they would not permit the ecclesiastical law ' to be 
 despised by any barons, rulers, rectors, or other 
 temporal lords or magistrates, and particularly by 
 the servants of the princes themselves ; but that 
 they would punish severely those who impede the 
 liberty, immunity, and jurisdiction of that law.' In the 
 decree passed December 4, 1563, the Council further 
 admonished all princes that ' they would not permit 
 its decrees to be depraved or violated by heretics, 
 but that by these and by all they would be devoutly 
 received and faithfully observed.' 
 
 ;3. The following are the directions of the Canon 
 
106 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 Law of the Church of Rome in reference to the 
 persecution of heretics. A digest of that law is given 
 in the Corpus Juris Canon, emend, et notis illustr., 
 Gregorii XIII., Pont. Max. jussa edit. 1650. On p. 
 635, cap. ix., it is expressly ordered that heretics are 
 to be excommunicated, their property confiscated, and 
 they themselves delivered over to the secular power 
 to be punished. Cap. x. quotes the authority of Pope 
 Innocent III. to the same effect. Heretics are there 
 declared incompetent to succeed to any property left 
 to them, and advocates and notaries appearing in 
 their defence are to be suspended from office. So in 
 capp. xi. and xii. Cap. xiii. quotes the canons of the 
 Fourth Council of Lateran, held a.d. 1215, that 
 temporal princes are to be compelled ' to swear to 
 exterminate with all their powers all heretics con- 
 demned by the Church ; and a temporal prince who 
 does not purge his territory from heretics is to be 
 excommunicated, and if he persists under the ex- 
 communication for a year, the pope is to absolve 
 his subjects from the oath of allegiance, and to give 
 his territory to the faithful.' 
 
 4. Dens, in his Theolog. Mora/is, torn. ii. No. 56, 
 asks, 'Are heretics justly punished with death ? Answ. 
 Saint Thomas [Aquinas] answers in the affirmative, 
 because forgers of money, or others disturbing the re- 
 public, are justly punished with death. Therefore also 
 heretics, who are forgers of the faith, and, experience 
 being a witness, greatly disturb the republic' 
 
 5. Among the popes who issued Bulls for the 
 extermination of heretics are : Innocent III. against 
 the Albigenses, Lateran Council, (1215); Innocent 
 IV. (1243), followed by Alexander IV. (1254) ; Urban 
 
ROMAN PERSECUTIONS 
 
 107 
 
 IV. (1262); Innocent VIII. (1485); Clement VII. 
 (1528); Paul III. (1536) in the infamous Bull Ccena 
 Domini; Paul IV. (1569) endorsed all the persecut- 
 ing Bulls of his predecessors; Pius V. (1569), Bull 
 against Queen Elizabeth; and others. 
 
 6. The late Dr. Christopher Wordsworth, Bishop 
 of Lincoln, writes as follows : ' Has, then, the Church 
 of Rome ever stained herself with the blood of 
 Christians? Yes; she has erected the prisons and 
 
 Medal to commemorate the Massacre of St. Bartholomew (see p. to8). 
 
 lighted the fires of what she calls " the Holy Office of 
 the Inquisition " in Italy, Spain, America and India. 
 She commanded the ancestors of Victor Emmanuel 
 to persecute to the death the Christians of Piedmont. 
 One of her popes, whom she has canonized, Pius V., 
 is praised in her liturgical offices 1 for having been an 
 inflexible Inquisitor. She has engraven on her coins a 
 picture of the sanguinary massacre of St. Bartholo- 
 
 1 Breviar. Roman, v. Maii, ed. Ratisbon, 1840 ; and p. 662, 
 ed. Paris, 1842 : ' Inquisitoris officinum inviolabili fortitudine 
 sustinuit' (Bp. Wordsworth's note). 
 
108 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 mew's Day, and represents it there as a work done 
 by an angel from heaven ; and her pontiff 1 went in a 
 public procession to church to return thanks to God 
 for that savage and treacherous deed. She has 
 inserted an oath in her Pontifical, by which she 
 requires all her bishops to persecute and wage war 
 against all whom she calls heretics. What would St. 
 John have said to this ? Would he not have justly 
 wondered with great admiration (Rev. xvii. 6) that 
 such acts should be done under the auspices of 
 one who calls himself the Vicar of Christ ' 2 
 
 It is absurd to pretend that the St. Bartholomew's 
 massacre was only a political matter. And if it be 
 urged that Protestants have also been sometimes 
 persecutors, it may be replied that they learned that 
 in the school of Rome. No Protestant Church has, 
 however, justified such acts. But Rome claims to be 
 infallible, and is bound by the decrees of her Councils 
 and the Bulls of her popes, which she has never 
 ventured to denounce. 
 
 1 It may be seen on the coins of Pope Gregory XIII. 
 Nmnismata Pontif., p. 87, ed. Paris, 1679. Strange to say, 
 Home struck this coin again in 1839 and in 1840, thus 
 showing her desire to identify herself with this massacre. See 
 Irish Eccl. Journal, No. 13 — Bp. Wordsworth's note. A copy 
 of the religious service used on that occasion at Rome exists 
 at Oxford in the Bodleian Library. The present librarian has 
 published a facsimile of this programme, entitled, Ordine delta 
 solennissima Processione falta dal Sommo Pontifice neW alma 
 citta di Roma, per la felicissima noua delta deslruttione delta 
 setta Vgonotana. Photolithograph of this most rare pamphlet, 
 printed at Rome in 1572, from the copy in the Bodleian Library, 
 Oxford. Issued, with an introductory note, by Edward W. B. 
 Nicholson, M.A., Bodley's librarian. London : Bernard 
 Quaritch. 
 
 * Bishop Wordsworth's Union with Rome. Is not the Church 
 of Rome the Babylon of the Book of Revelation ? An Essay, 
 8th edit., London, Rivingtons, 1874. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 FALSE TEACHINGS OF THE CHURCH OF ROME ON 
 OTHER CARDINAL POINTS OF DOCTRINE 
 
 § i. Original Sin. i. The teachings protested 
 against at the Reformation. In the Creed of Pope 
 Pius IV. the Roman Catholic affirms what has ' been 
 defined and declared in the Holy Council of Trent 
 concerning Original Sin and Justification.' In session 
 v , paragraph 5, the Council of Trent affirms that in 
 baptism ' the guilt of original sin is remitted,' and 
 everything ' which has the true and proper nature of 
 sin ' is taken away. It states that in baptism men 
 are 'made innocent, immaculate, pure, harmless, and 
 loved by God ; heirs indeed of God, but co-heirs of 
 Christ, so that nothing absolutely keeps them from 
 entrance into heaven.' But the Council confessed 
 that ' concupiscence or lust ' (Lat. fomitem) ' remains 
 in the baptized, which, since it is left for trial ' (Lat. 
 ad agonem), ' is not able to harm those that do not 
 consent thereto.' It further declared ' that the 
 Catholic Church has never understood this con- 
 cupiscence to be called sin, which the apostle some- 
 times calls sin ' (Rom. vi. 1 2, vii. 8), ' as being truly 
 and properly sin in the regenerate, but because it 
 arises from sin and inclines to sin.' For the better 
 understanding of this passage, we have inserted in 
 
110 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 brackets the texts quoted in footnote appended to 
 the decree. 
 
 2. Bodily desires and the Fall of Man. Man is 
 composed of body, soul, and spirit, and has desires 
 belonging to each part of his nature. The body 
 demands food, and the feeling of hunger and the 
 gratification connected with eating stimulate it to 
 seek food. This desire, like the other bodily desires, 
 must be kept in subjection by the higher powers of 
 the soul and the spirit. Natural desires are not in them- 
 selves sinful, but become so when we wish to break 
 through any higher law which opposes their grati- 
 fication. This occurred when our first parents longed 
 for and partook of the fruit of which they were 
 commanded not to eat. That sin was immediately 
 followed by the death of ' the spirit,' and ultimately 
 by the death of the body. The harmony of man's 
 nature was broken, and ever since man has inherited 
 a nature without power constantly to withstand the 
 temptations of the flesh, the world, and the deviL 
 
 3. The Reformers were not fully agreed as to how 
 far 'concupiscence and lust' could theoretically be 
 regarded as sin. Article IX. says, ' The apostle 
 doth confess that concupiscence and lust hath of 
 itself the nature of sin.' But Rome, starting from 
 the principle 'that there is no sin where there is no 
 will,' boldly maintains that the ' tendency to sin ' is 
 not in itself sinful. 1 That theory, however, confounds 
 the desires of the body for the gratification of natural 
 wants (not in themselves sinful, 1 Tim. iv. 4) with 
 what St. Paul terms the 'lusting after evil things' 
 
 1 See Dr. J. Faa Di Bruno's chapter on ' Original Sin ' in his 
 Catholic Belief, pp. 4-7. 
 
ORIGINAL SIN III 
 
 (i Cor. x. 6). The statement in Galatians v. 24 : 
 ' They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh, with 
 its affections and lusts,' proves such lusts, or concupis- 
 cence, sinful. Concupiscence or desire {hriQvpltx) is 
 declared sinful in Romans vii. 7, 8, and is that ' carnal- 
 mindedness ' (to (fjpovrjfia Trjs o-apKos) which is death 
 (Rom. viii. 6), and 'enmity against God' (^P a e ' s 
 ©eoV, v. 7), as 'not subject to the law of God, 
 neither indeed can be.' St. John says, ' the lust of 
 the flesh ' (17 i-mdv/j-La 1-775 crap/cos) ' and the lust of the 
 eyes' are 'not of the Father, but of the world' 
 (1 John ii. 16). This 'infection of nature doth re- 
 main, yea, in them that are regenerated,' being part 
 of the sinful nature not yet wholly overcome. But 
 so far as it exists it is sinful, and it ought not to be 
 regarded as only left, as Rome says, ad agonein, ' for 
 trial.' The ideal of the full sanctification set forth in 
 the New Testament is a complete victory over sin, 
 resulting in the 'casting down of imaginations, and 
 every high thing that exalteth itself against the know- 
 ledge of God, and bringing every thought into captivity 
 to the obedience of Christ ' (2 Cor. x. 5). 
 
 4. Man's state in consequence of the Fall. The 
 statements of Scripture concerning man's present state 
 by nature are clear and decisive. St. Paul speaks of 
 the Fall and its results in the second part of Romans 
 v. He describes the sinfulness of the human race, 
 especially of the Gentile world, in Romans i. 21-32, 
 and of the Jewish race in particular in Romans iii. 
 Further passages on the subject are Psalm xiv. 3 ; 
 Isaiah lxiv. 6. Those statements are endorsed in 
 Romans iii. 9-18. Hence the apostle affirms, 'AH 
 have sinned, and come short of the glory of God ' 
 
112 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 (Rom. iii. 23). He describes man by nature as 'dead 
 in trespasses and sins' in Eph. ii. 1-3, as well as in 
 other places; and similar descriptions are to be found 
 in the Epistles of St. James and St. John, etc. 
 
 § 2. Justification. 1. Justification by faith only, 
 without the deeds of the law. Justification, or the 
 being counted righteous before God, is not attainable 
 by any act of man (Rom. iii. 20; GaL iii. n ff.). 
 The apostle says : ' All have sinned, and come short 
 of the glory of God: being justified freely by His 
 grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. 
 (Rom. iii. 23, 24). 'Being justified by faith, we 
 have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ ' 
 (Rom. v. 1). In another epistle (Eph. ii. 8, 9), he 
 affirms : ' For by grace are ye saved through faith ; 
 and that not of yourselves ; it is the gift of God, not 
 of works, lest any man should boast.' Hence he 
 declares : ' The wages of sin is death ; but the gift of 
 God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord ' 
 (Rom. vi. 23 ; comp. Rom. iii. 27, 28). 
 
 2. St. fames' teaching on justification by works. 
 One passage in St. James ii. 24 is apparently contra- 
 dictory to the teaching of St. Paul. While St. Paul 
 in Romans iv. affirms that Abraham was justified by 
 faith only, St. James, alluding to Abraham's offering 
 up of Isaac (referred to also in Heb. xi. 17-19), and 
 to the case of Rahab (mentioned also in Heb. xi. 31), 
 affirms : ' Ye see, then, how that by works a man is 
 justified, and not by faith only.' James refers to 
 justification before men, and does not speak of 
 justification before God. We read in Luke vii. 29, 
 that the people and the publicans that heard Jesus 
 'justified God' {i.e. declared God to be just) 'being' 
 
JUSTIFICATION 113 
 
 [or, having been, marg. R.V.] baptized with the 
 baptism of John.' Even so those persons who, having 
 a living faith, show mercy to others, are justified (or 
 counted righteous) by their works in the sight of men, 
 while those who ' say they have faith, and have not 
 works,' exhibit no proofs of saving faith, and are 
 therefore justly judged by those 'that are without' 
 as ' dead in trespasses and sins.' This exposition 
 will be found to agree with the argument contained 
 in the passage, James ii. 14-26. 
 
 3. Good works accompany genuine faith. Good 
 works necessarily accompany true faith which works 
 by love. They spring up from the root of faith, and 
 are inseparably connected therewith. Christ ' gave 
 Himself for us, that He might redeem us from all 
 iniquity, and purify unto Himself a peculiar people 
 [i.e., a people for His own possession, R.V.], zealous 
 of good works ' (Tit. ii. 14. See John xiv. 15 ; Rom. 
 vi. 2, xii. 1 ; 2 Cor. vii. 1 ; Eph. ii. 10). Christ 
 says : "Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men 
 gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles ? ' (Matt. vii. 
 16, 17). 
 
 4. Christ's atonement and example. The work of 
 Christ, which He performed for man, is thus described : 
 ' He was wounded for our transgressions, He was 
 bruised for our iniquities : the chastisement of our 
 peace was upon Him ; and with His stripes we are 
 healed ' (Isa. liii. 5 ; Matt. xx. 28, comp. xxvi. 28). 
 St. Paul says of Christ : ' Whom God hath set forth 
 to be a propitiation through faith in His blood . . . 
 to declare His righteousness ; that He might be just, 
 and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus ' 
 (Rom. iii. 25, 26. So Rom. v. 8 ; 2 Cor. v. 21). 
 
 H 
 
114 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 Christ is not only portrayed as ' our redemption,' but 
 also set forth as an example to His people to follow 
 in His steps. (So John viii. 12, x. 27, 28; 1 Pet. ii. 
 21-23). And St. John says, ' He that abideth in Him 
 ought himself so to walk, even as He walked ' (1 John 
 ii. 6 ; see also Phil. ii. 2-5). 
 
 5. The Scripture way of salvation. In virtue of 
 Christ's atoning work, sinners are invited to come to 
 Him just as they are. He alone can remove their sin. 
 His invitation is : ' Come unto Me, all ye that labour 
 and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest ' (Matt. 
 xi. 28-30). ' Him that cometh to Me I will in no 
 wise cast out' (John vi. 37; comp. 1 Tim. i. 15 ; 
 Heb. vii. 25). And St. Peter testified : ' Him hath 
 God exalted with His right hand to be a Prince and 
 a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and for- 
 giveness of sins ' (Acts v. 32). But although invited 
 to come as they are, men must come to be made 
 holy ; to be ' sanctified ' and ' justified ' ' in the name 
 of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God ' 
 (1 Cor. vi. 11. See Gal. iv. 6; v. 23, 24). Hence 
 believers are described as ' chosen to salvation through 
 sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth' 
 (2 Thess. ii. 13. See Matt xviii. 3 ; John iii. 3, 
 compared with 1 John v. 1, 2, and iv. 19). 
 
 6. Sin in the regenerate. Sin however remains in 
 those who are born again or regenerate. Sanctifica- 
 tion is progressive, and is not fully completed until 
 the day of Christ. We must therefore put on the 
 whole armour of God, described in Ephesians vi. 
 10-17 (comp. 1 Cor. ix. 27). Hence warnings like 
 those found in Hebrews xii. 1, n-13 ; James i. 19-21. 
 On the passages in St John's Epistle, see p. 38. 
 
fUSTIFICA TION 1 1 5 
 
 7. The Romish doctrine of justification. The Romish 
 doctrine is expounded in 32 canons of session vi. 
 of the Council of Trent. Some of these might be in- 
 terpreted in an evangelical sense. Modern Roman 
 controversialists sometimes seek to minimize the 
 differences. See Bruno's Catholic Belief, part iii. 
 p. 375. But the differences are far from merely verbal. 
 Dr. Di Bruno thus writes, pp. 378-9 : 'Regeneration, 
 and therefore justification and pardon of sins, given 
 for the first time, are clearly attached by our Lord to 
 the sacrament of Baptism (St. John iii. 5), which is 
 emphatically styled by St. Paul the laver of regenera- 
 tion (St. Titus iii. 5) ; and again, our Lord Jesus 
 Christ has plainly and peremptorily attached the 
 pardoning of sins at other times to the sacramental 
 absolution of the priest (St. John xx. 21-23), an d not 
 to mere trusting ; though hope or trust in God is in 
 itself one of the necessary dispositions never to be 
 omitted on coming to the sacrament of Penance, as 
 the Catholic Church teaches.' On the texts referred 
 to by Dr. Di Bruno, see p. 37, p. 39, and p. 79. 
 
 The Council of Trent affirms (canon xi.) that 
 men are not justified by the imputation of Christ's 
 righteousness alone, nor by the remission of their 
 sins. It maintains that good works done under the 
 influence of the Holy Spirit form an important 
 element in justification. Canon xii. anathematizes 
 all who maintain that trust in Christ is the sole cause 
 of justification. Canon xxiv. condemns those who 
 maintain that justification is complete when the 
 sinner believes in Christ ; and affirms that justifica- 
 tion is capable of being increased. Violence is thus 
 done to the meaning of the term justification, and the 
 
116 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 work of justification confounded with that of sanctifi- 
 cation. Canon xxx. asserts that ' after the grace of 
 justification has been received,' punishment in purga- 
 tory may have to be endured before the sinner can 
 enter heaven, according to the doctrine expounded 
 p. 92. Canon xxxii. affirms that a believer is 
 'justified by good works done by him through the 
 grace of God,' and that those works may ' truly merit 
 increase of grace,' eternal life, and ' an increase of 
 glory.' 
 
 The New Testament Scriptures invite the sinner to 
 ' lay hold upon the hope set before us ' (Heb. vi. 18), 
 and teach that Christ will not 'cast out' those that 
 come unto Him (John vi. 37). They set forth a 
 'justification by faith,' obtainable 'without money 
 and without price'; but Rome maintains that such 
 statements are ' not absolute, but conditional.' 
 
 Justifying faith, of course, includes a ' belief in God 
 and God's revelation ' (Heb. xi. 6). Those who 
 came to Christ when on earth did so because they be- 
 lieved that He was a teacher sent from God, that God 
 was with Him (John iii. 2), and He had 'the words of 
 eternal life ' (John vi. 68, 69). He who comes to 
 Christ for salvation must needs have a knowledge of 
 sin, and a desire to be freed from it. He must believe 
 that Christ is able and willing to save. His faith is 
 therefore accompanied by ' fear, love and repentance.' 
 But it is not from any meriioriousness belonging to 
 such faith, trust or reliance, as an act that he is saved, 
 but because, though 'wretched, and miserable, and 
 poor, and blind, and naked' (Rev. iii. 17), he comes 
 to Him who is able to comfort, enrich, enlighten and 
 clothe. A sick man is not healed by the journey to 
 
THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION IIJ 
 
 the physician, but by the treatment he there re- 
 ceives. 
 
 According to Dr. Di Bruno, faith includes good 
 works. St. Paul maintains that ' a man is justified 
 by faith without the works of the law.' x Dr. Di 
 Bruno appeals to 1 Corinthians xiii. 2 ; but the faith 
 there spoken of is not saving faith, but a belief in the 
 power of performing miracles (comp. Luke xvii. 6). He 
 quotes and explains St. Paul's words : ' the doers of 
 the law (of faith) shall be justified' (Rom. ii. 13). 
 But 'the law' there is not 'the law of faith,' but that 
 of the Ten Commandments. The apostle does not 
 (as the context shows) assert that a man can be 
 justified by the law, but if he were to be justified 
 thereby he must keep all the commandments. The 
 other texts cited by Dr. Di Bruno have been dis- 
 cussed elsewhere. 
 
 § 3. The Immaculate Conception of the 
 Virgin Mary. The Church of Rome was long 
 divided in opinion upon the question of the Immacu- 
 
 1 Dr. Di Bruno explains St. Paul's statements in the Epistle 
 to the Romans as follows : The Jewish converts ' thought that 
 it [justification] was nothing else but the result of their own 
 exterior good works, independent of grace ; whilst Christian 
 justification, or justification by faith, is a free gift of God ; he 
 therefore insisted that the Jewish rites and ceremonies, now 
 done away with, never could of themselves effect justification,' 
 {Catholic Belief, p. 370). The statement is, however, inaccurate 
 and untrue. Even the Pharisee in the parable (Luke xviii. 9-14) 
 ascribed to God's grace the good works of which he boasted, 
 and hence commenced his prayer, 'God, I thank Thee.' St. Paul 
 had not ' Jewish rites and ceremonies ' in view, but good works 
 generally. In speaking to the apostles from their standpoint, 
 and assuming, for argument's sake, that the law could be 
 perfectly perlormed, Christ still denied that any merit was 
 attachable to such acts : ' We are unprofitable servants : we 
 have done that which was our duty to do ' (Luke xvii. 10). 
 
Il8 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 late Conception of the Virgin. The Council of Trent 
 affirmed that the Virgin Mary was, ' by the special 
 privilege of God,' kept free from every sin (sess. vL 
 can. xxiii.). In its decree on 'original sin' it says, 
 ' it was not its intention to comprehend in that 
 decree the blessed and immaculate Virgin Mary, the 
 Mother of God' Cardinal Cajetan, the opponent of 
 Luther (styled by Alphonsus Liguori ' the glorious 
 St. Cajetan'), strenuously opposed the doctrine of 
 Mary having been conceived without sin. Innocent 
 III. states, 'Eve was produced without sin, but she 
 brought forth in sin ; Mary was produced in sin, but she 
 brought forth without sin ' (Sermo ii., de Festo Assumpt. 
 Maria, Colon. 1552). A long line of Roman Catholic 
 divines could be quoted holding similar opinions. 
 
 Milner, in his End of Controversy (part i. letter 12), 
 remarks : ' The Church sees nothing absolutely clear 
 and certain concerning it either in the written or 
 unwritten word, and, therefore, leaves her children to 
 form their own opinions concerning it.' 
 
 But the Bull of Pius IX., issued December 8, 1854, 
 declares : ' We declare, pronounce, and define, that 
 the doctrine which holds that the Blessed Virgin 
 Mary, at the first instance of her conception, by the 
 singular privilege and grace of the omnipotent God, 
 in virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of 
 mankind, was preserved immaculate from all stain 
 of original sin, has been revealed by God, and there- 
 fore should firmly and constantly be believed by all 
 the faithful. Wherefore, if any shall dare — which 
 God avert ! — to think otherwise than has been defined 
 by us, they should know and understand that they 
 are condemned by their own judgment, that they 
 
THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION 119 
 
 have suffered shipwreck of the faith, and have 
 revolted from the unity of the Church ; and besides, 
 by their own act, they subject themselves to the 
 penalties justly established, if what they think they 
 should dare to signify by word, writing, or any outward 
 means.' 
 
 The action of the Church of Rome with regard to 
 this dogma proves what little faith she has in her 
 infallibility. In the dispute Rome has acted exactly 
 as a Church without pretensions to infallibility would 
 have done. She did not assert her authority until 
 the majority had come round to that opinion. She 
 has permitted herself to be led by the more super- 
 stitious and unenlightened within her pale. Dr. 
 Salmon has some telling remarks on this in his 
 Infallibility of the Church, chap. xi. 
 
 Hence Rome did not decree the Immaculate 
 Conception to be an article of faith until December, 
 1854, although violent controversy had for centuries 
 existed on the subject within her pale. 1 
 
 The dogma is based upon the most offensive ma- 
 terialistic details, and apart from them the sinlessness 
 of the Blessed Virgin is opposed to the teaching of 
 
 1 Dr. Salmon observes, ' From the beginning of the four- 
 teenth century vehement disputes on this subject had been 
 carried on, the leading part being taken by two powerful 
 Orders ; the Dominicans, following their great doctor, Thomas 
 Aquinas, holding that, though cleansed from original sin before 
 her birth, Mary had been conceived in sin like others ; the 
 Franciscans, after their great teacher Scotus, exempting her 
 from the stain by a special act of God's power. The Dominicans 
 went so far as to accuse the assertors of the doctrine of the 
 Immaculate Conception of heresy, and even charged with mortal 
 sin those who attended the Office of the Immaculate Conception, 
 although that Office had been authorized by papal sanction ' ^In- 
 fallibility of the Church, p. 175). 
 
*20 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 many passages. * All have sinned, and come short of 
 the glory of God ' (Rom. iii. 23). Christ died for her 
 as well as for us. ' Christ died for the ungodly ' 
 (Rom. v. 12). 'If one died for all, then were all 
 dead ' (2 Cor. v. 14). There is no hint anywhere 
 afforded in Scripture that there was any exception 
 from sin save Christ alone (2 Cor. v. 21). Mary 
 rejoiced in God her Saviour (Luke i. 47). The 
 sinlessness of Jesus is affirmed in such passages as 
 Hebrews iv. 15, vii. 26, 27; 1 John ii 29, iii. 3, 5. 
 The sinlessness of Mary is stated nowhere in Scripture. 
 Had Mary been an exception in that particular, the 
 fact could not have been passed over in silence in 
 the New Testament. 
 
 By ' the Assumption of the Virgin ' is meant that 
 Mary was raised from the dead like her Divine Son, 
 and carried by the Lord Jesus and the holy angels 
 with great triumph into heaven. This legend, found 
 in an apocryphal writing of the fourth century, 
 entitled The Assumption of Mary is now almost an 
 article of faith in the Roman Church. 
 
 § 4. The Worship of the Virgin Mary. It 
 should be borne in mind that the Church of Rome 
 distinguishes theoretically between three different 
 kinds of religious worship, which are as follows : (1) 
 latreia, or, in its Latinized form, latria, the worship 
 due to God ; (2) hyperdulia, which is also a Greek 
 word Latinized, and means excessive servitude, the 
 worship given to the Blessed Virgin Mary ; and (3) 
 dulia, Latinized Greek, meaning servitude, bondage, the 
 * worship ' accorded to the saints. But, as we shall 
 see, this is simply a subtlety of language utterly 
 ignored in practical use. 
 
MARIOLATRY 121 
 
 Latria, according to classical usage, is used also 
 of service done to man, and therefore a quibbler might 
 argue that it means nothing peculiarly Divine, 
 Hyperdulia is not used in Biblical Greek, and dulia 
 in the New Testament never of any religious worship. 
 The mediaeval distinction was devised for polemical 
 purposes. 
 
 Roman Catholics protest against the charge that 
 they pay an honour to the Virgin Mary which is due 
 only to the Creator. They maintain that they do 
 not give the Virgin the worship of latria. But the 
 very word idolatry is an Anglicised Greek term, and, 
 like the word mariolatry, is also compounded oi latria. 1 
 
 Idolatry is used in the New Testament of the 
 worship of inferior divine beings, and of the honour 
 paid to their images. The Greeks and Romans did 
 not imagine the images or idols they worshipped 
 possessed all the properties of the gods represented. 
 They knew very well that idols were not immortal, 
 but might be burnt or destroyed. Pagan apologists, 
 arguing with Christians, used arguments similar to 
 those urged by Roman Catholic divines. But the 
 New Testament writers affirm that worship paid to 
 those inferior gods and to their images is idolatry. 
 
 Although the Virgin Mary is never spoken of in 
 the New Testament as a person to be invoked in 
 prayer, Rome does pay to her a worship which in 
 Scripture is given only to God. As it is important 
 only to refer to well-known books, we confine our 
 references to the work The Glories of Mary, by Al- 
 phonsus Liguori, canonised (1839) as a saint in the 
 
 1 The Greek is elSiaKoKarpda, compounded of d5w\ov, an 
 idol, and \arpda, service or worship. See p. 131. 
 
122 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 pontificate of Gregory XVI., whose book is authorized, 
 and widely circulated among devout Roman Catholics. 
 
 The Psalter of St. Bonaventura is often quoted 
 with approval in St. Liguori's Glories of Mary. That 
 Psalter turns the whole language of the Psalms ad- 
 dressed to God only into addresses to the Virgin. 
 Can such conduct be justified ? The matter is beyond 
 all dispute. Passages from the Psalms, interspersed 
 with passages which in the New Testament belong 
 to Christ, are in that book applied to the Virgin 
 Mary, and this by another canonized saint of the 
 Church of Rome. 
 
 Hundreds of similar passages can be quoted from 
 The Glories of Mary to the same effect. Here are a 
 few : 
 
 i. 'Although Mary is under an infinite obligation to 
 the Son for having chosen her to be His Mother, yet 
 it cannot be denied but that the Son is under great 
 obligation to her for having given Him His humanity; 
 and, therefore, Jesus, to pay as it were what He owes 
 to Mary, and glorying in her glory, honours her in a 
 special manner by listening to and granting all her 
 petitions' (Glories of Mary, part i. chap. i. sect. i.). 
 
 2. ' As it is written of the love of the Eternal 
 Father towards men, in giving His own Son to death 
 for us, that " God so loved the world as to give His 
 only-begotten Son." " So also,'' says St. Bonaventura, 
 " we can say of Mary, that she has so loved us as to 
 give her only-begotten Son for us," etc.' (Glories of 
 Mary, part i. chap. i. sect. iii.). 
 
 3. ' Bernadine de Bustis relates that a bird was 
 taught to say " Hail, Mary ! " A hawk was on the 
 point of seizing it, when the bird cried out " Hail, 
 
MARIOLATRY 1 23 
 
 Mary ! " In an instant the hawk fell dead ' (part i. 
 chap. ii. sect. ii.). 
 
 4. ' " The way of salvation is open to none other- 
 wise than through Mary ! " as a certain author remarks. 
 And before him St. Germanus had said the same 
 thing, speaking of Mary — "No one is saved but 
 through thee." . . . This is confirmed by St. 
 Antoninus, who thus beautifully expresses himself: 
 " Whoever asks and expects to obtain graces without 
 the intercession of Mary, endeavours to fly without 
 wings " ; for, as Pharaoh said to Joseph, " the land of 
 Egypt is in thy hands," and addressed all who came 
 to him for food to Joseph, " Go to Joseph," so does 
 God send us to Mary when we seek for grace, " Go 
 to Mary," for " He has decreed," says St. Bernard, 
 " that He will grant no grace otherwise than by 
 the hands of Mary." " And thus," says Richard of 
 St. Lawrence, "our salvation is in the hands of Mary ; 
 so that we Christians may with greater reason say of 
 her than the Egyptians of Joseph, " Our salvation is 
 in thy hands " ' (part i. chap. v.). 
 
 5. 'And, therefore, says Saint Peter Damian, the 
 Blessed Virgin can do whatever she pleases both in 
 heaven and on earth. She is able to raise even those 
 who are in despair to confidence, and he addresses 
 her in these words, " All power is given to thee in 
 heaven and on earth, and nothing is impossible to 
 thee, who canst raise those who are in despair to the 
 hope of salvation." ..." Yes, Mary is omnipo- 
 tent," repeats Richard of St. Lawrence; "for the 
 queen by every law enjoys the same privileges as the 
 king. And as," he adds, " the power of the son and 
 that of the mother is the same, a mother is made 
 
124 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 omnipotent by an omnipotent son." " And thus," says 
 St. Antoninus, " God has placed the whole Church, 
 not only under the patronage, but even under the 
 dominion of Mary "' (part i. chap. vi. sect. i.). 
 
 6. ' In the Franciscan chronicles it is related that 
 Brother Leo once saw a red ladder, on the summit of 
 which was Jesus Christ, and a white one, on the top 
 of which was His most holy Mother; and he saw 
 some who tried to ascend the red ladder, and they 
 mounted a few steps, and fell — they tried again, and 
 again fell. They were then advised to go and try the 
 white ladder, and by that one they easily ascended, 
 for our Blessed Lady stretched out her hand and 
 helped them, and so they got safely to heaven. 
 " Mary, in fine," says Richard of St. Lawrence, " is 
 the mistress of heaven: for there she commands as 
 she wills, and admits as she wills " ' (part i. chap. viii. 
 sect. iii.). 
 
 7. ' The Glories of Mary says, " With a fiat [let 
 it be\ God created light, heaven, earth," but with 
 Mary's fiat ["be it unto me according to Thy word "], 
 says the saint, " God became man like us " ' (part ii. 
 disc. iv.). In the same chapter, Saint Bernardine says 
 that "to become Mother of God, the Blessed Virgin 
 had to be raised to a sort of equality with the Divine 
 Persons by an almost infinity of graces." ' 
 
 This is not a question of mere words. Whether 
 termed Mariolatry or hyperdulia, the position accorded 
 to the Blessed Virgin Mary in the Glories of Mary is 
 exactly that which is accorded to the Lord Jesus Christ 
 in the New Testament. Christ in the New Testament 
 invites sinners to come to Him. They are invited in 
 the Glories of Mary to go to Mary, and hundreds of 
 
MARIOLATRY 125 
 
 legends are related to encourage them to seek her 
 protection. Christ says, ' Him that cometh to Me I 
 will in no wise cast out ' ; the Glories of Mary asserts 
 that ' no one is saved but by Mary.' Christ is actually 
 pushed off ' the throne of mercy,' while Mary is seated 
 upon it. This, we contend, is giving to the creature 
 the honour due only to the Creator, and is Mariolatry. 
 
 It is a sentimental fiction to assert that Mary's 
 consent was asked and obtained by the angel before 
 she conceived in the womb. It is a gross parody of 
 the gospel narrative in Luke i., and as fictitious as St. 
 Bernard's statement, that ' God has decreed that He 
 will grant no grace otherwise than by the hands of 
 Mary.' 
 
 In marked contrast to all such unchristian extrava- 
 gances are the statements of Holy Scripture. The 
 Blessed Virgin herself said, ' My spirit hath rejoiced 
 in God my Saviour' (Luke i. 47). On one occasion, 
 when she sought to withdraw Christ from His work, 
 thinking He was 'beside Himself (Mark iii. 20, 21), 
 our Lord said to the multitude : ' Who is My mother, 
 and who are My brethren ? ' and stretching forth His 
 hand towards His disciples, He said, ' Behold My 
 mother and My brethren ; for whosoever shall do the 
 will of My Father which is in heaven, the same is My 
 brother, and sister, and mother ' (Matt. xii. 46-50 ; 
 Mark v. 31-35 ; Luke vii. 19-2 1 ; see also Luke xi. 
 27, 28). 
 
 On another occasion also our Lord rebuked His 
 mother, namely, at the marriage supper at Cana in 
 Galilee ; when she told the Lord ' they have no wine,' 
 Jesus saith unto her, ' Woman, what have I to do with 
 thee? Mine hour is not yet come ' (John ii. 4). It 
 
126 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 is possible that our Lord may have given her an 
 intimation of what He was going to do. But whether 
 He did so or not, He admitted no interference with 
 His work ; and because she was nearest to Him in the 
 flesh, she required to be taught that she had no right of 
 interference. In the Roman Catholic translation of 
 the Bible John ii. 4 is translated, ' Woman, what is it 
 to Me and to thee? My hour is not yet come.' And 
 the note on that passage asserts that the words used 
 by our Lord do not convey any rebuke whatever. 
 
 The statement is however incorrect. The words 
 in the Greek imply rebuke, though not necessarily of a 
 harsh character. The man possessed with the unclean 
 spirit cried out to Jesus, ' What have I to do with 
 Thee, Jesus, Thou Son of the Most High God?' (Mark 
 v. 7). The expression in the original is the same 
 as that in John ii. 4, namely, ' What is it to Me and 
 to thee?' The Douay Version in the latter passage 
 agrees with our Authorized Version. The phrase 
 really signifies, 'What is there in common between us ?' 
 It occurs in the Greek version of 2 Samuel xvi. 10, 
 xix. 22, where reproof is certainly signified. 
 
 Genesis iii. 15 is by many Roman Catholics explained 
 of the Virgin, and rendered, ' She shall crush thy head.' 
 So the Douay Version translates, inasmuch as that 
 Version is a translation of the Latin Vulgate, which 
 has here ipsa, probably a simple mistake, but possibly 
 retained for theological reasons. The Hebrew cannot 
 be thus translated, because both the pronoun and the 
 verb are masculine. Many of the Fathers read ipse 
 (masculine). Even if the feminine ipsa were correct, 
 the passage would not refer to the Virgin, but to Eve. 
 The Douay note observes, ' The sense is the same ; 
 
INVOCATION OF SAINTS AND ANGELS 1 27 
 
 for it is by her seed Jesus Christ that the woman 
 crushes the serpent's head.' 
 
 § 5. Invocation of Saints and Angels. The 
 Catechism of the Council of Trent affirms that ' the 
 worship (cultus) and invocation of saints' is not 
 contrary to the second commandment. The ' invoca- 
 tion of saints' includes the veneration and invoca- 
 tion of saints, angels, and blessed souls who enjoy 
 celestial glory. It affirms that the Catholic Church has 
 always approved of ' the worship (cultum) of their 
 bodies, and of their holy ashes.' The veneration and 
 worship given to the saints and their relics is main- 
 tained to be consistent with the worship given to God ; 
 because the honour given to the king does not prevent 
 a lesser honour being given to magistrates. It adds : 
 ' Although Christians are said to adore (adorare) 
 angels, by the example of the saints of the Old 
 Testament, they do not give to them the same venera- 
 tion which they bestow upon God ' (Cat. Concil. Trid., 
 pars iii. cap. ii.). 
 
 The Catechism explains the texts which speak of 
 angels refusing such adoration to mean that angels 
 declined to receive the honour due to God, although 
 ready to accept inferior honour and reverence. 
 
 In the New Testament writings nothing is said 
 respecting the duty of Christians to give honour and 
 worship, even in a subordinate degree, to angels. 
 This is remarkable, because those celestial beings are 
 so frequently mentioned. 
 
 But if it were right to worship and pray to such beings, 
 the apostles must have said something on that subject, 
 especially when St. Paul writes to the Colossians (ii. 
 18): 'Let no man beguile you of your reward in a 
 
128 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intrud- 
 ing into those things which he hath not seen, vainly 
 puffed up by his fleshly mind.' The passage is trans- 
 lated in the Revised Version : ' Let no man rob you 
 of your prize by a voluntary humility and worshipping 
 of the angels, dwelling in the things which he hath 
 seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.' 
 
 Christ told Nathanael that he would see greater 
 signs, namely, 'heaven opened, and the angels of 
 God ascending and descending upon the Son of 
 Man ' (John i. 5 1). The allusion is to Jacob's dream 
 (Gen. xxviii. 12) Christ is like the ladder which Jacob 
 then saw, and the Saviour intimated that the angels of 
 God would be under His control. They are ' minis- 
 tering spirits, sent forth by the Head of the Church to 
 do service for the sake of those who shall be heirs of 
 salvation' (Heb. i. 14, R.V.). Hence it is recorded 
 that on two occasions, when St. John was about to 
 worship the angel which showed him wondrous things, 
 he was distinctly forbidden to do so (Rev. xix. 10, 
 xxii. 8, 9). 
 
 There are however several passages of the Old 
 Testament which seem to justify believers offering up 
 prayer to angels. Such, for instance, is the passage 
 in which Jacob says : ' The Angel which redeemed 
 me from all evil bless the lads.' Mention is also made 
 in Zechariah i. 12 of an angel interceding on behalf of 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 But those passages are easily explained from the 
 context in which they are found. God revealed 
 Himself as an angel (in appearance like a man) on 
 several occasions. With the New Testament as a 
 guide in the interpretation of the Old Testament we 
 
INVOCATION OP SAINTS 129 
 
 may safely affirm that the Angel whose appearances 
 are spoken of in the Old Testament was the Word 
 before He ' was made flesh,' that is, Christ in His pre- 
 incarnate or eternal spirit (Heb. ix. 14). That Angel 
 is often directly identified with Jehovah (Gen. xxxii. 
 30 ; Exod. iii. 2-6 ; Josh. v. 14, 15, with vi. 2 ; Judg. 
 vi. 11-14; Zech. iii. 1, 2, etc.). In Hosea xii. 3-5 it 
 is said of Jacob, ' He had power with God ; yea, he 
 had power over the angel, and prevailed : he wept 
 and made supplication unto Him : He found him in 
 Bethel, and there He spake with us, even the Lord 
 God of hosts ; the Lord is his memorial.' The 
 ' seven spirits which are before His [God's] throne,' in 
 Revelation i. 4, symbolically signify the Holy Ghost in 
 His fulness, as is proved by Revelation v. 6, where the 
 Lamb is described as having ' seven horns (all power), 
 and seven eyes (all knowledge), which are the seven 
 Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth ' (comp. 
 Isa. xi. 1, 2, and Zech. iii. 9, and Zech. iv. 10). 'God 
 giveth not the Spirit by measure unto Him' (John 
 iii. 34; comp. Ps. xlv. 7, and cxxxiii. 2). Christ 
 is called the Angel, or Messenger, of the covenant 
 (the Hebrew word for angel is the same as that for 
 messenger) in Malachi iii. 1. Hence, although angels 
 and angelic ministration are spoken of in the New 
 Testament, and especially in Hebrews i., the only 
 mediator of the New Testament is in that epistle dis- 
 tinctly stated to be Jesus (Heb. xii. 24; comp. also 
 v. 23 ; and see iv. 14-16). 
 
 Nothing is said respecting the invocation of the 
 saints in the New Testament. But before the last 
 book of the New Testament was written, many 
 remarkable saints had passed from the ranks of the 
 
 1 
 
t30 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 Church militant into those of the Church triumphant 
 While the eleventh chapter of the Epistle to the He- 
 brews recounts incidents of faith in the lives of those 
 of whom ' the world was not worthy,' no hint is given 
 that men should have recourse to them in prayer. 
 The writer of that epistle bids the Hebrews remember 
 their past teachers, some of whom were apostles of our 
 Lord and Saviour (comp. Heb. ii. 3, 4); but he does not 
 say a word of invoking them in prayer. In Hebrews 
 xiii. 7 the writer refers to those teachers who were 
 dead. Hence the text is rendered in the Revised 
 Version : ' Remember them that had the rule over 
 you, which spake unto you the word of God : and 
 considering the issue of their life, imitate their faith.' 
 In verse 17 he speaks of those teachers who were still 
 alive. 
 
 Hence the invocation of saints is not warranted by 
 God's Word written. And is it necessary? No, for the 
 Scriptures testify to Christ's willingness to hear (Matt 
 xi. 28; John xiv. 6, 13, xvi. 23, 24 ; Rom. viii. 15). '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 there- 
 fore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we 
 may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of 
 need' (Heb. iv. 15, 16; see also vii. 25, 26). 
 
 § 6. Reverence paid to Images and to 
 Relics. 1. Religious use of images. 
 
 (a) The Creed of Pope Pius IV. declares that ' the 
 images of Christ and of the Mother of God, ever 
 virgin, as well as of the other saints, ought to be had 
 and retained, and due honour and veneration are to 
 be given to them.' 
 
IMAGES AND PICTURES 131 
 
 The Council of Trent (xxvth session) teaches 
 ' due honour and veneration ' to images. It says : 
 ' By the images which we kiss, and before which we 
 uncover the head and bend the knee, we adore Christ, 
 and venerate the saints whose image they bear.' 
 
 The Second Council of Nice — the Seventh General 
 Council, according to the Roman reckoning — held 
 ad. 787, decreed ' to give them [the images in 
 question] the salutation and honorary worship, not 
 indeed the true latria, which, according to our faith, 
 belongs to the Divine nature only.' See p. 121. 
 
 But Rome is inconsistent; for the Roman Pofitifical 
 directs that : ' the cross of the Legate [of the Holy 
 See], because latria is due to it, shall be on the 
 right hand' — Pontif. Roman. (Mechlin, 1845), vol. iii. 
 tert. pars. p. 713 : Ordo ad. recip. Process. Imperator. 
 And St. Thomas Aquinas says : ' Since, therefore, 
 Christ is to be adored with the worship of latria, it 
 follows that His image is to be adored with the wor- 
 shipof latria.' — SummaTheol. 3rd part. Qu/zst. 25, art. 3. 
 
 (b) Dr. Di Bruno affirms that the reverence paid to 
 holy images does not offend against the command- 
 ment of God. He argues that the words of the com- 
 mandment are to be explained by the words that follow : 
 "thou shalt not adore them (non adorabis ea), nor 
 serve them " (Exod. xx. 4, 5, and Deut. v. 9). The 
 meaning, therefore, clearly is : Thou shalt not make 
 unto thyself a graven thing, or idol, for the sake of 
 adoring it as a false god or idol. The words " bow 
 down " in the Protestant version, instead of " adore," 
 are calculated, unhappily, to mislead unreflecting 
 persons. This commandment cannot be taken to 
 condemn the use of images intended to promote the 
 
132 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 honour and worship of our Lord Jesus Christ, the 
 true living God, or the inferior honour due to the 
 holy angels and the saints, as this is not worship of 
 strange gods, and therefore not idolatry ' ( Catholic 
 Belief, pp. 208, 209). 
 
 But the same word used in the Hebrew of Exodus 
 xx. 4, 5, and Deuteronomy v. 91s employed in Genesis 
 xxiii. 7, 12, where it is narrated that Abraham bowed 
 himself to the people of the land. Also of Jacob, bowing 
 himself before Esau (Gen. xxxiii. 3), of Joseph's 
 brethren bowing down before him (Gen. xlii. 6), etc. 
 Moreover, in the service for Good Friday, in the 
 Romish Missal, the priest at one time partly uncovers 
 the cross, and exclaims, ' Behold the wood of the cross,' 
 while the chorus answers, ' Venite adoremus.' The 
 priest afterwards completely uncovers it, and exclaims, 
 ' Behold the wood of the cross upon which the 
 salvation of the world hangs. Come, let us adore,' 
 and taking off his shoes, kneels three times, and then 
 kisses it, after which the clergy, and then the laity, 
 thrice kneeling, adore the cross. 
 
 In the Roman Pontifical, the cardinals adore the 
 pope sitting on the altar (see the medal on page 
 36). 
 
 (c) Two distinct things are forbidden by the Second 
 Commandment, namely, (1) the making of a graven 
 image of anything whatever for any religious purpose, 
 and (2) secondly, all worship or reverence paid to such 
 images (Exod. xx. 3-5). Men were accustomed on 
 ordinary occasions to bow down to one another, as 
 Jacob and his family did to Esau (Gen. xxxiii. 3, 6, 7), 
 and the Israelites did to the Lord and the king 
 (1 Chron. xxix. 20), and such respect is termed in Scrip- 
 
IMAGES AND PICTURES I33 
 
 ture, both in the Hebrew original and in the English 
 version, 'worship.' Bat all such veneration wasdistinctly 
 forbidden to be shown to images or pillars (Lev. 
 xxvi. i), although the latter might occasionally be 
 used as a sign that a place was holy (Gen. xxviii. 18 ; 
 Isa. xix. 19). The prophetical writings are full of 
 denunciations against idolatry (Isa. xliv. 9-20) ; 
 idolaters are also denounced in the New Testament 
 (1 Cor. vi. 9; Rev. xxii. 15), and St. John closes his 
 First Epistle to the Church with : " Little children, 
 keep yourselves from idols ' (1 John v. 21). 
 
 Some have asserted that since Christ has become 
 incarnate it is lawful for religious purposes to make 
 images or pictures of Him as a Man, to keep Him 
 in remembrance, and to enable us to fix our contem- 
 plations better on Him. But those who assert this 
 cannot quote a single text of the New Testament 
 where such permission is given. The same line of 
 reasoning might be adduced in favour of the practice 
 denounced under the Old Testament. For the 
 Second Person of the Godhead frequently manifested 
 Himself in human form, and was supposed, for a 
 time, to be a man. The narratives of God's appear- 
 ance to Abraham (Gen. xviii.), of His wrestling with 
 Jacob (Gen. xxxii. 24-30), and others, prove this. 
 (See other examples quoted p. 128.) But although 
 God then manifested Himself in human form, the 
 commandment distinctly forbade all attempts to 
 make even human representations of the Deity. 
 
 (d) Dr. Di Bruno maintains that the second com- 
 mandment 'was thus understood by the Jews, who, 
 by the command of God, placed two graven images 
 of the cherubim on the ark of the covenant (3 Kings 
 
134 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 [i Kings] vi. 23), and other images of angels in the 
 Temple of Solomon (2 Paralip., or 2 Chron. iii. 10, 11). 
 It is, in fact, thus practically understood also by those 
 Protestants who have no scruple in making graven 
 images, and even in setting them up in their places of 
 worship ' {Catholic Belief, p. 209). 
 
 The answer is simple. The cherubim were sym- 
 bolical figures of gold, whose wings overshadowed 
 the ark of the covenant (in which the tables of the 
 law were kept). Their faces were directed toward the 
 cover of that ark called 'the mercy seat' (Exod. xxv. 17- 
 22), upon which the blood of atonement was sprinkled 
 once a year (Lev. xvi. 14, 15). The glory of God, 
 manifested above the cherubim, indicated that He 
 was exalted over all creatures. Those cherubim were 
 never beheld by the people, or by the ordinary priests 
 or Levites. On the march, the holy vessels of the 
 sanctuary were covered, and were not seen (Num. 
 iv. 15, 19), and the ark of the covenant was probably 
 also concealed (Num. iv. 5, 6; Exod. xl. 20, 21). Thus 
 'Joshua rent his clothes, and fell to the earth upon 
 his face before the ark of the Lord until the eventide' 
 (Josh. vii. 6). The cherubim were never 'venerated.' 
 The cherubim in 2 Chronicles iii-. 10, n, made by 
 Solomon, were simply ornamental, and were also 
 never seen by the people. 
 
 (e) The division of the commandments in use in the 
 Romish Church, though possibly not originally intended 
 for the purpose, has been utilized to conceal from her 
 people the strictness of God's law. The command- 
 ments are set forth in full in comparatively few Roman 
 catechisms. By the division in use in the Roman 
 Church, the second commandment becomes the close 
 
DIVISION OF THE COMMANDMENTS 1 35 
 
 of the first ; the tenth commandment is then divided 
 into two, the ninth consisting of the clause, ' Thou 
 shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife.' Dr. Di 
 Bruno states that this division is as old as 
 Augustine (Bishop of Hippo in the fifth century), 
 mentioned in his Questions on Exodus, 17. It prob- 
 ably arose from the division of Deuteronomy v. 21 
 in the Hebrew Bible, where, to call attention to the fact 
 that the clauses ' neither shalt thou covet thy neigh- 
 bour's wife, neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's 
 house ' (R.V., which is here verbally more correct), 
 stand in a reverse order to that in Exodus xx. 17, the 
 scribes (slavishly following the letter of the text before 
 them) made the first clause a separate paragraph; 
 and then, to preserve the number ten, included the 
 second commandment in Deuteronomy in the first 
 paragraph. The Lutherans have retained this Romish 
 division, but the original form of the ten command- 
 ments is no doubt that in Exodus xx. 
 
 (f) Whatever definitions of idolatry may be given 
 by some writers, Scripture regards any breach of the 
 second commandment as idolatry. Hence the frequent 
 denunciations (Lev. xvi. 1; Deut. iv. 15 ff., xvi. 22, 
 xxvii. 15 ; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 7 ; Isa. xl. 18 ff. ; Hab. ii. 
 18 ff.; Acts xvii. 29 ; Rom. i. 21-23 ; Rev. ix. 20. The 
 sin of the Israelites at Sinai did not consist in making 
 the image of any strange god, but in worshipping 
 the true God through a symbol. Similar was the sin 
 of Jeroboam, the son of Nebat, in setting up the 
 calves in Bethel and at Dan. It was a worship of 
 the true God in a forbidden way. So jealous was 
 Hezekiah for the purity of worship that he broke 
 in pieces the precious relic of the brazen serpent, 
 
136 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 which Moses had made under God's express direction, 
 ' for unto those days the children of Israel did burn 
 incense to it; and he called it Nehushtan,' i.e. a piece 
 of brass (see 2 Kings xviii. 4). 
 
 2. The relics of the saints. In its xxvth session 
 the Council of Trent maintains that a ' due veneration 
 and honour were owed to the relics of the saints.' 
 
 There are no traces in Holy Scripture of any 
 veneration paid to the relics of the patriarchs or 
 prophets. The bones of Joseph, though carried about 
 for forty years, were never worshipped. In favour of 
 the veneration due to relics, the case of the man 
 raised up to life on touching the bones of Elisha 
 (2 Kings xiii. 21) is quoted. But that incident, if 
 part of the original book, stands completely isolated, 
 and even that miracle did not lead to the worship of 
 the prophet's bones. The Jews built and garnished the 
 sepulchres of the prophets, but went no further (Matt, 
 xxiii. 29-32). The touching of the hem of Christ's 
 garment (Matt. ix. 20) was a sign of faith in Christ, 
 but not a proof of any virtue in His clothes. Extra- 
 ordinary was the faith of the people in Peter after the 
 awful deaths of Ananias and Sapphira. But although 
 they imagined Peter's shadow could heal the sick, 
 the text does not state that as a fact (Acts v. 15, 16). 
 Aprons were, indeed, on one occasion brought from the 
 body of Paul (Acts xix. n, 12) ; but if ever extra- 
 ordinary miracles were required, it was at Ephesus, 
 the great stronghold of magical arts. 
 
 It is impossible here to discuss the miracles said to 
 be performed at the tombs of saints by the relics of 
 martyrs, or at holy springs, etc. The power of ' faith- 
 healing,' even among Hindus and Mohammedans, 
 
PURGATORY 1 37 
 
 as well as Roman Catholics, in certain kinds of bodily 
 disease, need not be disputed. But neither the Old 
 nor New Testament gives any warrant for Romish 
 practices, such as those in our day at Knock in 
 Ireland, or at Lourdes in France. 
 
 § 7. The Romish Doctrine of Purgatory. 
 The Council of Trent in its xxvth session affirmed 
 
 Medal struck in honour of Jubilee (Clement VII., 1525). The Latin 
 inscription is, ' And the gates of heaven are opened.' 
 
 that there is a purgatory, and that 'souls detained 
 there were helped by the suffrages of the faithful, 
 but especially by the acceptable sacrifice of the 
 altar.' It directed the bishops to take care that 
 the sound doctrine concerning purgatory handed 
 down by the holy fathers and the holy councils was 
 •believed, held, taught, and everywhere preached.' 
 But it did not define that doctrine. It discountenanced 
 
I38 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 the 'more difficult and subtle questions which did 
 not make to edification,' and prohibited all matters 
 ' tending to superstition, or savouring of filthy lucre, 
 and likely to create scandals and offences.' 
 
 The Catechism of the Council of Trent went 
 further. It says : ' Moreover there is a purgatorial 
 fire (purgatorius ignis) in which the souls of the 
 pious tormented {cruciate) for a definite time are 
 expiated, that an entrance may be opened for them 
 into the eternal country, in which nothing stained 
 can enter. And concerning the truth of this 
 doctrine, the sacred C.'ouncils declare that it is con- 
 firmed by the testimonies of the Scriptures and by 
 apostolical tradition ; therefore it ought to be more 
 diligently, and the oftener discoursed about by the 
 parish priest, because we have fallen upon those times 
 in which men do not endure sound doctrine.' (Pars i., 
 cap. vi. v.) 
 
 There were evidently two parties in the Council of 
 Trent, one more and the other less ' advanced ' or 
 ' superstitious ' ; and the latter ultimately prevailed. 
 
 Purgatory then may be denned to be a place of 
 punishment after death, in which the souls of the 
 faithful are detained until all stains of lesser or venial 
 sin have been washed away, or until satisfaction has 
 been made to Divine justice by undergoing the tem- 
 poral punishment due for the greater sins (see p. 92). 
 
 The New Testament revelations mention no such 
 place. Christ said to the thief on the cross who suffered 
 on account of his grievous offences,' To-day thou shalt 
 be with Me in paradise ' (Luke xxiii. 43). St. Paul 
 makes no reference to it when speaking of the 
 earthly house of this tabernacle being dissolved (2. 
 
PURGATORY 1 39 
 
 Cor. v. 1-8). He speaks (Phil. i. 21-23) 0I " depart- 
 ing to be with Christ, or of abiding in the flesh, but 
 not of purgatory ; and (Phil. ii. 1 o) refers to prayer 
 offered up in the name ot Jesus by those in heaven 
 .(angels), those on earth (men), and those under the 
 earth (saints in paradise). Comp. Eph. iii. 15. In 
 Hebrews ix. 27 he says, 'It is appointed unto men once 
 to die, but after this the judgment.' 'Blessed are the 
 dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, 
 saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours ; 
 and their works do follow them ' (Rev. xiv. 13). 
 
 When Christ died, He descended to that part of 
 Hades, or the unseen world, where the souls of the 
 blessed await the resurrection day. Thai piact is 
 called ' paradise ' (Luke xxiii. 43). Paradise is men- 
 tioned in 2 Corinthians xii. 4, where St. Paul relates 
 how he was ' caught up into paradise,' probably 
 identical with ' the third heaven ' of the verse preced- 
 ing. In Revelation ii. 7 Christ promises to give to 
 him that overcometh ' to eat of the tree of life which is 
 in the midst of the paradise of God.' This abode of 
 the blessed dead is so named after ' the garden of 
 Eden ' spoken of in Genesis ii. and iii., where the old 
 Greek translation known as the LXX. renders garden 
 by paradise. Christ did not rise till the third day, 
 but remained till then among the dead. He did not 
 ascend to His Father until forty days after His 
 resurrection (see John xx. 17; Acts i. 3). This is 
 taught in Psalm xvi. 10, Acts ii. 31, and. is referred to 
 in Ephesians iv. 9, where St. Paul calls the place He 
 ' descended into' by the name of 'the lower parts of 
 the earth,' that is, the grave. (Comp. Ps. lxiii. 9, 10.) 
 
 We do not know what Christ effected among the 
 
I40 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 dead, for Scripture says little or nothing. The 
 comparison of Hebrews xi. 40 with Hebrews xii. 23 
 may afford a few hints. The former text speaks of 
 the saints who lived and died before Christ as 
 ' not made perfect,' while the latter text, in reference 
 to their state after Christ's resurrection, speaks of 
 'the spirits of just men made perfect.' The world 
 beyond the grave is called, in Hebrew, Sheol (the 
 under-world), which is often used in the Revised 
 Version of the Old Testament. In the New Testa- 
 ment the expression used is Hades, the unseen world. 
 ' Hell ' in the Authorized Version, often means the 
 invisible world, or the place of departed spirits, as Job 
 xxvi. 6 ; Psalm cxxxix. 8 ; Isaiah xiv. 9 ; Ezekiel 
 xxxi. 17, xxxii. 21 ; Matthew xi. 23 (where of 
 Capernaum it is said, ' thou shalt be cast down to 
 hell,' that is, utterly destroyed); see also Revelation 
 i. 18, xx. 13-14. ' Hell,' or Sheol, often indicates 
 the grave, as in Psalm ix. 17, lv. 15 (comp. Numbers 
 xvi. 30-33, where it is translated ' the pit') ; Proverbs 
 v. 5, xxiii. 14, xxvii. 20; Isaiah v. 14. [On Matt, 
 xvi. 18, see p. 30.] 
 
 ' Hell,' in the Authorized Version sometimes 
 signifies the place of lost souls, as in Matthew v. 22, 
 29, 30; x. 28, xxiii. 15, 33; Mark ix. 43, 45, 47; 
 Luke xii. 5 ; James iii. 6. But when used in that 
 signification the word employed in the original is 
 not Hades, but Gehenna, which name was originally 
 Gehinnom, the Valley of Hinnom, where human 
 sacrifices were offered to Moloch (2 Chron. xxviii. 
 3). That valley was defiled by Josiah (2 Kings 
 xxiii. 10), and used as a place of burial (Jer. vii. 32). 
 Sennacherib's army was buried there (Isa. xxx. 31- 
 
PURGATORY 1 4 1 
 
 33). The valley was called also Topheth, a place 
 of burning (the dead), or perhaps rather a place to 
 be spit upon, abhorred. On account of the reference 
 to the Valley of Hinnom in Isaiah lxvi. 24, the word 
 Gehenna was employed by the Jews to denote the 
 place of future punishment. 
 
 According to the New Testament there is no 
 necessity for purgatory. Souls may, indeed, be trained 
 in paradise to understand more fully the love 
 of God in Christ Jesus. But such training must be 
 a blessing, unaccompanied with the pain and tortures 
 which popular Romanism thinks of in purgatory. 
 For St. Paul says, ' There is therefore now no con- 
 demnation to them which are in Christ Jesus' (Rom. 
 viii. 1). The same apostle, further speaking of 
 persons who had been guilty of the worst crimes, 
 remarked, ' Such were some of you : but ye are 
 washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in 
 the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our 
 God' (1 Cor. vi. n). And St. John assures us, 
 'The blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanseth us 
 from all sin ' (1 John i. 7). 
 
 The consequences of sin no doubt remain, in many 
 cases, even after repentance and forgiveness. Im- 
 morality may cause disease. The wound may smart 
 long after it has been bound up ; the broken limb will 
 suffer pain in the process of healing. Penal con- 
 sequences may naturally follow- in the track of sin 
 committed, whereby the enemies of the Lord have 
 been given great occasion to blaspheme (see p. 94). 
 But all such are endured only in this world ; there 
 is no warrant for any penal inflictions on believers 
 beyond the grave, although there may be a loss 
 
t42 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 throughout eternity by reason of lives on earth not 
 having been spent in the service of Christ. In other 
 words, there may be degrees in happiness propor- 
 tioned to the love of God shed abroad here in our 
 hearts. 
 
 Texts quoted in favour of purgatory are : — 
 
 (i) i Corinthians iii. 13, 14, 15. 'Everyman's 
 work shall be manifest, for the Day [of the Lord] shall 
 declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire : and 
 the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 
 If any man's work abide which he hath built there- 
 upon : he shall receive a reward. If any man's 
 work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss, but he him- 
 self shall be saved, yet so as by fire. ' 
 
 Romanists maintain that the work of that man will 
 abide who is entirely free from sin, having died in 
 ' a perfect state of grace,' while there exists for others 
 ' the fire of purgatory.' 
 
 But the fire the apostle speaks of is that which shall 
 accompany Christ's second coming. For, as St. Paul 
 says in 2 Thessalonians i. 7, 8, the Lord Jesus shall 
 be revealed from heaven ' in a flame of fire, taking 
 vengeance on them that know not God, and that 
 obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.' The 
 fire of the day of Christ shall test every man's work 
 — not only the work of the incompletely righteous ; 
 purgatory therefore cannot be meant. The apostle 
 speaks of the work of ministers, whose converts, if 
 any, will be their joy and "crown of rejoicing in the 
 presence of Jesus Christ, while if such workers for 
 Christ have no such seals of their ministry (1 Cor. ix. 
 2) their work will be consumed, even though they 
 themselves may individually be found among the saved. 
 
FALSE TEACHINGS 143 
 
 (2) The second passage adduced is Matthew xii. 
 31, 32, in which our Lord asserts that sin against the 
 Holy Ghost 'shall not be forgiven neither in this 
 world nor in that which is to come.' The context of 
 the passage is as follows : the Pharisees being unable 
 to deny, as a matter of fact, the power of our Lord 
 to cast out devils, ventured to ascribe the performance 
 of those miracles to the power of Beelzebub. Our 
 Lord then uttered the solemn warning that blasphemy 
 against the Son of Man would be forgiven, but that 
 blasphemy against the Holy Ghost was unpardonable. 
 That is, Christ warned the Pharisees that though their 
 blasphemy against Him might be pardoned, yet when 
 men before whose eyes ' the powers of the world to 
 come ' (Heb. vi. 5) had been vividly displayed, dared to 
 ascribe to Satan that which in their hearts they knew 
 came from God, they were dangerously nigh com- 
 mitting an unpardonable sin. 
 
 Numerous citations are given by Lightfoot in his 
 Hortz HebraiccB (and later by Schottgen and Wun- 
 sche), to prove that ' this world ' in the phraseology of 
 our Lord's day meant ' the times prior to Messiah's 
 coming ' ; and ' the world to come ' signified ' the 
 times of the Messiah,' who was to introduce 'the 
 time of reformation ' (Heb. ix. 10). 
 
 In the New Testament 'the world to come' is 
 used in that sense in Hebrews ii. 5 and vi. 5, and 
 hence the above is the most natural explanation of our 
 Lord's words in Matthew xii. 31. That passage 
 therefore affords no proof of pardon after death, 
 much less of a purgatory. 
 
 (3) Matthew v. 25, 26, is often quoted. The 
 ' prison ' mentioned there is explained by Roman theo- 
 
144 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 logians to mean purgatory. But, as will be seen from 
 its context, in that passage our Lord merely advises 
 a man who has offended his fellow to seek at once 
 to be reconciled to him, lest a favourable opportunity 
 for reconciliation be lost, and he be condemned 
 in a penalty which could never be paid. The 
 passage has no reference to a prison after death, 
 although the text is often quoted by preachers in 
 that sense, by way of arguing from 'the less to the 
 greater.' 
 
 (4) Great importance is attached to the passage 
 in 2 Maccabees xii. 43, 44, where it is recorded that 
 Judas Maccabeus offered a sacrifice for the sins of the 
 dead. That is not the meaning of the Greek origi- 
 nal, although it is the interpretation put upon the pas- 
 sage in the Latin Vulgate, and consequently in the 
 Douay Version. The Greek records that Judas Macca- 
 beus offered a sin-offering for his army. Judas feared 
 that his army was involved in the guilt of idolatry, be- 
 cause idolatrous emblems or charms taken from the 
 Jamnites were found on the persons of his soldiers 
 who fell in battle. (Compare the story of Achan 
 and the army of Israel in Joshua vii.) The writer 
 of 2 Maccabees approved of prayers for the dead; but 
 there is no proof that Judas Maccabeus offered up 
 such prayers. The writer of 2 Maccabees, too, is 
 inconsistent, because he records the fact that those 
 men were slain because of their idolatrous practices, 
 and yet speaks of Judas acting righteously because 
 of the 'great favour laid up for those that died 
 godly.' That text is not therefore a satisfactory 
 proof of ' prayers for the dead ' ; and in no case 
 proves a 'purgatory.' For no one who dies in a 
 
PkAYERS FOR THE DEAD 1 45 
 
 mortal sin, like idolatry, can, in accordance with 
 Romish doctrine, ever enter ' purgatory.' 
 
 § 8. Prayers for the Dead. The question of 
 prayers for the dead is inextricably mixed up 
 with that of purgatory. But the two questions ought 
 to be kept distinct. No instance occurs in the Old 
 Testament of prayer for the dead. Isaiah speaks of 
 the righteous dead as ' taken away from the evil 
 to come,' and as entering ' into peace ; they rest in 
 their beds, each one that walketh in his uprightness ' 
 (Isa. lvii. 1, 2, R.V.). The Psalmist, speaking of the 
 Lord showing him ' the path of life,' says : ' In Thy 
 presence is fulness of joy; at Thy right hand there 
 are pleasures for evermore' (Ps. xvi. n). 
 
 In the Book of Wisdom, probably written between 
 B.C. 150-100, which the Church of Rome regards as 
 canonical (see p. 18), we read: 'The souls of the 
 righteous are in the hand of God, and there shall no 
 torment touch them. In the sight of the unwise 
 they seemed to die . . . but they are in peace ' 
 (Wisdom iii. 1, 2). 
 
 Yet it has been asserted that the Jewish practice 
 of praying for the dead prevailed at the time of our 
 Lord, and that our Lord must have offered up such 
 prayers at the synagogue worship. But the strange 
 fact has now been proved by M. Israel Levi that the 
 Jewish prayers for the dead are not of a date earlier 
 than the Crusades, and were an imitation of the 
 usage in the Roman Catholic and other corrupt 
 Christian Churches. 1 
 
 1 See M. Israel Levi's article on La Commemoration des Ames 
 dans la Judaisme in the Revue des Etudes Juints, Juillet-Sept., 
 1894. A sketch of this article is given in our tract entitled 
 
 K 
 
I46 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 No Jewish inscription prior to the Christian era is 
 yet known which contains prayers for the dead. The 
 date of the Aden inscription cited by Dean Luckock 
 in many editions of his work After Death as B.C. 
 282 is a.d. 718, i.e. one thousand years later. 1 
 
 The Talmuds and the Midrashim contain distinct 
 proofs that the practice of prayers for the dead did 
 not exist until centuries after Christ. 8 On 2 Macca- 
 bees xii., see p. 144. 
 
 St. Paul's prayer for Onesiphorus in 2 Timothy i. 
 16-18, is claimed as an instance of such prayers in 
 the New Testament. Bat it cannot be shown that 
 Onesiphorus was dead when St. Paul penned that 
 prayer. The apostle at the close of that letter 
 sends a greeting to ' the house of Onesiphorus,' 
 and not specially to Onesiphorus. St. Chrysostom 
 affirms that Onesiphorus was at the time at Rome. 
 Fabricius cites a tradition that Onesiphorus, years 
 afterwards, was a bishop of Corone, in Messenia. 
 
 The context however throws another light upon 
 the matter. In it St Paul exhorts Timothy to firmness 
 and fidelity ; he reminds him that ' all they which 
 are in Asia be turned away from me, of whom are 
 Phygellus and Hermogenes' {v. 15); he then refers 
 to Onesiphorus and his house in the verses quoted, 
 and concludes, ' thou, therefore, my son, be strong 
 in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.' 
 
 Onesiphorus, at the time the apostle wrote, may 
 
 Prayers for the Dead, published by the Church Association (No. 
 214), and sold at the office of that Association, 14, Buckingham 
 Street, Strand, London, at id. 
 
 1 See the pamphlet referred to in former note. 
 
 4 Passages from the Talmud and Midrash are cited in the 
 pamphlet already referred to. 
 
PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD 1 47 
 
 have been among those who, like Demas, had tem- 
 porarily ' forsaken him,' beguiled by false teachers. 
 St. Paul did not, however, forget Onesiphorus' deeds 
 in former days, and while hinting at the grief caused 
 by the desertion of one who had long been his 
 devoted adherent, prays that he may obtain mercy 
 of the Lord in the great day. This explanation suits 
 the context. 
 
 That the family of Onesiphorus were not involved 
 in the defection of their chief member is probable 
 from the salutation at the close of the epistle (chap, 
 iv. 19). But the mention of ' the house of One- 
 siphorus/ without mention of Onesiphorus, is no 
 proof that Onesiphorus was excluded from that greet- 
 ing. There is a parallel instance in the mention 
 made of 'the household of Stephanas,' 1 in 1 Corin- 
 thians xvi. 15. For Stephanas was certainly included 
 in his ' house ' or ' household' mentioned in those 
 passages, and he is mentioned in 1 Corinthians xvi. 
 17, as alive and with St. Paul. The utmost therefore 
 that can be said with regard to Onesiphorus is that 
 he may have been absent from his family when St. 
 Paul sent the greeting at the close of his Second 
 Epistle to Timothy. 
 
 There is, therefore, not a particle of proof that the 
 prayer for Onesiphorus was a prayer for a dead man ; 
 and the entire castle of cards' erected on this solitary 
 text accordingly falls to the ground. 
 
 Some have ventured to adduce Revelation vi. 10, 
 
 1 The Greek is (rbi) 2iTe<pat>3. oZkov, 1 Cor. i. 16), corresponding 
 with t§ 'OvrjaMpSpov otxip of 2 Timothy i. 16 and iv. 19, whicli 
 is mentioned under an equivalent expression (rty oUlav 
 2re0<w2) in I Cor. xvi. 15. 
 
I48 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 where the souls of the martyrs are represented as crying 
 for vengeance on their murderers. That passage tan 
 not be taken literally. It would be strange if the New 
 Testament martyrs continually prayed for vengeance, 
 and longed for the day of the punishment of their 
 adversaries ! That was not the spirit exhibited by 
 Christ, nor by His first martyr Stephen ! But that 
 is not the meaning of the passage. Under the Old 
 Testament arrangements, the blood of the victims 
 used to be poured out at the base of the altar. 
 Hence the Jews spoke of the blood of the prophets, 
 and of sufferers for God, as lying under the altar, 
 which was regarded as, in some aspects, God's throne. 
 Abel's blood is represented in Genesis iv. as crying 
 unto God from the ground. The blood of Jesus, which 
 was shed for sin, and to take away sin, ' speaketh 
 better things than that of Abel ' (Heb. xii. 24), 
 because it cries out for mercy, and not for vengeance. 
 But the blood of the martyrs shed on earth is re- 
 peatedly said to cry out for vengeance ; and the cry 
 for vengeance in Revelation vi. 10 is represented as 
 answered in the horrors connected with the opening of 
 the sixth seal (Rev. vi. 12-17). 
 
 We have lastly to touch briefly on the celebrated 
 passage in 1 Peter iii. 18-20. 
 
 ' For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just 
 for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being 
 put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: 
 by which also He went and preached unto the spirits 
 in prison ; which sometime were disobedient, when 
 once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of 
 Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein lew, 
 that is, eight souls were saved by water.' 
 
PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD I49 
 
 The Revised Version is : ' Christ also suffered for 
 sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He 
 might bring us to God ; being put to death in the 
 flesh, but quickened in the spirit; in which also He 
 went and preached unto the spirits in prison, which 
 aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of 
 God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a 
 building.' 
 
 The most important difference in the latter version 
 is that the words ' quickened in the spirit' are substi- 
 tuted for the phrase ' quickened by the Spirit ' in the 
 Authorised Version ; the latter was often explained 
 to mean, ' made alive by the Holy Spirit,' whereas the 
 text really speaks of Christ's ' spirit ' as contrasted 
 with His ' flesh.' 
 
 The Douay, or Roman Catholic, Version is as 
 follows : ' Because Christ also died once for our sins, 
 the just for the unjust; that He might bring us to 
 God, being put to death indeed in the flesh, but 
 enlivened in the spirit. In which also coming He 
 preached to those spirits that were in prison : which 
 had been some time incredulous,' etc. 
 
 This passage has undoubtedly been supposed by 
 many theologians (Protestant as well as Roman 
 Catholic) to refer to a preaching of Christ in the 
 invisible world previous to His resurrection. Such a 
 supposition is unnecessary. St. Peter plainly refers 
 to a fact well known, and not to a heiv fact . then for 
 the first time revealed to him by the Holy Spirit, and 
 made known in this passage for the first time to the 
 Church of God. No preaching of Christ in the 
 unseen world is anywhere else referred to in Scripture. 
 By the spirit, in 1 Peter iii. 18, there is indeed no 
 
I50 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 doubt that the Spirit of Christ is meant, and not the 
 Boly Spirit, under whose influence Noah warned the 
 sinners of his day of their approaching doom, 
 exhorting them to repentance (Heb. xi. 7), for which 
 reason he is styled in 2 Peter ii. 5 'a preacher of 
 righteousness.' And, though as critical interpreters 
 we must call attention to the fact that just as 'the 
 flesh ' spoken of in the passage is ' the flesh of 
 Christ,' so ' the spirit' there mentioned must be the 
 spirit of Christ ; yet, practically considered, the teach- 
 ing of the passage is the same, or nearly so, as that 
 set forth in the Authorized Version. Christ in His 
 Spirit, i.e., as the pre-incarnate Word — whose ' eternal 
 spirit ' is spoken of in Hebrews ix. 14, 1 often appeared 
 in human form to the patriarchs. He went in that 
 ' eternal spirit ' (comp. the expression ' came down ' 
 in Gen. xi. 5-7) and preached to the sinners before 
 the flood whether through Noah, or by some special 
 manifestation, as the Angel of the Covenant (comp. 
 Judg. ii. 1-5, which some understand thus), is a matter 
 of little consequence, and concerning which nothing 
 can be asserted positively. 
 
 The text states that the spirits of those men who 
 then despised the longsuffering of God are now in 
 prison (the prison of Gehenna, Isa. xxiv. 21-23), 
 because of that disobedience in the days of Noah, 
 
 1 Bp. Westcott in his Commentary on Hebrews, well re- 
 marks : 'In men the "spirit" is, as has been said, that by 
 which they are capable of connexion with God. But in Christ, 
 who did not cease to be the Son of God by becoming man, the 
 " spirit " is to be regarded as the seat of His Personality in His 
 human Nature. So far the irvevfia atthviov [the " eternal spirit "] 
 included the limited irved/ia ["spirit"] of the Lord's humanity. 
 This irveO/ia, having its own proper existence, was in perfect 
 harmony with the ryeu/ia altliviov.' 
 
FASTING 151 
 
 which caused God to send the flood on the world. 
 ' The spirits in prison ' can as well mean ' the spirits 
 now in prison ' (Rev. xx. 1-3, 7 ; Matt. v. 25 ; 2 Pet. 
 ii. 4 ; Jude 6) as ' the spirits who were in prison ' at 
 the supposed time of Christ's preaching. 
 
 The dead to whom the Gospel had been preached 
 in 1 Peter iv. 6 were believers who, like their Lord, 
 suffered death for His sake, and were judged accord- 
 ing to men ' in the flesh.' They were thus made 
 'partakers of the sufferings of Christ' (1 Pet. iv. 13), 
 in order that they might be made alive 'according to 
 God,' like Christ, ' in the spirit.' 1 
 
 § g. On Fasting. No command to fast is to be 
 found in the New Testament. But our Lord, in the 
 Sermon on the Mount, speaking to such as were then 
 accustomed to fast, says : ' When thou fastest, anoint 
 thine head and wash thy face ; that thou appear not 
 unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in 
 secret ; and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall 
 reward thee openly' (Matt. vi. 17, 18). 
 
 There was but one fast enjoined by Divine authority 
 in the Old Testament, namely, 'the fast ' on the great 
 day of atonement (Lev. xvi. 29-31), which is referred 
 to in Acts xxvii. 9. Other fasts were, however, 
 enjoined on special occasions by the direction of the 
 authorities in the Jewish Church or State (e.g. Jer. 
 xxxvi. 9). After the destruction of the Jewish State, 
 more frequent fasts are spoken of (Zech. vii. 5). But 
 
 1 In my volume of Biblical Essays, published by T. and T. 
 Clark in 1886, a full examination is given of that passage, with 
 a discussion of the passages alluding to the subject in the writ- 
 ings of the early Fathers, as Hermas, Clement of Alexandria, and 
 others. The fourth essay in that work was written in reply to 
 Dean Plumptre's book on the Spirits in Prison. 
 
152 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 when the Lord was inquired of concerning those 
 fasts, the answer given by the prophet was that they 
 were neither enjoined nor forbidden. Persons were 
 therefore free to observe those fasts or not, accord- 
 ing as they might find the observance beneficial or 
 otherwise. But those observances were not meritori- 
 ous in the sight of God (Zech. vii. 5 ff.). 
 
 There is moreover even more distinct teaching on 
 this subject in the Book of Isaiah. 
 
 The Lord there asks (chap, lviii. 5-7), ' Is it such a 
 fast that I have chosen? a day for a man to afflict his 
 soul ? is it to bow down his head as a bulrush, and to 
 spread sackcloth and ashes under him ; wilt thou call 
 this a fast, and an acceptable day to the Lord ? Is 
 not this the fast that I have chosen ? to loose the 
 bands of wickedness ; to undo the heavy burdens ? 
 . . . Is is not to deal thy bread to the hungry, 
 and that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy 
 house ? When thou seest the naked, that thou cover 
 him ; and that thou hide not thyself from thine own 
 flesh ? ' 
 
 Christ gave the following directions with regard to 
 the times most suitable for fasting : 
 
 ' Can the children of the bride-chamber mourn, as 
 long, as the bridegroom is with them? but the days 
 will come when the bridegroom shall be taken from 
 them, and then shall they fast ' (Matt. ix. 15). 
 
 This passage of the Gospel is explained by the 
 Church of England in her Homily on Fasting — part 2 
 — as follows : 
 
 ' Ye shall note, that so long as God revealeth His 
 mercy unto us, and giveth us of His benefits, either 
 spiritual or corporal, we are said to be with the 
 
FASTING 153 
 
 Bridegroom at the marriage. . . . But the marriage 
 is said then to be ended, and the bridegroom to be 
 gone, when Almighty God smiteth us with affliction, 
 and seemeth to leave us in the midst of a number of 
 adversities. So God sometimes striketh private men 
 privately with sundry adversities, as trouble of mind, 
 loss of friends, loss of goods, long and dangerous 
 sicknesses, etc. Then it is a fit time for that man to 
 humble himself to Almighty God by fasting, and to 
 mourn and bewail his sins with a sorrowful heart. 
 . . . Again, when God shall afflict a whole region 
 or country with wars, with famine, with pestilence 
 . . . and such other like calamities, then is it 
 time for all states and sorts of people ... to 
 humble themselves by fasting, and bewail their sinful 
 living before God.' 
 
 This statement can be illustrated from Scripture 
 histories. 
 
 David fasted when his child was sick (2 Sam. xii. 
 16); Esther, with her maidens, fasted ere she went in 
 to Ahasuerus (Esth. iv. 16) ; Ezra fasted at the river 
 of Ahava (Ezra viii. 21) ; 'Daniel set himself to seek 
 by prayer and fasting ; (Dan. ix. 3). Christ said of 
 certain demons, ' This kind goeth not forth but by 
 prayer and fasting' (Matt. xvii. 21). The oldest 
 Greek MSS. omit that verse, and it is omitted in the 
 Revised Version. In the parallel in Mark ix. 29, the 
 concluding words ' and fasting ' are also omitted in the 
 Revised Version, on the authority of the best MSS. 
 Prior to the solemn ordination of elders, Paul and 
 Barnabas ' prayed with fasting ' (Acts xiv. 23). 
 
 Our Lord, indeed, fasted forty days and forty 
 nights, as did Moses on two occasions on Mount 
 
154 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 Sinai (Exod. xxxiv. 28 ; Deut. ix. 9, 18), and Elijah 
 on Mount Hoieb (1 Kings xix. 8). 
 
 But our Lord did not experience any pangs of 
 hunger during that time. St. Matthew says, ' He 
 was afterward an hungred' (Matt iv. 2). St Mark 
 does not mention the fasting at all (Mark i. 12, 13). 
 St, Luke says of those days, 'And when they were 
 ended, He afterward hungred.' The forty days of 
 our Lord's fast therefore seem to have been spent in 
 rapt ecstasy and contemplation. 
 
 Fasting therefore appears to be of value only 
 when employed for the purpose of giving oneself up 
 to continuous prayer. 
 
 Abstinence from special kinds of food is nowhere 
 enjoined or recommended in any part of Scripture. 
 St. Paul alludes to the ' commanding to abstain from 
 meats ' as a mark of the apostasy (1 Tim. iv. 3), and 
 a sign of weak faith in those persons who attach im- 
 portance to such trifling matters. ' The kingdom of 
 God is not meat and drink, but righteousness and 
 peace and joy in the Holy Ghost' (Rom. xiv. 17 ; see 
 the whole of that chapter). 
 
 It is of importance to note what the Church of 
 England says respecting the prohibition of eating 
 meat on fast days, prescribed by the statute 2 and 
 3 Edward VI. c. 19, and alluded to in 'the Tables 
 and Rules ' attached to the Book of Common Prayer 
 which mentions ' the Fasts, and Days of Abstinence 
 to be observed in the year.' 
 
 The Homily on Fasting, part 2, distinctly states 
 (as does the statute itself) that that law was framed 
 for political reasons. It was ' in consideration of 
 the maintaining of fisher-towns bordering upon the 
 
VOWS OF CELIBACY 1 55 
 
 seas, and for the increase of fishermen, of whom do 
 spring mariners to go upon the sea, to the furnishing 
 of the navy of the realm. . . . Such laws of 
 princes and other magistrates are not made to put 
 holiness in one kind of meat and drink more than 
 another, to make one day more holy than another, 
 but are grounded merely upon policy,' namely, as 
 afterwards explained, for' the increase and support of 
 the English navy, and for 'the sooner reducing of 
 victuals to a more moderate price, to the better sus- 
 tenance of the poor.' 
 
 § 10. Clerical Celibacy, Vows of Virginity, 
 Extreme Unction. Space compels us to notice 
 in the briefest manner some other points of the 
 Roman system. 
 
 i. The celibacy of the clergy. It is strange that 
 Rome should strenuously insist upon forbidding mar- 
 riage to her clergy, when it is expressly permitted in 
 Holy Scripture. Christ called Peter to be an apostle 
 when he was a married man (Matt. viii. 14). The Apostle 
 Paul seems to have been at one time a member of the 
 Jewish Sanhedrin, and must then have been a married 
 man. In Acts xxvi. 10, ' voice ' should be rendered 
 ' vote,' as in the Revised Version. As a widower he 
 asserts his right to be married, like other apostles, 
 the brethren of the Lord, and like Peter (1 Cor. ix. 
 5). Under the peculiar circumstances at Corinth, 
 Paul recommends the unmarried state (1 Cor. vii. 
 25-40). That recommendation was not to the clergy, 
 but to the laity. In the pastoral epistles, Paul 
 speaks of marriage as required in presbyters or 
 bishops (1 Tim. iii. 2-4), and in deacons (vv. 10- 
 1 2). Similar directions are given in Titus i. 6. ' For- 
 
156 ROMAN CATHOLICISM 
 
 bidding to marry' is a mark of the apostasy (1 Tim. 
 iv. 3), and the Church has no right to lay a burden 
 on clergy or laity which its Lord has not laid (Matt. 
 xix. 11). No such yoke was laid upon the priests in 
 Old Testament times, and the Old Testament 
 prophets were generally married men. 
 
 2. Vows of virginity or celibacy in general. The 
 Lord prayed for His people, not that they should be 
 taken out of the world, but kept from the evil (John 
 xvii. 15). Christians are to remain in the world, and 
 to shine there as lights (Matt. v. 14-16). No monas- 
 teries or nunneries existed in Old Testament days ; 
 nor are they recommended in the New Testament. 
 Marriage is commended in Scripture, and virginity is 
 not regarded as essentially a higher state, though to 
 be preferable in individual cases (Matt. xix. 12 ; 1 
 Cor. vii. 7). The unscriptural idea concerning the 
 merit of virginity was early introduced into the 
 Christian Church from Gentile sources. The Coun- 
 cil of Elvira, in Spain (a.d. 305), was the first which 
 enacted canons concerning clerical celibacy ; but the 
 struggle in favour of freedom lasted for centuries. 
 
 3. Extreme Unction is the last anointing given to 
 the dying. It is regarded as one of the seven sacra- 
 ments, and administered by a priest anointing with 
 holy oil the eyes, ears, nostrils, mouth, hands and 
 feet, repeating the form ula, ' The Lord, through this 
 holy unction >J< and His own most gracious com- 
 passion, forgive thee whatsoever sin thou hast com- 
 mitted ' — the words, ' by seeing,' ' by hearing,' ' by 
 smelling,' ' by tasting and talking,' ' by touching,' 
 and ' by going,' being used suitably to each part 
 anointed. 
 
EXTREME UNCTION 1 57 
 
 The texts, Mark vi. 13 and James v. 14, 16, are 
 cited as proofs. But the anointing spoken of in 
 Mark was performed for the healing of the body, 
 while extreme unction is administered for the healing 
 of the soul, and never administered unless the death 
 of the person is expected. Even Cardinal Bellar- 
 mine says the apostles had not then been made 
 priests (see p. 66), and could not administer such a 
 rite. The anointing in James v. was for the healing 
 of the body ; and probably oil is only mentioned 
 there because it happened to be one of the most 
 common remedies employed at that time (comp. 
 Luke x. 34). St. James' direction is that in case of 
 sickness united prayer ought to be had recourse to for 
 the needs of the soul, at the same time that remedies 
 are employed to remove the sickness of the body. 
 Whatever may be the precise meaning of St. James's 
 direction, it is certain that no mention is there made 
 of a sacrament of Extreme Unction. 
 
 Supplementary Note to page 102. 
 
 In a Spanish copy of the Indulgence given on p. 103, just 
 procured from Spain, the measure is said to be "preserved in a 
 convent of Loreto in the kingdom of Italy, in which city is 
 preserved her Most Holy House., brought miraculously by the 
 hands of the angels from Jerusalem." The wording of the 
 Spanish copy is in other respects the same as the Italian trans- 
 lated on p. 102 n. 
 
 The Indulgence depicted in the frontispiece was sold by 
 Tetzel, commissary for Archbishop Albert of Mainz and Magde- ' 
 ifburg, acting under the Bull of Leo X. (p. 98). To secure its j 
 ^benefits the possessor was required to obtain priestly absolution. I 
 'A facsimile of this Indulgence is also given by Kostlin in 
 & Luther's Leben, 1885. 
 
TEXTS NOT MERELY QUOTED, BUT EXPLAINED. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Genesis. 
 
 iii. xg, 16 92, 94- 126 
 
 xiv. 18 64, 70 
 
 xlviii 1-3 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 xx. 3-5 132 
 
 xx. 4, 5 131, 132. 135 
 
 xxv. 17 134 
 
 Leviticus. 
 vi. 1-7 83 
 
 xvi. 14, 15 6s, 134 
 
 xxiv. 5-7 68 
 
 NUMBERS. 
 
 v. 6, 7 83 
 
 v. 11, 31 83 
 
 X.10 68 
 
 xii. 14 ff 64 
 
 DEUTERONOMY. 
 
 V. 9 J 3i- I3 2 . T 35 
 
 Joshua. 
 v.14, 15 "9 
 
 JUDGES. 
 
 vi. n-14 129 
 
 2 SAMUEL. 
 xii. 13 92.9S 
 
 1 KINGS. 
 
 xix. 17 80 
 
 2 Kings. 
 
 xiii. 21 136 
 
 xviii. 4 n 
 
 2 Chronicles. 
 
 iii. 10, 11 134 
 
 PSALMS. 
 
 cx-4 69 
 
 ISAIAH. 
 
 T1X, 19 133 
 
 xxiv. 21-23 I 5° 
 
 xliv. 3 37 
 
 U-iiL J-? 152 
 
 Uvi. . ■ 63 
 
 JEREMIAH. 
 
 i. 10 80 
 
 EZEKIEL. 
 
 xxxvi. 25-27 37 
 
 HOSEA. 
 
 vi. s 80 
 
 xiv. 3 62 
 
 Jonah. 
 
 iii. 10 95 
 
 ZECHARIAH, 
 
 i. 12 128 
 
 vii. 5 ff IS 1 . r 52 
 
 MALACHI. 
 
 L zi 62.63 
 
 Apocrypha. 
 
 Wisdom iii. 1, 2 14s 
 
 i Mace. xii. 43, 44 .... 144 
 
 PAGE 
 MATTHEW. 
 
 . 25, 26 143 
 
 viii. 4 83 
 
 ' .15 J 52 
 
 ix. 20 137 
 
 xi. 23 140 
 
 xii. 31, 32 143 
 
 xvi. 18, 19.-30, 81, 86. £9. 90 
 
 xvii. 21 153 
 
 xviii. is i7i 3° 
 
 xviii. 18 81, 87 
 
 xix. 28 39 
 
 xx-ii. 2, 3 31 
 
 xxvi. 39 99 
 
 MARK. 
 
 v. 7 126 
 
 vi. 13 157 
 
 ix. 29 153 
 
 xvi. 16 39 
 
 LUKE. 
 
 ii. 27 66 
 
 v. 14 83 
 
 vii. 29 113 
 
 xvii. 10 117 
 
 xvii. 17 83 
 
 xviii. 9-14 117 
 
 xxii. 19 48, 66 I 
 
 xxii.3i.33 86,89 j 
 
 xxiii. 43 139 
 
 xxiv. 30 4 s 
 
 JOHN. 
 
 I..51 128 
 
 ii. 4 IZ S 
 
 "ii- S 37- "5 
 
 iii.6 38 
 
 vi. 33 43 I 
 
 vi. 52-56 42. 44 ] 
 
 xx. 22, 23 79, 89, 90 , 
 
 xxi. 15-17 86 1 
 
 ACTS. 
 
 11.42 
 
 iii. 1 
 
 v. is, 16 ... 
 ix. 4, 16 ... 
 
 4i 
 
 42 
 136 
 11 
 69 
 136 
 
 XIX. II, 12 .... 
 
 xx. 7, 11 42 
 
 xxvi. 10 155 
 
 xxvii. 35 42, 143 
 
 ROMANS. 
 iv 112 
 
 vni. 14 . 
 xiii. 6 . 
 xv. 16 . 
 
 1 Corinthians. 
 
 iii. 13-15 142 
 
 V 99 
 
 X. 4 48 
 
 x. 6 in 
 
 x. 16 42, 50 
 
 xi. 23 48 
 
 xi. 16, 17 49 
 
 xi- IS 49 
 
 xi. 27......... 176 
 
 xi. 29 50 
 
 xiii. a 117 
 
 xvi. 15, 17 147 
 
 158 
 
 PAGE 
 
 2 Corinthians. 
 
 ii. 6-10 82,99 
 
 iii. 2, 4 64 
 
 Galatians. 
 
 iv. 24 48 
 
 EPHESIANS. 
 V.32 55.56 
 
 PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 ii. to 139 
 
 iii. 15, 16 24 
 
 COLOSSI ANS. 
 
 i. 24 95 
 
 ii. 18 127 
 
 2 Thessalonians. 
 
 ii - 7 8 
 
 1 Timothy. 
 
 iii. 15 21 
 
 2 Timothy. 
 
 L 16-18 146 
 
 TITUS. 
 
 n. 14 "3 
 
 iii- 5 39. "5 
 
 Hebrews. 
 
 i. 14 69, 128 
 
 vij-3 69 
 
 vii. 23, 24 71 
 
 vii. 27 71 
 
 ix. 12 71 
 
 ix. 24 72 
 
 ix. 14 129,150 
 
 ix. 26 72 
 
 x. 1-5 72 
 
 x-2 68 
 
 x. 10-14 72 
 
 xi. 28 66 
 
 xi. 40 140 
 
 xiii. 7-9 31 
 
 xiii. 7, 17 130 
 
 xiii. 5, 16 62, 63 
 
 xiii. 10 64 
 
 James. 
 
 ii. 24 112 
 
 v. 14, 16 84, 157 
 
 1 PETER. 
 
 iii. 18-20 14? IT 
 
 iv. 6, 13 151 
 
 v. 13 88 
 
 2 PETER. 
 
 L 20, 21 20 
 
 1 JOHN. 
 
 ii. 16 in 
 
 ii. 29 38 
 
 iii. 9 38 
 
 iv. 2 49 
 
 v. 1 38 
 
 2 John. 
 
 7 49 
 
 REVELATION. 
 
 i. 4 128 
 
 i. 18 87 
 
 iii. 17 116 
 
 v-5 97 
 
 v. 6 128 
 
 vi. 10 148 
 
 xi. 5, 6 80 
 
 xvii. 6 xo8 
 
INDEX 
 
 Abbott, Rev. Prof., 66, 67. 
 
 Abstinence and fasting', 154. 
 
 Alford, Dean, Letters from 
 Abroad, 102. 
 
 Angels in Old Testament, 128, 
 
 Altar, 64, 65. 
 
 Apocrypha, Old Testament, 
 17- 
 
 Apostasy, warnings against, 
 29. 
 
 Apostles, foundation of, 28; 
 office of, 32 ; itinerating 
 missionaries, 32 ; pro- 
 phetic powers, 52. 
 
 Apostolic offices different in 
 number at various times, 
 
 32- 
 
 Apostolic succession, 26. 
 
 Atunement, Day of, 65, 71. 
 
 Attrition and contrition, 91. 
 
 Augustine, 135. 
 
 Auricular confession, 82 ; im- 
 morality of 85 ; to be 
 minute in all particulars, 
 go ; not countenanced by 
 St. James, 84. 
 
 Baptism, Jewish and Chris- 
 tian, 36 ; re-baptism, 36 ; 
 symoolizes work of the 
 Spirit, 37 ; no reference 
 to Christian baptism in 
 discourse with Nicode- 
 mus, 37 ; water and Spirit, 
 37 I R'ft of the Spirit, 39 ; 
 Romish teachings as to 
 necessity of, 39 ; necessity 
 of infant baptism, 40 ; 
 triple baptism, 40 ; bap- 
 tism by heretics recog- 
 nised, 40. 
 
 •Bar to grace, 41. 
 
 Saronius' account of the 
 tenth century, 25 n. 
 
 ; ible and church authority, 
 19. 
 
 Biesenthal, 64. 
 
 Bishops and Presbyters, 32. 
 
 Born of the Spirit, 38. 
 
 Bonaventura, Psalter of St, 
 122. 
 
 Bread, breaking of, 41, 42. 
 
 Bruno, Dr. Di, Catholic Be- 
 
 ' lief, 70, 99, 115, 117, 131, 
 i33. i34. 135- 
 
 Cajetan on Indulgences, 97. 
 
 Canon of Old and New Tes- 
 tament, 20 ; Canon of 
 Mass, see Mass. 
 
 Celibacy, vows of, 155. 
 
 Charity, Language of, 39. 
 Charteris, Rev. Prof., Can 
 
 icily, 20. 
 
 Chase on Lord's Prayer in 
 Early Church, 33. 
 
 Cherubim, 133, 134, 
 
 Christ, atonement of, 49, 113 ; 
 eating and drinking 
 Christ, 49 ; not offered 
 daily, 71 ; not present on 
 earthly altars, 73 ; second 
 coming, 73, 74 ; words at 
 Lord's supper, 49, 50 ; 
 Roman statement that 
 Christ still in state of 
 humiliation, 54 ; obedient 
 to the priests, 54 ; Roman 
 priests claim to represent 
 Christ, 59 ; priesthood of 
 Christ, 65, 69 ; promise to 
 Peter, see under Peter ; 
 can forgive sins, 81. 
 
 Christian ministry, Divine 
 institution of, 35. 
 
 Chrysostoin, 63, 146. 
 
 Church no infallible interpre- 
 ter of Bible, 20 ; what 
 is the Church? 22; uses 
 of word, 22 ; visible and 
 invisible Church, 33 ; 
 marks of, 24 ; unity, 24 ; 
 holiness, 25 ; catholicity, 
 25 ; apostolicity, 26 ; not 
 divinely constituted like 
 
 synagogue, 29, 32, 35 ; 
 no infallibility promised, 
 29, 30; its authority, 36 ; 
 organization in New Tes- 
 tamen times, 32. 
 
 Commandments, the ten, 
 division of, 134 ; mode of 
 giving, 28. 
 
 Concupiscence and lust, no. 
 
 Cunfession, see Auricular. 
 
 Confirmation, 55. 
 
 Consubstantiation, Lutheran 
 doctrine of, 47. 
 
 Contrition and attrition, 91. 
 
 Corinthian, the incestuous, 
 82. 
 
 Council of Trent, 7 ; sessions, 
 8 ; canons and decrees on 
 Mass, 57 ; on Eucharist, 
 46, 47 ; on transubstantia- 
 tion, 51 ; on penance, 89, 
 105 ; on confession, 90 ; 
 on justification, 115; on 
 original sin, 109 ; on satis- 
 actions, 93 ; on images 
 
 159 
 
 and relics, 131 ; on purga. 
 tory, 137; on persecution, 
 105; Catechism of Council 
 of Trent, 8, 9 ; on half- 
 communion, 75 ; on pur- 
 gatory,i38 ; on confession, 
 91- 
 
 Council (third) of Carthage, 
 20 ; Council of Constance, 
 20, 76; Vatican Council, 
 9,-10,88; Lateran Coun< 
 cil, 16, 76, 106. 
 
 Creed of Pope Pius IV., 7, 
 9. 45. 9 5 < 109. 
 
 Cyprian, 16, 64. 
 
 Daumer, 45. 
 
 Deaconesses, 34. 
 
 Deacons, 34; "The Seven 
 not Deacons, 34. 
 
 Dead, prayers for, unknown 
 in Old Testament, 145 ; 
 no authority for in New 
 Testament; case of One- 
 siphorus, 146 ; Jewish 
 prayers not as old as our 
 Lord's times, 145; Jewish 
 inscriptions, 146 ; 1 Peter 
 hi. discussed, 148. 
 
 Delahogue, 99. 
 
 Dens, Theol. Moralis, on in- 
 dulgences, 98, 99 ; on per- 
 secution, 104, 106. 
 
 Didache, the, 32. 
 
 1 Do this ' not sacrificial, 66. 
 
 Dodd's Sayings of our Lord, 
 11. 
 
 Dulia, 120, 121. 
 
 Dupin's Eccl. Hist., 101. 
 
 Eucharist, see under Lord's 
 
 Supper, and Mass. 
 Extreme unction, 56, 156. 
 
 Faith, Rule of, 11. 
 
 Fall, The, no, in. 
 
 False teachers, warned 
 against, 29 
 
 Fathers, unanimous consent 
 of, 10 ; works of the, 17 ; 
 differed as to Matt. xvi. 
 18.-17, 86 - 
 
 Fasting, 151 ; Church of Eng- 
 land, Homily on, 152, 153. 
 
 Flesh, eating of human, 44. 
 
 Ghillany, 45. 
 
 Hades, 140 ; gates of, 30. 
 Half Communion, 74. 
 Hell, 140 ; gates of. 30, 
 
i6o 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Holiness, mark of the Church, 
 
 25. 
 Homily on fasting, 153, 153. 
 Host (hostia), 60; supposed 
 
 to be alive and to speak, 
 
 74 ; see Mass. 
 Hyperdulia, 120, 121, 234. 
 
 Idolatry, 135. 
 
 Images and relics, 130. 
 
 Immaculate conception, 9, 117. 
 
 luce, Rev. Professor, 67.. 
 
 Indulgences, 94,96; sale of, 
 07, 98 ; article on, 98 ; 
 Dens on, 98 ; Rheimish 
 Test, on, 100 ; complaint of 
 German princes concern- 
 ing, 100 ; Virgin Mary's 
 shoe, 102, 103; Dean Al- 
 ford on, 102. 
 
 Infallibility of the Pope, Vati- 
 can decree, 10, 88 ; infalli- 
 bility not promised to the 
 Church, 29. 
 
 Intention, doctrine of, 37, 53. 
 
 Invocation of saints and 
 angels, 127. 
 
 Irenxus, 16. 
 
 Israel after flesh and spirit, 
 23; Church of Israel 
 fallible though divinely 
 organized, 27. 
 
 Justification by faith only.iis ; 
 St. lames on, 112; and 
 
 Sood works, 113 ; Romish 
 octrine of, 115. 
 
 Kingdom of heaven, 87. 
 
 Latria, 120, 121, 131. 
 
 Leo X., 97. 98. 
 
 Levitical order, 38. 
 
 Lightfoot, J., HoraHeb., 143; 
 Bishop, on Philippians, 
 33- 
 
 Liguori, Alphonsus, Glories 
 of Mary, 121, 125; Visits 
 to the Sacrament, 54 ; on 
 confession, 78, 85. 
 
 Littledale, Dr. R.F., 6, 44, 45. 
 
 Lord's Supper, where men- 
 tioned, 41 ; breaking of 
 bread, 41. 
 
 Luckock, Dean, After Death, 
 146. 
 
 Lust, no, in. 
 
 Lutheran doctrine of consub- 
 stantiation, 47 ; division 
 of commandments, 135. 
 
 LXX., is ; see Septuagint. 
 
 Maccabeus, Judas, 144. 
 
 Mary, Virgin, immaculate 
 conception, 117 ; sinless- 
 Bess o l not scriptural, 120 ; 
 assumption of, 120 ; wor- 
 ship of, 120 ; Glories of, 
 121 ; rebukes of, 125, 
 126. 
 
 Mass, defects of the, 51 -33 ; 
 canon of the, 58, 61, 76, 
 
 77; a representation of 
 the sacrifice of the cross, 
 ■£ ; the same sacrifice, 59 ; 
 Vestments used at, 59; 
 six parts of, 60 ; postures 
 andacts, 61 ; texts quoted 
 in defence of, 62 ; Scrip- 
 ture proofs against, 69 ; 
 words of consecration at, 
 76. 
 
 Massacre of St. Bartholomew, 
 107, 108, 
 
 Matrimony, 56; see under 
 Cehbacy. 
 
 Melchizedek, 69, 70. 
 
 Midrash, 146. 
 
 Migne, edition of the Fathers, 
 I 7- 
 
 Milner, Bishop, £ftd 0/ Con- 
 troversy, 118. 
 
 "Ministering," 63, 69. 
 
 Missale Romamttn, 52, 76. 
 
 Mosaic law, binding and loos- 
 ing, 81 ; law of leprosy, 
 83- 
 
 Moseley, H. N., Notes of a 
 Naturalist, 101. 
 
 Mysteries, sacraments not 
 called, 54. 
 
 Nice, second council of, 131. 
 
 Opus Operatura, 41. 
 Orders, 32, 56. 
 Original s>in, 109. 
 
 Papias, 16. 
 
 Paul a married man, 155. 
 
 Paradise, 138. 
 
 Penance, 56, 78, 82, 89; the 
 word * penance,' 95. 
 
 Persecutions, 104. 
 
 Peter, supremacy of, a fiction, 
 85 ; fall and restoration of, 
 85, 86 ; promise made to, 
 86 ; Fathers on, 87 n. 
 
 Pius IX., Bull, 118. 
 
 Presbyters and elders, 32. 
 
 Priesthood, Rome on the 
 greatness of the, 78. 
 
 Priests, Levitical, 83 ; priests 
 (Roman) as judges, 90; 
 Roman priests supposed 
 to represent Christ, 59, 
 
 Priestly absolution, 79. 
 
 Profession, men classed ac- 
 cording to, 23, 39. 
 
 Prophetic succession, 27. 
 
 Pontificate Roma?tum, 133, 
 
 Purgatory, 93, 137. 
 
 Regeneration, 39 ; see Bap- 
 tism. 
 Reichel, Bishop, 91 
 Relics, 136. 
 Remembrance or memorial. 
 
 67, 68. 
 esch, Ag 
 
 Resch, Agrapha, 11. 
 Romish church not holy, 25. 
 Rule of Faith, Roman, 9; 
 true rule Scripture, n. 
 
 Sacraments not called mys- 
 teries, 54 : the five Roman 
 55 ; administration of, 34, 
 42 ; bee Lord's Supper, 
 Baptism. 
 
 Saints and angels, invocation 
 of, 127. 
 
 Salmon, Rev. Dr., Infallibil- 
 ity of the Church, 10, 11, 
 25 11., 119. 
 
 Salvation, way of, 114. 
 
 Satisfactions, Council of 
 Trent doctrine of, 92. 
 
 Schottgen, 142. 
 
 Schurer, Hist, of Jewish 
 People, 32. 
 
 Scripture only rule of faith, 
 n ; appealed to by our 
 Lord, 12 ;by apostlei.is; 
 Old Testament practice, 
 13; intended for all, 13, 
 14 ; and Church, 19 ; see 
 Tradition. 
 
 Septuagint (LXX.), the is. 
 
 Seven, the, 34- 
 
 Seventy, the, 35. 
 
 Sin in the regenerate, 114. 
 
 Sinless perlection not taught 
 by St, John, 38. 
 
 Sixtus V. Bible, 76. 
 
 Staley (V.), Catholic Religion 
 67. 
 
 Supple, Rev. W. R., 67. 
 
 Synagogues earliest name of 
 churches, 33 ; offices of 
 Christian Church derived 
 from, 29, 32, 35. 
 
 Talmud referred to, 43,^ 146. 
 
 Temple (vaos), 23; lepov t 
 24. 
 
 Traditions, io ; not co-ordi- 
 nate authority with Scrip- 
 ture, 15; condemned by 
 our Lord, 15; Irenaeu^, 
 and Cyprian on, 16; un- 
 reliability of, 16. 
 
 Transubstantiation, 45 ; texts 
 quoted as proofs of, 48 ; 
 against testimony of the 
 senses, 50 ; alleged reason 
 of miracle, 51 ; conse- 
 quences of, 53. 
 
 Unity of the Church, 24. 
 
 Vatican Council, 9, 10, 88. 
 Vestments used at Mass, 59. 
 Vincent of Lirinum, 25. 
 
 Wace and Cheetham, Did, 
 
 59- 
 Westcott, Bishop, Hebrews. 
 
 71. iSO- 
 Wordsworth, Bishop Christ- 
 opher, 107. 
 "Wright iC.H.H.J, Bampton 
 Led. on Zech., 45 ; article 
 on Human Sacrifices, 
 45 ; Btblical Fssays, 151 j 
 Prayers for Dead, 146. 
 Wiinsche, 143. 
 
 Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frorae, and London,