MASTER 
 
 NO. 93-81635-3 
 
MICROFILMED 1993 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES/NEW YORK 
 
 as part of the 
 "Foundations of Western Civilization Preservation Project" 
 
 Funded by the 
 NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES 
 
 Reproductions may not be made without permission from 
 
 Columbia University Library 
 
COPYRIGHT STATEMENT 
 
 The copyright law of the United States - Title 17, United 
 States Code - concerns the making of photocopies or 
 other reproductions of copyrighted material. 
 
 Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and 
 archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other 
 reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the 
 photocopy or other reproduction is not to be *'used for any 
 purpose other than private study, scholarship, or 
 research.*' If a user maizes a request for, or later uses, a 
 photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of *'fair 
 ' that user may be liable for copyright infringement. 
 
 use, 
 
 This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a 
 copy order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order 
 would involve violation of the copyright law. 
 
A UTHOR: 
 
 GLADSTONE, WILLIA 
 EWART 
 
 TITLE: 
 
 THE BATTLE OF THE 
 
 PLACE: 
 
 CINCINNATI 
 
 DA TE: 
 
 1875 
 
^; 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 
 PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARHFT 
 
 Master Negative # 
 
 936 
 C154 
 
 Original Material as Filmed - 
 
 6589 
 
 Campbell, Alexander, 1788-1866. 
 
 The ^tattle of the giants | a debate on the 
 Roman Catholic religion, held in Cincinnati, 
 between the late Alexander Cair^bell ••• and 
 the Right Rev. John B. Pur cell; together with 
 the Vatican decrees in their bearing on civil 
 allegiance, by the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone 
 ... with the replies of Dr. Newman, Archbishop 
 Manning, the Right Rev. Monsignor Capel, Lord 
 Acton, and Lord Camoys, and a full abstract 
 of Gladstone's rejoinder. Cincinnati, C. F. 
 
 
 ^^Ml l ^ 
 
 (Continued on next card) 
 
 936 
 C154 
 
 Restrictions on Use: 
 
 Bibliographic Record 
 
 Campbell, Alexander, 1788-1866. The battle of 
 the giants ... 1875. (Card E) 
 
 Vent; Chicago, J. S. Goodman & oo., 1875. 
 viii, 9-360, 247 p. ISf^. 
 
 "The battle of the giants; the Vatican de- 
 crees in their bearing on civil allegiance, by 
 the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone ..." has spe- 
 cial t.-p. and separate paging. 
 
 TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA 
 
 S^^fpf^ 
 
 FILM SIZE: 
 
 IMAGE PLACEMENT: lAr EA^ IB IIB 
 
 DATE FILMED; 1 -3 - > ^ INITIALS 
 
 HLMEDBY: RESEARCH PI TBI JrATlOMg jf^ c WnnnRiri^^;^ - 
 
 REDUCTION RATIO: /^<^ 
 

 
 Sf^.J^^ 
 
 c 
 
 Aasociatioii for Information and Imago Managomont 
 
 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1100^ 
 Silver Spring. Maryland 20910 
 
 301/587-8202 
 
 Centimeter 
 
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 
 
 1 1 1 iitiiminiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilinilniilmiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiii 
 
 ^ 
 
 Inches 
 
 1 
 
 T 
 
 I 
 
 m 
 
 1 1 I I 1 1 
 
 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 
 
 uJuuluuliiUiljii^^ 
 
 15 mm 
 
 m 
 
 TTT 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 1.25 
 
 1*5 
 
 16.3 
 
 13.2 
 
 i 
 ii 
 
 3.6 
 
 14.0 
 
 Ift 
 
 1.4 
 
 25 
 2.2 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 1.6 
 
 TTT 
 
 MflNUFfiCTURED TO fillM STflNDflRDS 
 BY RPPLIED IMRGE, INC. 
 
 <i> 
 
 
of.^ 
 
 I-/ 
 
 
 C/ifq- 
 
 intlifCttpoflrtDllork 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 PURCHASED FROM 
 
 THE 
 
 WILLIAM C. SCHERMERHORN 
 MEMORIAL FUND 
 
i 
 
 . 
 
 I 
 
 i ^ 7 ^ 
 
 iXlEi 
 
 BATTLE OF THE GIANTS: 
 
 ON THE 
 
 ROMAK CATHOLIC RELIGION, 
 
 HELD IN 
 
 CINCINNATI, 
 
 BETWEEN 
 
 THE LATE ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, 
 
 Founder of the *' Christian" Church, 
 AND 
 
 THE RIGHT REV. JOHN B. PURCELL; 
 
 TOGETHER WITH 
 
 THE VATICAN DECREES 
 
 IN THEIR BEARING ON CIVIL ALLEGIANCE, 
 
 BY THE 
 
 RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, M. P. 
 
 WITH THE 
 
 REPLIES OF DR. NEWMAN, ARCHBISHOP MANNING, 
 
 THE RIGHT REV. MONSIGNOR CAPEL, LORD 
 
 ACTON, AND LORD CAMOYS, 
 
 AND A FULL ABSTRACT OF 
 
 eLADSTONE'S KEJOINDER. 
 
 CLNCINI^JATI. 
 
 \C!.'-F. 'Y.EKT..' , .■' . 
 
 S GOODMAN & CO., CHICAGO, 
 ' ' , .1875'.:,"' ;.: 
 
 * • • •! I 
 
 * > » . 
 
i 
 
 i.i'>C 
 
 I 
 
 THE 
 
 \ 
 
 BATTLE OF THE aiANTS: 
 
 ON THE 
 
 EOMAl^J- CATHOLIC RELIGION, 
 
 HELD IN 
 
 CINCINNATI, 
 
 BETWEEN 
 
 THE LATE ALEXANDER CAMPBELL. 
 
 Founder of the *'C/iristian" Churchy 
 AND 
 
 THE RIGHT REV. JOHN B. PURCELL; 
 
 TOGETHER WITH 
 
 THE VATICAN DECREES 
 
 IN THEIR BEARING ON CIVIL ALLEGIANCE, 
 
 BY THE 
 
 RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE, M. P. 
 
 WITH THE 
 
 REPLIES OF DR. NEWMAN, ARCHBISHOP MANNING, 
 
 THE RIGHT REV. MONSIGNOR CAPEL, LORD 
 
 ACTON, AND LORD CAMOYS, 
 
 AND A FULL ABSTRACT OF 
 
 GLADSTONE'S REJOINDER 
 
 Gi.N<;i:N^A.T.|.r; : /. 
 
 S GOODMAN & CO., CHICAGO. 
 
 •I « • • • 
 
 • t 
 
 
 • • • « 
 
 • • • « 
 
 * • 
 
 • •- • 
 
 
 * • 
 
 
 * • 
 
X 'T!^/'"' 
 
 I 
 
 ^^C 
 
 C/5'f- 
 
 fZJ "■" •'i, 43- / 
 
 We the nndewigned. havings sold and conveyed to J. A. James and Co.. of 
 Cincinnati, for a certain sum par copy, (to be pid by them to us, or to our or 
 der, and to be appropriated to two public charitable imtitutiona, as arreed on 
 between our9erve8,^ for all that shall be printed; the exclusive right of printing 
 and publuhin- the DEBATEon the ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION;held in 
 th^ Sycamore Street Meeting House, Cincinnati, from the 13th to the 21st. of 
 January 1837, inclusive, between ourselves, and taken down by Reporters, em- 
 ployed Ly the said J. A. James & Co., and revised, corrected, and approved by 
 m, do hereby make known that the edition or editions published by j! A. Jarae. 
 & t.o., or by their authority, and revised by us, must be considered the only cor- 
 rect and authorized editions of said DEBATE, 
 
 CiNCMSNATi, Feb. 1st. 1837. f JOHN B. PURCELL, 
 
 Bp. Cin, 
 A. CAMPBEU^ 
 
 n 
 
 
 TO THE PUBLIC. 
 
 The Publishers being well aware of the importance of obtain- 
 ing a full and correct report of this discussion, have spared no 
 pains nor expense to effect this object. 
 
 They employed two gentlemen well qualified as reporters. 
 
 From the joint notes of these, they furnished each of the 
 parties with a copy of his part of the report for revision, with 
 the express understanding, that nothing should be added or sub- 
 tracted to make theif speeches different from what they were 
 when originally delivered. 
 
 AAer being put in type, a proof sheet of all was sent to 
 each, for his last corrections. 
 
 Believing, that by this mean?, the desideratum sought, has 
 been obtained, this work, is now commended to an enquiring, 
 intelligent, and reading community. 
 
 THE PUBLISHERS. 
 
 Cincinnati, Fsb, 1837. 
 
 •11 -t 
 
 \ 
 
 m * # 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 To introduce the following report to the reader, we lay he* 
 foie him the correspondence of the parties, which immediately 
 preceded the debate. 
 
 LETTER FROM MR. CAMPBELL. 
 
 CiKciirirATi, Jait. lltb, 1837. 
 Bishop Purcell-^Respecttd Sirs 
 
 At two o'clock this morning, afler a tedious and perilous journey of 
 ten days, I safely arrived in this city. The river having become innaviga- 
 ble in consequence of the ice, I was compelled to leave it and take to tho 
 woods, about two hundred miles above. By a zigzag course which car- 
 ried me to Chillicothe and Columbus, sometimes on foot, sometimes on • 
 aleigh, and finally by the mail stage, I accomplished a land tour of two 
 hundred and forty miles, equal to the whole distance from Wheeling to 
 Cincinnati. 
 
 After this my travel's history, I proceed to state, that it was with pleas- 
 ure I received either from you or some of my friends, a copy of the Daily 
 Gaxette, on the 22d ult. intimating your fixed purpose of meeting me in a 
 public discussion of ray propositions, or of the points at issue between Ro- 
 man Catholics and Protestants. This, together with your former declara- 
 tions in favor of full and free discussion, is not only in good keeping with 
 the spirit of the age, and the genius of our institutions, but fully indicative 
 of a becoming confidence and sincerity in your own cause. This frank and 
 manly course, permit me to add, greatly heightens my esteem for you. 
 
 Now, sir, that I am on the premises, I take the earliest opportunity of 
 informing you of my arrival, and of requesting you to name the time and 
 place in which it may be most convenient for you to meet me for the pur- 
 pose of arranging the preliminaries. It has occurred to me, that it would 
 be useful and commendable to have an authentic copy of our discussion, 
 signed by our own hands, and published with our consent •- and that is 
 might have all the authority and credit which we could give it, it would b« 
 a2 ▼ 
 
nfTEODWCTIOII. 
 
 a|Mdi«iil to tell to ■mne of iIm piibltshera in thb citj, tlie eopjriglit, and 
 let tiieiii emploj a atooofrapliar or atenographera to report faithfully ths 
 whole matter. 
 
 It will alao aecore for aach a work a more exteniive reading, and coneo* 
 quentlj a wider range of usefulness, and I have no doubt, be most accep- 
 table to oor feeEngs. and every way reputable, to devote the profits, or tha 
 proceed* of the copyright, to some benevolent institution, on which we 
 may both agree ; or in case of a difference on a fitting institution, that wa 
 aelect each an object to which we can moat conscientiously assign all tha 
 pwili of aach publication. 
 
 In Mikr to these ends, it will be necessary, that we timously arrange all 
 the piellminaries, and as many persona are now in waiting, I trust it may 
 be every way practicable, during the day, to come to a full understanding 
 on the whole premises. 
 
 Yeiy feapectfally. 
 
 Your ob*t. serv't 
 
 A. CAMPBBI«Iia 
 
 BISHOP PURCELL'S REPLY. 
 
 CmciirHATi, 11th Jivitaiit, 1837. 
 
 Ji*. Jilexander CbnififteA— J% Dear Sir 9 
 
 I sincerely sympathise with you on the tediouanesa and perils of your 
 joitrney,from Bethany to Cincinnati This is truly a dreadful time to 
 embark on our river, or to traverse our atate. The sun's bright face I 
 have not seen lor several days ; I hope whmi the forth-coming discussioa 
 Is once finished, our minds, like his orb, will be less dimmed by the clouda, 
 and radiate tha light and vital wanalh without which thia worhl would ha 
 
 If it neat your convenience, I shall ha happy to meet yon, at any tinM 
 in Hm BOfiiing, or in the afternoon, at Ilia Atheneum. 
 
 Yoor proposition respecting the aale of an authentic copy of the discus* 
 aioii to a pnbliaher, and the proeeeda, all expenaea deducted, applied to tha 
 baaaiil of some charitable institution, or inatitatioiia, meeta my hearty eon- 
 currenea. And I pto^iaat that one half iha availa of aala be given to tha 
 •* Cincinnati Orpiiaa Asylum," and the other half to tha •« 81. Peter's fe- 
 male Orphan Asylum,** comer of Third and Plum streets, Cincinnati. 
 
 With best wishes for your eternal welfare, and that of all those who siir 
 caicly seek for the truth aa it is in Christ Jesua, I remain 
 
 Vary reapectfully yoara, 
 
 t JOHN B. PURCELL, 
 
 Bishop of Cincinnati. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ¥11 
 
 Th« parties met in the Athenaeum at 2 o'clock, P. M. of Jan. 
 lUh., when after some debate on the question, IVho 8haU Oi 
 the reaponderU ? they finally agreed to the following . 
 
 RULES OF DISCUSSION. 
 
 1. Wo agree that the copy-right of the discussion shall be sold to some 
 bookseller, who shall have it token down by a stenographer, and that all the 
 avails of the copyright shaU be equally divided between two such public 
 charities as Bishop Purcell and Mr. Campbell shall respectively designate. 
 
 2. That the discussion shall take place in the Sycamore-street meeting 
 bouse ; ami k aliall continue seven days, exclusive of Sunday, commencing 
 lo^ay, (Friday, 13th) from half past 9 o'clock, A. M. to half past 12, and 
 
 from 3 to 6 P. M., each day. 
 
 3. Mr. Campbell shall open the discusiiion each session, and Bishop Pur- 
 cell respond. During the morning sesRion the first speech of each shall not 
 exceed an hour, nor the second half an hour. In the afternoon each speaker 
 ahaH occupy only half an hour. 
 
 4. This discussion shall be under the direction of a board of five modera- 
 tors; of whom each party shall choose two, and these a fifth: any three of 
 whom shall constitute a quorum. 
 
 6. The duties of the moderators shall be to preserve order in the assem« 
 
 Uv. and to keep the parties to the question. 
 
 ^' ^ ^ ^ ^ JOHN B. PURCELL, 
 
 A. CAMPBELL. 
 
 In order to meet, as far as possible, the arrangements entered 
 into for conducting the contemplated debate for seven days, Mr. 
 Campbell, according to agreement, sent to bishop Purcell, on 
 Thursday morning, Jan. 12, the following statement of the 
 
 POINTS AT ISSUE. 
 
 1. The Roman Catholic Institution, sometimes called the <Holy, Apoa- 
 tohc, Catholic, Church,' is not now, nor was she ever, catholic, apostolic, 
 •r holy ; but. b a tec/ jn the &ir import of that word, older than any other 
 ■eci now existing, not the * Mother aad Mistress of all Churches,' but an 
 apostacy from the only true, holy, apostolic, and catholic church of Christ" 
 
 2. Her notion of apostolic succession is without any foundation in the 
 ' Bible, in reason, or in foot ; an imposition of the most injurious consequences, 
 
 built upon unscriptural and anti-scriptural traditions, resting wholly upon the 
 opinions of interested and fallible men. 
 
 3. She is not uniform in her faith, or united in her members; but muta- 
 ble and fallible, v any other sect of philosophy or religion — Jewish, Turk- 
 
¥111 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 isli, or Cliriatian— a confederation of aects with a politico-ecclesiastic 
 liead 
 
 4. She is the "Babylon" of John, the "Man of sin of Paul, and the 
 Empire of the "Youngest Horn" of Daniel's Sea Monster. 
 
 5. Her notions of purgatory, indulgences, auricular confession, remission 
 of «nfl, transubstantiation, supererogation, &&, essential elements of her sjs- 
 Imii, are immoral in their tendency, and injurious to the well-being of sod- 
 •ly, religious and political ^ 
 
 0. Notwithstanding her pretensions to have given ns the Bible, and faith in 
 it, we are perfectly independent of her for our knowledge of that book, and 
 its evidences of a divine original. 
 
 7. The Roman Catholic religion, if infallible and unsusceptible of reforma- 
 tion, as alleged, is eaaentiallj anti-American, being opposed to the genius of 
 aE free institutions, and positively subversive of them, opponing the general 
 leading of the scriptures, and the dilfusioa of useful knowledge among 
 the whole community, so essential to liberty and the permanency of gocil 
 
 fovenunent* 
 
 A. CAAIPBELI^ 
 CiacixvATii ISth January, 16S7. 
 
 DEBATE 
 
 OS THB 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 REPORT. 
 
 -. ,. . „^t Mcordinff to appointment, on the 13th Janiiary, 1837, at the 
 
 SyTll^oTeTtJer Meat^^H^^^^^ past nine o'clock, A. M. 
 
 MODERATORS. 
 
 Messrs. Samuhl Lewis, Thomas J. Biggs, Wiluam Disnet. Johi. Rc 
 
 AKRS AND J. W. Piatt. 
 
 WILLIAM DISNEY CHAIRMAN. 
 
 ajf. Q«m«pl f^wi» havinr called the meeting to order, read the rules of tha 
 nilie r^Led uJ;>n bSleen the parties, and the proposit.on. advanced by 
 Debate, as^reea upon oei requested the audience to rtfram from any 
 
 J^ibi:7,'f Lf^ptTa^ ^^^^^ "Lp'robation a, it would interrupt the debate. 
 Mr. Campbell then opened the debate as follows :— 
 
 My Chrigtian Friends and Fellow-CUizen*-' 
 
 I appear hefore you at this time, hy the |ood providence of ora 
 Heavenly Father, in defence of the truth, and in explanation of the 
 grearrXmi?^, 'regenerating and ennohling principles of Prot^«tan^ 
 fsm, as opposed to the claims and pretensions of the Roman Catholic 
 church. I come not here to advocate the particular tenete of any 
 secCbit to defend the great cardinal principles of P'^^^f.^^t^^"!- ^„ 
 
 Considerable pains appear to have been taken by the gentleman 
 whoTs my opponent on this occasion, to impress upon the minds of 
 Ilie public the idea that he stands here in the attitude of a defender 
 of Catholicism, and to represent me as its assailant. I am sorry to 
 say that even some Protestants have contributed to give f^^Usolor to 
 Jhfs debate ; for I saw in this morning's Gazette an ^^J^le, m^*^^^^^ 
 I am represented as conducting a crusade against the Ro'^f . .fatho- 
 lies? Ite editor appears to have his sympathies f ^^^»/ly f ^^^^^^'^ 
 thdr cause. He Uvery sympathetic indeed, m behalf c»f the Roman 
 
 Catholic religion. Eviry aaony the 7^>^«\<^^,;»;tu^ofU^^^ 
 to him; for every groan she heaves he has a bottle full of tears readjr 
 to blpoured ou^ ^I will not Stop to enquire whether thev are polm- 
 cal or religious tears. I have to do with the worthy gentleman here. 
 Who hrs represented me as having volunteered to come forward with 
 
 '^"l^rJ sTr^eW^^f^l'"^^^^^^^^ of my audience, who were pre- 
 
 seltT^hHa'tteeting of th^ College of 'i;eacjiers m^^^^^ 
 
 •) far from its being true that I made an attack in the first ^nstance, 
 
10 DEBATB ON THB , 
 
 ■iMMi the Roman Calliollc cliiifcli, the gentlemaii did firet asf ail t]i« 
 Prfitestants. 
 
 Me says in theGazeUeof the 19th of Dec. 1830, that I am a bold and 
 wanton challenger; but a word of comment on this document will 
 •liew ^at it is quite the other way. 
 
 The issue was made in the first instance in the College of Teach- 
 ers. You will recollect that when Dr. J. L. Wilson read an oration 
 on tbe subject of unirersal educntion, the gentleman arose, and in that 
 Fioteatant house, and before a Protestant assembly, directly and pos- 
 itively ])rote8ted a^^inst allowing the book which Protestants claim 
 to contain their religion, to be used in schools. He uttered a tirade 
 ifiinst the Protestant modes of teaching, and against the Protestant 
 iniuence upon the community. This was the origin of the dispute^ 
 Had it not been for the assertions made by the gentleman on that oc« 
 casion, we should not have heard one word of a discussion. 
 
 It is true that the propositions just read may present me in the at 
 titude of what he is pleased to call an assailant of the Roman church. 
 But the question is — how has the controTersy originated ? And let 
 me ask, how is it possible for the gentleman to prove that, because, 
 a ,e« ago, I made aome answer to an attack on Proteatantism from 
 the state of Illinois, and called for some more reputable antagonist, 
 that on this account he did not assail Protestantism, and that I am 
 the assailant in this case! Does my having been plaintiff in that 
 case make me necessarily plaintiff in every other case t Does my 
 having told him that I stooo prepared to discuss the question at largo 
 with any creditable gentleman— [Here Mr. G. was interrupted by the 
 moderators as not speaking to the point] I submit to the decision 
 of the moderators. I thought it due to myself, that the public should 
 .know precisely the attitude in which the gentleman and myself stand 
 in tUB matter. I stand here as the defender of Protestantism, and 
 not as the assailant of Catholicism. I wished to exonerate myself 
 from such an imputation. But as the gentlemen have decided that 
 we proceed at once to the question, let us begin and examine the &rst 
 proposition. It ii as follows : 
 
 ** Pmop. I. The Roman Catbolic Inititution, tomettmet eailed the * Holy, 
 
 Apostolic, Catholic. Church,* is not now, norwtt she ever, catholic. apottolic, or 
 holy ; but is efeef in the fiiir import of that word, older tbanafly other lect now 
 eziatiiir* not the * Mother and Mittrega of ail Charches/ but an apottacy fniai 
 tka oa^ true, holj,apoatoUc, and catholic charch of Christ." 
 
 As this is the place and time for logie rather than rhetoric, I wili 
 pioeeed to define the meaning of tlw important terms contained ia 
 tliit propoaition. The inbject ia tlia Roman Catholie Institution. 
 Tlda inttitntlon, notwitlittanding its large pretenaiona, 1 affirm, can 
 lie profed clearly to be • acfl, in the true and proper imnort of the 
 term. Though ale call herself the mother and mistress of all churches, 
 iha is, striiSlT speaking, a sect, and m more ikmm m tetL We now 
 fnfom lo adduce proof to auatain this part of the proposition. 
 
 In the first place, the i^ term Roman Catholie mdicates that sh« 
 is a sect, and not the ancient, nniveraal and apostolic church, the mo- 
 ther and mistress of all churches. If she be the only universal or 
 Catholic church, why prefix the epithet Roman ? A Roman Catholic 
 church is a contradiction. The word Catholic means universal — ^the 
 wont Jioinan means a—jtliimg local and particular. What sense or 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC EBLIGIOK. 
 
 11 
 
 ^., IS there ^ - FJ^-^- ^^^^^^ tUtn'J^'^^'aS 
 
 another account. J^tris^^^^on^ ^i „X^^ and in all times, why 
 
 '^Th^lrf C^nt^ C^ Catholic church of Amert 
 
 call herself RomanTio say pj^ji^^n^ia church of Cincinnato, 
 ca, IS just a« «*>«"^f *? KurX-the^hurch of France of the 
 F^^d'^Stat'. ^'T^L'^e^J^^s A^^ chooses indicates that sue 
 
 ■" T^e^titJ ctec historians endeavor to reconcile this jTisi^ 
 pa2?;ffrrs b^ saying that, though those particular -ou^^f^onn 
 
 "But in antiqu ty no more was intended by the name oi vwc y .^\^cTto 
 
 tf«fie ch««2orthe city of ^'«'«- ''^.^XS^ ^ftZllV^R^ T^' 
 «on, or .apencnptioM. look •>">?'? «»«J« ^''j'^, „^« of tb. church of 
 Gnek «:hi.m.tic. Kern to ^e »he fi"t who Mve toej»M.e^ „f u,„to.li.. 
 
 Konie to .11 the churche. of the ""V^^'i'^j'^if X"h of Rome, from th. 
 tinguid. the churchM whwh ""™""'"*'^ "i\^**F„^?h°, c^ the custom 
 Sli: 7t"Zr. •?rtu^h™f'^:m^ToTe'c,th5 J"h„rch^ But the other 
 
 only unsctiptural, but dishonorable ; as opprobnous as erer were the 
 
 •TtS- we'^Ter-CathoHc". alone; -1^- ^^-^.^ 
 end^Tor to impress the ide» that she is no longer to be <^^^'^ 
 maTcatfiolic,'* but Catholic, this term e<,nally proves her a sect; f« 
 ?J^e New Testament and primitive antJquity there is no such de- 
 ^nation It U^py the church of ChSst, It is one th.ng for us 
 
 K^J:-. IZefro^rseWeVr'^ "">*" ^^re^'J^Wet'r^cS 
 
 Ln.:ruisSh^i^f.^H^rii^^^ 
 
 ana is, ^^^ /JJ^ *^''\ .1^ bestow it, for she is not catholic. But, 
 it: and we dare not, in truui, oesww iv» »"» wj»^ , name 
 
 M there is no church known in the New Testament by that name, 
 i*miia we BO designate her, still she would be a sect. 
 
 lltZ^ 2k what is the church of Rome of the nineteenth cen- 
 tn^ or rShe? what is t^ present Roman Catholic mstituUon! 
 Pe^irmfhere tTsay. most emphatically, that I have not the slight- 
 
 e'luisp^^^^^^^^ 
 
 or of the worthy gentleman who is opposed to me in this deoaie. 1 
 do not wish or intend to use the slightest expression wh ch could be 
 c^nsl^Uito Mn unfriendly tone ofsatire, irony or invective towards 
 
13 
 
 1IB14m 0!f TfTV 
 
 'I 
 t' 
 
 1J 
 
 w 
 
 tliB feapeettble grentleman, or towards his chtirvli. I shall speak 
 fireoly of her pretensions to he thd only true church, &c. but 1 shall 
 ohsenre a scrupulous respect in all my lan^a^ towards the present 
 iejifetint»tivefl of the CatlioHc church in the nineteenth century. 
 
 Are wo then to understand her as the immutable, universal, ancient 
 primiiive, apostolic church of Christ! Are we to understand this bj 
 the Roinmn Catholic church of the nineteenth century, with her popes 
 her cardinal her patriarchs, primates, metropolitans, archbishops, 
 archdeacons, monks, friars, nuns,&c. &c. teachmg and preachin|v tho 
 use and worship of images, relics, penances, invocation of departed 
 men and women, veneration for some beingf whom they call " the moi 
 ther of God," teachinor and preachinor the doctrine of priestly absola 
 tion, auricular confession, purgatory rtransubstantiation, extreme unc 
 tion, &c. &c. 
 
 Is tliis the ancient, universal, holy apostolic church ! Not one of 
 these dogmas can be found in the bible. 
 
 They ori^ntted hundreds of years since, as I am prepared to show, 
 from the evidence of Roman Catholic authors themselves. How thei 
 ean we call it the ancient apostolic church I Not one of these offices 
 nor dogmas is mentioned in the New Testament. Hear Du Pin on 
 this point In exposing the imposition, practised, by an effort, so 
 late as the ninth century, to foist into the history of the church certain 
 pfetonded decrees or writingjs of those called the first popes, Du Pin, 
 an anthentio Roman Catholic historian, proves these decrees and 
 writings to be spurioas, because in them there are numerous allusions 
 to offices and customs not yet existing in the times referred to. 
 
 *• The foUowliig proves them spurious. Ist. The second epistle of St. Clement 
 directed to St. James, speftlts of the Ottiarii or doorkee{>ers, irchdeacons and 
 other ecxlesiastical officers, that were not then iotrodiiccd into the church.'* 
 
 2nd. ** Thb letter mentiom fu^-deacons, an order not then ealabiislied in the 
 church." p. S84. 
 
 3d. '* In the first Epistle attributed to St. Stxtm, he it called an * archbishop,' 
 a word not used in this time." 
 
 4th. "The second, attributed to the same pope, mentians consecrated vessels, 
 and appeals to RomCt the grandeur of the church. It is there pretended that all 
 bishofia wait for the pope^s decision, and are inatracted by his letters ; modes 
 of ipeakli^ never used b^ the first bishops of Rome." 
 
 Sih. **Tiie epistle attributed to Tehtphoru* calls him an archbishop, a naoM 
 unknown in the first ages." 
 
 fith. •• There is a decree in it, to enjoin three masses on our Savior^s nathritj, 
 A custom not so andent" 
 
 f th. " We find several paanfes in the letter attributed to Ameebu, which 
 mm not agree with the time of that pope ; as, for instance, what is there laid 
 down concerning the onflnoftotu ofbhhopt, iaeerdotal tmtmre, arcklfi*hop$ and 
 pfifitafef , which were not instituted till long after ; besides many things of the 
 same nature." p. 585. 
 
 How, then, can we suppose that this ehoroh of the nineteenth cen- 
 tury, with so mMy appendages, is the apostolic church— the only 
 ©liginal, primitive, universal institution of Christ! 
 
 But she glories in the name of mother and mistress of all churches 
 throughout the world. This astonishes me still more ; for with the 
 bible in his hand and history before him, wha can stand up and say, 
 that this church ever was the mother, and mistress of all churches ! 
 
 The most ancient catholic church was the Hebrew. She was the 
 toother, though not the mistrm of all churches; for the christian 
 church has no reigning queen on earth, to lord it over her— as Paul 
 nays, on another occasion— " Jerusalem is the mother of us all." 
 
 KOMAN OATHOUC RELIGION. 
 
 m 
 
 If the irentleman admit Luke to be a faithful historian, he must not 
 J^nfafeX Hebrew church first, but the Samantan, Phemcian, 
 SvLn and Hellenist churches as older than the church m Rom^^ 
 aavTwe speak of churches, as respects antiquity, the Hebrew, Sa^ 
 mJriterSvnan and Phenician churches must be regarded as pnor to 
 Tr? llie Acte of the AposUes close with Paul's first appearance in 
 
 ^ «lft that the Roman Catholic institution may stind before you in 
 bold reUef t f rc^ari^n establishment, I will give you a defimUo^ 
 oHic prete^^^^^^^^^^ an authentic source, one of her <>wn s^n- 
 
 Sards The Douay catechism, in answer to the question— " What 
 i^the essLntlarptJts of the church 1" teaches " A pope, or supreme 
 
 ^^thrrn^aTeTe trlt^^^^^^^ --"net^^TwIlt 
 
 Sse^d^SrCv t?^^^^^^^ 
 
 ToSd wV4e away any one of these, she 1?«««^ 1^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 ceases to be what she assumes. My f «t! w.'^ w^tLut suc^ 
 tK«t for hundreds of years after Christ, she was without sucn a neaa , 
 hfmtt i^^^^^^ of these elements ; and consequently, this be- 
 
 . ng TsenUal tS her existence, she was not from the begmmna Be- 
 ^Le no body can exist before its he^. Now, if we can finda ume 
 when there was no pope, or supreme head, we find a time when there 
 
 was no Roman Catholic party. oi^Mpaiastical re- 
 
 Bvreferrine to the scriptures, and to the early ecclesiastical re- 
 corZ we can^asily settle this point. Let us begin with the New 
 Tes^enrwhich all agree, is the only authenticated standard of 
 fe^K mannerL^the only inspired record of the christian doctrine. 
 tZ ^ a^ardinal point, and I ^ thankful that in this we all agree. 
 wLVnoTfound'^the^, wants the evident -n-f^VoUX'^Tk 
 and can never command the respect and homage of those who sect 
 for divine authority in faith and morality. , j „„ v^ 
 
 I iffim then, thit not one of the offices, I have ^nu^iej^^.^f^ ^ 
 longing to the Roman Catholic church was known in the days of 
 Se apSstles, or is found in the New Testament. On the f mitraiy. 
 Se very notion of a vicar of Christ, of a prince of the apostles, or of 
 a unlv7rsal head, and government in the cfhristian church is repugnant 
 toX genius and spirft of the religion, We shall ^^^^^^^^^ 
 ges of scripture. frSm the Roman version, to prove that the je^^dea 
 ff aa earthly head is unscriptural ^^d.anti-scnpturaL Th^^^^ 
 from which I am about to quote was printed m New York, and is <»r 
 tified to correspond exactly, with the Rhemish ^.^^^J?!^^/ *^^?^^^ 
 of gentlemen, of the first standing in society. If ^t ^iffersfrom any 
 othlr and more authentic copy, I wiU not rely upon it. l^^^'^ 
 to take whatever bible the gentleman may propose. ^^^1^^°"^^^^ 
 twentieth of Matthew. « fesus said to his disciples, You knowj^at 
 Zprinces of the Gentiles overrule them, and those that are the grea- 
 tor e^xercise power against them. It shall not be so a^o«g J^"^^^^^^^ 
 whosoever will be the greater among you, let him be your minister. 
 Does this convey the idea of a prince among the apostles, a vic«r of 
 Christ a loXoTer the people of God 1 Does it not rather say there 
 
 that there shall not be a pope, a s^R^^^^^jt^'VJ^lo [™ 
 Again, Matt. 23, 8. ** Be not you called Rabbi, for one is your Master 
 
 B 
 
14 DBUATB ON TUB 
 
 tiid all je are lircthTen : and call none father (i. e. pope) for one is 
 joir fattier, be that is in heaven. Neither he you called masters, for 
 one is yonr master, Christ. He that is the greater of yon shall be 
 your servitor !" If the very question about a pope had been before 
 ihe Messiah at this time, he could not have spoken more clearly. 
 This expression indicates the most perfect e<}ua]ity of rank among 
 the apostles and disciples of Christ, and positively forbids, in a re* 
 liirious sense, the assumption of the title of father or pope. The com- 
 mandment which says ^^ thou shalt not Bteaf!^* is not ^e clearly laid 
 down than the command ** call no man father." 
 
 Now will the gentleman deny that " pope*' (in Greek " pappas," 
 in Latin, '*papa*') means " father 1" ana that the case clearly comes 
 within the command. Jesus Christ says, " call no man pope ;** yet 
 they ordain a bishop and Call him pope ; and this pope claims the 
 title of *♦ universal father" — supreme head and governor of tlie church 
 of Christ. He is sometimes called Lord God the pope. 
 
 This testimony of Christ will outweigh volumes. Put all the fo- 
 lios and authorities, which the gentleman may bring, on one side, and 
 this text of Jesus Christ on the other, and the former, in comparison, 
 will be found light as the chaff which is blown away by a breath. 
 
 Can any one, then, who fears God and believes in the Messiah, call 
 the pope, or any human being ** father*' in the sense here intended. 
 The Ijord anticipated the future in all his precepts, and spoke with 
 an eye to it as well as to the men of hit own time. He had the pride 
 and assumptions, of the Rabbis of Jerusalem, in his eye, who cove- 
 ted lemown, who loved such greetings in the market place, and re- 
 eelved such compellations in the 8ynaj|rogues. Describing these men 
 to his disciples, lie cautions them against their example, and teaches 
 them to regard each other as brethren. I hope the gentleman will pay 
 farticular attention to this point in his reply to these remarks. 
 
 The third testimony on which we rely will be found in Ephesians 
 iv. 11. This passage sums up all the officers or gifts which Jesus 
 gave the church after his ascension into heaven. *« And ** says Paul 
 *' he gave some apostles, and some prophets^ and some evangelists, 
 and some pastors, and doctors " or teachers. In this enumeratidn, 
 which contains the whole, there is no pope. The highest or first rank 
 Is ffiven to apostles. 
 
 In every other enumeration found in the epistles, there is the same 
 dear reference to the apostles as thefint class. 1 Cor. xii. 28. But 
 let Peter himself speak as to his raiut. We see that in his own Itt 
 Epistle, ch. 1, he calls himself an apoitle, not ihe apoetle of Jesus, 
 not the prinee of apostles, not the supreme head of the chmch. Pe- 
 ter had no idea of such headship and lordship. 
 
 Again in addressing the ^'senion** or elders, chap. v. 1. he says, 
 " 1 myself am a fellow senior.'* They were all co-elders, co-bishops, 
 eo-apoetles, as respected each other ; and as respected all other offi- 
 cers the apostles were jfrsl. The thought of a supreme head among»t 
 them is not found in the New Testament; only as reprobated by our 
 Savior. 
 
 I will not, at present, advance any more scriptural authority upon 
 the point, but shall proceed to examine what foundation this element 
 of the Roman church, has in ancient history. But I would here say 
 distinctly, once for all, that I will not open a single document to prove 
 'Say doctrine, tenet, or principle of Protestantism, otlier than this holy 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 15 
 
 record of the prophets, and apostles, the holy men of God, whospake 
 aTthey were moved by the Holy Spirit. On these 1 rely, and 1 a^ 
 firm that these contain no authority for the assumption of the doctrine 
 of a universal father, pope, or head of the church. Fhere was no 
 such person mentioned— no such idea cherished until hundreds of 
 vears after the death of the apostles. , , • * • 
 
 1 will read the following general remarks by this learned histonan 
 The tide page is as follows : — 
 
 A New iTistory of Ecclesiastical Writers, containing an account of 
 the authors of the several books of the Old and New Testaments ; of 
 the lives and wriUngs of the primitive Fathers: an abridgment and 
 cataloirue of their works; their various editions, and censures, deter- 
 mining the genuine and spurious. Together with a judgment ujyon 
 style and doctrine. Also a compendious history of the Councils ; with 
 Chronoloffical Tables of the whole, written in French by Lewis El- 
 lies Du Fin, doctor of the Sorbonne, and Regius Professor at Paris. 
 3 vols. Folio. The Third Edition corrected, Dublin, printed by and ioi 
 George Grierson, at the Two Bibles in Essex Street, mdccxxiv. 
 
 I imi happy to find, appended to the preface, the seals and signatures 
 of men high in the church, which I cannot now stop to read. 
 
 From this work I will proceed to read some passages in proot 
 Of the proposition I have advanced, that there is not a vestige of evi- 
 dence in favor of the cardinal idea, of the Roman Catholic religion, 
 that there was a pope in the first ages of the church. At the close of 
 the third century the highest advance yet made towards any supremacy 
 in the church on the ground of metropoUtan standing, is thus descnh- 
 ed by Du Pin. .■.•.• a • 
 
 - The bishops of great cities had iheir prerogative* in ordinations, and in coun^ 
 ciU: and as in civil affairs men generally had recourse to the civil metropolis, so 
 likewise in ecclesiastical matters, they consulted with the bishop of the metro- 
 politancity. The churches of the three principal cities of the world were looked 
 iipon as chief, and their bishops attributed great prerogatives to themselves. Ths 
 church qf Rome, founded by St Peter and St. Paul, was considered as first, 
 and its bishou as first amongst all the bishops of the world ; yet they did not be- 
 lieve him to be infallible: and though they frequently consulted him, and hit 
 advice was of great consequence, yet they did not receive it blind-fold and im- 
 plicitly. every bishop imagining himself to have aright to judge in ecclesiastical 
 
 Observe the bishops of the principal cities attributed to themsehm 
 greai prerogatives. And Rome, the chief city, began to assume the 
 chief prerogatives. But the general character of the clergy as detail- 
 ed by this writer waa not yet &vorable to such assumpUons-^or, 
 
 " The clergj were not distinguished fi-ora others by any peculiar habits, but 
 by the sanctity of their life and manners, they were removed from all kind ot 
 avarice, and carefully avoided every thing that seemed to carry the appearanc« 
 of tcandaloas, filthy lucre. They administered the sacrament g-ra/«, ami believed 
 il to be an abominable crime togive or receive any thing for a spiritual blessinar. 
 Tithe* were not then appropriated to them, but the people maintained them vol- 
 ontanly at their own expense." . u,„flk;- Tk-» 
 
 " The clergy were prohibited to meddle with any civil and secular aflain. Tbey 
 wer« ordained against their will and did not remove from one church to another 
 out of a principle of interest or ambition. They were extremely chaste and re- 
 gular. It was lawful for priests to keep the wives they married before they were 
 
 ordained.** . . , . ,. » . a • — 
 
 Nothin<y indeed like an ecclesiastical establishment was yet in ex- 
 istence : for says Du Pin, speaking of these times, 
 
 After all, it must be confessed, that the discipline ot the church has been •• 
 
 -'.1 
 
16 
 
 DSBATK ON TU'E 
 
 i 
 
 titrewclf diiereiit »md m often »It«ml, that it ii almost lmpo!!i;b!e to say aii| 
 thiiijr poMtivel¥ concerning it." p. 590. ^ 
 
 So Stood the matter at the close of the third century. 
 
 But we have still more definite and positive testimony, in the great 
 councils of the 4th and 6th centuries. Let us then examine the early 
 councas. The famous council of Nice which sat in 325, is the first 
 general council that ever assembled ; for although they call the con- 
 Mltations of the apostles — ^Acts 15., a council, yet in the enumeration 
 iif feneial councils, of which they establish eighteen, that of Nice it 
 called the first 
 
 At this council there were present 318 bishops. It was called by 
 the Roman emperor in order to settle certain discords in what was 
 them called the church. By the sixth canon of this first council it ap- 
 iMtro, aocoiding to Du Pin, that the idea of a pope, or supreme head, 
 liad not bmn to be entertained. The sixth canon of tlie council of 
 
 Nice is as rollowt. 
 
 •* The 64h canon it fanioat for the lereral questions it has occasioned. Tb*i 
 most natural sense that can be given to it, is this: * We ordain that the ancient 
 custom shall be obaerved, which gives power to the bishop of Alexandria, over 
 all the provinces of EgypU Idbm^ and Pantapolia, because the bishop of Rome 
 has the like jurisdiction over all the tuburbicarv regions (for this addition must 
 be supplied ont q( RuAnm;) we would liliewise have the rights and privileges oi 
 tbecMrch of .^iiltocA and the other churches preserved ^ but these rights ought 
 not to prejudice those of the metropolitans. Ir anv one is ordained without thf 
 COBMiit of the netropolitan, the council declares, tnat he is no bishop: but if an| 
 one it canonically choeeo oy thesufirage of almoatall the bishop of the province 
 and if there are but one or two of a contrary opinion, the suftrages of th« h» 
 greater number ought to caify it for the ordinattoo of those particular persons 
 Thii canon bein-^ thus explained has no difficulty in it It doea not oppose tbt 
 primacy of the church of Rome, but neither does it establish it* 
 
 *« In this iCBse it is, that it compares the church of Rome to the church oi 
 J||MmJr<«, by considering them all as patriarchal churches. It continues also 
 to the church of Antimh and all the other great churches, whatsoever right* 
 they could have; but lest their authority should be prejudicial to the ordinary 
 metropolitans, who wer« subject to their jurisdiction, the council confinns what 
 had been ordained in the fourth canon concerning the authority of metropo- 
 litans in the ordination of bishops. This explication is easy and natural, and we 
 have given vmny proofs of it in our Latin disiertation concerning the ancient 
 dtsciwine of the cnnrcb." 
 
 **This canon," says Du Pin, who be It remembered was alwayi 
 tnxious to find some authority for the pope's supremacy, " does not 
 
 ■ST4SLISH THE SUPASMAC¥ QW THE CHURCH OF RoME." Willing SS 
 
 he was to have this primacy traced to the beginning of Christianity, 
 h® is constrained to admit, that even the council of Nice does not es- 
 tablish it Nay more — it is in truth against it ; for it gives the Bishop 
 of Alexandria like jurisdiction with the church of Rome; and also 
 preserves to the church of Antioch its metropolitan dominion. 
 
 It would be too tedious to go into an exposition of the causes, why 
 ■o much power was accumnlatod in the hands of four or five bishops. 
 It originated in the divisions of the empire. In Roman iurisdiction, 
 there were four great political dioceses, (for Mocae was then a politi* 
 eal term) and to these the church conformed. Hence the patriarchal 
 sees of Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria. In process 
 of time, Jerusalem was added, and these all became radiating centres 
 of ecclesiastical jpower and patronage. The bishop of each diocese 
 assumed a sort ot primary, in his own district ; and as various inter- 
 ISnrences and rivalries in jurisdiction occurred, the council of Nice so 
 far decided that the same power should be given to them all — ^that all 
 
 SOMAYi CATHOLIC REMOION. 
 
 17 
 
 primates should be coordinate. Hence Du Pin could not find m that 
 council authority for the supreme primacy of Rome. In the canons 
 of the second and third general councils tliere is no reference to these 
 
 matters whatever. ., ^ rti. i j r 
 
 I shall therefore proceed to the great council of Chalcedon, of pre- 
 eminent authority, the greatest of the first four general councils. 
 
 From all the canons of the council relating to government, it is cvi 
 dent that they had not yet excogitated the idea of a supreme head. 
 Says Du Pin, , ^ ^ . , .... 
 
 "The 28th canon grants t3 the church of the city of Coiutenftftopw, whicn •• 
 called JVew Rome, the same privileges with old Rome, because thb city isthe ■* - 
 cond city in the world. It also adjudges to it, besides this, jurisdiction over tba 
 dioceses' of Ponius.AMia, and TAmcc, and over the churches which are out of the 
 bounds of the emperor, and aright to ordain metropolitans in the provwces ot 
 these dioceses." p. 678. i_i. • .t 
 
 Thus this council, composed of 340 bishops, and assembling m the 
 year of our Lord 451, gave the same power to the patriarch of Con- 
 stantinople as to the patriarch of Rome, and makes the supremacy of 
 the one equal to the supremacy of the other. 
 
 I have examined the proceedings of all the councils of the first six 
 centuries, of which I find about 170, promulgating in all about 1400 
 canons. I have read and examined the twenty creeds of the fourth 
 century witli all their emendations down to the close of the sixth ; 
 and I affirm, without the fear of contradiction, that there is not in all 
 these a single vestige of the existence of a pope or universal head of 
 the church down to the time of Gregory the great, or John the Faster 
 of Constantinople. 
 
 I shall now proceed to show from the same learned historian when 
 this idea began to be divulged. And be it emphatically observed that 
 the title of pope in its peculiar and exclusive sense was first assumed 
 by the patriarch of Constantinople, and approved by the patriarch of 
 Rome. Du Pin says in his life of Gregory, chap. 1, *' He did of- 
 ten rigorously oppose the title of universal patriarch, which the patri- 
 archs of Constantinople assumed to themselves." Indeed he calls 
 the title, " proud, blasphemous, anti-christian, diabolical," and says, 
 the bishops of Rome refused to take this title upon them »* lest they 
 should seem to encroach upon the rights of other bishops." But the 
 following document or remonstrance against the title shews what a 
 novelty Sie idea of an universal head, father, or pope was even at 
 
 Rome, A. D. 588 : — 
 
 •♦ St. Gregory does not only oppose this title in the patriarch of Conttaniino- 
 mU, but maintains also, that it cannot agree to any other bishop, and that the 
 bishop of Rome neither ought, nor can assume it. John the younger, patriarch 
 of ConstantinwUt had taken upon him this title in a council held in 586, in the 
 time of pope Pelagiua, which obliged tbis pope to annul the Acts of tbis coun- 
 cil. St. Gregory wrote of it also to this patriarch ; but this made no impression 
 on him, and John would not abandon this fine title, B. 4. Ep. 36. St. Gregory 
 addressed himself to the emperor Mauritius, and exbortwi him earnestly to 
 employ his authority for redreseiag this abuse, and force him who assumed this 
 title to quit it. He remonstrates to him in his letter, that although Jeans Chnst 
 had committed to St. Peter the care of all his churches, yet he was not called 
 univertal apostU. That the title of universal bishop is against the rules of the 
 gospel, and the appointment of the canons: that there cannot bean universal 
 bishop but the authority of all the other will be destroyed or diminished ; that 
 if the bishop of Con»iuntinopU were universal bishop, and it should happen that 
 he shonld fall into heresy, it might be said that the universal church was fallen 
 into dtstrurtiou. That "the council of Chalcedon had offered this title to i-^o^ 
 
mi 
 
 I 
 
 \ i 
 
 BMBATM OW TRI 
 
 ^iit nrither nt. nor Hit loaeaton would accept it, leit bj giffii|^ foniethMif |i9> 
 culiar to one bishop only, tli«j should take away the i%nts which belong: ta all 
 the bislio|itd—That it beloogt to the emperor to reduce by hii authority him 
 who tiespiaet the canons, and does injury to the unifersal church by assuminf 
 this singular name." B. 4. Ep. 33. 
 
 But It this time the patriaichs of Constantinople and Rome were 
 contendingr for the supremaey, and while it appNsared to Gregory that 
 hi« ri^al of the east was likely to possess the title, he saw in it, ere- 
 ij thing anti-christian and profane. When a new djmasty, however, 
 •''tceml^ the throne and oflered tl|e title to a Roman bishop, it lost all 
 ifs blasphemy and impiety, and we find the successor of Gregory can 
 wear the title of universal patriarch when tendered him by Phocas* 
 without the least scnipulosiiy. 
 
 It is then a fact worthy of much consideration in this discussion, 
 that John bishop of Constantinople first assiJimed the title of univer- 
 sal head of the whole christian cnurch, and that the bishop of Rome 
 did in that case oppose it as anti-scriptoral and anti-christian. 
 
 Concerning the reputation of Saint Gregory I need not be profuse. 
 Of the Gregories he is deservedly called the Great Renowned in 
 iisloffy as one who stamped his own image on the Roman world foi 
 a period of five hundred years, yet he could not brook the idea of a 
 pupe, especially when about to be bestowed on his rival at Constan 
 tinnple. 
 
 St Gregory, be it remembered, says Du Pin, did not only oppose 
 the title in the case of John the Faster, as proud, heretical, blasphe* 
 Moua, &c. but could not agree to its being assumed by any other 
 bishop; he affirmed that the bishops of Rome ought not, dare not, 
 cannot assume this pompous and arrogant title. 
 
 Urns stood matters as respects a supreme head up to within 14 
 years of the close of the 6th century.^[Time expired.] 
 
 KOMAN CATHOLIC MBLIOION, 
 
 10 
 
 Bishop Puhckli. rii 
 
 Ekrnn o'clock J, M, 
 
 I tliought it likely, my respected and beloved fellow citizens, that I 
 ehould have to day a difficult task before me. fiut I perceive that 1 
 ■hall have an easy one. I expected from the reputation of my antag- 
 cmlst as a debater, that he was going to argue so closely, and to press 
 me so hard, that he would, to use a common expression, make mmced 
 meat of me, and not leave oitc bone of me unbroken. I thought that 
 my cned, so ancient, so venerable, so holy, was to be torn into tat- 
 ters and scattered to the four winds of heaven — I was mistaken ! 
 
 The gentleman occupied ten minutes of his time in endeavoring to 
 bias the judgment of his hearers in fa?or of the idea, that this contro- 
 versy ong[inated not with himself, but that I was the aggressor, in 
 doing which ha was cilled to order. I will not trespass more than 
 two or three minutes on your patience in answering his preliminary 
 observations. 
 
 I am willing to let that matter rest on its own merits. As to the 
 
 rHion of amlant and defender in this controversy, the public have 
 data, and it is for them to judge. My worthy opponent began the 
 present debate by representing himself as the staunch defender of Pro- 
 tesHniism, endeavoring thereby to enlist the sympathies of Protestants 
 in his iivor. And what, I would presume to inquire, are his princi- 
 
 Klesl What are his claims, his pretensions, or his right to appear 
 efore this assembly as the defender of Protestantism 1 We are all 
 
 awam what sad pranks have been lately played off before high Hea- 
 ^Mhs men styling themselves Protestants, which all classes of Pro- 
 S^tants unite in deprecating, which they all condemn. I know not 
 Whether thlre be not some Protestants here, who wi 1 not admit his 
 *"* • e .u^:, ^^»»:ni/io wlirt will not believe thai the 
 
 8 numerous and respectable class, wiU not consent to be represented 
 bf Tm'for he denies, if I am rightly informed, that there is propei^ 
 l/anTministry in the Protestant church «o called-that a dmne caU 
 •Luld precede the assumption of the sacred office. [H«'^ ^f, "J^J" 
 emtors interrupted, by requesting the speaker to confine himself to the 
 
 '^"weU we are so far even, [a laugh.] The gentleman, then, began 
 bv the assertion that the term Roman Catholic was an incongruity.— 
 rfut 1 deny it to be an incongruity. Terms, we ^^11 know, are used 
 S^e mo^ clearly to designate the idea or object which they represent. 
 " cSic- is the narae^f our church; and we only pre^x the word 
 Roman to signify that she is in communion with the see of Rome. 
 We acknowledge there a primate of superior, ecclesiastical junsdic- 
 tion, and in his communion we do abide. ^„a«^4- 
 
 He says the word Roman is incongruous; yet his own authonty, 
 Du Pin, says it was synonymous with Catholic. It was so und^- 
 •t^ formerly. And here l may observe that I deny Ae authonty 
 of Du Pin to be competent to the settlement of questions to be called 
 up for decision in the course of the present controversy. Du Pm was 
 a*Janseni8t, removed from his place of Regius Professor at the Sw- 
 bonne for his doctrinal errors, by Louis XIV. to whom Clement Xl 
 addressed a brief on this occasion, commending his xeal for the 
 truth. The claim of Rome was undisputed m the early ages, and it 
 was only when her preeminence was contested that the term Koman 
 was used before the word Catholic. Hence it was no incongruity, 
 but a clearer designation of the see in whose communion were all the 
 churches. He has stated an inaccuracy in saying that the word cath- 
 olic was not found in the bible. Is not the epistle of St James cal- 
 led catholic 1 And will he presume to say the word was not placed 
 there in the very first age of Christianity % 
 
 The gentleman says he will use no words that may convey an op- 
 probrioSs meaning. God forbid that I should set him the example. 
 1 shall debate thfs question with earnestness, but not with passion. 
 As soon as the discussion closes, I can meet the gentleman without a 
 aingle unkind or unfriendly feeling. n^.x^^w^ ^\,„rr\ T wmt 
 
 But in enumerating various doctrines of the Catholic church, I was 
 •hoeked to hear him use the language " some being called the mo^cr 
 of God " Great God ! didst thou not send into the world thy &on, 
 Jesus Chri8^ to save perishing man, and didst thou not select one 
 of dl the daughters o/Eve,tol)e the mother of that child of benedic- 
 tion, and was not Mary this holy one, to whose care was ccmimitted 
 his nfancy, and to whom he was subject 1 Was she not the chc^en 
 one of helven, to whom its archangel was sent with the communica- 
 Son-" Hail, full of Grace," or as it is i^^^e Protestant version- 
 '*th0Q that ;rt highly favored-the Lord is with ^y^''jl^,fl^^ 
 BOW hear her stigiSatiied in such language, and designated as "some 
 being called the mother of God 1" 
 
The fNitlemaii fhen fsontests tlie doctrine of ■ hierarcYiy in i1m 
 diuicli ; and says what he asserts is proved by the scriptures. 1 
 vmld ask—has he read the bible ? Has he read the book of Levitt* 
 em f Does he not find there the eiample set of a distinction of orders 
 in religious affairs f Did not the Lord speak to Mosee, sayin^y^ 
 •♦•TliAe Aaron with his sons, their Testments and the oil of uncuon,' 
 and he poured it on Aaron^s head — ^he put also the mitre on his head. 
 And amr he had offered his sons, he vested them with linen tonics 
 ■li firded them with ffirdles," Uc. &c, "And Nadab and Abiii 
 
 I consumed with ire for opposinf them, and thej died before the 
 Lord/* Did not Moses lead i Did not Aaron assist! Were thera 
 
 not councillors appointed by the Lord, to divide the burden of thei? 
 mioistrv 1 Did not king Josaphat send Zachariah and Nathaniel and 
 Michael, and with them the Levites, Senneias, Ice., to teach the peo- 
 ple? Paralip. 17. 7. What is this but a distinction of orders and of 
 authority in the Jewish disjpensation 1 
 
 He says there was no distinction of orders in the early christian 
 ehurch; and he refuted himself by appeiling for a solutipn of the dif- 
 leuljjr to St. Paul. Were there no orders, no hierarchy I What says 
 St. ¥wak in 4th Ephesians I " And he gave some apostles, and somt 
 prophets, and other some evangelists, and other some pastors, and 
 teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministryi 
 for the edifying of the body of Christ; until we all meet onto the 
 unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect 
 11HII9 unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ." Wc 
 nipt here remark a nadation of authority in the church of God. Fot 
 winti For the work of the ministry. There np%'er has existed a so- 
 da! body without subordination, or distinction of *ank. The churoh 
 of Christ is a social body. It needs to be subjected to order, even 
 more than a political body; and as if St Paul anticipated tlie objeo« 
 tion, which we have, not without surprise, heard this day urged, ho 
 eiprnaaiy states the object of the institution of a hierarchy by him, 
 wio Moending on high ^ave gifls to men, to be the nerfeeting of the 
 saints— liie unity of faith. "Are all," he aslffl, fwhat my friend 
 would make them) " prophets ? Are all pastors ?'*— He elsewhere 
 asks, *' How can they preach unless they be sent 1" By whom 1 By 
 an ecclesiastical superior. — So much for the evidence of the Old Tes 
 tament, and the New Testament. They both teach a head, a hierar- 
 dlfand subordination among the people of God. 
 
 This takes me to the examination of the title, assumed by theCath* 
 olic church, of mother and mistress of all the churches. He saya 
 Jemsaleiii was the mother church at firatF^-nnd then the Samaritan, 
 and so on, I need not follow him. I will eiplain what we mean by 
 tile tern.— We call her mother becante she gnidea, tkm eherishes ua. 
 We oall her mother, beeanse we feel a filial reiverenee for her— -just 
 aa an orphaq calls her who protects her, educates her, and gnides her 
 VBiidering feet, by the same tender appellative. There is no blasphe- 
 my In this comparison. It is the Son of God that established the 
 aathoritv of that church. The name is its designation. 
 
 Bmt the word * mistress* is never used in spring of the chureh, 
 in the sense of lordship, or queenship. It is the way in which chil- 
 dren address their teacher. They frequently nse the expression, as 
 we read in Cordcry's Colloquies, "salve magister." Ma^islra here is 
 addressed to her in her capacity of teacher, and such she is, and, as I 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC »»LIC10N. 
 
 21 
 
 shall prove, by tlie appoti.tment and the express institution of Jusua 
 
 Christ. ■ 1 » i! • 
 
 He next referred to the Doway catechism to show from the defini- 
 tion of the Catholic chinch, that she consisted of four elements, via. 
 tlie pope, bishops, pastors, and laity. 
 
 Now the catechism of this diocese defines the Catholic church to 
 be the congregation of all the faithful, professing the same faith, re- 
 ceiving the same sacraments, and united under one visible head, tlie 
 pope, or vicar of Jesus Christ, on earth. 
 
 It is defined to be the congre^tion of all the fatthfuL This is the 
 definition which most authors give. It is that of the catechism from 
 which my friend has quoted. , , , 
 
 But let us adopt his definition, and I am prepared to show that the 
 idea of a supreme head has its ori^n in the bible, and is supported 
 by the eariiest ecclesiastical authonty. I must here take notice of the 
 promise he gave to put his finger on the precise day and date when 
 the church called the Roman Catholic church, ceased to be the church 
 of Christ. He has left us as much in the dark as ever on this most 
 important of all events. It is a point which ha& puzzled the worid, 
 and will for ever puzzle it, to fix that date. It will, I am sure, puz- 
 zle my friend. The whole worid has never been able to state at what 
 particular moment the Catholic church lost her prerogative and the 
 favor of God— when she ceased to be in the true sense the Calhoiie 
 CkureL Tlie reason of this is obvious. She has never forfeited her 
 prerogative. But to the matter before us. It is opposed to scripture 
 lo assert that the church in apostolic days had no head. What did 
 Christ say to Peter when he addressed him the mysterious question — 
 " Lovest thou me more than these"] Peter says he does love him. 
 Jesus gives him the order, " feed my lambs." A second time he asks 
 the question, and receives the same reply. The third time he repeats 
 the same question. Peter, troubled that his Lord should doubt his 
 affection, replies, " Oh Lord, thou knowest all things— thou knowest 
 that I love tliee," and Jesus repeated the command — " feed my lambs" 
 — " feed my sheep." 
 
 Thus Christ establishes the headship of the church in Peter, and 
 him he makes his vice-gerent, or common pastor, to feed both lambs 
 and sheep — both clergy and laity. 
 
 Mr. Campbell quarrels with the doctrine of the pope's headship 
 because it carries a power and an authority with it: and he quotes the 
 New Testament to prove no such power to have been exercised in the 
 days of the apostles. I have disproved his argument upon this point 
 already. Christ did institute a body of leaders, a ministry to guide 
 his people, " that henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro, 
 snd carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the wickedness of 
 men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in vrait to deceive. 
 But doing the truth in Christ, we may in all things grow up in him 
 who is head, even Christ; from whom the whole body being compac- 
 ted and fitly joined together, by what every part supplieth, according 
 to the operation in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the 
 body, unto the edifying of itself in charity." Must not the body 
 have a head, the house a foundation ? He objects that we call the 
 sovereign pontiff— Pope, or father, whereas Christ says, "call not any 
 man Father." But is this prohibition of our Savior to be taken liier- 
 •lly 1 Is there any guilt or imoiely in calling a parect " l/atlierl" 
 
J 
 
 28 DBnATE Olf IHB 
 
 Mtny of Christ's commands are similar. He commands os to call 
 no man good.- for C5od only is good. But do we not, in saluting • 
 friend in common life, say " CJood Sir," " ray good friend !" &c. Is 
 tlwi® mm impiety in this I It is the using these terms in that sense 
 ii which they are peeuMar to the di? inity, which Christ forbids. And 
 ft© pope when he corresponds with the bishops, does not assume 
 these proud titles, but addresses them as an elder Brotheb. We do 
 Dot call him " Lord God the Pope." 
 
 Mr. C. says, St. Paul did not lord it over the clergy. Neithei 
 does the pope. He is to govern the chnrch aeeording to the eanom. 
 Me cm make no articles of faith. He cannot, he does not act arbi- 
 tfurlly m proposing articles of belief unknown to Catholic antiquity. 
 But neither will he suier innovation. His language is like St. Paul's, 
 *' Were I or an angel from Heaven to preach to you any other gospel, 
 than what has been preached, let him be Anathema !" This expres- 
 sed the sense the great apostle entertained of his own responsibility, 
 ■Ml the danger of novelty in religion. He would not suffer altar lo 
 he laised against altar, on the ground of private interpretation of the 
 bible. H© would not suffer the wolves of heresy and error to prowl 
 around the fold, and tear, and scatter the sheep entrusted to him by 
 Jesus Christ 
 
 It would be horrid blasphemy to apply to man the title Father, in 
 the sense in which it is addressed to God. We never call the pope 
 in any sense God. When the pope writes to the bishops, he begins 
 by " Diieeti Fratrm" *' Beloved Brethren," — a republican, and if 
 you please democratic address. The bishops are all brethren nndci 
 one common father. The pope is accused of letting himself be woi^ 
 shipped. This is not so. But when the Pope comes before the altai 
 lie D0W9 down like the humblest of his people. " I confess," says 
 he, "to Almightjr God, to the blessed Virgin Mary, the holy Apostles, 
 and to all the %ints," the least of whom he therefore acknowledges 
 to be greater than himself, " that I have sinned ;" and this is what is 
 called settinff himself up to be a God ! See how you have been de- 
 ceived by the invidious representations you have had of the pope, and 
 of our doctrine, my friends. 
 
 I assert again that the authority nuoted by my friend, Mr. C, viz. 
 Bu Pin, is no authority. He was tne rank enemy of the Roman see, 
 a Jansenist, reproved and censured by the Catholic chureh. Mr. C. 
 knows this, for I have read to him the documents that prove it, and 
 he was confounded by them. It is neither good faith, nor good logic, 
 to quote him as an authority against my argument As for the signa. 
 tures appended to the Engfis? translation,! care not for them ; Uiey 
 may have been wrongfully placed there, or those certificates subom- 
 ed. This makes nothing for the authority of the book, and no argu- 
 ment can be drawn from them. But, my friends, I am sure you ois- 
 ceYeied his discomfiture when he appealed to Du Pin. There was a 
 stumbling block in his way, something he could not get over. Bid 
 you not notice how with the rapid speed of a rail-road car dashing 
 suddenly on an obstruction, he fled the track, when he found to his as- 
 tonishment that the testimony adduced by his author, was not unfa- 
 veiable to the supremacy of St Peter, and his successors ! I will 
 eiamine his writings to show that even in the third century, the bish- 
 epB of Rome claimed this prerogative, and Du Pin tells you thai this 
 was acknowledged. He says tticre were three principal bishops. 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC KKLIOION. 
 
 23 
 
 This Is a great admission, and I am thankful for it He says that 
 even then, bishops came from inferior sees, and laid their conflicting 
 claims before the see of Rome ; and submitted to the chair of Peter, 
 doubts in religious matters; and ur^ed it to proclaim a solution of 
 their difficulties; but he says, they did not believe the pope of Rome 
 infallible. This is granting to tiie Catholics the whole mooted ques- 
 tion. The question is cleariy settled by this admission. Appeals 
 were lodged before the bishop of Rome, though he was not believed 
 to be infallible. Neither is he now. No enlightened Catholic holds 
 the pope's infallibility to be an article of faith. I do not; and none 
 of my brethren, tiiat I know of, do. The Catholic believes Uie pope, 
 ts a man, to be as liable to error, as almost any other man in the urn- 
 verse. Man is man, and no man is infallible, either in doctrine or 
 morals. Many of the popes have sinned, and some of them have 
 been bad men. I presume my worthy antagonist will take his brush 
 in hand, and roll up his sleeves, and lay it on thera hard and heavy ; 
 80 will 1 ; and whenever he uses a strong epithet against them, I will 
 use a stronger. But let us return to the gentieman's authonty, Du 
 Pin. We come to the council of Nice, which was held A. D. 325, 
 and where 318 bishops were assembled. This council was convoked 
 oy the first christian emperor Constantine the Great, at the suggestion, 
 I might have more correctly said the instigation of Sylvester, bishop 
 of Rome, and of course, with his consent Osius, bishop of Cordo- 
 va, and two legates, Vitus and Vincentius, presided in it, in the name 
 of the Roman pontiff. The principal doctrine on which the council 
 was assembled to decide, was the divinity of Jesus Christ denied by 
 the Arians. From the manner of the convocation of the council, the 
 circumstance of its having been presided over by the representatives 
 of the pope, or bishop of Rome, the submission of the entire chris- 
 tian worid to its decrees, and the authentic records of its transactions 
 which have reached us, we have the most convincing evidences of the 
 reverence which was even then entertained for the successor of St. 
 Peter ; and the best practical illustration of the wisdom that estab- 
 lished his pre-eminence of rank among his bretiiren, to wateh over 
 the purity of doctrine, the soundness of morals, the uniformity of 
 discipline, and the maintenance of union among the churches. What 
 more direct and satisfactory testimony could we require of the supre- 
 macy of the see of Rome, than the distinct recognition of its authori- 
 ty by so venerable an assembly 1 And what if rival claims were ad- 
 vanced by other sees 1 This ambitious spirit is as old as Christiani- 
 ty, as ancient as the origin of the human race. The aposUes, them- 
 selves, strove for the mastery. They contended which of them was 
 the greater. But this rivalry only served, in the end, to establish 
 more firmly the precedency of the claim of St Peter. In answer to 
 the pretensions of the bishop of Alexandria, the council says to him, 
 "As the bishop of Rome has his primacy in Rome, so the bishop of 
 Alexandria has his primacy in Alexandria." It says to him, "you 
 have no cause to complain— if he has his authority, you have yours ; 
 in yonr respective sees, or churches, you have the chief control ; but 
 it is his prerogative, as occupying the place of Peter, to wateh over 
 the welfare of all." "Neither," says Du Pin, "does it disprove 
 THE PRIMACY OF ROME." The council offered a sedalire to the pride 
 of rtie bishop of Alexandria, or asserted his authority in his own see, 
 but it does not disprove the primacy of Rome* 
 

 DBBATB 021 'TBX 
 
 W 
 
 Wliit mine do you want than what God has caused to he thus re- 
 
 copiMi 'Mie I 
 
 The dissension first oriffinated among the patriaichal sees. The 
 counsel took cognizance of it, and deciaed according to the rules and 
 usages of the apostolic and immediately subsequent ages. From this, 
 whatever follows, it surely does not follow that there was no primacy 
 in Mome* 
 
 Me says that the bishop of Constantinople assumed to call himself 
 the universal bishop, and that the emperor winked at it. What does 
 this mean 1 Why that the crafty emperor, and the more subtle bishop 
 intended to compel Rome to acknowledge Constantinople as hei 
 equal. This attempt of the emperor and the patriarch illustrates the 
 
 K>int at issue, and clears it in fact of any difficultv. Thev knew that 
 ome was referred to on every occasion ; and that her decision was 
 final. They were jealous of her authority. The manner of this as- 
 sumption ot the bishop of Constantinople, and of the emperor wink- 
 ing at it, are in fact proofs of the supremacy of Rome. Now, thought 
 the proud Greek, I will bring this haughty pontiff of Rome crouchmg 
 ill my feet, I will make him surrender all his authority, and we, the 
 •niperor and myself, will divide the earth between us. It was there- 
 fore that tlie bishop made this assumption, and that the emperor winked 
 at it. It was in this unjust and intolerable sense of the term Universal 
 Father, that Gregory who deserves all the praise which has been 
 given him, and more, objected to its assumption. It was thus that he 
 iQprobated the title of universal father. 
 
 If the bishop of Rome now claims to be called the first pastor in 
 Christendom, he pretends to be no lord of the consciences of his breth- 
 ren, or dictator of the terms of salvation to the servants of God. 
 He acknowledges with humility his own intrinsic nothingness, unless 
 supported by God, and guided and guarded by him in the administra- 
 tion of his eminently responsible office. 
 
 He is a father because he breaks the mystic bread, and dispenses 
 the spiritual nourishment of sound doctrine to the souls of the people 
 of God. He is a father because to him we appeal in our doubts, and to 
 him refer in every emergency, as to the vicar of Christ. 
 
 The term Universal father was likewise worthy of the condemna- 
 tion of Gregory, in the bad sense in which it was assumed by the pa- 
 tiiaich of Constantinople, viz. that of lord and master of spiritual 
 power amd of the consciences of the brethren, so as not to need' or ask 
 the advice of the bishops. The pope never gives a decree without 
 taking counsel from his constitutional advisers, availing himself of 
 the light of present wisdom and past experience. He takes all human 
 means to weigh the subject well and to come to a sound and scriptural 
 conclusion. Discard the pope— sever from the communion of the 
 chiirei of Rome, and you lose all claim, or shadow of claim to a con- 
 nexion with the apostles. Hear Waddiuffton speaking of the Vaudois— 
 
 ** In 0iar joarney back towaitls the npostolic times, these leparatiits conduct 
 Of ■§ fitr as the beginning of the tweU'th century; but when we would adTance 
 fiurther, we ar* intercepted by abroad region of darkness and uncertainty. A 
 ■park of hope is indeed suggested by the history of the Vaudoi ». Their origin is 
 not ascertained by any authentic record, and being immemorial, it may have 
 been coeval with the introduction of Christianity. 
 
 ••But since there is not one direct proof of their existence during that long 
 ■piice; since they have never been certainly discovered by tlie cnriosity of any 
 writer, nor detected by the iiiquisitorial eye of any urthodox bi&licip nor 
 
 KOMAN CATHOUC ASUUION. 
 
 
 wmed by aay pope, or council, or mnj church record, chronicle, nr memorial. 
 we are not justified in attaching any historical credit tu their mere unsupportea 
 tntdition. It is sufficient to prove, that they had an earlier existence than tut 
 twelfth century; bat that tdey had then been peri>etuated throach eight ot 
 nine centuries, uncommemorated abroad, and without any national monumenl 
 to attest their existence, Is much more than we can venture, on such evidence. 
 to assert. Here then the golden chain of our apostolic descent disappears. 
 and though it may exist, buried in the darkness of those previous ages, ana 
 though some writers have seemed to discern a few detached links which thev 
 diligently exhibited, there is still much wanting to complete the continuity. * 
 rPmee 554 of the Hutory of the Church from the earliest age$, by Rev. Geo. 
 Waddin^on, A. M.fdhw of Trinity College, Cambridge, and Prebendary tjf 
 fkrrime, in the emthedral ehnrch of Chichester, J>few York edition, 1835.] 
 
 Well if Christ established a church on earth, that church must be 
 eathoUe, •* I believe in the holy catholic church," is the language 
 of tfie apostles and of councils, of Protestants as well as of Catholics. 
 The /rtk; church must be catholic. What church then is catholic 1 
 The universe answers the question — ^Italy, France, Spain, Austria, 
 Ireland, South America, Canada, five hundred churches lately erected 
 in England, Calcutta, Ceylon, Oceana, all the islands of the Pacific 
 and the Atlantic : even in every country where Protestantism is dom- 
 inant, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, the testimony is given, and tha 
 words »* I believe in the holy catholic church" are used by the mem- 
 bers of the Roman Catholic church, who alone have a nght to use 
 them. Applied to any other church they are a misnomer. Protestant* 
 cannot employ such language. They are cut up into a thousand dis- 
 cordant and chaotic sects. As no oUier church but ours is ftow cath- 
 olic, so no other but ours ever has been or will be catholic. ** Chris- 
 tian is my name and Catholic my surname," said Pacian. With love 
 fjid charity to all men the Roman Catholic church subsists throughout 
 all time, teaches all truUi, and gathers into her communion the chfldren 
 of every clime. What she lost in one region, she gained in another. 
 The axe of persecution that lopped off some of her branches, made 
 the vigorous trunk produce the more luxuriously. 
 
 *• InvestiKating," says Fletcher, *' in those countries, where either Christianity 
 has once subsisted, or where it subsists at present — the monumentt which ther 
 exhibit, and interrogating these (tnomimenls have voices, my brethren, that igMM 
 plainly^) — it will be found that they all loudly attest the greatness and the an- 
 tiquity of our religion. "We are Catholics," the venerable ruins say, **afii 
 the tmbkmi even, which still adorn us, shew it.*' It is so, likewise, not only in 
 the monuments, which were once, or are vet, sacred to religion, but in a great 
 variety of other vestiges. The proofi of the ancient splendor of Catholicity are 
 legible on almost every object, that has seen the tide of ages roll away,— on the 
 piUaces ofprinces,— on the castles of the great, — on the gates of citJesr>-on the 
 asvluros ofcharity, — on the tombs of the dead. They may be read in the con- 
 stitutions and laws of kingdoms — in the foundations and rules of universities,-* 
 in the customs and peculiarities of the vulgar. *»»«»« 
 
 It is indeed, possible that prejudice may object to those arguments, that 
 ••they are very general and inclistmct, — ^proving, it is true, that in almost every 
 nation, and in every are, there has existed a widely diffused religion, — a Catholic 
 religion, bat not provmg that this religion, its principles and doctrines, were I'Z 
 erery mg% the same — in every age, the identical rel'mon, which the Catholic be- 
 lievei at present/' It i« the essence of the true rehgion to remain unchanged ; 
 and to have descended, and to descend alvrays, down the stream of time, without 
 corruption or alteration. If, therefore. I undertake distinctly to prove, that the 
 Catholic religion of the present period is indeed, the true religion, then should 
 I also distinctly prove that it has never undei^one any alteration, and that it is 
 the same, which, revealed originally to mankind, has, during the course of eigh- 
 t«*en centuries, formed always the object of the veneration of the orthodex be- 
 liever." vol. 2, p. 173 
 
 C 4 
 
 1 
 
"■PHP 
 
 DIBITS ON IHV 
 
 ** Ai tt WHS the ddifra of God, that tiie trna cimrch should be Cslholic; to it 
 vaa also hii desien. that the true church thould alwari be distinriiished by tha 
 lumonlile appetlation of Catholic: — as it was the wilt of Jeini Cnrist, that the 
 fatabliahiiMiiit which he Ibroied* should extend through eTerj nation, and subMat 
 ibroueh every age ; so alao it was his wtllt that this establishment should be dw* 
 nifed bf a uanie correspondinr to these great characteristics. ** I believe," tna 
 •poniet commarded the faithful io every age to say, **mik€ hohi Caihcujc 
 
 every age to say, 
 
 CtemcA. ' *- oy this name Cathouc," says St Austin, **imm rammtd m Hu 
 CyiiMsc ehurcht" ** my namet" adds St. Paciaii, ** it CkH§Hmmi my »wmmm§ 
 CAHIOUC; mnd by this SURNAME, / am diwtmgmilud/rim oli the Mtcta tf 
 ht^m. Sermon on the catholicity of the church, page 195, roL ii. Baft, 
 edit. 1130. '^ 
 
 It IS certainlv. my beloved friends, a very animating circumstance, to viewtha 
 iwaeMity and the long duration of our churcli; to see it stretdbiag out ito em. 
 llittellirougii every climate; consoling by its beneits, and enlightening by its doc- 
 trines, the remotes* comert of the universe: to see it existing through the long 
 lapse oi so uiany ages, unmoved, while the strongest empires sink to ruin; and 
 anshalcen. while 'all things fall in decay around it. It is animating to remark it 
 triumphant over all the powers ofdaricness,and the exertions of human malice; 
 cwnbaung otien, it is true, with the ttonas of penecutioa and the artifices of 
 heresy ; vet combatinr, always, to come off with victory; riding through the lem* 
 pest, and exalted by the very means which had been levelleaat its depression. 
 Ibid, page 198. 
 
 From this contemplation, my christiaD friends, we mar derive the consoling 
 assurance, that happen or be&l what may, thougli the oillows of persecution 
 swell and the tide of error rage; every enbrt to destroy the church shall turn 
 out fruitless. The church, these aeeneeassure you, tt an edifice protected by the 
 hand of the Almightj, a rock fixed on the basts of the divine power amid the 
 tea of human life. The billows of persecution shall swell, the tide of error 
 dash against it in vain. They will no more move it, although they may, in- 
 deed, sweep away many of its ungatarded members, than the gentlest 'spray 
 will move the ftrmest mountain that the ocean laves. 1 should be sorry to tee 
 Hm ■ttifoftuoe happen, yet could I behold the most furious tempest gathering 
 llilhcNit one feeliog of anxietjf for the stability of the church. As the Ptolmist 
 •iqrsv **ii thauJd comn io notking, Ukt the rumnianf wuier" (Ps. Ivii.) It would 
 fwove but the preparation for fresh conquests. The security of the church amid 
 alima% darinf the long interval of eighteen centuries, is alone sufficient assur- 
 mam of itt security, amid the fury of fiiture tempest Ibidem, pa^e 198. 
 
 If it can be proved that the Catholic church had not these 
 diaiaeteiistiGe, we admit she is not the church of Christ. I shall go 
 til trial on this point. If she has ever ceased to teach the whole doc- 
 trine of Christ, to difliise over all nations, the true christian precepu, 
 or if she has not had a larger body of professors, than any of the sects, 
 that separated in every successive age from her communion, then will 
 I yield the question. But it will try the ingenuity of the gentleman 
 io pnnre any suchthin^, and still more, to show in that ease, what 
 Mieh was catholic. Tliis difficulty meets him at the very threshold. 
 ''"""■ expired] 
 
 Three o'ehek^ P. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rl 
 
 My leamed and worthy opponent commenced his forenoon speech, 
 ■ayimff that he found before htm a more easy task than he had expect- 
 ed. Were it a question of rhetoric rather than of logic, I confess I 
 should have more to fear. He has b^n more accustomed than I, to 
 Urn Umiaif of that art I am rather a matter of fact man, and logic 
 more ilian rhetoric has occupied mj attention. 
 
 I apprehend, however, before this discussion is ended he maj find 
 his task not quite so easy as he would seem to anticipate. And to me 
 the good book has suggested a caution which I hope always to remem- 
 
 BOMAN CATHOUC B8LIGION. 
 
 87 
 
 her. It is happily coached in these words, " Let not him that huck- 
 leth on his armor boast as he that taketh it off.*' 
 
 But to examine his defence, so far as in it there is reference to my 
 speech, has he not made in the very first effort an unfortunate admis- 
 sion ! The name Caiholie he admits is generic and the name Roman 
 speciflc<--and that the term Roman only indicated the church in which 
 this caUiolic communion is to be enjoyed : that the universal church 
 is found in the particular, the genus in the s]>ecies. Thus we can 
 have Greek catholic, English catholic, American catholic, as well 
 as Roman catholic. These particular universals are susceptible- of 
 indefinite multiplication. And so the catholicity of Rome is specifi- 
 cally the same with that of England ! ! 
 
 His second admission is equally unfortunate. He did not seem to 
 perceive that he argued for me rather than against me, on the word 
 fiUher, He said that it could not be underst(K>d literally. 8o said I. 
 How then mnst it be used but religiouslv 1 Call no man your religions 
 or ecclemastic Father. He has then fully conceded all that I aw. It 
 it then an id>8olute prohibition of the Roman Catholic notion of a 
 supreme holy Ikther. To designate any person pope is then a viola- 
 tion of Christ's command. 
 
 The gentleman has admitted, somewhat reluctantly however, that 
 the Doway catechism is a standard work, and that the definition of 
 the church is indRdUbly oorreq|. My argument hitherto has been to 
 shew that the supreme head called pope, being of the essential ele- 
 ments, nay the chief element of the Roman Catholic church, and not 
 found eith^ in the bible or ecclesiastic history ffn* ages after the chris- 
 tian era, the church of Rome is a aeet in the true import of thai 
 word, and not the mother and mistress of all churches, for she cannot 
 he older than her head, unless a body can exist without and before its 
 head, which is impossible. It is not the nature of that head, whether 
 political or ecclesiastic or both, but the simple fact of its existene« 
 eonceming which we enquire. The nature and claims of the head 
 may heieuW he the subject of examination. That the Roman sect 
 is divided into lour parties, touching the supremacy— one affirming 
 that the pope is the fountain of all power political and religious— 
 another teachingr that he has only ecclesiastic supremacy— « third 
 party affirming mat his ecclesiastic dominion is over all councils, per- 
 ■ODf and things spiritual, and a fourth party limiting his jurisdiction 
 to a sort of executive presidency-^ a proposition susceptible of 
 am}ile prool^ and of much importance, but we wi^ it to be very 
 distineUy stated that the question now helore us is the feet that a 
 head, or universal father, pope or patriarch, is not found in the Roman 
 empire, east or west, for six hundred years, and consequently that 
 during that time that church did not exist, whose four essential ele* 
 ■lents, are a pope or supreme head, bishops, pastors and laity. 
 
 I am the more diffuse on this point because my learned opponent 
 reems tomis^ethe question or to confound it with another of adifib* 
 rent category. He seems to be squinting at infallibility, authority. 
 Older in Uie ministry, rather than looking in the face the simple ques- 
 tion, was there a pope in any church for ihefirtt six centuries ? Authority 
 is not infallibility, nor is order, supremacy. I go for authority in the 
 president of the United States, but who infers thence that I hold the 
 president to be in£illible ! I go for order in the christian church, but 
 what has this to do with the supremacy of tiiie bishop of Romcl 
 
t. 
 
 I 
 
 DSBATS OM TUB 
 
 Why, I empli«tli«llj ask, iom the bishop of Cincinnati confound ths 
 fiwsiioii of fiwjt hmm m with that concerning the Levitical priests 
 llMMi. I lisw not tgitsted ■ndi a question. 
 
 Ami what hare my viewt of church order and government to do 
 with the question before us. Why drag these matters into discussion. 
 Bid I not distinctly say that I came not here to defend the tenets of 
 any party of ProteHMtt, but the jpreat princiDles of Protestantism I 
 Aim what have my views of chuich order to tfo with the questions at 
 lliue! Of these however the gentleman is wholly misinformed. I am 
 ihe advocate of order, of a christian ministry, of bishops and deacons 
 ii the church. Without order no society can eiist, and therefore no 
 tiaaimable man can object either to order or authority in the church 
 But again I ask what is this to the question in debate ! 
 
 lio gare OS too a dissertation on the passage, " Invest thou me mors 
 tinn ikmeJ* This Is certainly gratuitous at this time. I am glad 
 however th« gentleman has delivered himself on this text But this 
 is niit tlio question now. We are seeking for a head for the church, 
 g ptfMl Md Ibr the ehmvoh In the first ages, while our friend is ex- 
 pounding scriptures on other themes. 
 
 To the authority of Du Pin the gentleman seems to except. But 
 mi what authority does he object! His works are certiHed by the 
 JoctoTS of the Soiboone and by the guardians of the Catholic press. 
 Will he say tint Iw is not an authentic historian I Du Pin was bom 
 and edneated, lived and died and was buried in the Roman Catholic 
 •Imnk Tlie gentleman proved, two or three months a^, that general 
 lift Fayette was a Roman Catholic because he was baptised in ths 
 iluireh of Rome and burled in consecrated ground. Certainly then 
 Bo Pin was all this and more ! It matters not whether he was a Jan- 
 •■nist or Jesuit. Both orders have been at different times in good and 
 bad repute. Jansenlsts have sometimes been proscribed, and Jesuits 
 have been snfpwssed. But the question is not, was he a Rood Ca- 
 tholic, but iwif Is on muikenik kitionmn ^ For a good CathoFic is one 
 Iking, and a good historian is another. I wish the gentleman to 
 ■Mwer. (Bishop PureeU. I answer emphatically, he was not an an* 
 iMiitic historian.) 
 
 Then this gentleman and the bishop of Bardstown are at variance. 
 The latter gentleman, if I mistake not, admitted In a diseussion pub- 
 lished In the Catholic paper of that place, that Du Pin was an authen- 
 it kislorian. I have seen this work repeatedly quoted In discussions 
 between Romanists and Protestants, and I do not reeoliect to have 
 seen any thing advanced against his authenticity. Mr. Hoghes of 
 Philadelphia, but on different grounds than those stated by my opponent, 
 dM Indeed object to him as a lalthlul witness in his controversy with 
 Mr. Breckenndge. However while 1 wish it to go to the fiublie that 
 bishop Purcell has objected toDu Plii as an authentic historian, I will 
 distinctly state that I rely upon him in this controversy only so far as 
 he Is sustained by other historians, and therefore I will only quote 
 him In such matters as I know can be sustained from other sources. 
 Other historians record the same fact, and many of the works which 
 Du Pin quotes are not only extant but accessible. 
 
 The word eaihoHe the gentleman has stated that it is of high anti- 
 
 Jnity and found at the head of some books of the New Testament. 
 lut how came it into the New Testament 1 Was it Robert Stephens 
 ef Pinia that placed it there in the 16th century as a sort of general 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 Beading to certain epistles, or was it placed there by the apostlee 
 
 Touching the council of Nice and whether Sylvester had any thing 
 to do with its convocation, may hereafter be worthy of discussion ; 
 at present this is not before us. The decree of the council and its 
 convocation are distinct things. . 
 
 Of the texts relied on by me to dispose of the pretensions of supre- 
 macy, the gentleman has taken special exception to Ep. iv. H. and 
 would have different ordere of ecclesiastic powers, rather than gtJU 
 for the edification of the church and the fitting of saints for the work 
 of the ministry, to be contained in that passage. But the text says 
 mfU and not lordakipi. Of these gifts vouchsafed by the ascended 
 Savior the first was apostles. " He gave first apostles, secondanly 
 prophets," and here again "he gave some apostles and some pro- 
 ph^." No supremacy is expressed of an individual. It is not ranks 
 of authorities Uke civil or military functionaries, such as magistrates, 
 aldermen, constables, &c., but gifts of light and knowledge and grace, 
 the splendid gifts of the Holy Spirit ; gifts of teaching, preaching, ex- 
 horting, and setting up the tabernacle or church. The aposUes had 
 all authority and all «fts themselves ; but they needed assistants and 
 a distribution of labor, and not an hierarchy, in laying the foundation 
 and in fitting saints for the work of the christian ministry. 
 
 Having now touched all the relevant points in the Bishop s opening 
 speech, f hasten to my argnment. .../.. .v 
 
 On examination of the New Testament, the pnmiUve fathers, the 
 councils both provincial and general, down to the close of the 6th cen- 
 tury, we do not find in the whole territory claimed by our opponents 
 as vet, the idea or name of a supreme head, pope, or vicar of Christ. 
 
 My learned antagonist has not produced any such document, and 
 doubtless he knows if there be any such authority now extant, and 
 
 would produce it. .^ i. • i " 
 
 The strong expressions of Saini Gregory in opposition to the titte 
 shew what a singular novelty it was in Rome during "his ponttfi- 
 cale,'* and his bold declaration not only of the arrogance and blas- 
 phemy of the title, but of its aspect to all the bishops, as annulling 
 their equality, sufficiently prove that he rightly appreciatwi its torue 
 meaning and its hostility to the genius of that simplicity and humility 
 which comported with the servants of Christ. So far then as we have 
 examined the evidence on hand, the defence of the Bish<^, the argu- 
 ment as now developed stands thus :— a pope, or unlveisal patriarel^ 
 is the first essential element of the Roman Catholic sect. But there 
 was no such penonage in existence for 600 years after Christ, there- 
 fore there was no church of Rome, in the sense of the creed, during 
 the first six centuries. 
 
 We are now prepared to narrate the circumstances which ushered 
 into being the pope of Rome. Mauritius the emperor of the East died 
 It tlie hand of Phocas a centurion of his own army. Mauritius fop 
 vored the pretensions of the bishop of Constantinople, and turned a 
 deaf ear to the importunities of Gregory on. the subject of taking from 
 bishop John the tide of universal father, so painful to the pnde and 
 humility of the great Gregory. For the saint had vmtten to the en^ 
 peror on the arrogance of John, metropolitan of the great diocese of 
 the east Mauritius was supplanted and the throne usurped by Pho- 
 Giegory rejoiced at his death, and hailed the elevaUon of his 
 
 ca 
 
 
 t\ 
 
 g^HtaflUriiiiau 
 
 Ig^l 
 
 MM 
 
ilr 
 111 
 
 WEBATM (Mf TH:1 
 
 it ihe tliioiie. Gmmnj ooneeonied IiIib« in ^e 
 
 of St. John the Baptist at Constantinople, and Phocas, aa • fa 
 wafd for hia consecration and laToraMe regards, conferred opon the 
 ■ueoeasor of Gregory, Boniface the third, the title of ufdvermi pairi^ 
 mwk in the very sense in which it had been repudiated by Gregory. 
 Thus in the year 606 two years after the death of the saint, th« 
 iiat pope was placed in the chair of the Galilean fisherman, si in- 
 deed Peter had erer sat in a chair inRome. 
 Conoeminf the eonseeratioa of Phoeas, Mr. Gibbon thus remaifca: 
 ■*Tbeteiwte andcleivf obeved hii trnnmoni, and as lOon as th« patriarei 
 was aanrad of hit orthodox belief, be consecrated the toccenful oaarper in tbe 
 thanh of St. John the Baptist On the third day, amidst the aoclannlioDs of a 
 ttoofhtless peopk, Phocat made his pnbtic entry in a chariot drawn by four 
 white hortei : the revolt of the troopa was rewaitled by a lavish donation, and 
 the new sovereif n, after visitii^f the |ialace, beheld from his throne the SanMt 
 of the hiDpodrome.** Oibboa's Dertme and Fall Ron. £ni|i. ¥oL viii. p. 269. 
 
 But me infidel hm food leason to laugh at Ihe aaint, where he re- 
 iaiia the exultation of Gregory at liie death of Mauritiva. 
 
 " Asa snbject and a christian it was thn dn^ of Gregory to acquiesce in tha 
 caCabiished fovemnent; but the jojrfnl^ applanse with which he salutes the for* 
 tunes of the assassin, has sullied with inaelible disgrace the character of th« 
 ■aint. The successor of the apostles might have inculcated with decent firm- 
 ness the guilt of blood, and the necessity of repentance: he is content to cele* 
 brate the deliverance nMfthepeople and the fiill of the oppressor; to rejoice that 
 the piety and benignity of Phoeas have been raised by Providence la the imperial 
 iirone; to pray that his hands may be strengthtnnd against all his enemies ; and 
 to express a wish, perhaps a prophecy, that after a long and triumphant rein, he 
 ■ay be translerred from a temporal to an everlastinr kingdom." Id. ib. p.^11. 
 
 It looks indeed aa if Gregory had permitted the recollection of the 
 conduct of fifauritiua towards hia rival to minffle with hia exultations 
 at the elevation of Phocaa. When we recollect that Mauritius, his 
 wife, four sons and three daughtera were immolated at the ahrine of 
 ^e ambition of Phoeas because he feared a rival, we are astonished 
 that saint Greffory could have called heaven and earth to rejoice in hia 
 exaltation to Uie throne of the Cesars. His words are : 
 
 ** Benifoitatem vestne pietatts ad imperiale fastigium pervenltse gandemnt. 
 Lsdaatur coeil et exultet terra, et de vestris benignis actibus noiversae retfiubltcne 
 MNMlusnane usque vehementer afflictus hilaresca^" Ac. Gref^. L xi. ep. 38, ind. vi. 
 
 nSt ia not 80 honorable to the aneeeaaore of Boni&ee the third, that 
 the title of nope in ita aopreme import^ waa eonierred by ao mean a 
 wretch aa Pnoeas the laiifer wmd muiderart and nlhei aa a nwaid for 
 the teiaporixing and easy virtne of Gregory the fint. Boniftce, though 
 ialincBlalogiittof popes he atands the 66tliin descent from Peter, waa 
 in truth the iiai pope of Rome in the aenae whieh ia placed in the 
 CateehJaaiB and atandards of the preaent ehureh nf Rome. 
 
 Jm yet the power waa only eceleaiaalte« Bui power ia naturally 
 flvmnlative, and especially ecelesiaatic. Let any pereon be imagin« 
 ad to wear at hia firdle the keys of heaven, and the aword of apiritoal 
 power, let him have kings Jd princes bLwIag at his footst^l, and 
 we shall soon see him like Napoleon, atretching out hia hand not only 
 to jrraap the gorgeous crown of ecelesiaatic but of political power. 
 
 Mut to complete the story of the origin of the papal power we must 
 idd a few words on the assumptions of Saint Zachary,or Stephen the 
 Second. Pepin the father of Charlemagne waa in the cabinet of 
 Childeric the king of France in those days. His master was a feeble 
 prince and he waa an ambitious miniater. He knew the power of the 
 pope, and beibro he dared to aeiie the thioDtof his master he deemed 
 
 ROMAir CATHOLIC BKUGION. 
 
 81 
 
 ^tr:;^n^gtfhiitx^^ 
 
 miration, helcized the crown of his master, and rewarded the pope 
 wiAsMne temporal power :-certain states in Italy which by his son 
 rll^rlpftL^at were aufrmented, till he had the domimon of the 
 a^denTAtirL'S'tr:^^^^^ and the Exarcha^ IfrZ^P^e 
 peradded to his spiritual jurisdiction. Then ^^.f ,^«,^^^"^* ^^^^ 
 crown and the two swords^and stood ^^'\^f^^^^J^^^.^^ 
 the prophetic characters of the ««F"»S ^"'^ mm« p^S^ 
 aiastic corporation called the church of Rome.— [Tmie expired. J 
 
 Half pad 3 o'cAicA^ P. M. 
 
 Bishop Pubceix — j. *v * 
 
 Fellow citi»ena-My friend objects to my explanation of the term 
 u Rom^CaSolic." He observes that it has turned out no explan^ 
 tion at all. His difficulty of apprehension on this particular pomt, is to 
 
 me%owever, perfectly Wll\gible: "»« ^^?. "^^bf a?S kt^ h^ 
 a oroof of its unity and universality ; and this, as he dislikes i^ he 
 Lnnot^ of course, understand. The word 'catholic' in ancient days 
 Z S^! rSy Xer old and new words in Webster's dicUonarv, 
 foTmC^^oses than one. Its true and principal «ense was easily 
 nsc^ined in its application to the whole catholic church of Chnst. 
 uZTTo used ufVlesignate the authority of certain chief nattonal 
 churches, to distinguish them from inferior churches in the same dis- 
 teicts, and to mark the superiority of archbishops and patnarchs oyer 
 SJek brethren in the Episiopacy. The name of " Roman Catholic" 
 ahewed the bond of union which bound all these various churches in 
 the profession of the faith of the chief see of the entire christian 
 world. Hence it always brought to the believer's mmd» in every 
 dime, the church which was tie head,-the great, pnmitive, senior 
 church, the church of Rome; and as njore people b^ame convertwl 
 to the faith, they were called by their different and distinct appella- 
 tiona, aa English Roman Catholics— American Roman Catholics- 
 French Roman Catholics, &c. , . 
 As to the prohibition from calling any man « Faiher,^ &c. I said it 
 was not meant literally, and this he seizes as an admission that it is 
 a prohibition from calling " Father" i" a?.f<^l««i^*^*^,,f ^: F^ 
 mav be true or not, but it does not prohibit us from calling the head 
 of our church " fether" as one who cherishes, instructs, and otherwiso 
 acta the part of a father towards ua; aa he who adopta an orphan 
 child ia, ma figurative sense, his father, though not literally married 
 to his mother. The gentleman cannot therefore underetand me aa 
 admitting his argument in my previous explanaUon. But this is mat- 
 ter too insiffnificant to waste more time on it. 
 
 Mr. CanTpbell tells us the church had no head for 600 yeare. fhia 
 ia a strange representation ! The church was then a headless body. 
 I never hiard of a body without a head, on which all the membera 
 depend for the vitol influences. But was there indeed ho head to the 
 chSrch % Was not Jesus Christ the head % and I say further that hia 
 servant on earth, his humble servant, was the pope. The language 
 o?Christ himsek "on this rock wUl I build my church," refere not 
 
■11 
 
 DEBATE ON TBI 
 
 to tli« divine head of the chureh in Heaven, but to the ropie«entatiT0 
 ©f his divine commission on earth. I affirm that what Christ thought 
 necessary in ihe days of the apostles, is necessary now ; and the 
 ■lore remote we are from that day, the more necessary does it become. 
 Jesus Christ well knew that there must be scandals and errors; and 
 M determined his church should not be left headless. We know this 
 head exists and where it resides ; but we are not slaves in the Cap 
 Iholic^chufch. We acknowledge no mere human authority between 
 us and God. We are as free and untrammeled as any people under 
 heaven. It is not the man, but the authority, we inspect. The man 
 may err, and if the pope claims a power not belonging to him, we 
 soon remind him of his mistake. How this lesson has beea lamrht 
 to a few popee, the history td the ohuroh will show. ^ 
 
 My fnend now contradicts the statement he made to^ay. He first 
 aigaed that the introduction of patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, 
 deacons, and so on, into the church, was of exotic growth— and, as if be 
 had forffotteiwhat he had previously denied, he turns round, and tells 
 us, neariy in the same breath, that he goes for bishops and deacons and 
 ofders. So far then, Mr. Campbell is a good Catholic, and I congra- 
 Mate him on this advance towards the truth. [Symptoms of applause 
 in the audience, were here manifested, but were immediately checked 
 by the moderators; and bishop Purcell besought them, once for all, 
 to abstain from the least demonstration of the kind during the debate. 
 It w^ improper in a discussion of this character, and the house beinir 
 greatly crowded, much inconTenienoe would follow, and the debate 
 mtM not go on.] 
 
 As to Oie authority he has produced here (Du Pin's Ecclesiastical 
 history) I will remark that I consider Du Pin a learned man. I would 
 even select him as a splendid illustration of the strength imparted to 
 the human intellect by the Catholic intellectual discipline. He was 
 truly a prodigy of learning and of precision of style. But there was 
 a plague spot, a gangrene upon him, which must forever neutralise his 
 antiiirity as a Catholic. Before the gentleman pronounced his name 
 we bad a flourish of rhetoric, and a labored eulogy upon my tact In 
 mana^ni this controversy. For my part, I must say that 1 am quite 
 a novice in these matters— I am not accustomed to debate. My fnend 
 
 bH 
 
 _ _ _ my irtend relies as Catholic authority, recoinitsed 
 
 b¥ the chureh, was in constant eorrespondence with Wsie, the arch- 
 bishop of Canterburv. He tried every stratagem to brimr about a 
 re^imon of the chureh of England, and the chureh of Rome. I^eib. 
 nita, md many a disUngnished name, had previously labored in the 
 SiBie vocation. But Revd. Dr. Du Pin's motives were, unfortunately, 
 snspieiiiiis. He proposed as the basis of the le-union, the abolition 
 of annevlair confession, of religious vows, of the Lenten fast and ab- 
 stonence, of the pope's supremacy, and of the celibacy of the clergy. 
 Me was hinself, like Cranmer, secretly married ; and after his death, 
 his pretended wife came publicly forward to assert her right to hi6 
 goods and chattels. And this is Catholic authority ! 
 
 It is said these papers were discovered in his study after his death. 
 But he was censured by pope Clement XI. even during his life-time: 
 Slid when, as 1 have steted, Louis XI V. removed him from among th^ 
 lloetimi of the Sorbonne, Clement approved the act. 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC BELI6I0N. 
 
 If my friend can produce Roman Catholic authority, let him do so. 
 But let him not produce one that approaches with a mask. 11m 
 authority of Du Pin I have challenged on iusl grounds ; but this has 
 nothing to do with the views I have stated upon the great question 
 we are discussing. 
 
 We are told that the commission spoken of in Ephesians, 4th 
 chapter, " To some he gave apostles, &c." confers, not powere, but 
 simply gifts, 'fhis I deny. St. Paul tells us authority was given to 
 the rulere of his church by Christ, not for their sakes but thcit we maif 
 be no longer children tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine. They 
 were not, dien, merely gifts, they were powers and authorities to re- 
 gulate the church, and to rule the people of God. These commissions 
 are the foundation of the church esteblished on earth by Christ, before 
 he ascended on high. They were necessary, as the more -solid parte 
 of a temple are nrat laid, that the whole building may afterwards 
 have strength, consistency, and symmetry. I deny that the church 
 ever has been or could be without a foundation. The foundation is 
 at kast as necessary as the superstructure. Christ made Peter, there- 
 fore, the rock of his church, and was himself the comer stone whereon 
 that rock rested, as did the whole edifice seevrolT rest upon the rock. 
 
 Why has Mr. Campbell anticipated the subjeet of the third or 
 fourth day of this discussion, and brought up the pope as the man of 
 siii~-the sea monster of Daniel — the youngest horn of the beast 1 &c. 
 For aught I know, he may prove the pope to be the sea serpent— no 
 doubt his powers of logic are adequate to the task. W^e shall see. ^ 
 
 Again — the pope is not a tyrant, nor does he claim the title of Uni- 
 vereai Father, in the sense in which Gregory rebuked John for claiming 
 It Mr. Campbell has solved the question beforehand, in steting the 
 arrogant pretensions of the bishop of C. P. who pretended that all au- 
 thority preceded from him. I do not derive all my authority from the 
 pope. The bishops of the United Stetes consult together. They propose 
 candidates for the vacant sees ; and they send to Rome the names of 
 three clergymen, marked according to their judgment, "Worthy, 
 Worthier, Worthiest." The pope generally truste to their wisdom, 
 and acquiesces in their choice. It was thus that a certain testimony 
 of my fitness to succeed the venerable Fenwick, as bishop of this 
 diocese, was forwarded to Rome. The sovereign |>ontiff, Gregory 
 XVI. ratified the selection of the j^relacy of the United Stetes, and 
 expedited the brief, or letters, in virtue of which I was ordained a 
 bishop ; but my power to consecrate, to baptize, and to perform other 
 episcopal functions, comes not firom the pope ; it comes like ibM of 
 the apostles, directly from God. 
 
 There are other denominations, besides the Catholic, that contend 
 for the necessity of apostolical succession of ordere and mission, and 
 these too are the objecte of my friend's sarcasm. I select only twi>-« 
 tiie Episcopalians and the German Reformed. 
 
 In the last number of his Millennial Harbinger, in speaking of tiic^ 
 Episcopalian bishop OteyofTennessee, he asks "why is bishop Otey 
 silent? He either feels that his castle of Episcopalianism has been 
 demolished by the editor of the Harbinger (Mr. Campbell) or he does 
 not. If he feels that it has been overthrown, as an honest man hs 
 ought to acknowledge it But if he still thinks that he is adorning 
 " &e doctrine cf Go^* by sustaining Episcopalianism, let him shew 
 his strength to such as wish to read both sides of the question. It is 
 
 I 
 
84 BBMn m m 
 
 •n tpostolie sdmonition to «* eontend earnestly foi tlie fmth delivered 
 in tlie saint!.'* If he is sent of God, as he professes to be, as a faith* 
 M watchman on ZIon's walls, he should not lemain mute ; but err 
 ilond, seeing his opinions have been poHUly assailed. Pereontator/* 
 
 An8wer.T— Many reasons might be imagined for bishop Otey's si- 
 lenee, but I will tentuie upon only one, viz. that like M. de La Motte 
 (I orotnme the witty and pious bishop of Amiens) he is waiting for a 
 tii|Mf to Atf mknee* How, &c. 
 
 Again— Mr. Lancellot Bell, addressine the editor, Mr. Camnbell 
 ftH. Mil. Harbinger, p. 670.) says «i accompanied brother L to 
 uavetown, where he addressed the citizens, &c. Two of the •• called 
 and iani*' of the German Reformed church, considering, I suppose, 
 tMr '^eitH in danger,'* earns to the place, and I spoke against these 
 llings, eontradktini, who ware foiiig— to express it in the language 
 of some of the peoDle, Hi ••lick m np like salt," &c. &c. 
 
 Mr. Campbell, itsfefore, has changed his tone ; he is now in favor 
 off ocdeii ; and this change has apparently taken place within a few 
 clays. 
 
 I have proved that the headship of ^••e church vras no new thing 
 in tiie heginninff of the fourth century. Du Pin spoke of the decision 
 tiff iio council of Nice, itepecting the contest between the bishops 
 of Alexandria and of Rome, but said that this decision of the council 
 did not disprove the primacy of Rome, so that this doctrine is at least 
 ■8 old as the year 318, when Sylvester of Rome presided by his 
 legate Osius of Cordova at the council of Nice. This shows that the 
 mtfaority of Rone was then recognised. He spoke of the council of 
 Chaleodon. I have here an authentic historian recognized by the Ca- 
 tholics, and one who tells sharp troths of individual Catholics, when 
 ho conceives them to be in the wrong. It is Barronius. In his Annals, 
 |oi* of Oiiriat 451, of pope Leo, 12th, t#enty seventh of Valentine and 
 mi of Mtieian, he says that in tilis council the authority of the see 
 if Peter was recognised. 360 bishops met in this council. Cirrum- 
 ■tewsos not permitting pope Leo to assist at it in person, he sent threo 
 legates, two bishops and a priest, to preside in his name. At the first 
 ieialon Pasehasinus, bishop of Lillibeum, and One of the legates of the 
 popo, pielerrod charm against Dioscorus, patriarch of Alexandria, for 
 n ineanonieal conduct in the conventicle of Ephesus. 
 
 Bioseoras, thus accused and convicted, was compelled to leave hit 
 ie^nd sit in an inferior place in the middle of the assembly. Snb- 
 isfiintly a sentence of deposition was pronounced against him ; and 
 St iir* was manifest, he lefl the assembly and appeared no more. 
 The miiers of the council unanimously exclaimed that the doctrinal 
 doeiilois of Leo weie thoee of Peter himself—" Petrus per Leonem 
 locntus est"— Peter hath spoken by the mouth of Leo. (vid. Reeves, 
 lat vol. ffi3.) the fathers of the council directed to St. Leo a synodical 
 letter, in which they acknowledge him for the interpreter of St. Peter, 
 Ibf thoif head and guide." (vid. Barronius, ibid.) Now here is the au- 
 •ority of the first general council of Nice, as quoted by Labbe, 
 ilreek bishops say: 
 
 ^ ^ CJOUNCIIA 
 
 •JJh* Roman church has ahfrajB had the ^riwaey." (Labbe. t 2. p. 41.) 
 The moond general council and first of Constantinople st^s : 
 ** Lat tki bithop of Coottaiitiw>ple have the int thaie of hooor a/Vcr the biih 
 opofllAWM." (Alexandria wii cBCitM to the Mcond rank.l 
 
 BOKAH CATHOLIC RSLIGION. 
 
 The IhinI general eonncil of Ephesus says i . . ^ ^ ,. 
 
 * St. Feter, the prince aod bead of the apostles, the tbandatioa of the Cathoae 
 chnrcht received the keys of thekiogdom from our Lord Je*u8 Christ, and the 
 power of loosiof and of biading sin was given to him, which to the present 
 time, as it ever has done, subsists and ejterciws judgment in his 8ucces«>rs. 
 
 TTie fourth general council of Chalcedon, writing to St. Leo, says : 
 
 •• We therefore entreat you, to honor our judgment by your decrees; and as wa 
 have adhered to our head in good things, so let your supremacy supply what 
 becometh (or is wanting) for thy children." .... 
 
 The council of Florence in which the Greek and Latm bishops wero 
 
 present, thus speaks : .*..,•. 
 
 "We define that the holy apostolic see and the Roman pontiff hold the prima- 
 cy over the entire earth, and that he is the successor of the blessed Peter, tha 
 prince of the apostles, the true vicar of Christ, and the head of the whole chorch, 
 Ac. T. 13. p. 515. , - „ . 
 
 The general council of Trent, speaks m the foUowine terms : 
 "The sovereign pontiffs, in virtue of the supreme power delivered to them 
 •ver the entire church, had a rig^hi to reserve the judgment of certain more 
 grievous crimes to their own tribunal." , •» «_ 
 
 Melancthon holds the following language, as quoted by Bossuet to 
 
 his history of the variations. L. 5, n. 24. 
 
 " Our people agree, that the ecclesiastical polity, in which are recoeniiad 
 supetior bishops of many churches and the bishop of Rome superior to all bim^ 
 ops, is permitted. Thus there is no contest respecting the supremacy of the 
 pope and the authority of bishops, and also the pope and the bishops could easi- 
 ly preserve this authority, for it is necessary for a church to have leaders to 
 matntam order, to keep an eye upon those called to the ecclesiastical state, and 
 upon the doctrine of the priesU, and to exercise ecclesiastical judgment, ao that 
 Ifthere were no bishops we would have to make them. The monarchy of tha 
 pope would also serve much to preserve amount many nations the unity of 
 doctrine; wherefore we couM easily agree at to the supremacy of the pope if wa 
 could agree in everr thing else." 
 
 Ijfcibnitz, as quoted by De Starck, p. 23, speaks as follows: 
 •• Ai God is the God of order, and as by divine appointment, the bodjr of the 
 only, apostolic. Catholic church can be maintained by a single, hierarchical and 
 universal government, it follows, that there must be a supreme spiritual chief, 
 who shall be confined within proper bounds, established by the same (divine) 
 right, and invested with all the power and dictaiorial authority necessary for 
 the preservation of the church." 
 
 VATHEKS. 
 
 St. Irenwus of Lyons, the disciple of St. Polycarp, who himself ap- 
 pears to have been consecrated by St. John the Evangelist, repeatedly 
 urges this argument against his contemporary heretics. He saifs : 
 
 •♦ We can count np those who were appointed bishops in the chnrches by 
 ibe apostles and their successors down to us, none of whom taught thu doctrine. 
 But as it would be tedious to enumerate the succession of bishops in the diflfi^ 
 ent churches, we refer you to the tradition of that greatest, most ancient, and 
 univemlly known ehurcb. founded at Rome by St. Peter and St PmI, and 
 which has been preMrred there through the succession of iU bilhflfit, down to 
 the present time." 
 
 TertuUian, who also flourished in the same century (year 150), arguet 
 in the same manner and challenges certain heretics m these terms ; 
 
 "Let them produce the origin of their church; let them display the succession 
 of their bishops, so that the first of them may appear to have been ordained by 
 an anostolic man, who persevered in their communion." 
 
 St. Athanasius wntes to St. Felix, the Roman Pontiff: 
 ••For this purpose Christ placed you and your predecessors to guide the ark 
 and to have tbe care of all the churches, that von may help us." 
 
 St. Cyprian, in his 56th Epistle, holds the following language : 
 **Th«y cutre to sail and carry letters to the chair of Peter and tba pnacipal 
 ciuii«h, wbenfte sacerdotal unity proceeds." 
 
 t 
 
i 
 If' 
 1 
 
 ■lit 
 
 DSBATS Off TUB 
 
 1 
 
 iipoiig 
 
 •'There are luanj otiier thino whkli keep 
 rhureb. Th« a^enient of diHereiit people and oattoiis keeps me there. TU« 
 authority establmhed by miracles, nourished bj hope, increased bj charity, and 
 conAruied by antiquity, keeps me there. The sncceision of bishops in the see of 
 St Peter, the apostle (to whom our Lord after hu resurrection, committed hit 
 ■heftfi to be hd) down to the present bishop, keeps me there. Finally the werj 
 ■ante of CAthouc which, among so many heresies, this chnrcfa alone possesses, 
 keeps me there.** 
 
 St. Jerome in Ms 4th Epistle to pope Damasas says: 
 
 •• I, following no leader but Christ, am In communion with your holiness, thai 
 is, with the chair of Peter. Whoever gathereth not with you scattereth, that is, 
 whoever is not of Christ is of anti-Christ.*' 
 
 This is, in substance, the testimony of the bishops throughout the 
 world, in ©very age to the prosent time. — [Time expired.] 
 
 Mm. CAMmBLLri 
 
 #biir o*eio€kf P. J£ 
 
 On the subject of the emendation of the term Roman Catholic, bi 
 pefiiinff the word English, &c., I am willing that my friend should 
 have all the advantage to be derived from that explanation. I am 
 willliig that he should appear before the public with that explanation, 
 if ho tliiiilis it can help the matter. On the same principle he may 
 say the Philadelphia Pittsburg church of Cincinnati. The church, 
 I argued, had no mortal head for six hundred years. He certainly 
 could not have undenitood me as denying that Christ was the head 
 of Am church ! I admit that Christ is the immortal head of the church 
 which is his body, and Christ is her only head. Christ's church ra> 
 quires a living and omnipresent head. She needs not two heads, for 
 her head is the head of all firinoipality and power. Can the pope be 
 eainipresent, keeping order in mil his dominions 1 
 
 I was surprised at the gentleman's hvpothesis, that if I argued that 
 the church had no visible and human head for six hundred years, I 
 tiien asserted that Christ was not the head of his church. I spoke 
 mot of Christ, hut of the great hierarch on earth, who claims to be the 
 fenmtmin of all power ami authority in the church. Could he not 
 nnderstand me I 
 
 The fsnlleman says, that the Catholics are as free as others. I ask 
 hmve tiiey the same liberty to read the Bible, to think and act for 
 llMmselves, as have the Protestants 1 I am soiry that he seemed to 
 take advantage of mw acknowledginf mvaelf a niend to bishops and 
 deaeoBS in the churoh. In my enniMmuon of the different oiden, in 
 the present Roman church, I mentioned JrtaMiishops and J^dMeaeons | 
 but he did not hear me say bishops and deacons. They were on pur- 
 poee left out of that enumeration, that I might not fall mto the error 
 whiek he has imagined for me. 
 
 I dispose of the gentieman's extract from the Millennial Hari>inger 
 and of his learned remarks upon them, by informing him that he has 
 mistaken the writer : I am not the author of the article in question. 
 
 Still I must ask, why this evasion of the question m debate! Why 
 seek to excite the odium theologicum, on account of some distorted 
 Iheorr unjustly attributed to me— on subjects, too, wholly foreign to 
 this debate ! Are these the weapons by which my learned opponent 
 Is eimpelled to defend the '^wtomtwd wddrm of all churohes^ from 
 
 ROMAN CATHOUC RKU6ION. 
 
 87 
 
 llie charge of unseriptural, mad vnfbunded assumptions ? Let no one 
 imagine, however, that 1 am at all opposed to order and government 
 iii£e church. As far as concerns oversight, or the having of bishops 
 to preside over the flock, I am an Episcopalian. I am for having pres- 
 byters or elders in every church. I do not believe in a church without 
 presbyters or bishops. So far I am both a Presbyterian and an Epis- 
 copalian* ^ 
 
 On the subject of the primacy of Rome, the gentleman quoted Baij 
 fonius, and snaried at Du Pin. But it is too late for any bishop of 
 Rome, or of England to stand up in this nineteenth century and tell 
 US that Du Pin is not an authentic historian. My friend intimates 
 that the certificates in the preface were suborned. What a charge on 
 the learned and venerable author of this work ! 
 
 JBUhop Pureell here uiid, thai thoie eertifieatei being in ike bookpro^ 
 nothing i — thai they might have been ptU there by the printer,'] 
 I will now read these attestations and vouchers that you may judge 
 bow gratuitous are the objections and insinuations of the bishop* 
 
 THE APPROBATION OF THE DOCTORS OF THE 80RB02fNE. 
 
 **The whole world has openly declared the esteem which they think due to 
 
 the JVew HUtory (f EecUniuitemL Wntere, that we could not but be sensible 
 
 of the complaisance shewn to us, since the judgment we had formed of it was 
 
 followed, supported and authorized by that of the public. 
 
 j» « ', '^'^ « « «» « • • • 
 
 **AH those who have already read them, will here find what will recall to Ihei? 
 memory many things they may have forgotten, and will see with pleagure. that 
 our author has reduced their doctrines to certain principles, by which they show 
 their solidity and coherence. Those who wish to read them will here nieet 
 with what will sare them mu^ktime and trouble; and those that are engaged w 
 that long end wearisome journey, will at least have tiie advantage of a faithful 
 and experienced guide, who wift lead them only through paths equally safe and 
 knownr Both the one and the other will meet with a piece of criticism which 
 Is always clear, prudent, and upright; distinguishti what is certain from tlt«« 
 which IS fiilse or doubtful; never precipiUles the judgment, nor Uvs down sin- 
 ple conjectures in place of demonstrative proofs; gues to every thing what it 
 nerits, purely on its own account ; and the better to attend to reason, banishes 
 all prejudices and looits at nothing in its search after truth, but truth itself; nor 
 condei»ns,only, where It cannot excuse. » t » 
 
 -Gi,.a - pLi- A^-t l<«h*. ««|*^Mp,GNON. ReC.r of S.. Menu. 
 
 HIDEUX, Rector of St. Innocents." 
 
 APFnOBATION OF THE ROYAL CENSOR. ^ „ ^ „ . , 
 
 •• Bv the order of my lord Chancellor; I have read a book, entitled **^ fnttorjf 
 
 # the church and ofEccUiioMtical Author* in the sixteenth eejUurv,' by Mes- 
 
 !Ur Lewis EUies Du Pin. Priest, Doctor of Divinity of the Faculty <»* P»™. 
 
 aod Reriui Professor of Philosophy: Containing the History of the Church, 
 
 and of ecclesiastical Authors, and from the year 15o0, to the year 1600; # 
 
 which I find nothing to hinder its being printed. 
 
 «• Given this l«th day of Joituary, 1703. ,«,,.., 
 
 uivea ui» * J "^BLAMPIGNON, Curate of St. Mems." 
 
 APPBOBATION OF THE DOCTORS OF DIVINITY OF THE FACULTY OF PARIS. 
 
 « We whose names are under written, Doctors of Divinity of the Faculty of 
 
 Divinity of Paris, certify, that we have examined a book, entitled **A History 
 
 of the Church, and ofeccleaiastical Authors, in the sixteenth centunr;" hv Mes- 
 
 •ieur Lewis EUies Du Pin. Priest, Doctor of Divinity of the Faculty of Pkris, 
 
 and Reeitti Professor of Philosophy : and that we have found nothing therein 
 
 contranr to the Catholic faith, or to good manners. In assurance whereof, w« 
 
 have set our hands this 20th day of January. 1703. ,<,»»• 
 
 nave set our u j BLAIvIPIGNON, Curate of Si. Merna 
 
 HIDEUX, Curate of St Inuoccuts.** 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
BBBATB ON TMM 
 
 I pit it now to tlM food oenae of bit ondioiiee, wlietlier soeh tesii- 
 inoiiioi HO to Iw tot oeide, liy styiiiff tlitt the printer moy koTo foixml 
 ot pimied them on his own reAponeihilitT. 
 
 no divine warrant for the priraacv of the pope is not the question 
 on which the gentleman read from Barronius. There are two things 
 io OTeiy history,— the statement of foots, and the comment on those 
 facts. The opinion of the historian is like the opinion of the reader; 
 hnl tho facts stated are common property ; and these are the proper 
 malerialo of Mb work. Barronius does not, however, on the point in 
 debate, state a faei contrary to Du Pin. lliere were, indeed, prima- 
 cies at Alexandria^ Antioch, Rome, Constantinople, Jerusalem. But 
 the primacy of a metropolitan, and the doctrine of an univerral pri- 
 niacy ovor all metropolitans at any one place, is a differeo*. matter. I 
 could not nnderstand in what sense he meant to be understood when 
 he said Gregory could not go for primacy in ** that sense." Was 
 ihoro m peoiuiar mysterious meaning attached to the claim or title 
 which Qiogofy reprobated ! It has not been proved that any contem* 
 DOiaiy mdorstood it so. I affirm that there was not an intelligent 
 Daiiolio of that day who understood the title of universal patriarch, 
 in any other sense man tliat in which, it is understood among us now. 
 The poison irst established in the primacy of Rome exercised a uni- 
 voisal superintendency over the church exactly similar to that first 
 elaimed by the bishop of Constantinople. 
 
 My firiend says, * the author from whom he read joa states the fact 
 of such a primacv early in tho Roman Church.* If we examine tho 
 mlhority we shall see, it is nothing but the opinion of a fallible man; 
 Hid iml opinion contrary to all ancient history. I affirm that them 
 is no ocdosiastical historian of authority, who attests the fact, whidi 
 he is desirous to prove. It is one thing to state a lact, as a historian. 
 Hid anothor to stalo m Ofinbn or commentary on a hcU The oues- 
 tioii befoie us, is not the metropolitan primacy of Rome, or Antiochf 
 Off Akxandita; hnl the universal primacy of the whole church ! 
 
 I adnil^ at to tho council of Nice, what it was said Du Pin asso|v- 
 ted, vix. * that the sixth canon does not deny the primacy of Rome.* 
 But Du Pin goes further, — (and why did not the gentleman read all 
 that Du Pin asserts 1} I read it all. 1 told the whole truth respect- 
 fofr it^-4he gentleman has told vou but the half of it — Du Pin shys 
 ^ ids canon does not preclude the Idea :*' but ** tiaYicr,'* says he, ^Ulom 
 M miMUk tf.** I am for quoting the whole authority. Du Pin, as a 
 fJliioUc, was endeavoring to find some authority for supporting tho 
 antiquity of the primacy of the see of Rome. Ho is examining tho 
 mmm of the council carefully, and he says that though this canon 
 does not preclude the primacy, "yit NxrrHra does it ■stasush it." 
 It alTorded him nothing for or against it. And what other decree or 
 council did establish itl ! That is a secret tho bl^op will never 
 
 Ii0t ns now return to my argument. I loll off at the year 750, and 
 was In pursuit of the day, when the present church of Rome began. 
 I hasten to establish it. 
 
 It would be both tedious and unnecessary to read, or narrate the 
 Quarrels between Nicholas of Rome and Photius of Constantinople, 
 on the vital question who shall be the greatest 1 which greatly pre- 
 pared the way for the grand schism. We have not time for this, as 
 we are now, before we sit down, to give you the day and date of the 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC SBLI6ION. 
 
 d9 
 
 i 
 
 separation of the Roman church from the Greek church, wliich must 
 be regarded as the day of her separate existence, when she became 
 what she now is, o fclwiih or •ec/. . , ..^ . , 
 
 There was a violent contest between the patnaich of Constantmoplo 
 and the patriarch of Rome, or pope, if you please, (for I state em- 
 phaiically, that the idea of a supreme head of the church had never 
 been digested in the east, and though the eastern church may have 
 submitted, or acquiesced for the time being, she never did consent to 
 it). The promotion of the layman Photius, gifted and splendid as 
 he was, to the primacy of Constantinople, greatly vexed his holiness 
 of Rome. Indeed, from the time of Victor, bishop of Rome, A. D. 
 197, who assumed to exercise jurisdiction out of his proper diocese, 
 in respect to the observance of Easter, there never was a cordial feel- 
 ing of unity, or co-operation between the eastern and western por- 
 tions of the church. The arrogance of Victor, called for strong ex- 
 pressions of insubordination on the part of the Asiatic brethren, who 
 claimed for themselves as much license to dictate to the western, as 
 he had to ihe eastern church. 
 
 The •• Catholic" body was not yet divided into two great masses. 
 Photius had charge of the church of Constantinople. Nicholas of 
 Rome was indignant that a layman should hold the high dignity of 
 patriarch of the eastern church, however the emperor and the church 
 might think. To make matters worse, they excommunicated each 
 other, which laid the foundation of dissentious and bad feelings, which 
 to this very day, never have been atoned. For the jealousies and ri- 
 valries of these two bishops never slumbered nor slept, till the church 
 was divided into what have since been called the Greek and Latin 
 churches. All historians, give substantially the same account of this 
 matter. I will read an extract or two from Du Pin. 
 
 •*Thoogh the Latin and Greek churches were not io close commnnion with etch 
 other ever sioce the affair o( Phatiut, jeX they did not proceed to ap open rup- 
 ture till the tini« of pope Leo IX. ^nd of Michael Ceniterttit. patriarch of C«i>- 
 HantinopU. Thit breach began by a letter which th« litter wrote la the yew 
 1053. in his own nana, aad in th« name of Leo archbiabop of Aendw aad of 
 all Bulgmrm, to Johm bishop of Trmni in Apulia, that he might commiiiucate it 
 to the pope and to all the western church. In this letter they reproved the Lmt- 
 iiu (ifBecause they made use of unleavened bread in the celebration of the 
 eucharist. (2) Because they fasted on Saturdays'in Lent. (3) Because they 
 eat the blood of beasts^ and thingt strangled. (4) Because they UmJ not sing 
 MUeluiah \n Lent." Ac, &c. Vol. ii.p.m . ,, ,^ 
 
 The patriarch of Constantinople first anathematixed Loo IX. oc- 
 cleeiastioally cursed him and his party, and this may have provoked 
 severer measures against the Greeks than were at fint eontoBajplated 
 b V the Latins. It w, however, an important hei, that ike Gnm wen 
 
 The pope of Rome sent three legates to Constantinople, under pre- 
 tence of healing the divisions and strifes existing, who had, secretly 
 In their pockets, a bull of excommunication against the patriarch and 
 his party. They were instructed to exhort him to yield f but if they 
 found him incorrigible, they were to fulminate against hi a the dread 
 anathema. After a fruitless attempt to bring over the patriarch by 
 mild means, they entered the church of St. Sophia, at noon day, on 
 the 16th of July, in the year 1054, and mounting the altar read aloud 
 the bull of excommunication, before the people, and then departeo, 
 shaking off the dust ot their feet against the patriarch, his city and 
 people. The bull speaks on this wise: 
 
 I- 
 
 i 
 
m 
 
 OIBATK ON TRK 
 
 * The Holj Apostolic m« of Rom*, which it th« diief of the whole world* 
 In witich •• to th« hMMi bdongt b • mora offwcial nraniier the cam of sll tb« 
 diachiit; has sent us to tfaitfoyal citj in the quality of iu legates, for the weiitra 
 mmI paace of the church, that as it is written, wa shoold go down and see whe- 
 ther the cries which pierce its ears inm thk great city be tm? or no. 
 
 Let therefore the emperoni, clergy, senate and people of this city of Coostan- 
 tinopie know, that we have here found more good to excite oar joy* than evil 
 to raise onr sorrow. For as to the sapporters of the empire, and the principal 
 citiiens, tie city is wholly christian and orthodox: bcit as for Michael, v^o 
 took upon him the hhe title of patriarch, and his adherents, we have 
 fimnd that they have sown discord and heresjr in the midst of this city • 
 * * because they rdmjptited, as did the Arians, those who had been bap 
 tixed m the name of the bless«>d trinity, and particutarly the Latins; because 
 witk th$ Dmmiktg lAiy wmimimm lAnlfJU Gr$ek ehurth u Ihi miy trut ekurcht 
 
 «mI thmi lit incrpcci 'mmdkqpluMefmmu eke are vrnUd^'* 
 
 • ••«-•••• 
 
 The Greek chiiich, be it noted with all distinctneea, did stand upon 
 tiiie jpointy that ale was ike onfy true ekurek ; and tiud no ordinance^ 
 kaphmm or ike eutkairM. wm aimUmHd^ unkm admnieiertd kifkermw 
 Ihoritjf, 
 
 I will road a little 
 
 •* Michael having been advertised of these errors" &c.ftc. *• refused to appear 
 hcibre, or to have any conference with us, and has likewise forbad our entrance 
 iiMo the churches to perform divine service therein forasmuch as he had for- 
 merly shut up the churches of the Latins, calling them Atwnitm, persecuting 
 and excommunicating them, all which reflected on the ho(y see, in contempt 
 wh«reof he stylod himself (EcuMBNic A L or DkitemmaIs Patriarch. Where- 
 fore not being able any longer to tolerate such an unheard of abuse as was of- 
 fifed to the holy apostolical see. and lookiiu; upon it as a violation of the Ca- 
 tholiis laith in several inetances. &c., ** We do subscribe to the anathema which 
 onr nMMt holy &ther the pope has denounced against Michael and his adhe- 
 
 mlia if they do not retract their errors/' ftc. Id. ib. p. 238. 
 
 If iieiit there be anjt truth in history, from that day the present 
 of the church of Rome beffan its existence. 
 
 It never was fully, or cordialTy conceded by the Greek church, that 
 the pope was, or ought to be, the universal &ther; and it may ha 
 aAnned in all truth, that this was the real cause of the schism* 
 
 To recapitulate, thus far, in seeking for the paoal head, so essen- 
 tial to the Roman efauich, we find it not in the New Testament, in 
 ili« ancient lathers, in the canons of the first general councils, nor in 
 tile history of the church, till the commencement of the seventh cen- 
 taiy. On the authority of Barronius, it is said that Phocas gave the 
 title to Boniface the 3rd in the year 606. We have also seen, that 
 f apin, another usurper, |ave temporal estates and political dominion 
 to the popes about the middle of the 8th century, and that on the 16th 
 of Jilly 10&4 the Western or Roman half of the church, after having 
 been first anathematized by the Eastern or Greek half, did solemnly 
 •epaiate itself from the communion of the Greek church by an 
 a n alhema. Hence, both the origin and the name of the church of 
 R i O i m>' iF—'£Time expired.} 
 
 Maf-pad 4 o'eloeic, P. J£ 
 Bishop Pi icill nses— 
 
 My friend Mr. Campbell has fought a noble battle for me. I shall 
 prove that presently. Cibbon was an infidel, and became so be* 
 •auae his father would not allow him to embrace the Roman Cath* 
 olic faith. He was a prodigv of mind, and his intellect was so 
 precocious that even when only sixteen years old, he read, I think 
 
 BOlIAlf CATROUC SXLIOIOlf. 
 
 41 
 
 it was, Bossuet'B UniTersal History, by which he was convinced of 
 Ihe truth of the Catholic religion. His father (sad proof of the re- 
 stiaints on liberty of conscience, as exemplified m Protestant coinmii- 
 nities) persecuted him for this, and sent him to Lausanne, m bwitecr- 
 land, where, under the close surveillance of P^'f^j^f^^^P^J^^ 
 minister, he was confined, debarred the reading of Catholie books, 
 and fed on bread and water, till at last he yielded his creed for better 
 &re. He thus became an infidel, and wrote against all religtoiis. 
 But a man who could thus shrink from duty to that fiiith which he 
 believed true, because he viras persecuted, was not fit to JHPPreciate the 
 beauty of the religion that had attracted him ; nor the sublime testi- 
 mony rendered to its divinity by its martyrs' blood. If k« «<»™ 
 thus prove recreant to the only one wMch he loved, no wonder he bo- 
 
 came'opposed to all. .. , ,, ^ .,...,„ 
 
 Such are the authorities against which I have to militate. 
 The irentleman told us that he would put his finger upon the precise 
 day and date, as recorded in history, when the Roman church separa- 
 te from the holy and ancient apostolic church, but he has not kept his 
 word. I warrant that that pledge will never be redeemed. (Mr. 
 Campbell here explained that he had fixed it at the 16th July, 1054.) 
 If then the Catholic church ceased to be the true church m 1054, 
 where was the churc,h of Christi Where was the true Catholic church, 
 from which the ifarniun Catholic church separated 1 "Behold lam 
 ALWAYS with you," says Christ, " and I will send you moOMi Parsp 
 dete who will abide with you all days." Matth. xxviii. SO. 
 
 If the true church vras no where—if Christ had no witness on earth, 
 his promises have failed ; and Revelation is a solecism. A church, 
 unless it be conspicuous, unless every enauirer can have access to m 
 is of no use as a witness of truth to mankind. If hid, how <»n it 
 testify of the true doctrine of Christ to all nations t But mark ihe 
 splendid testimony in fevor of tiie purity and watchfulness of the 
 Roman Catiiolic church, afforded by histonr. How did tiie schism 
 of the Greek church begin 1 A layman Photius intruded and de- 
 dared himself tiie head of tiie church. This single fact is a splendid 
 areument of itself, to prove tiie necessity of a supreme head *© watch 
 over the church. To use a Scriptural phrase, he vras like a faitiifal 
 sentinel upon the walls of Zion, to sound tiie warning to ttie world, 
 or, if you will, not to resemble "a dumb dog," but to bark at tiie approach 
 of tiie tiiief, who came not in at tiie gate, but came by another viray 
 into tiie fold,and he did bark at bun ; and PhoUus and Michael Cera- 
 larius and otiier Greek intrudere and errorists, not content witii as- 
 Burning a power not belonging to them, actually cursed and anatiie- 
 matisS tiie pope of Rome, a proof pcriiaps of tiie amiable charactow 
 tiie sentleman gives tiie enemies of order and of the pope, hut a suf- 
 ficient reason why tiie pope should exert aU his authonty m protect- 
 ing the church from their usurpations. ^^ 
 
 But the three legates to whom the commission was entrusted, car- 
 ried tiie bull of excommunication in tiieir pockets, and tiiey are made 
 to appear very treacherous because they did not produce it at once, 
 but Sed by pacific measures to bring about a reconciliation. Is it in 
 tiie gentieman's estimation, then, an evidence of treachery, to resor* ts 
 persuasive means witii an enemy, before appealing to the word and 
 involving one's country in war 1 Suppose the president ot the Unitea 
 States sends a minister to a foreign country to obtaiu tiie settlement 
 
 i%^ 
 
^ *^^ *>^"fWiiiw>* I>oet that mloistflr besin hj declaring war, 
 hm ibiMif Ms profwaal with a bayonet down &e tliroata of the peo- 
 ple to wkoB he ia aeeroditedl No, he triee eveij auld meaaa fint. 
 The eeatiary eomae wonld be neither politie nor wjae, neither homana 
 Mr in aiseofdanee with the mka ef eiviliaed aoetetj. The great and 
 li» peealiar character of the people of the United States, is neither 
 111 |iio¥oke Mt to bnok aipsMioik If her righta aie violated, she 
 •ndiaviai to ecBviaer the ¥1018101 of his injnatiee^ to diaabiiBe him 
 of hiaemr, to win fain boeic to a aenae of rectitade by peranaaion 
 ■Bd imt lemonatraiiBet M thia lail% iho leaorto to anna, and though 
 *o1ot«» P«co »be 18 pieparad fot war. In a word she is torribly 
 pioafU* flow mark the eoorae of the legatoa. They entreat Michael 
 to loeonnider hie conduct, they urge oviiy argvment that aeal can sug 
 geat, but finding all their efforts fhiitlesa, they afterwards act in pur 
 suance of their inatructiona, with peiiwt ingenuousness and opennesa 
 Oboenre their procedure. They aacend the altar of the great chnich 
 «f St, Sophia, the seventh wonder of the worlft— at whoae portals 
 flood that laige vaao for the holy water, wherawith Gieefca and Ro- 
 flians, conunemoraling the sprinkling of the blood oi Christ, by which 
 oar conscienoea aro pnriied from dead works to servo the living God, 
 wore aecuatomed aUio to bieaa themselvea ; and on which were in> 
 Mnbed the Greek weida ««N«9mvAf^^M^umi^^f«i4iy» '« purify O 
 Ckid, our transonressioBa, and not oor countonance only." They went 
 on the altar and in a iamal apoeeh explained to the asaembled mahi- 
 iuda what were the grounds of the anathema. The crime of Mi- 
 chaelwaa that in deianoe of the prohibitions both of the old and new 
 f *^» ^ ™ "mmI* eunncha prieeta* He waa alao aoeuaed of Arian- 
 ism. Blow the Ariana deny the divinity of Christ— I have heard 
 iraiB some of our most respectable eitisens, that Mr. Campbell alao 
 icnaa that cardinal doama, but I do not vouch for the conectneaa of 
 tteif aaoertlon. (Ma. C ampbbix here staled that he did not deny the 
 divinity of Christ.) ^ 
 
 It appe«a pretty plant fiooi history that the people wore for the 
 — *- -- ^ opposed to their own usurping arehbiahmi. Why I " The 
 lerodlhem." But how! Solar fiom it their whole argument 
 ^ .d amdmi a man liyiiig amoogsi thia very people, and for 
 
 m iniivMual far distant. It ia natural to snppoee that the people 
 were prejudiced in favor of their owaaiohhiahopaBd against one who 
 waa a Strang to them. In abort, weio they not apeakmg againat the 
 piBiaey and tho aaaamplioaa of the eeeleaiaatieal dignitary of the 
 verv ohuf^ m whieh they apohe, andof tho very people to whom they 
 
 ZS!:* ♦C'*^-i9L*^ ^ •*"83r' n«i "flwy ■tronrly inveighed 
 agatnat the nnaeiiplwal and lincanenical ordination of tie odioua en- 
 
 iincfes,by wh« thepatriarehwaa eurio^ Thia iraa a ine U- 
 lustration of the leal iW sound doctrine and diaetpline, diaplayed in 
 ^qg^P^?^ ^ iybae^ooiit ago kj the holy aee. ItlSaVting 
 
 m mm apoitoiiB mmtm It m holler to obey God than man— .1^ 
 
 intiea are ova and conaeqneneaa are God'a. 
 " Oh TJinotlhr, gu«d die dei^ 
 
 -Now the tpwk mmfettly uMh tbrnt in tli« kat tinet^ loae ahall deptrt 
 iron Uie fiuth. giving becd to tpiriu of error, ipeakiiig Urn in hypocrwy , bMilar 
 
 ^^i^'^'^P^mm^ with • red hot iron. ThSe things piSpoting to ihl 
 bfethren thou ibtit b« a •«~« —;«;-*— -./ i ol_:_* JI^H.J:^ ^ ."^ ^r" 
 
 wonit of the fiuth and ol 
 
 111 Ep. to Tia. ch. h. w, 1 
 
 od «,iBiiitr 
 
 BOMAH CATHOLIC mBMOION. 
 
 18 
 
 ThttS on this occasion did the pope. «.»u„«»k «f r ah. 
 
 My friend could not understanJ m what sense *^«P«^"«° jjjf "• 
 atandnople claimed the title of universal bishop; and w^mtod to l»ani 
 how his claim differed from the pr^nt underetimdwg ^^^^ jfj^ 
 Hehas the answer in this history of facts. He has, or his authonty 
 bS pSZfor him. admitted that this Michael had said m effect tha^ 
 he was Lord God over all the earth; and that there was no auAon^ 
 without his sanction for any officer of the church to perform any M 
 Se oXances of relirion. ^Eyen the pope of Ro™« ™«f ,«^^f ^ 
 his feet before he could administer the eucharist or even »>aotize an 
 Sfent And the historian says that the document accusing die areh- 
 
 ES^p was read before the people of ^-^^T^'^^^'^^e'^S 
 when he leiirned, where he was known, and where all the tacM oi 
 Se^^3^^fore them. What i. the mo« naturri »»PS«»f on t 
 Surely this ; that if that docmnent had not been true *e,Pf<T»« '»^ 
 have eried out against it;-fl.ey worfd not have "f »%^'^ ,£0 
 ^t all thia is a Splendid triumph of the supremacy of Uie B»^^ 'e*- 
 Zt why refer to Particular instance, when *cles.^t.ca^^^^^^ 
 fall of anoeals made to the bishop of Rome by all the other OMiiopa 
 rf christendm."nd all acquieseiig in hisd^irion as not ojJy *e Je- 
 c^on of Peter but of Ch^t himself. "^'^S^^^XT^ 
 ■ion riven to Paul," saya Bosauet, « «pifed :^*. >»»™ » "^i^^ 
 blen£ne with the authority of Peter, to which >» 7»?„»"''»^*5 
 nised fte Boman see to the height rf authority and tM'^^ 
 SeThureh which, taught by Peter »f »?» ?"'*'*n^.,^^ 
 infected with heresy. This power of binding ?»d 1~«»« fi»™ "^ 
 was riven first to Peter and then to the rest of the twelve apostles. 
 Fo^ifw^ranifestly the design of Jesus Christy to pl«>e «>«»»■» 
 wha he afterwards fiitended to confer °n many, but Ae sequel un^ 
 not the commencement, nor does the first lose »"f .?>»?«• Ji' "^ 
 the same power from the same source, but not all »"*''«. ^,J*P*f' 
 BOT rSie same extent, for Jesus Christ "on^-J^cf** JTSS ifnif 
 nlMma and alwavs in the manner best calculated toMtabliahtheum- 
 g'H'e^hi^lI?? u Peter," says. St. A-gJ^^^n, ^ho, « th^hon« 
 oY his primacy, represented the enure chureb, first "* "•'T' "^S?" 
 the kevs. which were next to be communicated to all the othere. 1 ho 
 ts^KiSTsas.ignedby.St.C««iri«rfArl«|.tto^^^ 
 authority, first established in a single bishop, and afterwards di»uM« 
 
 ^Kli^nMn Uparebly nnit«l \^'Tl^^-iJ^Xe^i^mh2 
 *k«it th« phair of Peter so much celebrated by the Hathere, m wnien 
 they Vi^wiSo^ another in extolling .he principality of the aportoljc 
 Srthe principal principality, the source of ""'♦J'*? »^" 
 Snreh. the fcead (^or centre) of the •?»?<?«?•''':''»" P"^*^"' "^ 
 «,vemment, the chief, the only see whieh bmde* all » «»• V- 
 
 In these words you hear Ootatns, St. AngnsUn, St. Cypnan, St. 
 I»n«u8 It Prospir, St. Avitus, Theodore^ thecouncil ofChalcedon, 
 Kid G^!^;Uc. and Aria, the e«t »d the west umj»d «oj^ 
 3i« This is die doctrine of all the church ; this is its unity and 
 S^isth Here all is strong because all U divine, all m m.ited. And 
 r^hpS^ divine, the'^bond also is divine, »* *« ""'»»„^ 
 SrZSnL auch that each member acts wiU, the ^^^ "^ *«»2^ 
 bo^r Heooe whUst the ancient bishops said, they exercised antksi- 
 
44 
 
 WiMBATM cm THE^ 
 
 i 
 
 ^ly in tlieir refpeetivo cliiucket ai tiM lieara of Smm Chaht and sno* 
 •tmon of the a|iotilM Mnl immodiatelj by him, th^ also declared 
 tliat tliif aoted in Ilia name of Peter in firtne of the anthori^ given to 
 all blahopa in the peraon of Peter ; ao that the conespondeiioe> the 
 union ami hannonv of the entire body of the chnrch are such that what 
 one btahop doea, id aeoordanoe with the apirit and ralea of Catholic 
 nnity, all the church, all the Eptacopaey, aiid tha chief of the Epiaco- 
 pacy act io concert and accompliah with him. 
 
 My Mead obaerfea that the Oraaka were alwaya nneaay under the 
 Human popedom. I admit thia to a ^[reat eitent, but St. John, and 
 Myeaiii, and Ignatiua and Irensua (hia name aignifiea Peace, or the 
 Mieailil) and Euaebiua and Chrysostom and a hundred othere were 
 iSreeka, and the moat eloquent advocatea, and the ablest supporters of 
 the preeminence of the chnrch of Rome aboTC all other chnrchea. 
 
 Here then is a cloud of witneaaea who furnish an aatoniahing maaa 
 of teatimony to the fact that in the early daya, the Greek chuich aa 
 wM m the Latin eubmitted willingly to the authority of St. Peter and 
 anccesaors— the authority neoeaaary to preserve order and peaca 
 unity, lie. in the church of God on earth. 
 
 With regard to the controveray of the sentleman with Bishop Otey ; 
 than wia a mooted point between Mr. Campbell and himself. I un* 
 dentiMid however that all the diaeoaaion was on Mr. Campbell'a side. 
 
 (Mb. CAMPaaiA here eiplained that he had had a private discusaion 
 wnm Biakop Otey, and had afterwards written him seven letters upon 
 the Bpiacopaey.) 
 
 Bmbop PtmcBu.. I really do not know what Mr. CampbelPa teneta 
 ■re, or what he believea. My brethren, I am fighting in the dark. I am 
 obliged In answer on the apot chargea and objectiona against my re- 
 IgiMi wiich I cannot anticipate, while I really know not what my 
 ■■ligiMiit'a belief is, what qualifications, what marks of a divine call 
 to the ministry he considers necessary, if indeed he believes in any 
 peculiar aeparation of any man or act of men, for prieatly functions. 
 
 Will mjf friend aay definitely, before thia assembly, if he believe in 
 the neoeaaity of aueh call or miaaion. 
 
 Ma. CampbHiIm I do* 
 
 BieiiQr PuBciLL. How ia that calling made known, that mission 
 
 Ma. CiKPitLL. By the woid and providence of God. 
 
 Bnaop PuMsiu.. How can we aacartain that word and providence 
 of God! 
 
 Mb. Campbell. By tha voice of the people and tha wiitten word— 
 •« vox popnli vox Dei." 
 
 B18HOP PimcBLL. Snppoaa tha people are diapleaaed, for inatance, 
 with a Presbyterian naator, have may the aole power to remove him I 
 
 Mr. Campbell. Yea. 
 
 Bishop Purcbll. Suppoae the mioistnr of a Preabyterian church 
 are diaiilaaaed with him, and the people oi'^his church are pleased with 
 him. May he then retain hia atation againat the will of the ministry I 
 
 Mr. Campbbll. If the people will have it ao, it muat be ao. ^ Vox 
 mmmM, v«ox Dei"! 
 
 liaMP i%BCBLL. There my brethren, you have haaid Mm! Socli 
 deolantiona! 
 
 BOMAH CATHOLIC KELIOION. 
 
 4ft 
 
 SATURDAY, Januabi 14th., Half past 9 o'clock, 
 
 
 Mb. Campbell riaei— 
 
 I shall resume the subject where I cloeed yesterday evening, reserv- 
 ing my remarks on the last speech of my opponent till the conclnaion 
 oifiny present argument. 
 
 The gentleman read in the various reasons assigned for the boll of 
 Nicholas, against the patriarch of Constantinople and hia brethren, 
 among others, the statement that the Greeks pretended to be the only 
 true, catholic and apostolic church. It would not be difficult to prova 
 fipom history that in point of seniority, the Greek church has a auperior 
 claim to the Roman. It ia firat in point of time, and claims a regular 
 descent from the apostles. There is one strong argument in her favor 
 which never has been met. To her belong the first seven councils. 
 They were held in Grecian cities, called by Grecian emperora, and 
 composed of Grecian bishops. They were wholly Grecian. The Ro- 
 man church has no right to claim them. And if the doctrines proclaim- 
 ed by these councils be true, they are the doctrines of the Greek chuich 
 Bubsequently borrowed by the Romans. 
 
 Aa this is an important point, I will expatiate a little more fully up- 
 on it. I have taken the trouble to collect the following facts : at tha 
 jint council of Nice there were 318 bishops : of these 316 were Greek 
 and 3 Roman. This was the first genenu council, A. D.336. At the 
 first council of Constantinople, (the tecond general council of the 
 chuich.) A. D. 381. there were 150 bishops ; of these 149 were Gieeka, 
 and only 1 was Roman. At the third council held at Cphesus, A. DU 
 431, there were but 68 bishops present. Of these 67 were Greek, and 
 one was Roman. At the/o«WA general council, which was the largest 
 and most authoritative of the first four, held at Chalcedon A. D. 451, 
 against Eutyches, there were present 353 bishops : 350 of whom were 
 Greeks, and only 3 Roman. At the second council of Constantinopla 
 {thej^ general council) there were present 164 bishops: 156 of 
 whom were Greeks, and 6 Romans — held a^nst Origan and othera, 
 A. D. 553. At the third council of Conatantmople, (and the rizth gen- 
 eral council,) there were 56 bishops present : 61 of whom were Greeks, 
 and 5 Romans. This council met against the Monothelites A. D 680. 
 At the second council of Nice, (the seventh general council,) there 
 were present 377 bishops; 370 of whom were Greeks, and 7 Romana. 
 They met to restore images, A. D. 787. These were the firtt aeoen 
 general eo»fiet/f of the church. I have been at the paina to make thia 
 collection of facta, to ascertain the merita of the controverey between 
 tin Greek and Roman aecta, aa respects the (question to whom of 
 right belong the doctrines of the ancient councila. I find that tha 
 wnole number of bishops in these councils was 1486 : only 26 of 
 whom were Romans. Certainly the Greek church has the prior claim 
 on our attention, and ought to be revered for her antiouity and autho^ 
 iiy, more than the schism which haughtily separated from her ! 
 
 But, in addition to these councils having been called — ^not by tha 
 authority of the chuich of Rome: but by eastern emperors, and com- 
 
 Jioeed of eastern bishops; evenr great question discussed in the firet 
 bur.f and, indeed, I may add, m the last three councils, waa of Gre- 
 
 
«iaB oiigii. They mw up in tlie Greek school— t icliool wtUy dlt- 
 infiislieil iroiii the Latii, by the peculitr iubtiliy of its definitions— 
 m school long neenstonied to nice distinctions, and whose reasoners 
 could split the thousandth part of in iden. Of this, their wars about 
 kommmm and hmmmmm are ample proof. There are no queationii 
 mote pwwly abstnel and OMtaphysieal than many of those discnssed 
 in these set en great eenmenicsl coonolls. 
 
 AffBltt, these councils were not only called by Greeks, composed of 
 Qnelnt and occnpied about Greek qiestions ; but were all assemUed 
 In Greeinn eitlee* 
 
 If there be any Tirtne in councils to establish doetrues and the pnor 
 ity ef ehvelies, the Greek church most be considered the mother of 
 tlie MoBini, rether than her daughter. At all events, it is fully proted 
 thattlie lemnn Catholic chnreh is a sect or schism, which is the bur- 
 Umi of tin pnpoaition before us. To strengthen this conviction, I 
 ptoeeed to eommenton a standard definition of Catholicity. 
 
 I would now ask if there be any objeetion to the book which I hold hi 
 ny hand, as a good Roman Catholic authority. I belicTe it to be the 
 tPM standard of the Roman Catholic chnreh. It is •< the dodrine if 
 mmm€atfl^mt,mmrmedimike€mii(popePimihevrJ** Bnl 
 while the word '^cathofic** Is in my eve, I am reminded that my 
 Hieni has aasefted, • that eatkoUe is a scripture Utle of the chnreh.* I 
 reply that it is not so used in the New Testament; and that it is onlj 
 Ibund as a fleneral, mnning title to some epistles : that its antiquity is 
 very donbt&l, as it eannot be found In the body of the book ; and, con- 
 ■eqnentty* it has no authority. But now for the definition from the 
 ■piiroTed standard of the chnreh : 
 
 S«€Htm IV. Under th« h«Ml, ** TImi tktehtrch ^ Ckriti u Cathouc mt 
 UinTBmsAf^** it It wkod, 
 
 Whmi do you mtdenkmdby tkh f 
 
 JiMwer. * Not onlj that tb« church of Christ ihali arar^jt be known by the 
 name of Catholic, bj which the ii called in the creed; bat that fhe shall abo 
 be tra^ CTatholie or Univanal bj being the church of all ages and nations.** 
 
 Wo have been slmwinff that the chnreh of Christ was not orlginalli 
 iMiPn by the name MfiMiei that the Roman sect was not the chnrob 
 «f tiM imt six centuries ; and, therelbre, that the approved definition 
 of tho efsed will not apply to this pnrtr. I have proved that she had 
 •o pope, or supreme liead, for foil six hundred years, and in conobom 
 Hsu of the niguaoott drewn from general councils, I have shown that 
 iM first seven wore sot here, bnl peooliarly thoee of the Greek chnrehi 
 and that the Greek chnreh is, in met, the mother. 
 
 Greek than the Roman, needs not be slatsd but for a few. One proof 
 of this feet is, thnt the Hebrew has given many words to the Greek, 
 
 while the Greek has given none In the Hebrew So the Greek has 
 siven mony words to the Latin, while the Latin has given none to the 
 Greek. Thus we prove the Roman chureh to have come out of tho 
 bosom of the Greek, from the fact, that all the leading ecclesiastical 
 tarais in tho Roman ohnrch are Greek. For example : "/x>pe," ^^pairi' 
 ■mr9h,*\^^mod** *^eeekmat^" "seAum," "aeAtffmalic/' ^^hereajf" "A«fis> 
 Ue^" " ker€9iaireAf" " ca^ctcAumtfrt," ^^ hierorehy" "cAurehj" "chrim^/* 
 
 XOIIAX CATBOUC BUJOION. 
 
 i«, 
 
 ^hnystk,^ "cattoAc,"' ^*carum,^^ &c., dec., &c. This as folly prove! 
 the seaiority of the Greek chureh, as it does that of the Greek lan- 
 guage over the Latin. 
 
 All ancient ecclesiastical historians, are also Greeks, such as Euso- 
 bins. Secretes Scholasticus, fivagrius Schdasticus, Sozomon, Theo- 
 doret. The most ancient and primitive fathere are also Greek. They 
 were models to the Latins and imitated in their writings. 
 
 To recapitulate, we have now shown that the Greek church is more 
 ancient Uian the Latin church ; because the first seven general councils 
 were all Greek, there being 1486 Grecian bishops and onlv 26 Roman 
 biahops present, they were called by Greek emperora, held in Greek 
 cities, and employed about Greek questions. 
 
 The leading ecclesiastic terms of all the ancient offices, customs 
 and controversies, are Greek : So are the early fathera and historians. 
 
 These considerations superadded to the facts and documents of yes^ 
 terday, we think fully prove that the Roman church is not the chureh 
 of all ages and of all nations — ^notthe catholic and apostolic church, at 
 theereedof Trent defines; but a tec/, a branch or schism, from tbo 
 Hebrew and Greek churches of the New Testament. 
 
 In proving the proposition before us my plan is to select one of tho 
 grand elements embraced in the standard definition of ihe chureh, and 
 to show that such being essentia to the church, the church could not 
 exist witiiout it. Now, I prefer the arithmetical mode of procedure in 
 this discussion. Firet lay down the rule and work a single questioBf 
 and then leave it to othera to work as many as they please. 
 
 Thus I first laid down a definition of the Roman Catholic chnrA 
 from her own standards. From that it appeared that a pope or univefi- 
 Md bishop is an euenlial element of her existence. I then showed that 
 six hundred yeare had elapsed from the time of the apostles, before tho 
 doctrine or existence of a nniTersal bishop was thought of, and that tho 
 office vras not instituted till the year 606. But when I have proved 
 this, I have worked only one question. Any one may take up the doo- 
 trine of trensubstantiation, the worship of images, purgatory, (a doo- 
 trine more ancient however, than either the Greek or Roman church,) 
 nnd every other peculiar doctrine of the Roman Catholic church, and 
 prove that not one of them is to be found in the divine book, nor in tho 
 records of the church. 
 
 What, let me now ask, is the great point in my first proposition t 
 To prove that the Roman Catholic church is not " the mtmer and mtt- 
 Iras*' of all churches ; but a ieeU i° the foil import of that word; and 
 if tet be not now proved, I Imow not what can be proved. I admit 
 the subject is capable of much more extensive developement ; but wo 
 think it neidier necessary nor expedient to be more diffuse. 
 
 Will the presiding moderator please read my fint proposition 1 
 
 (Here proposition No. 1. was read by the moderator, j 
 say then she is not the Ao/y, twottoke, eatholie church, as she pro* 
 tends to be ; for in proving her to be a teeU I prove her to be notetMm 
 Hct nor apoitolic ; because the true apostolic church cannot be called n 
 met. To prove her to be a sect is to prove her not Catholic, therefore, 
 nor apostolic. What remains nowt Even on the concession of my 
 opponent, she is not the CaihoHe church ; for he admits, that the Greek 
 thureh di^red from her only in a few non-essential matters. On that 
 
WMBATM ON TUB 
 
 admitsiiNi, if lie •inilti Himt peitont m wTed in jOw Greek dmieii { 
 ■be mutt 1m a duI of ikm ehmeh of Cbftst ; for with him, tbeie ie oc 
 •dvatioii out or theelmfeh. 
 
 Im the next plaee my vropocitlon iiye ' ehe ia not hofyJ I am im- 
 pelled lij a aense of doty, and not by any unkind feelings towards such 
 of my fellow citiieas as belong to ^toommont^, to attemnt to prore 
 Ihal the church of Rome ia not holy. I would not heedlessly or need- 
 ieealy oiend aj[ainst the feelings of an Indian, a Hindoo, or a Pamn, 
 in his aincero devoaons, how absnid aooTer they might be. Much less 
 would I wound any one that professes the christian religion under anj 
 form; but in aerring my contemporaries, in redeemingr my pledj^ 1^ 
 has become necessary to investigate the jmnd metensions of thu fira 
 tetnity, that exdnsiTelT arrogates to itaelf the tide of Ao^. 
 
 Mot to expatiate at Ifaia time on the vices of the clergy and of the nopet 
 what the cardinals Barronioa and Bellarmine have so fully noticed, and 
 sometimes specially detailed, I shall take a single text from Bellar^ 
 mine, De. Bccl. lib. 3. c 7. which avows a doctrine thstt must for 
 ever make the Roman church unholy. It is expressed in these 
 
 words :^ 
 
 •* Wicked men, inftdelt and reprobatet remaining in the public profetiion of 
 the Romifh church are Im* memben of the body of Chri«t. ' 
 
 How then can we admit that ahe ia holy ! Again : it must be ad- 
 mitted that the great mass of all thoee who die in the faith and profes* 
 eion of the Catholic doctrines are not strictly holy ; for why then should 
 thsf have to pasa through the fires of purgatory I 
 
 But again ; in her own Testament (if she have a Testament. The 
 
 rtieman may, indeed tell us his church has no English Testament ; 
 she never owned hot the Vulgate. She never gave to her people, 
 with approbation a French, or English, or any vernacular Testament. 
 The Rhemish Testament is, however, published by the anthority of a 
 portion of the chuich ; and from it we can find the doctrine of Bellap> 
 vine explicitly taught in the notes appended, by the same authority 
 w blah gave the Testament) in ker oum Tatamenif I repeat it, on John 
 XV. 1. these Roman annotatora say :«• 
 
 KOXAN CATHOLIC SBLIOIOK. 
 
 49 
 
 •* j;v«ry ftfwneJk m AM. Ac.** Chritt hath aone hrancbet in hit bodv i , 
 that be fmitleM; therolbffe, ill livers alto insj he menbert of ChriiC*i cbertkr 
 
 " 111 Kvmi^ (mark it) •• mmj be membera." This is repeatedly sta- 
 ted in varioua places, and as I understand, avowed by all that commn- 
 nity, as the tme doctrine of the church. ** 111 /iwen," wicked men, in- 
 lidela, leprobates, vieiona charactera, those guiltj of crimes of every 
 enonntty and color, may then continue memberb of the Roman church, 
 while tim acknowledge the pope and the priesthood, and make profee- 
 ilea of fittth in the Catholic church ; ahe therefore counts within bet 
 iild IHMNIO^OOO of aonls, as my opponent stated in this city in October 
 last. M thai happen to be bom in Catholic coontriea, infidels, athe* 
 ist% and all, are enrolled in her eommnnion. Her ffatea are wide aa 
 me Inman raee. It ia all church and no worid with her. The lusts of 
 tie flesh, the last of the eyes, and the pride of life, are found in her 
 communion. 
 
 The Roman Catholics in the United States are probably the best body 
 of Catholica in the world. I mean those who are native cttixens. But 
 visil Old Spain or New Spain, Portugal, Italy, Austria, France, or Can- 
 ada, where Catholicism is the established religion ; and then ask whe- 
 ther hotiaeaa be a distingoiahing attribute of the depraved and degraded 
 
 millions who call tfiemselves Roman Catholics! This with me la no 
 vary pleasant theme, and I will not extend my remarks on this point by 
 unnecessary detaihi. I have aaid enough to prove the allegata is my 
 first proposition, and to show that the church of Rome m a mc< and not 
 the holy, apostolic church of Christ, as she proudly and exclnsifely 
 pretends. I am willing to submit these documents to" the severest ii^ 
 vestigation ; and if other arguments and facts are called for, I will oaljr 
 add, we have them at command. 
 
 My learned opponent seems to imagine that when I fix the birtfi inf 
 ©f the Roman Catholic church, on the 16th day of July 1054, I must 
 admit that the chnroh from which she tcparated was the true and nneoi^ 
 rupted church of Christ ; but this is what logicians call a non ieqmimr. 
 It does not follow. The gentleman seems to reason a» if it were inva- 
 riable that when one sect separates from another, the bodj from which 
 it separates, must necessarily be the true church. Tliis is not logical. 
 A new sect may spring from the bosom of the worst sect on earA ; 
 but does this prove that the mother sect has piety, character, or author- 
 ity ! Neither does it follow that in the year 1054 the Gfeck church, 
 though the mother or sister of the Roman, was the true church of Christ. 
 When it becomes necessary, I may show that both the Greek and Ro- 
 man schisms had long before 1054, been separate from the apostolic 
 
 church. • J ^ 
 
 Protestants have all conceded too much m every age and penod of 
 this controversy. Even now there is a morbid sensibility upon this 
 Bubject among some, lest we should make Christ's church too indepen- 
 dent of the pope's chuich. * In reproaching the mother church,* say 
 they, ** you reproach us, also." 
 
 In one of the periodicals of this mornmg it was intimated that th^ 
 fates and fortunes of some Protesiant party arc involved in the pending 
 conuoversy. Be not afraid of the insinuations of such political alarm- 
 ists. I stand here as a Protestant, not as a Baptist, or Methodist, or 
 Episcopalian ; but to defend Protestantism. I am not afraid to naeet 
 any antagonist on these premises. In advocating the great cardinal 
 principles of Protestantism, I feel that I stand upon a rock. There is 
 nothin«r in haxard. I am sorry to see this sort of sensibility manifest- 
 ed. Can the truth suffer from discussion I . . . .^ 
 In the mean time I will proceed to the second proposition, which wiR 
 much illustrate and confirm the argument already offered in proof of 
 the first. These great points so embrace one another, and are so in- 
 timately allied, that none of them can be fully demonstrated without re- 
 ference to the others. 
 
 •* Piw*. IL Her notion of Apottoltc Soccevtion it without any foundation If 
 th« Bible, in reason, or in &ct ; an imposition of the mott injanous coiuequen- 
 ces, built upon anscriptural and anti-scriptural traditions, resting wholly upon 
 the opinions of interested and Mlible men." 
 
 Before I heard that the bishop intended to meet me in debate, I had 
 tesolved to deliver a series of lectures, on the whole pretensions of the 
 Roman Church, in the following order : 1st her apostolicity, 2nd anti- 
 quity, 3rd infallibility, 4th supremacy, 5th catholici^, 6th unity, 
 and 7th sanctity. These seven great topics, I intended to discuss ef 
 full length. Each involving the others, none of them is so isolatedat 
 to be susceptible of an independent and separate developement. The 
 very term apottolidty involves antiquity: hence, we find her pretending 
 B 4 
 
m 
 
 .MBATE ON TH"E 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC MBLIGION. 
 
 51 
 
 to tnicpiilitf J^wtnt, by regular iteiMit back to Peteri wkOf ilio asserttt 
 wat tlio iial Maliop or Rome. 
 
 ** Onljr thoM that ciw derive their linenge fron tlie spottles are the heira of tha 
 
 3ottIes: and conscquentlj thfj alone can rtaim a ri|^nt to the scriT}(ares, to the 
 mtniitratioB of the lacrtroentf, or anj ibarc in the pastoral mini-ftrf. It it 
 tltfirpRMMrinharitaaoa which thf'y have tecelved from the apoRtiet, and the 
 ■pttitltii inm Chriil * As nir fiither hath tent me, even lo I mod joa.' ** Jobs 
 EX. 21. [Groundi of Cath. Doc. p. 17. 
 
 Tliia is the ioetrine of the eraed of pope Pius it. and a more grlaring 
 ptiiUii|itkMi is not easily imagtaed. This church, however, delights 
 Id assomptioii. She assumes that Jesus Christ did establish a church 
 of all nationSf to be ruled by a sort of generalissimo, or universal 
 Ifil, who was to be his vicar on earth ; by virtue of whose ecclesi- 
 aaieal poirer she assumes for him political power; for his loj^e is. 
 that Jesiis Christ's vicar roost rej^iesent his master in all things, in his 
 folilioal as well as hia ecclesiastical power. And as Christ himself 
 pfi S iiSits all authority in heaven and! on earth, she assumes that the 
 Mipo his vicar ought to be the fountain of all power : that by him 
 sings should rei|{n, and princes decree justice. After having thus as* 
 snmed, that Christ did establish such aicingdoraand headship on earth, 
 thpl ho did constitute the office of a vicar for himself and of a prince of 
 Ihompostles ; iu the second place, she assumes that this headship was 
 given to Peter, that Christ gave the whole church and the apostles 
 ibniselves in eharge to Peter ; that he gave him absolute control over 
 the bishops, pastors and laity ; and in the third place, to complete 
 the climax of assumptions, she assumes that Christ established a suc- 
 oessorsbip to Peter throughout all ages. On tMs triple assumption 
 rests the colosaal empire of the papacy. 
 
 Now, as to the nature of the apostolieal office be it observed with 
 brevity, that it was essentially incommunicable. Holv writ recogni- 
 w§B but three orders of apostles, and none of them had lineal succas- 
 •ors. Jesus Christ, the apostle of God the Father, was the^«^. He 
 is failed in Ihe New Testament, ^ike 4fmtk and high priest of the 
 ohristian pioihssion.** It is not necessary to prove that he could have 
 00 successor. Seamd, the twelve apostles, who were apostles of 
 Christ, as he was the sposlle of God. In John xvii. he says, "As my 
 9kiker made me his apostle, so I mahe you my apostles.** These then 
 Ifiog personal attendants on the Messiah, could have no successors. 
 TMrdf Apostles sent out birparticolar churches, on special errands. 
 These are ealled in the New Testament m mmwrtui rm tMMkMnm. These, 
 always sent on special errands, could have no successors. 
 
 If the qualifications of the apostolic office were understood, there 
 eould be no controversy on the question of successors. As laid 
 down by Peter, Acts i. it behoved them to have been companions of 
 Christ Irom his baptism to his acseusloo, to be eye and ear witnesses 
 of all that he did and said. In this essential requisite they could have 
 ■o soocessors. Besides, if one should have a successor, why not aJlf 
 While the college of apostles was necessary, we see that succession 
 «S8 fiiUy carried out. Thertsfore, the chair of Judas the traitor deman« 
 dod a soeeessor as well as that of Peter. But yet we have not heard 
 of any controversy about the successor cf Judas! 
 
 Our first argnioent against the Catholic notion of succession is drawn 
 
 the f sture of iiiti »postoiic office. 
 Hit did we concede that the apostolic office was communicable, and 
 
 that Christ did appoint a president of the apostles, and place his chair 
 in Rome, there is no document on earth, from which we can lean with 
 any degree of certainty, that Peter was ever bishop in Rome. And yet 
 Catholics themselves, contend that it is essential to the cause of the 
 •uccossion and supremacy that Peter placed his see at Rome by Christ's 
 commandment. 
 
 Bellarmine positively affirms ; 
 
 •• The right of succession in the popeto/Fome is founded in tMs, that Peter 
 hy Christ's appointment, placed his seat at Rome, and there remained tiU hi* 
 Mhr Lib. II. c. 1. . .. r r * • 
 
 This resolves the controversy into n single question of fact, viz. 
 JHd Peter, by Chri^s appoifdment^ place hi* teal ai Borne and there re- 
 main till death ? Barronius, however says ; ^ .. „ 
 
 " It is not improbable that our Lord gave an express command that Peter 
 •hould to fix hi* see at Rome, that the bishop of Rome should abM>luteljr sue 
 ceed hiin. [Id. lb. . * » v 
 
 Only probable ! But there is no such succession tnfaet. In the 
 first place, there is no proof from scripture that Peter ever was at Rome, 
 much less, bishop of Rome ; and secondly, if he were an apostle, he 
 eould not be the bishop of any church. A king, a justice of the peace. 
 Hie bishop of London, the vicar of Bray ! It is, on these premises, 
 impossible to prove this most fundamental question. 
 
 Various efforts have been made by the bishop of Cincinnati to ex- 
 cite Episcopalians and others on this question, as if they were likely 
 to be involved in the same common ruin with my opponent's preten- 
 bions. There is no need for any alarm on this account. The office of 
 pope and his succession, certainly, are not identical with that of 
 Episcopalian bishops in England or America ! « ,. . 
 
 There is no body cf men who have done more to elevate English 
 Jterature and science, than the English clergy, none whose writings 
 I have read with more pleasure than theirs, on all subjects pertaining 
 to general literature, morality and religion. In some of them, indeed, 
 we find weak as well as strong places, and a too great timidity in 
 contending against the Romanists, lest they should endanger their right 
 of Episcopacy. I incline to the opinion, that the pretensions of the 
 church of Rome may be fully canvassed without at all jeopardixing 
 the simple quesUon of the divine right of Episcopacy. But if we at- 
 tempt to bring a clean thing out of an unclean ; or expect to find a di- 
 vine warrant in the commission given to the apostles ; or in the Ro- 
 man Catholic traditions ; we shall never find it to the day of eternity. 
 
 Successors must be successors in full, or they are not successors at 
 all. To illustrate this — does not the existing president of the United 
 States inherit all the power and authority of George Washington, by 
 virtue of constitutional succession 1 Does he not possess the same 
 oower, in all its length and breadth, its height and depth, as dii his 
 predecessor, from the first to the last 1 This is true of every constitu- 
 tional office in the civilized world. All the power which any prede- 
 cessor can have, belongs to every incumbent : So in the church. *i it 
 have constitution at all. 
 
 If the apostles have successors, they have successors m full. But 
 the Roman Catholics themselves give up the controversy, by admitting 
 that none of the bishops or popes inherit the power and functions be- 
 stowed upon the apostles by the commission. - , . , 
 
 I do not, indeed, found my argument for the divine right of bishops 
 
BSBATB 0!f TUK 
 
 or ey«is^ rnd deacons, on the comiiiiseion, whieli Jesiii Christ givet 
 to hb ■pottleti and I aiii mmmmi for nil the c ome q iwiicet of this ad* 
 miatioii. For hy every rale of intefpietatloo, I mast apply erery word 
 of the comiiiisaion to the apoetlea; because it addreaaea them only. 
 But let none ha alsrmed at this declaration : nothing ia jeopardiied^ 
 father, indeed, all is secured by it. 
 
 In the presence of the apostles alone, he pronounced these words ; 
 ** All authority in heaven and on earth is given to me ; go you there- 
 Ibre aid convert all the nations, haptiBing them into the name of tha 
 Fkthar and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all 
 iie thinga which I have commanded you ; and lo, / am with you ai' 
 iMiyt, even to the conclusion of this state,** or to the end of the age or 
 world. 
 
 Thia commission created plenipotentiaries : It reared up ambassa- 
 dors, and pve to the apostles the same power of erecting thechurchi 
 which God gave to Moaea for raising the tabernacle in the wilderness. 
 They had all the authority of Christ to set up what orders they pleas- 
 ad. They created both bishops and deacons ; and as the^ had a di- 
 vine right to do so, ao those created by them have a divine right to 
 iiileiate in the duties of those offices. A true interpretation of the 
 promise, **Iam wUk ^ou," will go far to confirm the declaration, that 
 they neither had, nor could have aucceaaora in office. Of thia, how- 
 aver, again — 
 
 Meanwhile, it may he objected that Paul waa an apostle, and ac- 
 ted wiihout this commission. He had. Indeed, a apecial commission, 
 and the qualifications of an apostle. He had ieen and heard the Lord. 
 For to this end the Lord appeared to him. But aa respected time, he 
 ■tiwvMged he was born rather two late to be an apostle — he was 
 •• kom mtt tf due lintel How, then, could any of them have succea- 
 iora at this day ! 
 
 The gentleman mentioned aome two persons in the Old Testament. 
 Thev could have no successors in office, according to the argument on 
 Iniid. It waa absolutely impossible that Moses could have a aucces- 
 ior. HIa office and commission were really from God, and strictly 
 peculiar to himaelf. He brought the Jews out of Egypt, and erected 
 the tabernacle ; thia waa hla peculiar office, which, m ita very nature, 
 m^/liind wkm mee ilt duiiet wertfuIJUfed. The commission of Joshua, 
 in like manner, was also peculiar to himself, and could not possibly de- 
 •aeiid to a aaccessor. When he led Israel across the Jordan, and di- 
 vided tha land by lot amongst them, his worka and office naturally ei- 
 pired. So when the apoetlea preached the goapel, revealed the whole 
 will of Jeaoa Christ, and ereelai hla church and all its proper officera 
 and dutiea, their work was done, and they, like Moses and Joshua, be- 
 b|f olieera extraordinary, could have no auccessora#-[Time expired.] 
 
 Mafpad 10 o'hkek J. M 
 
 Biaiiop PiTECEu. riaei. 
 
 Here la, beloved friends, as plain and lodcal a caae for arguments 
 tion, and aa fair an opportunity afforded for refutation, aa ever the 
 snnala of controversy exhibited. The firat argument of my friend 
 amounta to thia, viz : That for reaaona he haa given, the Greek church 
 haa superior claims upon our attention to the Roman. 
 
 I have quoted councils, general and particular laws, usages, appeals, 
 
 ROMAN CATHOUC XXLIOION. 
 
 53 
 
 Iho anthortty of Greek and Latin fathers, that is to say, the most au- 
 thentic teatimony of the firat ages, to show that with Rome was the 
 primacy of all the churches. This, at once, upaets all that he has said. 
 
 He says the first seven councils were Greek ; and that therefore the 
 Greek church had the preeminence. But, I ask, who convoked tliose 
 councils ? Who approved them 1 Who sanctioned their canons, and 
 gave throughout the entire church the force of law to their decisions I 
 Who guarded them against errors, and set them right when they were 
 going, or had gone astray 1 It was the pope. 1 have already said, 
 that Sylvester, bishop of Rome, aware of the danger that menaced the 
 faith in the east, convoked the great council of Nice — that the 
 emperor Constantino, the raler of ue east and west, of Rome and 
 of Constantinople, the man, consequently, upon whom as chief magis- 
 trate of the Roman empire it devolved, afforded the necessary facilities 
 to the various bishops to come to the council. Again, who presided 
 as legate of the pope I Osios of Cordova, in Spain, a western man, 
 assisted, as is and has been customary, by two inferior ecclesiastics. 
 
 The jealous Greeks beheld all this, and surely they would not have 
 permitted Rome thus to assume the supremacy, if her right to it had 
 not been universally admitted since the days of her founder St. Peter. 
 Is it not the most splendid proof of the correctness of my argument ? 
 The strongest evidence that could be desired of the discomfiture of 
 myadver^ry? 
 
 I thought to have seen a more powerful display of logic from the 
 strong and disciplined mind of my friend Mr. C. ; but 1 attributed the 
 poverty of his argument to indisposition on his part, or to the weak- 
 ness of his cause. 
 
 Well, another reason Is stated, to prove the supremacy of the Greek 
 church, viz. : that the questions discussed in these councils were of 
 Greek origin. Is it then to be wondered at, that as almost every error 
 in the old church originated in the East, it should be there eonectedl 
 that the remedy should be applied where the disease existed 1 
 
 The Greeks were at all times a curious, inquisitive, restless people. 
 The passion for disputation displayed in the schools of the philosophers 
 was, aa by contagion, communicated to many of the professors of 
 Christianity. But the manner in which it operated upon the one and 
 the other was essentially different. With the philosopher such ques- 
 tions were objects of understanding only, subjects of speculation; 
 whereon the ingenuity of a minute mind might employ or waste itself. 
 Bat with the christian they were matters of truth and falsehood, of 
 belief or disbelief, and he felt assured that his eternal interests would 
 be influenced if not decided by his choice. As soon as the copious 
 language of Greece was vaguely applied to the definition of apiritual 
 things^ and the explanation of heavenly mysteries, the field of eonten* 
 tion seemed to be removed from earth to air, where the foot found 
 nothing stable (nothing like the rock of Rome — new and striking 
 proof of ita necessity) to rest upon ; where arguments were easily 
 eluded, and where the space, in which to fly and rally, was infinite. 
 Add to this the nature and genius of the disputants ; for the origin Tf 
 tkue diiputea may be traced without any exception to the restless imagtntf 
 Horn if the Easi, The violent temperament of the orientals, as it wi's 
 highly adapted to the reception of religious impressions, and admittetl 
 them with fervor and earnestness, intermingled, so olosely, passion 
 b3 
 
m 
 
 .UBiATc on Tns 
 
 VOMAN CATHOLIC KEUOION. 
 
 6& 
 
 I-' J 
 
 with piety, a» scarcely to conceiTe them sepaiafole. The natnral ardor 
 df their lealings was not abated bj the natural aobtilty of iheir bihIct. 
 •tawliiif , which was sharpened in the schools of Kgypt ; and when 
 !bit latter began to be occupied by iiiquiriea in which the former were 
 M d«i|ily engaged, it was to be eipeelod that many extravagances 
 would follow. Vid. Waddington, p. 93. 
 
 Yet, because it was in the east that the heresies in the ancient day 
 of the church commenced, and in the east the councils met to correct 
 llioaehefMmi the Greek church must therefore have been the mother 
 oliifili! Sieh is my friend^s argnment! and it is now plain, ihatt 
 Iwbltr. a more inconclusive, and a more irrational one, he could scarce- 
 ly havo advanced before this enlightened assembly. But what is slIU 
 more remarkable, did not these very councils, these Greek councils, 
 •ttiiiitli by their own acts, and these of the most solemn and authenuc 
 einneliry ■Urn aupremacy of the Roman seel Did they not solicit the 
 mm% approbation of their decrees, and acknowledge that without hit 
 ianistioa their proceedings were void of effecti 
 
 He says iliat the emperor presided. I have already answered that 
 tlie emperor did not preside. He distinctly acknowledged the spiritual 
 to be independent of th«i temporal power, he alleged thai he pretended 
 to BO right to preside. He knew that God never told the emperors, 
 Ms predecessors, to preside over the deliberations of his church. The 
 constitution of that church had been established three hundred yeara 
 before Constantino became a proselyte to Christianity. It is unhearu 
 of that a temporal monarch ever presided over the deliberations of the 
 church, or ruled in ecclesiaslical matters. At least we catholics submit 
 to no such dictation — such a confusion of things divine and human— 
 •tich an anomaly I I am sorry it is allowed in England. In that coun- 
 try even a woman may be, for a woman has been, the head of th« 
 church, as in the instance of queen Elizabeth; nay, a little child, as 
 io iImi case of Edward. It is contrary to reason, to scripture, to humaR 
 fig hta and divine ordinances, that such as these should presume in any 
 vnaatioiia, to jfive or withhold authority to the ministry, to preach th« 
 fM|wl of Christ, or to dispense the mysteries of God. It outrag«»t 
 •very leeling of sanctity, it de^des, it vilifies the priesthood, to s«e 
 bishops and archbishops kneeling at the feet of women and boys, and 
 praying them to grant a Heeme to preach. 
 
 Mf friend has charged me with making professions of respect for 
 BpMeopalians and Episcopal methodists, &c., but do I suppress the 
 tniliit and do I fail to censure them where they too are wrong. My 
 lliond has gratuitously presented himself before this assembly as Uie 
 •hampion of Protestantism; and I have shown that he is, if at all, but 
 little less opposed than I am to the denominations I have named, on 
 III* f iial point of orders and a called and sent ministry. Ho would 
 lliiM tlioiii with an equivocal defence of their principles to-day, and 
 iitn pioioot them with his own views in theology — with Camphell- 
 ism, baptized Protestantism, — [Here the moderators called Bishop 
 Furcell to order.] 
 
 My friend, learnedly, (and I give him credit for it,) showed how it 
 came that there were so many errors and questionable doctrines in the 
 UiOik ebuich. I havn statwl the causes, humanly speaking, of tht 
 errors. It is then, an undisputed fact, that they were more numeroufli 
 ill the Greek aiau iti the Eouaii church ', that llta tiouidn cnuich was 
 
 wmparatively free from them. But he has plaimy misconceiv^ the 
 iXre^ tole drawn from the fact; and it is Aia: that as Rome 
 wSlhTprimary see, the centre of unity, the mother and mistress of 
 riUhrchuiSi^, God watched over her with peculi« cam, an^^^^ 
 served her from the errors and ^eresjes that provi^ infim^ely m^^^ 
 fatal than the pagan persecutions, to the churches of the east, l^h e 
 Ih^y weTe dist?ac^.i, the Roman church w^ ^^'^ ^^^.^^ L^^ 
 thev were in dan<rer of breaking to pieces the edifice of faith, 8he iw« 
 T^Jndti^ herlelf, and laborfng ti^ consolidate them under one creed. 
 TantSd^ proU,^ t^^ gospf 1 life in the east, it was tbe auAonty 
 if RoW ^By hef waS the^dJctrine of the Savior vindicated, and 
 kent pure from the foul admixture, the contamination of heresy. By 
 herwerTAiianism, Nestorianism, Eutychianism, Monothohsm, and m 
 htt Jr^othTrToveW, the spurious progeny of dangerous opimon* 
 in the east, «BCce8»iTely condemned. .„.,^_, i_ «i„ 
 
 And now. harine disposed of the argument which appeam in «h« 
 «^rf ^r^Uemln-a remarks, 1 will go on with a ^«?"on of ^t, 
 towhich he ha. again referred, touching ihc word pi«Ao/«. He says 
 thaTit is not found in the New TestamenU Admitting that t is not in 
 the b^v of the wnon, which I did not contend for. yet it is prefixed 
 to sSmeVf thTepistle'^ and a. old. if not older, as » *»;f^ bel°«gmg 
 to Si"hou8ehold of faith, than they are. He said Uie word K^"-. 
 }^»X«fcS was orefixed to the Epistle of James in the year 1549, by 
 KUZnror Robert B.irnne. by which name that fiunou. 
 
 fS pKnIer is better known-about SM. !«»" »8°;. , "i,^^ 
 will show you that here again his learning is at fault, that to the 300 
 r^rs muVbe added a thousand more, and then that the origin of Ae 
 ?,™d T^yl\ with Christianity. Before quoting the '«'"™°»y °f ^U 
 
 „%:7p!^ttrnd?ntrc'^^^ifor-=.anT^^^^^^^ 
 SttS'orcan.^^^^^^^ 
 
 •hlSU" '?WroV[h'e:e3es. viz. that of St i»me., Jhe^^o^, 
 «L Peter the 2d and 3d of St. John, the epistle of St. Jnde, as alw ">e 
 
 Sisti: of SU Paul to theHebrewa, --i, '»'« *rt^»L^°:i,^ 
 H.v..Ution of St. John, were doubted of, and not arrays and eTerr 
 Shere^i/ed h. the three first ages, till the canon and ^X^loP" »f 
 Jhe h^okfof Vcripture were deteniined by the authority of the Catho- 
 i- l ill .krZ.reme iudte of all controversies in matters of fiuth 
 i^trrion^~oK tils appointment of onrS.,ior ChrUt, ex- 
 I^Trnwy pla'Ss in th" ho'T scriptures. The«. 1 have me»- 
 5^!j ^ «rSinlT. for some time, doubted of; they are sull d<«*t. 
 :?rfby*::reTfZ'l.^"fonne,.. .»;"*"•,*• 17211:^:1"^^ 
 ~f„rm»tion is not ashamed to »ay, that this episUe of St. James, «» i» 
 
 ^JZot^n Na.i.n»M., at that eariy period, uses the word Clh- 
 .Hc..«ldesignates^tl,em^,.l.at^name: 
 
 Grtg. JVazianzen, Carmen de Canon. Scrtpt. 
 
 Id English-" Some sif there «6 anven Catholic epistles, otheii 
 
OXBATS ON TAB 
 
 IImiI tlitn Mt jMili thfBt— OM of Janes, one of Peter, and one of John *' 
 80 iMwIi ibr tie Imitli tfe. Does not iky friend tay his prayers! 
 Boit not e¥ery Protestant onite wioi erery Catholic in saying, **I 
 beliefe in the holy Catholie church," as we are taofftit in the apostles* 
 eieed t SfiealEing of this most aocieot formala of faith, composed, as 
 it is heliercdv hy the apnstles theniselYes« before they separated for 
 iM peal iPQiii of f naeliinf to all nations, that it may be for ever n 
 biBief nnbnaiid aa abridfment of sound apostolic belief, Wsddinf* 
 tea says, p. 46. *«The creed which was irst adopted, mmd IktAptrkapt 
 liillt very earKeti agtf by the church of Rome, was that which is now 
 eailed the apisiles'^ creed; and it was the general opiolon from the 
 Ibnrth century downwards, tkai il wm aduaSy the proAidim of Hum 
 Mtmedpermma muamhledfor thai purptmei our evidence is not snificient 
 in estanlish that fact, and some writers Tery confidently reject it. 
 But there is reasonable ground for onr assurance that the form of fiuth, 
 wbieh we still repeat and inculcate, was in use and power in the fery 
 eaiiv propagation of our reh'gion."* Now will the gentleman tell 
 «• tlial the woid Oaikoiie — ^was unknown to antiquity ? 
 
 Yon wil perseite, my friends, that until the ¥ery minute Mr. Camp* 
 bell apiais,! know not what he is going to say.. You will not woo- 
 ier that following him, my discourse should be desultory and rambling. 
 I am here under every disadvantage to which, a speaker can be subject. 
 Obll|ed to leave the beaten highway and follow him through the 
 iiiekets Into which, he finds it useful to plunge so frequently. 
 
 I have at this moment in my band, a copy of the New Testament, m 
 beautiful edition, published in Glasgow, a Presbyterian city, and also 
 an edition of Robert Etienne. Behold (displaying them) the title 
 ^Ootholic,** prefixed in both, to these epistles. 
 
 1 llBYe BOW established the fact that Catholic was the ancient name 
 ef iieebunsh — that no other than the Roman Catholic was entitled to 
 <hBl BiOM— 4hat the Roman Catholic church is the Calholic church 
 if flllBgei, that in all ages it has had a head. For we may call the 
 pope by any name we please, the name is nothing. It is the station, 
 and the incumbent thereof, that it is important to ascertain, and the 
 BMNiday is not clearer than that both existed from the very origin of the 
 ehristiaB' raiigioo in Rome. ' 
 
 He argues against the supremacy of RooBe from the circumstance 
 that all the ecclesiastical words are Greek. 
 
 This is not at all surprising. There was not a particle of the Scrip- 
 tures originally written in Latin. Surely my friend must be hard pres- 
 sed for want of argumeBtf when he graaM at such a floating, improba- 
 ble, airy one aa that I Words are hut the signs of ideas. But he al^ 
 iiiBa that all iie eplstlea are written to Greek eitiea. Was then none 
 of these epistles wiittoB to Rome ! And wae Bmm a Groek city I 
 Ilfie not Paul snrpass himself— does he not reason most deeply 
 Ib UmI epistle ! Does he not style the Romans the " Called of Jesus 
 Christ ; the beloved of God !»' Does be not say, ist ch. v. 3, "I give 
 thanks to my God, through Jesus Christ, for you all, because your 
 faith is spoken of in the whole world" I Is it not m that epistle that 
 
 • A note to Waddiii)rtoa on thii rabjert, contains the rollowinf; remarSc " Igw 
 nsniis. Jnttifi, and IreMtiM, make 00 meotioD of it, but thej oocatiionaHy repeat 
 woida. costaiaad io it, which it hsld aa a proof thfet they kneir it by hearf 
 
 KOMAN CATHOUC RELIGION. 
 
 &$f 
 
 he eonfbonds the Jews, by pruvine that the ceremonial works of the 
 law avail them Bothing towards salvation, and the Gentiles by snew- 
 inff thai their shameful eicesses, notwithstanding the boasted lights 
 of philosophy, involved them equally with the rejected Jews in the 
 divine maledicuoo I Does he not devote eleven chapters of this epis- 
 tie to establish solidly the fundamental doctrines of the christian faithl 
 Finally, was not the church of Rome at least as ancient as the church 
 
 nfConnthl rm. *i 
 
 My friend spoke of transubstantiation, and purgatory, 1 hcse wu 
 come in their proper place in the debate. n .u 1:- 
 
 The conclusion of all his arguments is, that the Roman Catholw 
 choreh is a sect. This, I may venture to say, he has failed to prove. 
 Indeed he has done any thing but prove it ; for he has in fact strengthen- 
 ed my grounds of defence, for the more he has questioned my authort- 
 ties and arguments, the more signally have I established them. 
 
 My friend is correct in saying that to prove the church not Catholte, 
 Is to prove her neither holy nor apostolic. Had he acted on this hint, 
 and compressed his first three propositions into one, and condensatton 
 is all important in discussion, he would have greaUy abridged his own 
 labor, and saved this audience and myself much loss of time. 1 have 
 proved that the Roman Catholic church is now the only church 
 that is, as a church, (and not as a band of sailors or travellers without any 
 fixed habitation,) spread over the entire world ; that she only has been 
 so from the beginning, to the exclusion of every sect : that she alone 
 now bears, that she alone has ever home the name of Catholic ; that 
 no other denomination, no sect now has or ever had a right to it—and 
 that, as she is Catholic, she is also holy, she is apostolic, she is 
 divine, and consequently the only true church of Christ. By the 
 same strictness of investigation and of reasoning, by the same 
 •plendid evideme if fadn I will prove that she alone is united in 
 faith and goTcmment as the true church should be; for Christ 
 prayed for hia disciples the night before he suffered, "that they 
 may be ohb, aa thou FaUier in Heaven and 1 are one." Novr in what 
 church shall we seek for this unity ! We shall see that, later m the de- 
 bate, for notwithstanding Uie admission of my friend, we nnust plod our 
 weary romd, debating these propositions as he has penned them. But 
 the gentieman Rays, " the Roman Catholic church oisumea every thing. 
 No, my brethren, it is not so. When she can so validly establish her 
 claim, she does not, she has no occasion to atsumt any thing. She 
 proves all things, and holds fast to them because tiiey are good. In 
 the first place we prove from scripture that Chnst did establish an 
 earthly head to his church, and tiiat that head was the aposUe Peter 
 If not, why did he say to Peter. " TAoa art Pder, (a rock) and 1^ 
 thiiroek will I build my churchy and the gales of hell shall not prevail 
 against it" 1 Again, he did give him a preeminence over the other 
 apoedes. If not, why did he say to him, Luke, xxii. 32, " Simonj 
 Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you (in the plural, that is, an 
 the apostles) that he may sift you as wheat, but I have prayed for thee 
 that thy faith fail rwt, and thou bein^ converted, confirm ihv brethren * 
 He told Peter tiiat he would deny him— Uiat he would fall-jbiU he at 
 the same time cheered him by the divine assurance thai his fall should 
 not be for ever, that ho would arise from it, and that after his transitory 
 humiliation, no longer presumptuously confiding in his own sUength, 
 
imiATB Oir THS 
 
 lot placiner all hit tfift in Ood, ha ihould not only Mcorelj stand hlm^ 
 •elfiielbn botli J«wi mnd Gcntilei, bat likowinn ntrengthen mnd ftap- 
 mm his hwsthwi. For this Christ prayed for Peter, and the Fktkw 
 who also loves the church, heard and he will ever hear that prayer. 
 The faith of Peter hath never failed. When did he ever say this to 
 the other apostles 1 Peter is named first, when the apostles are enu- 
 BMitted ; he speaks first in the meeting of the apostles and brethrsn, 
 mild fives instructions to proceed to the choosing an apostle in the placa 
 of the Iseariot He is the first to reproach the Jews wiih deicide, and at 
 his preaching eight thousand are converted. He is sent by an angel 
 fironi heavent to the gentile Complins ; is released from prison by an 
 ■ifil ; confirms the Samaritans with St, John : healeth Ericas at Lyd- 
 da : raiseth Tahttha from death at Jopoa ; founds the first see among 
 ili9 fpitilet at Antioch. He speaks first in the council at Jerusalem, 
 ••man, Iwiifen, &c." Acts, xv. " and all the multitnde among whom 
 them iad been previously, much disputing, held their peace.** ** Then 
 after three years" says St. Paul, Gal. i. 13, **I went to Jerusalem to 
 Me Petei, and I tarried with him fifteen days." And ch. 2. v. 1. "Then 
 •fter foiiftitii years I went np* again to ierasalem, and I went up ac 
 mrdimg i& remtaiion, and amf erred with them the gospel which I preacli 
 imong the gentiles, lest perhaps I shonld run, or had mn in vain." 
 
 My friend savs that this assumption is followed by injurious effects, 
 s.iginus and political, inconsequence of the power wielded by a sinijfle 
 •Hdividual. This directly impeaches the foreknowledge and sanctity 
 of Christ. He established the power, and from its exercise within the 
 last limits, which he has prescribed, I maintain that no consequences 
 injurious either to religious or civil society can ever ensue. History 
 atiMts, and 1 have quoteil some striking instances from the records of 
 the Greek church, that the power of the popes was conservativb. Their 
 iiinence has ever been most favorable to the best interests of society 
 as well as of religion. They were the friends of peace, the patrons 
 of learninf, the umpires of angry princes and hostile nations on the 
 mm hand, while on the other they preserved pure and unconlaminated, 
 the holy deposit of the truth and proscribed error. Confined to its pro- 
 per sphere the influence of the head of the church must needs be salu- 
 tary I imit, if God was wise, be beneficial and far above reproach, 
 Tlili fower has been exerted for the welfare of society under every form 
 fflf fawmment, monarchical, aristoeratical, mixed, and republican. It 
 is the friend of all. It is inreconcileable with none, but of the tempo- 
 ral influence of the popes it will be time enough to speak in its proper 
 f liMw I will now proceed to show that the want of an ecclesiastical 
 ■aperior, whom all are bound to obey, lets in a deloge of evils, and 
 th«e irremediable^ on every religious body that wants a head. Reason, 
 alone shonM attest this truth, without further illustration. The sheep- 
 fold over which there has been placed no shepherd, will soon be the 
 prey of the wolf. The school in which no teacher presides, the soci- 
 ety which recognises no chief magistrate, will not fail to exhibit a 
 Meme of confusion, and must finally be dissolved. Let ns appeal to 
 experience. What has multiplied the (so called) christian sects to 
 •iieh an excess that neither the evil nor the remedy can be any longer 
 •ninred in Protestant communions! It is the principle contended for 
 by my opponent. Ii is this, as bishop Smith justly obsonres, more 
 prolific than the knife that divides the polypus, that daily multiplies 
 
 BOHAN CATHOLIC RKUOION. 
 
 50 
 
 divisions and produces new sects in chrisaanity. Hear a hte numbo 
 df the Baptist Banner, spwJdng of this conUoversy. It aays^- 
 
 " But to be ««riou8, we cannot believe that any good will lollow this debate. 
 But too much excitement in attempted to be gotten up against the Roman Ca- 
 tholic*— an excitement bordering on intolerance. Could we feel assured, either 
 from his course in this instance or from a retrospect of his past life, that Mr. 
 Campbell souffht this discussion solely to vindicate truth and expose error, and 
 oot dstentatiously to exhibit his tact in debate and to reap a pecuniary harvest 
 bv a new publication, we might feel less distrust of consequences, and should 
 bare some (aint hope that probably good would ensue; but rredalous, nay, stu- 
 Did must be the man. who in looking over the circuiuftances which ha^«/on- 
 lurred in originaliog this debate, can suppose that any religious or commendable 
 Motive prompted him to throw the gauntlet and provoke the controversy. In 
 lookimr over his past career, a love of truth and a desire to promote the pemcn 
 and prosperity of Zion. have not been the promine;.l traiU which have marked 
 hU cWrwrter ind rendered conspicuous hU course. [Bishop P was here called 
 io^rienMr. Campbell also here observed, that as he had read the worst part 
 of the article he might read the balance; and the point of order being examin- 
 ^, the bo^d decided that he was io order.]. We do not speak for other 
 nlaces. but in Kentucky he has caused more serious injury to the cause ot reli 
 fion. iiore disturbance, more wranding, collision, and division in »o«^>^*2* "' * 
 ?«w year^ than in our humble jucTgtnent, the Catho .cs can ever do. But we 
 Sbe^iS^ The debate will teke pface. The Campbell.tes will sip delicious wis- 
 S2« Sm the lips of their leader. A new impulse will be given to their now 
 drooping state. *They will again wage his hi^h claims to com«|tency to reform 
 l*™Xn and introduci the Nfillennium. AntTMr. Campbell will have the proud 
 SSion of rendering great good-to himself by tW «le of another \>ook J 
 This will be about all that will result from th^ discussion. j « lur- 
 
 I knew not until yesterday that the Baptists were opposed to Mr. 
 Campbell; but as necessarily as the stream flows from Us source, 
 do these disastrous effects which the Baptist Banner deprecates, flow 
 from the system which acknowledges no head in religious matters, 
 but allows every individual, qualified or disqualified, to give his own 
 crude fancies for the revelation of heaven. , ^ _ „ .. , ,. -,. 
 
 The Zion's Advocate of the 28th ult. and the Palladium of the 7 h 
 insu give similar testimony against the l^^^^'^^^^'f^f^^y ^"^"^ 
 I spare him the reading. You can now judge ^^ *»^f^^!?^\^yj^.;™*^^^ 
 his are biliemess and confusion, those of the Catholics, admittuig a 
 sipr^^macy in the church, are order, unity and peace. H\X " cT 
 sarily creates enmities and endless altercations m the church; the Ca- 
 Solic rule cuts them up by the very roots, and not only arrests their 
 irrowth, but renders their very existence impossible. 
 ^ Mr. Campbell said that the Roman Catholic church was an ajws- 
 tacy from /^ true Church, and that this e^«"^ «« »7?^?"^ *" *^^^^ 
 mU of the worid, took place precisely on the 16 h of July 10^' ^»'«« 
 she separated from the *Greek church. It is a pity, as he intendedu> 
 be so particular, that he did not tell us whether n was aid ^^y^^^^' 
 But perceiving the terrible eff-ect of this admission, upon h s arp^- 
 ment, he retraces his steps, and taking us all aback Jie fay« \hat the 
 Greek church was not after all the true church ^f Christ, and thus he 
 has left us as much in the dark as ever. Remember I told htm how 
 much it had puzzled the world and would puzzle him to settle that 
 poS I ask'him again then, if the Roman Catho ic church apostatiz- 
 £d from the church of Christ at the period in 4«estion, and the Greek 
 church, from which she separated, was as corrupt as nereelt, where 
 was, at tharUme, the true church 1 God's covenant with her Ezech 
 xxxWi. 62, was an everlasting covenant of peace a co^^"^ ^;^'^gV a^ 
 of day and night, to last for all generaUons, .Ire. xxxui. 20, 21, al- 
 
DEBATX Oil THS 
 
 waft viiiUtt Ys* It* 3* X Mtchere r?. 1. 3. tprmd lar and near, and 
 iMoliiiif UMiiy Dfttiinity ft. zi. 8. Ban. zi. 35. 44. Malacb. i. 11. 
 Tlie pillar and the |[roiml of troth, nnfmilin^; the gat€s of hell were 
 never to prevail apinst her. If all these glorious prophecies were not 
 fulfilled in the Roman Catholic church, in what other church weie they 
 Htlfilled ! When will my friend answer me ? 
 
 Mr. ۥ oiiaenres that the Roman Catholic church or the see of Peter, 
 assimes to be the representative of Christ in ill his power, eccleniasti* 
 cal and political, and that as Christ wis supreme head over all the 
 cntli, temporal and spiritual, so was Peter, and so are his successors. 
 
 I have already shewn that this it no part or parcel of the Catholic 
 doctrine. The po^*s power is spiritual, his kingdom like that of 
 Christ, is not of this world. He has not a solitarr inch of ground 
 over which to exereise temporal authority in any temtory on earth, be- 
 yond the narrow limits of the papal states; and the authority with 
 wuch he is there invested rather originated in the people's preference 
 of the bishop's crosier to the kingly sceptre, than in any views he could 
 ilmtiilf, have cherished of worldly aggrandizement. Hear Gibbon, in. 
 fol. p. t30., Phil. 1830. **The want of laws could only be supplied 
 by the influence of religion, and their foreign and domestic counsels 
 were moderated by the authority of the bishop. His alms, his ser- 
 mons, his eorrespofldence with the king and prelates of the west, his 
 leeent services, their gratitude, an oath, accustomed the Romans to 
 Cfmider him as the first magistrate. The christian humility of the 
 ]^ipm was not offended by the name of ilbintfiua or lord, and their fao« 
 and inscription is still apparent on the most ancient coins. Their tem- 
 poral dominion is now confirmed by the reverence of a thousand years ; 
 and their noblest title is the free choice of a people, whom they had 
 redeemed from slavery.** 
 
 I had a great deal of other ground to go over on this point, but my 
 tine is limited ; and I will now proceed to review one of the most 
 dreadful char||es ever made against a pope of Rome, and to show thai 
 it in totally without foundation. 
 
 Jf I understood Mr. C. aright, he asserted, that it was the pope Gre> 
 gory consecrated Phocas the centurion king, in the church of St. John 
 the Baptist in Constantinople, and that he did so, contrary to every law 
 of God, or man, for the base, the iniquitous purchase of the title of pope. 
 
 (Mr. Campbell reasserted the charge.) 
 
 Now I aver that the charge is unfounded and false. I mean no dis- 
 lesfiect to Mr. C. He would not intentionally deceive this assembly 
 or wilfully sustain by calumny an otherwise hopeless cause. But 
 leaving motives to their proper judge, I shall now prove to this audi 
 enee that he has stated what is not true, and allied odious charges 
 ipaiDst the pope which he cannot substantiate. On his own reputa 
 tion for aoeuracT and his knowledge of history let the penalty for evoi 
 rest, of having been this day detected before so many of his fellow 
 citizens, egregiously at fault in both.'Hormisdas king of Persia, indig 
 nant at the defeat of his ^^neral Varamus (see Natalis Alex. svc. sext 
 Art r. p. 2116,1 sends him a petticoat in derision. The war is renew 
 od i Mauridnt loses liOOO troops, taken prisoners by the Chaean : ho 
 laHtses to release them by paying the humble pitting set as a price on 
 the head of each by the victor ; they are butchered in cold blood ; his 
 people, shocked at his avarice and cruelty revolt^Mauritius abdicates-^ 
 
 ltOMA:N CATHOLIC KEMCION. 
 
 it 
 
 die people choose the centurion, Phocas, to reign over tfieiii in liis 
 stead ; thepoMarth tf. Chmtmdimiple emm«f^ >hoess king.m the 
 chureh of sT John the BapUst, in C. P. The entire story is thus »- 
 
 "The"'lroop« of Maurice might listen to the voice of a victorious leader, Uiey 
 d..dainedTe^dmonUion.of statesmen and.«>phUtj..a^^ 
 
 l!dict which deducted from their pay the pnce of their arro« and clothing, thev 
 ^ecrTted tht^^^^^ o °a pr.nce FasUlblS of the dangers -^JjaU^-^^^^^^^'.^^ 
 he bad ewaped: and evefy age must condemn the mhumanity 0'".«?^f"ce of. 
 prince, who V the trifiinr iunnom of «« thousand P'^*^? ^^^^i^'^'S^^ 
 ?ented the o»i.«:«^ of 1I.OOO prisoner. »» the hand. <rf tke Ch^«. J^^^g^ 
 fervor of indignation, an order was signified to the •^X'^A^XJ^^^'nu^ 
 They should .^re the magazine, of the province, and «»^tablish their w,n^^^^^ 
 ter. IP the hoiSle count^ of the Avars. The mearare of their gn^^jnf** ™ 
 foU- they pfonounced%anrice unworthy to reign, expelled or Saugbtered hi. 
 SJlhlttlShlrent., and, under the commanaofPhoca,,a simple ce 
 
 •d by hasty raarche. to the neighborhood of Constantmople. „,. „.,^,, .t,_ 
 
 »• the rigid and parsimoniou. virtues of Maurice had Ion- since alienated the 
 hearts of hf. subject. ; and a vile plebeian who representedliis jo^ntenance ^d 
 apparel, was sealed on an ass. andfpursued b^ the m.precat.ons of ^^ multitude.* 
 flU emperor suspected the populkrity of CJermanus with the -o'd'ers and ciU- 
 
 .ens; hileared, L threaten^ but he delayed to •^I'LV/^tS/wam we«^^^ 
 the imctuary of the church; the people ro.e in hw defence, the wall, were at 
 Wrted by the guards, and the lawlesl city was abandoned to the flames and ra 
 p'mfof nocturnal tumult. In a small bark the unfortunate M^""' 7*\^"J^»^? 
 Td nine children, e^ped to the Asiatic shore ; but the science of the wind 
 compelled him to lan/at the church of St. Antoninus, near Chakedon,^^^ 
 wheSce he desoatched Theodosius. hi. eldest son. to imolore ^e &ratitude^ 
 friendship of the Persian monarch. For himself, be refused to Oy. "»» body 
 ™ tortured with Kiatic pains, his mind was enfeebled bv superstition; he p*. 
 ™ty awaited the event of the revolution, and addressecf a fervent and publ^ 
 pw« t^the Almighty, that the punishment of his sin. might be inflicted in h« 
 ^U rather thanfn i fiiture life. After the abdication of Maurice, the t^ 
 factions disputed the choice of an emperor; but the favorite 01 the blues, was re- 
 wS^by tfe jealousy of their antagonist., and Germanus himself was hurried 
 llong b/ the ciowds. who rushed to the H^ce of Hebdomen. seven miles from 
 Jhec^ity! to adore the majerty of Phocas. the centurion. A modest wish of re- 
 ; gn^g he purple to the-'rani and merit of Germanus was ojposed by J« fesolu- 
 tiSn. more Sbst^nate, and equally sincere : the ^nate ^nddergy obeyed th^i 
 .ummon.,and as soon t^nihepatrirch wa* asBura "Z^" ^'I'^^^f.'/yh^^' 
 gterated the successful usurper in the church of St. John the Baptist. G'bbon, 
 JiX Amer. Edit, of the HisCof the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Page 
 
 *1rh^1i W^n'SJt Gregory did not set the part assigned him Vy 
 mv friend, and that this accusation turns out to be, like a thousand 
 others, taken up at second hand, without examination 0^««jpician of 
 fttlsehiod or incorrectness, against the pope, a "^^re fabrication wit^ 
 out .Tadow of foundation in history 1 What will th« enlightened 
 audience now say? What apology is my fnmd prepared to m^ 
 for iTving unconiiously led them into error? This case may illustrate 
 Si^ Others that are similar, and I beg it may not be forgotten. 
 Kimbleon, Papin, &e. are pamlleh, the pontiff could not resist the 
 ^Ulor ai entL people; and it would only perpetuate kwless viok 
 knee and disorder to ^contest a ckim to the throne, to which no oue 
 was able to support his rival pretensions. T he pope .seeing that the 
 
 • T« tluilr d.mor. aaainst Maurice, the people of Con.tantlnople branded bini 
 wUh"lhi"i:.mt orMrSonite or Mar.ioni.t; J^.^^^-J. /-J^fn^S^ t** ^^ 
 cit ouJl iijul Aproaih! or had the emperor really Usteaed to ««ne otmux. 
 teacher of tboM ancieut Gnostics t 
 
DKBATS OH TUX 
 
 pMpk, who had <he ri^t, selected themselres t new rofer, Hie i 
 true lover of peaoeaiMl frieiid of established order, cooffratolated Phocaa 
 IMI Ua election, and osed the language of scripture, be it observed, in 
 hit letter, because anarchy was at an end, and an orthodox and gener- 
 ous prince substituted on the throne of C. P, for a tyrant, a miser, and 
 a suspected Marcionite heretic. Mauritius may have died penitent^ 
 but he reigned without love for his subjects. 
 
 We were spoken to of the president of the U. S. He has the saino 
 fower and authority as Washington had while the constitution of the 
 Mintry endures. And as long as the constitution of the church en- 
 iniw, tlie successors of Peter have the authority of Peter. If there 
 waa ever to eome a time, when the true church was to fail, Jesus 
 Christ was bound by his wisdom and love to foretell IL If it was his 
 intention to forsake the church, and if the power and authorities of all 
 the regularly constituted orders were to fail, he never should have 
 given It the promise of perpetual endurance, and the precise period, and 
 all the differeot circumstances of its defection should have been more 
 dearly and emphatically revealed, than any other event in the scrip- 
 taie. It Is needless to add that such defection is not foretold ; but on 
 tlM contrary it is repeatedly declared by the Son of God. that his 
 0hnreh ahoold stand forever, that his Holy Spirit should abide with it 
 all daya, that the gates of Hell should not prevail against it. What la 
 the meaning of the words "the gates of Hell shall not prevail against 
 Itl** In the east, laws were enacted, justice administered, and the 
 aages and people assembled for deliberation at the gates of the cities. 
 Hence the expression denotes, wisdom, subtlety, malice. Again, 
 when a city was Invaded by a hostile army, the hottest (ightinor was 
 around its gates. In them and around them, were all the energies of 
 the conflicting hosts put forth — and on the issue of the battle was sua- 
 ]iended a nation's weal or woe. Thus by the gates of Hell are clearly 
 meant, all the craft and power of Hell, the malice of heresy and er- 
 ror, the force and violence of peraecution. All these shall rage around 
 the church in vain, for Christ is In the citadel, and his Holy Spirit is the 
 aentlnel that guards Its outposts and defences from being overthrown 
 iiy error. But he says that the apostles had all power given to them 
 — grant it — ^but what was the nature of that power ? what was its ex- 
 iHit 1 It was a power to teach all nations. The weapon of their war- 
 ftte was not carnal but B|ilrlti«al ; ** for our wrestling,*' says St. Paul, 
 Bphes. VI. 12. ^ia not against flesh and blood, but against principal itiea 
 and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the 
 tpirlts of wickedness in the high places.** *« Behold," says Christ, " I 
 •end yon as laraba in the midst of wolves. Carry not with yon scrip 
 ■or staflT, &c. Be not solicitous for the morrow, what you shall eat, or 
 wherewithal you shall be clothed. Behold the lilies of the fleld, they 
 ■ow not, neither do they spin — and yet your Heavenly Father clotheth 
 them — careth for them — how much more ye, &c.** By patience they 
 were to run towards the fight proposed to them, and by patience they tri- 
 Wiinhed over their persecutors. The pope, should occasion require, 
 will show himself the faithful imitator of these heroic models. Were 
 he stript to-morrow of all external, temporal power whatever, and a 
 poor wanderer among the mountains of the moon in Abyssinia, he 
 would have no less power, and would be, for aught I know, no less 
 ie<tpected| thau he is at present. His chief authority is, thank God, 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC BELIOION. 
 
 m 
 
 •Qch 89 this world can neither give nor take away. It was given for 
 the salvation of the people of God, and as lon^ as there is a soul to be 
 ■aved, a sheep to be brought back to the fold, or a spiritual conquest 
 achieved for the glory of Christ, and the praise of his grace, so long 
 •hall that power survive ; when all else decays, itself, amidst vicissi- 
 tudes unchanged, shall flourish in immortal youth. 
 
 For our sakes, in this distant province of creation, and at this late age, 
 as well aa for those who saw the Word made flesh conversing among 
 men, was this commission given and this authority conferred. Our 
 souls were no less dear to Christ than were those of the first be- 
 lievers of glad tidings — ^and Cincinnati was the rival of Jerusalem In 
 the Saviors love ! With him there was no exception of persons — 
 neither past nor future. He provided for every casualty which he 
 foreknew should happen in the lapse of ages — he anticipated every 
 favorable or adverse circumstance that should affect the condition of 
 his church, and with diylne wisdom he adapted its constitutions to the 
 peculiar exigencies of every age and nation and individual believer, 
 until we reach "the consummation of the world." He sent his apos- 
 tles with power to ordain faithful men, who should in their turn be fit 
 to teach others. This is the charge that St. Paul repeated to Titus, 
 and thus has the succession of apostolic teachers been continued from 
 nation to nation, and from age to age, the church gaining in one region 
 of the earth what she had lost in anotlier, renewing her youth like the 
 eagles, increasing her members, and daily transmitting to t:he bright 
 realms of heavenly glory innumerable multitudes of her children of 
 every clime and tongue, and peculiarity of social government or manners. 
 
 The apostles exercised various functions — I admit iL But they 
 substituted the deacons to wait on tables, and distribute the alms, so 
 do their successors ; Christ gave them powers adequate to every 
 emergency. 
 
 It has been wrongly asserted, that Moses had no successor. Joshua 
 was, in one important branch, his successor, for it devolved on hiin to 
 lead the people into the land of promise, and without this consummation, 
 the ministry of Moses would have been in vain ; and tliere are Joshuas 
 now whose ofhce it is to lead the people to their spiritual Canaan— 
 and as God obeyed the voice of Joshua, in commanding the sun to 
 •taod still, so he now obeys the voice of his priests making snppli- 
 eation for his people. Here is an obvious analogy between the old 
 tnd the new covenants. My friend argues that, because Moses had 
 no successor, Peter could have none, and the apostles none; but it la 
 clear that Moses had a successor. All that Moses accomplished would 
 have been incomplete without a succession of ministry to carry on the 
 work of God in favor of his people, Israel. This, Eusebius beauti- 
 fully establishes, p. 46. So by thb same analogy, it is necessary that 
 the succession of an apostolic priesthood should he continued for the car- 
 ry ing on of the christian dispensation, and be transmitted down from gen- 
 eration of spiritual guides to generation, until the^ shall have conducted 
 all the people of God to the Uue land of promise, where I trust we shall 
 all meet, and cease to dispute, as we now do, like little children, at 
 the imminent risk of neglecting the weightier points of the law. For 
 myself, I am heartily sick of such interminable contention. Here 
 would I stop and suffer the matter to end without another word, if the 
 •ad necessity was not imposed upon me of defending the impugned 
 
t'll! 
 if' 
 
 ..lii; 
 
 .HI'.*'" :l 
 
 ■I 
 
 ii WmmATU oil TBI 
 
 liMta nf my cliiiTch, and tlTiDg with my Tolce tlie testimimy wlilcli, 
 with the dmne tMifltance, I tliiMild not hedtate to smI with my Mood, 
 to the truthn of the Romin Catholic (kith. From the discham of this 
 duty, no tine believer, still more no minister of God, should shrink ; 
 aiM it la worthy of notice thst, with all the lo^e and homil'ty of St. 
 Paul, he shoald hare warned his disciple Timothy, and still more the 
 biiy rfiie fiiithfbl, against associating with "heretics." I never nse 
 Ihia iford, as it is now so harshly anderstood, to designate those who 
 diiiir from me in religion ; but I know not how mnj human being is to 
 dMermine without the aid of a competent trihunal, who are heretics, 
 'tt iii who ate not; for we cannot look into the heart. 
 
 1 am told that an English divine was accustomed humorously to de- 
 ine theHilBffmsin this way. " Orthodoiy is my doiy and heterodoxy 
 Is yours.** But seriously, what being on earth ean look into the secrets 
 of the heart! Who was to determine when heresv occurred ! That 
 it existed in the early days of the church none can doubt. The apostles 
 denounced it. They delivered its authors to Satan (of whom St. Paul 
 ■ays, are Hymeneusand Alexander whom I have delivered to Satan, that 
 they may learn not to blasfiheme. 1st Tim. 1. SO.) The apostles did 
 ■ot suffer theif disciples to make this discrimination for themselves, in 
 deiance of the express word of Ood. They did not allow every man 
 to assert the ri^ht of private judgment on scripture, which they taught 
 was of no "private interpretation.** S Peter, 1. 20. The very form 
 **«iiMlenfafMitng lAtt /r«l** exceedingly strengthens the text. Divisions 
 wit ever exist. They are, unfortunately, as nalural to depraved man, 
 at viee ; and but little, if at all less fatal. " There were ako faim 
 frapld!i mmng Ike pettpk," says St. Peter, 8d Ep. xi, 1, even m 
 Mere akaU be ammg fow h^ng kmehert^ who ekall bring in §eei§ tf 
 mrHiimH and again v. 10 and If, « HMy /wir noi h bring in eed^ 
 blaspheming those things that they know not, promising their disciples 
 llbirtf, whereas they themselves are the slaves of corruption.'* T^ese 
 are f^^ntains without water, clouds tossed with whirlwinds, or ss St. 
 Jnde says, v. 13, ^* raging waves of the sea, foaming out of their 
 own confusion, wandering stars to whom the storm of daricness is re- 
 served for ever.** Who would trust his safety in a perilous voyage 
 to an unskilful pilot I Who would risk the horrors of the deep without 
 ^Mirt or compass I Has God abandoned his children sc far as to leave 
 them a prey to every innovator, every wolf in sheep*s clothing! Is 
 there no ark of safety for man, while the waters of error overspread 
 the ear<hl Yes, my friends, there is. It la the church. Thst ark 
 alone can save the worid. " Whosoever/* says St. John, 3d Ep. 9, 
 10, "rovolteth and continueth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not 
 God. If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive 
 him not into the house, nor say to him, • God speed you.* For he that 
 tayeth •God speed you,* comraunicateth with his wicked works.** 
 This admonition, we understand to he directed against false religions 
 ltd Ihlse teachera. It does not forbid charity, which wo owe to all 
 wen, and particulariy the erring; for whom, we are taught it to he our 
 doty to pray, that they may happily come to the knowledge of 
 tinth. 
 
 I confess that, for my part, I cannot practise this doctrine literally, 
 nor refuse to salute one who differs from me in faith. I retain my 
 «WD convictions and eschew his errors. The apostles did differently, 
 
 10MA.N CATHOLIC RBLIOION. 
 
 and who will presume to say, they were not more enlightened than we I 
 When St. John met Cerinthus (who denied the divimty of Christ) in 
 the baths of Ephesus, he ran out saying that he was afraid the baths 
 would fall upon him. And when his disciple St. Polycarp met Mar- 
 cion, in the streete of Rome, he refused to salute him. " Do you not 
 know me !'* said Marcion. " 1 do know you," replied Polycarp, to be 
 the oldest son of the Devil.'* This shows the dread of religious inno- 
 vators entertained hy the apostles of Christ and by their disciples, the 
 dangerous result of heresy.— [Time expired.] 
 
 Half-fad II o'doek, A, M. 
 Mr. Campbell rises— 
 
 I am sorry that I cannot sympathize with the gentleman in his em- 
 barrassmen^ occasioned, as he alleges, in being obliged to respond 
 promptly to objections to his doctnnes, which, he says, he cannot anU- 
 iipate. ^Sofaras he is placed in the Predicament of a respondent to 
 my allegations, he has no one to blame buthiniself. When arrang- 
 inff the preliminaries as to the mode in which ^hw discussion was to 
 be conducted, the gentleman perseverinffly insisted that I should lead 
 tlie way, commencing every session ; and that, whether the proposiUon 
 were affirmative or negauve, he must always respond. It was a fine 
 nua nan with him, that he should always have the last word. I 
 lould, as an apology for giving him such an advantage, »"fo™ ?»y »"- 
 dience, that on no other condition would he consent to meet me. It, how- 
 ever, he sincerely dislikes the arrangement, I am willing to alter it, 
 and change places with him to-morrow. The affirmative, should, m 
 all right, and by universal usage, open, and the respondent follow, in 
 
 *I regard this discussion, my friends, as a very serious and importent 
 affair, involving in it the very best interests of the whole community. 
 I do not appear^here to speak for myself alone in behalf of Protestant- 
 ism, or to you alone. I speak for my contemporaries, and for the great 
 omie of truth ; and I am glad for their sake that this debate is imme- 
 diately to go to record. I must, therefore, give as connected a form 
 as circumstances will permit to my argument. For this reason, I 
 passed over some things in the speech of yesterday that I ni'ght fimsh 
 my first argument this morning. I unfortunately, however, forgot to 
 notice them before 1 commenced my second proposition. 
 
 I will now recapitulate.— . tmru^,^ w«>a i\>» 
 
 The quesUon was asked me, yesterday evening, "Where was the 
 true church before the time of the Greek schism 1'* I ot>«f^«^';J" 
 morning, in answer, that my having shown the Greek church to be the 
 •cnior, or the original of the Roman, did not necessarily involve the 
 idea thai the Greek ehureh wa» at the time if eeparaitonthe trueVathohc 
 dmrch. To this answer the gentleman has not replied ; but yet jeiter- 
 ates the question. His assumption of a church of nations with a poli- 
 tical hearf, having always existed, so confounds him that ^^^ Jk! 
 a church without a pope, or a national establishment. I miffht ask, 
 in reolv where was the church before the days of Coustantine T 
 
 7e carhowever, show that from the eartiest times there has ex- 
 isted a people whom no man can remember, that have earnestly and 
 consiste'Ttl? c^^^ for the true faiOi once «>f -/^f^^^^^^ 
 If he requires me to put my finger on the page of history on which » 
 
 r3 ^ 
 
AH 
 
 ■>i'n A w nw » w tM M 
 UBiIATa Un THJi 
 
 iMcrilied the commeneemmit of the degeneracy of the Roman diocese 
 Unmi the true failh, I will turn hack to aboat the year of our Lord 250. 
 Then the controrersy betm*een Gomeliua and Novatian, about the 
 IMifiMie of Rome, embraced the points at issue, which separated the 
 litfi ehurch from that which was then griei onsly contaminated with 
 iHiir and Immorality. It was, indeed, a controYersy about the pority 
 Iff ccnMlinion and discipline, rather than about articles of doctrine. 
 And it is worthy of remark, that such was the principal issue made at 
 that time, althouGrh the doctrine of Christianity will not lonir continue 
 pure in a degenemte community. ^ 
 
 I hare here, before me, Eusebins, the oldest of ecclesiastical histo- 
 rians, who informs us that Novatus and his party were called 
 Ctdkari or FuriUtm, And, although he appears greatly incensed a» 
 gainst Novatus and his party, he can record no evil against them ex- 
 cept their ** unekaritabiefie$»,'** in refusing to commune with those of 
 Immoral and doubtful character. 
 
 The fentieman hat ^iven yon Att definition of orthodoxy and hete- 
 rodoxy : mtf definition is— the itrong party is the orthodox, and the 
 weak party is the heterodox, 
 
 1 bold In my hand one of the latest and best historians — Wadding 
 ton. My learned opponent has already introduced him to your ao- 
 
 Juaintance. He is a Fellow of Trinity college, Cambridge, and 
 'iehendary of Ferrinff, in the cathedral church of Chichester. The 
 iccouni he gives of these reformers is sustained by Jones and ottier 
 ecclesiastical historians. I prefer Waddington for his brevity and 
 ptivpicuity. He says : 
 
 ** We may coiwlude with some notic« of the Mct of th* Nciv^atkos who were 
 itignnlited st the time both as schismattca and heretics; but who may perbaps 
 be more properly considered us the earliest body of ecclesiastical retormert 
 They arose at Rome about the vear 250, A. D. and subsisted until the fifth ceo 
 Imew thnmihowt every part of Christendom. Novatian, a presbyter of Rome wai 
 • imh of ^at tmleBtsSnd learning, and of character so austere, that he nas uo. 
 willing, under any circumstances of contrition, to re-aduiit those who had beev 
 once separated from the communion of the church. And this severity he would 
 have eitended not only to those who bad fallen by deliberate transsression, but 
 even to inch m had mmde a forced compromise of their &lth nnder the terrors uf 
 
 Crsecution. fie considered the christian church as a socletv, where virtue and 
 MCence reigned univenally, and refused any longer to aclinowledce as mem- 
 lieta of it, those who had once degenerated into unrighteousness. This endea- 
 vor to revive the spotless moral purity of the primitive faith was found inconsis* 
 lent with the corruptions even of that early age; it was regarded with suspicion 
 hv the leading prelates, as a vain and visionary scheme; and those rigid princi- 
 plet which had characterked and sanctified the church in the first century, were 
 abandoned to the prolSeiaton of schismatic sectaries in the third.** 
 
 This ■miidi i little like Protestantism. Our author proceeds : 
 **Fiom a nvlew of what baa been written on this subject, some truths may be 
 derived of considerable historical importance; the following are among them :— 
 I. In the midst of perpetual disaent and occasional controversy, a steady and dis- 
 tinguishable line, both in doctrine and practice, was maintamed by the early 
 ehurch, and its efforts against those, whom it called heretics, were tealons and 
 peiaeveriact and for the moat part consistent. Its contests were fought with the 
 *aifOrdof Im ioirit,* with the amis of reason anil eloquence; and as they were 
 always nnalleMied by personal oppression, so were they most effectually success- 
 ful — sneetMil, not in estabrnhin^a nominal unity, nor silencing the expression 
 ol private opinion, but in maintaining the purity of the faith, in preserving the 
 ■llachment of the great majority of tie behevers, and in contigning, either to im- 
 . wadial ia dlspapite, or early neglect, all the uiijcriptural doctrines which were 
 ocemte^y amjed against it. 
 
 BOMAN CATHOUC MELIGIOff. 
 
 Other troths are here stated, as consequent from the premises. 1 
 will however for the satisfaction of my Episcopalian friends read what 
 follows, in this connection on church government. 
 
 ••There fias yet no dissent on the subject of church government. It was uni- 
 ▼ersally and undisputably Epiteopal ; even the reformer Noyatian, after hM «- 
 nubbn from the cfcurch, Msomed the direction of his own ng.d sect omler the t^ 
 fie of bishop; and if any dissatisfaction had existed as to the established method 
 of directrng^lhrchurch^it would certainly have ^i-plajed .tse f on the cK:c«jon 
 of a schism, which entirt iy respected matters of practice and disciplme. Hut. 
 
 These furitans or reformers spread all over the world, and contim- 
 ed to oppose the pretensions of those who, from being the major par- 
 ty, claimc-d to be the Catholic or only church. They continued under 
 the name of Novalians for more than two centuries ; but finally were 
 merged in the Donatists, who, indeed, are the same people under ano- 
 ther name. These Donatists were a very large and prosperous wimmii. 
 nity. We read of 379 Donatist bishops in one Afncan conncU. Ut 
 these Donatists the same historian deposes: „r *„»k 
 
 -The Donatists have never been charged with the slightert shpwof trutH 
 with any error of doctrine, or any defect in church governiuent ordincij^Xme^or 
 Tny depravity of moral practice ; th.y aerecd m ^rZ^^^f^l V^JZ^^^. 
 iaries, except ooe-they did not acknowledge as legitimate the ministiy of the 
 African chureh. but coniidered their o«n body to be the true, uncornipted, uni- 
 
 Mafkit. The Donatists considered «*«> own body to he ike true^ 
 meorrupted, umverml ekurek! "It is quite clear," our author pfo- 
 
 « It is qnite clear, that they pushed their schism to veiy great extremities, even 
 
 to that of rejecting the coiimunion of »»^ T^« ''«'«/° .^''^^^^Prj^ff Jr.* 
 church which^ they called fiilse ; but this was the extent of therr spiritual offence, 
 
 even from the assertions of tlieir enemies." fVad. Hut, p. lb*. 
 
 The Donatists, in some two centuries, were amalgamated with ine 
 
 Faulicians. They, too, were called Puritans. Jones, who has been at 
 
 the greatest pains to give their history, gives the following account of 
 
 #t|A|V| • 
 
 •♦ About the year 660. a new sect arose in the east, under the name of PAUU- 
 CUNS, which is justly entitled to our attention. 
 
 " In Mananalil an obscure town in thevicini^of Somosata, a !H*"on of the 
 name of Constantine entertained at his house a deacon, who hjvmg beena pris- 
 oner among the Mahometans, was returning from Syria. ;?^t»*'»«^>^j'«2^*l*» 
 carried awty captive. From this passing stranger Constantme received the pre- 
 cions gift of the New Testament in its original language which even at this car- 
 rirfod. was w» concealed from the vulpr, that Peter S.culus. to whom we owe 
 moWourinformation on the history oPthe Pan Icians. te Is us the f "t ^c™?*" 
 of a Catholic, when he was advised to read the bible was. "it is no lawful for u. 
 pro&ne persons to read those sacred writings, but for the priests onlv. Indeed. 
 Ee gross Ignorance whichpervaded Europe at that time, rendered the generali^r 
 cf tie people incapable of^readin^ that or any other book ; but «^««^.*>,f J^Jj 
 laity wfto could read, were dissua j^d bv their religious guides from meddling wrth 
 the Bible. Constantine however, made the best use ofthe deacon s present-be 
 studied the New Testament with unwearied assiduity-and "Of^ P*^'''"^'''*^ If* 
 writings of the apostle Pinl from which he at length endeavored to deduce a system 
 of do?trinc anJworship. • He investigated the creed of primitive Christianity, 
 •ays Gibbon, •und whatever might be tl^ success, a Protestant reader '^'{J W»»'«* 
 tbi spirit of the enquiry.' The%nowledge to which Constantme ^'^^^f »f ™'.»»: 
 der the divine blessing enabled to attain. Eegladly communicated to o}**.*" "O'JJJ 
 him and a christian church was collected. In a l.ttle time, »«^*,'^ •°^»\.^""^« 
 Lse among them qualified fortheworkof the nunistry; and several otb^^^^ 
 «s were cofiected throughout Armenia and Capoaaocia. It apF«"fr^^ 
 wkole of their history, to have been a leadmg ol-«ct with Constantme and hu 
 
 pi 
 
ef» 
 
 BaiAm oil' TB'H 
 
 BOXAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 69 
 
 
 bntlhMB to rr stow is 6r utiMWiible flie profession of christianitj to all hi prm- 
 iUf • ■iMiilicitv." Jmm* MmL CkriOim ekh, p. 239. 
 
 AfBiii : 
 
 •^Tlic Paulkian teachers/' mjt Gibbon, **were distin^ished only by ihmr 
 aeriiititnl aaniea, by the modest title of their felluw pil^iiut ; bj the austerity 
 of lleir lives, their leal and Inowledfe, and the credit of some extraordinary 
 fill of the Holy Spirit But they were incapable of desirlnr, or at least, of ob- 
 taiaifig tlie wealth and honors of the Catholic prelacy. Such aati<-christian prido 
 Cbey stronf ly censured." — Id, ib. y. 240. 
 
 I might read almost to the same effect from Waddington and D« 
 Pin. True they are called heretiet by thdse who call themselves C»- 
 Ihoiic ami us heietics ; but what does this prove ! 
 
 Until tlifi appearance of the Waldenses and Albigenses, these Pro 
 
 •ttonts continued to oppose the church of nations in the east, and in 
 
 lliewest, until atone time they claimed the title of Catholic. We 
 
 lead of hundreds of bishops attending the different councils in which 
 
 tbey met to oppose the violent assaults of their enemies. 
 
 It Is sometimes difficult to say which were the more numerous party, 
 llifMe in communion with the Cathari, or Puritans, sometimes called 
 Viovatians, sometimes Donatists, sometimes Paulicians, sometimes 
 WiMwses; but always, in fact, Protestants. 
 
 The spirit of true religion seems to have fled from Rome from tfao 
 first anpearance of the Novatians. The first schism at Rome acknow 
 Mged and recorded by the Roman Catholic historians, is that which 
 occurred at the election of Cornelius over Novatns. Hence Novatos 
 is called the first anti-pope. Du Pin and Barronius amply testify of 
 the violence by which St. Peter's chair was often filled with a vicai 
 aller this schism. In the election of Damasus many were killed in the 
 churches of Rome. One hundred and thirty four persons, beaten 
 to death by clubs, were carried out of a single house at this election. 
 Hid Ih® Holy Spirit any thing to do in thus filling the chair of St. P©- 
 ter with a vicar of Christ I Is the church which permits such things 
 and which has bf en sustained by such means, the true church of God ? 
 Is the person thus elected, the supremo head of Christ's church— 
 the proper vicar of Christ! ! May we not then say that the spirit of 
 God on that day, had departed from Romel And may we not add, 
 from the documents before us, that if there be any truth in history, 
 we have found a succession of witnesses for the ancient faith against 
 Rome, from the days of the first schism till the present hour 1 
 
 There is but another point in the speech of my opponent, to which I 
 will now respond. I called on him to explain the diflferencc between 
 the claim of the title of pope, or universal fatlier, (as St. Gregory op- 
 posed it,) and the same claim as now maintained by the head of the 
 chuich. The name pope, indeed, has in modem times, much changed 
 its meaning; for once it was applied to all bishops, and is now ap- 
 plied to every priest in the Greek church. But when has the title 
 ••universal father," been changed! He alluded, in reply, to the 
 sehtsra between the Greek church and the Roman church. The Greek 
 cinfch, it seems, would not allow that the ordinances of religion with- 
 out their sanction, were validly administered. Is not that the very 
 plea of Rome at this hour! Does she not say, that the bishops and 
 clergy of the English church are all laymen, because that church se- 
 parated from the Roman church ; and that all the authority she had 
 If on hei has been since revoked by the authority that gave it I How 
 
 oAen arc we told that the pope has the power of resuming all anthority 
 given him — that he can create, and afterwards destroy 1 that whatever 
 eeclesiastical power he gives, he can take away ; and that therefore 
 all heretics excommunicated and anathematized have no power left to 
 perform the ordinances of religion! The ground upon which the gen- 
 tleman stands as to his defence of the authority of the pope, is precise- 
 ly the ground of Gregory's opposition to the title, as claimed by Boni- 
 ^ce III. if I can understand his attempt to explain it. 
 
 But I must advert, before I sit down, to a single point on which I 
 touched in my speech of this morning, viz. that of the councils. Tlie ' 
 gentleman asks, did not Sylvester the pope preside in the first general 
 council by his legate ! I affirm that he cannot show documents to 
 prove that fact.— Nay, let him show, if he can, that the first seven 
 councils were called by the bishops of Rome, or thai his legates were 
 there to preside. 
 
 What would the gentleman prove by the fact, if it be a fact, that a 
 Roman bishop presided over one of these councils ! That, therefore, 
 they were Roman councils ! How would such logic pass with us with 
 regard to the house of representatives ! His argument runs thus : Mr. 
 Henry Clay was once speaker of that house, Mr. Clay is from Ken- 
 tucky, therefore, the house of representatives were all Kentuckiam ! 
 This would be exactly the pith of the logic we have heard. 
 
 My opponent admits the history of the first seven councils which I 
 have given to be correct : but explains it by asserting that all the busi- 
 ness was eastern. But there were western heresies^ as well as eastern, 
 and western business as well as eastern transacted in these councils. 
 I therefore object to his exposition of that matter. It would have been 
 impolitic on his exposition to call together eastern men to decide 
 upon eastern heresies. They ought to have sent western men, who 
 would have been more impartial judges. But he has not yet adduced 
 one document, showing that these councils were called for such purpo- 
 ses, or that the east only was concerned in these q estions. 
 
 On the prefix ^^ Catholic^^ to the epistles, the ^ntleman did not 
 hear me, or did not apprehend my meaning. The argument is not a- 
 bout its afi/»^7y but its authority! He has not proved, and cannot 
 prove that it was so prefixed in the first ages, nor that it was ever so 
 applied by any inspired writer. Having brought no documents to 
 prove this, his reasoning is wholly irrelevant. 
 
 But you have been treated, my friends, to a feast from the •* Baptid 
 Banner,'*'^ one of the party ephemerals opposed to reformation. Un- 
 fortunately for the cause of religion, every age has produced a crop of 
 these special pleaders for party tenets. Many such a banner was un- 
 furled against Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley and all re- 
 formers r for they were all heretics and controversialists. Indeed thers 
 never was a good man on earth who vras not a controversialist. From 
 the days of Abel and Noah till the present hour, the friends of truth 
 have been heretical and controversial. But what has the Baptist Ban- 
 ner to do with tne present points at issue ! Is the gentleman so hard 
 presided as to form such alliances, to deliver himself or cause from ruin ! 
 I trust he will either keep, or be kept to the question in debate, and 
 leave Protestants to settle their own controverBies.— [Time ex- 
 pired.] 
 
1© 
 
 B: 
 
 PumcEixri 
 
 IMBATB Oil VBM 
 
 MW$i9€ 0' clochf JH* 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC SBUGION. 
 
 
 4 
 
 I dimffat W0 should be placed under considerable obligations to my 
 HieMi, for patting his finger upon the historic page that reconlt tbo 
 day and data of Uie anoitacy of the Roman Catholic church from the 
 true and holy Apoetolie church, with to much precision. But now we 
 are adjourned baek nearly 1000 years, and yet nothing more definite 
 than a **some time about the year 35^!*' Some time about! He 
 doee not tell us whether it was m one year, or another, that the church 
 began to be corrupt. It wai lonie liiiie dkmOt and so on. About this 
 time, it seems, the Nofatiaot seprated from the church— -well, Paul 
 foresaw that such events woula occur in the church's history-^e 
 ibiisaw that ^ rsYeoous wolves would enter the fold ;" that dissensions 
 would exist, at all successive periods, to the end of tune— that every 
 day new heretics would start up, who would denyihe truth, introduce 
 false doctrine^ and trouble the people of God. The Novatians wero 
 one of these sects— and what did Aey teach t Why the most levell- 
 ing and horrible doetrines; among others, the doctrine that a convert 
 to Christianity, who, in times of peril and temptation, nay even when 
 t^mpdkd hy physical fmx^ should forsake his creed, could never be 
 restored, no matter how sincerely penitent. Who that feels his frailty 
 and knows that his heart in an evil hour might stray from duty, does 
 not revolt at such a doctrine, that for one offence would cot him off* 
 forever! God dealt not so with Adam, nor Christ with Peter, when 
 at the voice of a woman, and in an evil hour, even Am strong heart 
 failed him. He admitted him to mercy, received him back to his 
 bosom, and made him the rock of his church. 
 
 But if all heretics are right, and this among the number— if the 
 ehufch was wrong in separating herself from these men — if it is her 
 duty to say to the upholder of false doctrine "all hail," you areas 
 free from error, as incorrupt and immaculate, as we are, come partake 
 with us, we are of one communion ; the rule should, according to the 
 gentleman's logic, wmrk hath loa^, and Rome has as good a right as 
 anyother to be called the chuseh of Christ On the other hand, if the 
 Hovatians were right, as he says they were, in excluding othera, the 
 church was ri^t in excluding them. The speech of herettcs, St. Paul 
 tells us, 2d Tim. ii. 17, spreadeth like a cancer; he elsewhere says, 
 that evil communication corrupts good mannera ; and the Pagans wei« 
 mot insensible to the wisdom of the distich^ 
 
 ** Principiit ohttft ; Mro medicina pwrtttir 
 ••Coin nrnla per loims kvaluere raoraf." 
 
 Mjr firieiid must have fofgotlen his argument of this morning, when 
 Im aiid that the church of the living G(xl should include none but the 
 ■nreand holy. If this be true, we must all give it up } for who is holy f 
 Which of us can lay his hand upon his heart and say I am without 
 •in I No, we are only holy in acknowledging our sinfulness and guilt 
 in the sight of God, with humility aad prayer. •• If we say we have 
 no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us! If we say 
 we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. If 
 we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgiTe us our sins, and to 
 ^ear us from all iniquity.** Si. John, ifp. If such be the gentleman's ie» 
 fulsitioiis, there can be no church of Ch rist In this erring world. Them 
 h none pure from defilement, says Job, and all are included as the 
 
 •bleets of divine displeasure, from which only the blood of Christ, 
 with faith, repentance and good works, can save us. If the gentleman 
 insists on applying a test which would require absolute perfection to 
 enable us to endure it, there is no such holiness, that I am aware of, 
 exhibited in this probationary state. My friend may feel a proud con- 
 sciousness that he is a happy instance of its existence, but for my part, 
 I cannot, I should not think it safe to lay the flattering unction to my 
 soul. I would advise no man to do so, while the great St. Paul com* 
 mands us to work out our salvation with fear and trembling; and tells 
 us, he chastised his own body, lest while he preached to othera he 
 himself ** should become a reprobate,** Ist. Cor. ix. 27. It is our duty 
 to acknowledge that we are frail and sinful mortals even like the rest 
 of men. Establish a contrary rule, and pride digs one abyss after 
 another beneath our feet, and there will not be lel\ one virtuous feeling, 
 one sound principle upon which we can take our stand to make a 
 last appeal to heaven for mercy ! When Christ empowered the church 
 to throw her nets into the sea of human life, as the apostles did into 
 the lake, she gathered into it fishes, both good and bad ; when the nets 
 are hauled ashore, the good fish will be selected and the bad thrown 
 back into the sea. So will it be at the end of the world. The angels 
 of God will come forth and select the elect from the reprobate — they 
 will gather the wheat into the gamer, but the tares they will burn 
 with unquenchable fire. The Catholic church with a consciousness of 
 man*8 true condition in this life, and a liberality which does her honor, 
 and which, all agree, ought to belong to the fold of Christ, permits all to 
 join in her religious festivals and exterior communion who profess the 
 same faith, and are willing to submit to her decisions as her children. 
 
 But mark the distinction between the body and the soul of the church, 
 all who profess the true faith, assist at the same religious exercises 
 and obey the same pastors, belong to the body of the church and are 
 therefore numbered among her children ; but to faith and exterior com- 
 munion of which alone man can take cognizance, must be added hope and 
 love and grace with God, that we may belong to the soul of the church. 
 Of the latter the church does not undertake to decide. This she leaves 
 to God who alone can see the heart. She, herself, judges not the in- 
 scrutable things of the spirit of a man, but contents herself with know- 
 ing and teaching that nothing can escape the piercing and all-seeing 
 eye of God, who will render to every man according to his works, on 
 that day when the hope of the hypocrite shall perish. Hence, as long 
 as one of her membera disqualifies not himself for the communion of 
 the ftiihful by flagrant impiety notorious depravity, or scandalous 
 excess, she rejects him not; but like that charity of which St. Paul 
 speaks, 1st Cor. xiii. "is patient, is kind, thinketh no evil, r^joiceth 
 not in iniquity, but rejoiceth with the truth, believeth all things, hopetli 
 all things, endureth all things, with modesty admonishing men, if per- 
 adventure God may give them repentance.** 
 
 The gentleman quoted from Waddington the history of the Nova- 
 tians. He says, they continued, how long I know not, but till! 
 (forget not the word,) iill they merged in the sect of Donatists. The 
 expressive word till is enough. There is no such fatal and termiuatinst 
 woni in Catholic history. The Catholic church is universal, and not 
 sectarian. It Is perpetual in duration, and is not merged as one wave 
 of error is merged in or obliterated by another. The gentleman asserts. 
 
 >.9i 
 
n 
 
 DEBATE ON THE 
 
 .1 
 
 I 
 
 t 
 
 iwt Ih© Donatisto did not differ from the Novatians. This is incor- 
 mst. Th« Donatiits fell from schism into enors which the No- 
 latiaiia hid mwm adopted. They employed the ^'»avagc Cireum^ 
 tMom,'" as the proteatant historian Waddinftoi ealls them, to 
 Milage churches, murder Catholics, and perpetrate other acts of 
 Sarbarily unheard of amonjj the meek followers of Jesoa Chnal. 
 What, too, will my friend say to the uncontrollable propensity to spi* 
 aide, which they were accused of encouraging and indulging with 
 lltadful freouencyl Not so the true church— she comes like Jesoa 
 Chiitt to call sinners to repentance, and heal the contrite of hearts 
 ■he employs his own inviting, and attractive, accents of pity and 
 ciNn|iasion :— " Come to me all you that labor and are heavy bur- 
 dened, and /will refresh you, not drive you to despair, to acts of self 
 destruction; and you shall find rest for your souls," Matthew xi. 28. 
 A hard heart will fare badly in the end, says the scripture, and conse- 
 
 Swntly every feeling of justice and humanity revolts at the idea that 
 e Novatians could have been animated by the meek spirit of Jesua 
 Christ, when they condemned to eternal exclusion from the church for 
 tainglef and that, frequently, a compulsory fault, as when an individ- 
 ual waa Oondemned by brute force to offer incense to the idols, or the 
 JDoittliti, who revolted against the authority of the African bishops, 
 and ravaged the countries where they prevailed with a lawless soldiery. 
 Is this the meek cMurch of him who came to preach deliverance to 
 captives! Must we palliate these and a hundred similar excesses, to 
 onniinale a church which would, if her mild counsels were obeyed, have 
 ■terted these evils from mankind 1 Is it candid, is it just, to blame her 
 without cause and to withhold praise where it is due 1 The Roman 
 Catholie church has never given the example of such cruelty. She 
 on the contrary admits all sinners to repentance; she counts as belonging 
 to her communion, all the children baptized in Protestant communions 
 who die before they are capable of committing mortal sin, or who living 
 ill invincible ignorance that they have been bred up in error, keep 
 the comiandments of God, and love him, as far as their knowledge of 
 Ma divine nature will permit. All these belong to the soul of the 
 church ; and are consequently amon^ the most precious of her fold. 
 Even among the unenlightened Indians if any there be that keep inviola- 
 bly the natural law and serve their Creator according to the best lights 
 which they possess, these she enrolls among her children, and teaches 
 OS to consider them as objects of God's special mercy, whom he will 
 not, aecoiding to St. Thomaa Aquinas, fail to illustrate with the light 
 of divine truth. For this purpose the resources of his wisdom, are 
 like that wisdom, infinite. Thus while the Catholic church watches 
 with the most scrupulous fidelity over the purity of faith, in her 
 hat the beautiful aaying of the psalmist been fulfilled, " Merey and 
 Imth have met one another, justice and peace have kissed." Pa. 
 lizxiv. 11. 
 
 By what ingenuity can the gentleman flatter himself he will eatah- 
 llsh the claims of the discordant and evanescent sects of these early 
 ages to the title of Catholics. Slayphus-like, these sects which he is 
 laboring so hard, so vainly, to roll up to the summit of that " moun- 
 liin placed upon the top of mountains," spoken of by Is. ii. 3* 
 and which is the aptest figure of the Catholic church, to which all na- 
 flow, will fall upon faui and crush him. He can never prove 
 
 ROMAN gXTUOhlC RKLIGIOX, 
 
 73 
 
 them Catholic in itme^ in place, or in doctrine*. The Novatians did 
 not slip into the Donatists, nor the Donatists into the Paulicians ; there 
 was no common bond of union, no identity of doctrine, among these 
 heterogeneous sects. As it is the same sun which took its station in 
 the heavens at the creation that now shines over us, so it is the same 
 religion that was taught eighteen hundred years ago by Jesus Christ, 
 that irradiates us at this very day with the light of truth ; and not more 
 difficult would it be to count all the vapors, mists and clouds, that 
 passed athwart the bright luminary of day since he first gladdened the 
 universe with his beams, than to enumerate the numberless sect^ that 
 have cast their shadows on the light of Catholic holiness, and purity, 
 and truth, since the origin of Christianity. They have passed, or are 
 fast passing away for ever, while she lasts on, and will last till the end 
 of time. "I have seen the wicked," says the Psalmist, xxxvi. 35, 
 ** highly exalted, and lifted up like the cedars of Lebanon. And I 
 passed, and lo! he was not, and his place was not to be found." This 
 IS a glorious indication of the stability of the Catholic church — of the 
 truth of the power that sustains her. And as she signalized her 
 triumph over all the false gods of Paganism, by establishing the 
 church of All Saints, and of the God who made them saints, on the 
 ruins of the greatest of idolatrous temples, so does she signalize her 
 triumph over all sects and heresies, falsely professing to be christian, 
 by the ausfust pontiff who speaks to the eternal city and the Catholic 
 world. From the inspiration of scripture, and of splendid facts, I pass 
 to the inspiration of poetry, I care not whose, and close the words of 
 my argument in the words of Byron: 
 
 •*But thou of temijles old, or altars new, 
 Standest alone — with nothing like to thee — 
 Worthiest of God, the holy and the true! 
 Since Zion's desolation, wnen that He 
 Forsook his former city, what could be 
 Of earthly structures in his honor pil'd 
 Of a subhnier aspect ? Maiesty, 
 Power, g^loiy, strength, and l>eautv, all are aisl'd. 
 In this eternal ark of worship undefiPd." 
 
 • * « » • 
 
 My friend has dwelt eloquently upon riots in the church in particn- 
 lar aeasons of excitement. But shall a society forfeit all claims to 
 rcfard, because, in seasons of high excitement, differences of opinion 
 proceed to violence! or a few 1^ people come to blows! It has 
 happened, and may happen among all oenominations, even the most 
 peaceful sects, and every body of men ; (instances were here specified.) 
 A riot may take place at an election of president, and blood he shed ; 
 but does this affect the title of chief magistrate of this union ? Is ho 
 to lose his office because blows were struck during the election! and 
 if the pope could not always be elected peaceably, by reason of the 
 disturbances created by men, was the succession to cease, and waa 
 there never to be a pope again, or a bishop, or any other pastor in the 
 church ! was Christ not God because Peter, the servant Malchus, shed 
 blood for him! See the terrible effects of my friend's bad reasoning. 
 The deist has availed himself of it, and denied the God of the Old 
 Testament, because exterminating wars, as we there read, were waged 
 at his command. We must m&e allowances for the passions and 
 G 10 
 
 .I'll 
 
|4 
 
 
 ■OMAM CATHOLIC EKLIOION. 
 
 75 
 
 ■I 
 
 ifeaicneBses of human nature; but the aim of religion h to correct, tn 
 heal, if she cannot entirely remove them. When the pope was elected, 
 m the case alluded to, he restored order. As Christ said to Peter, so 
 said he to the mob excited by Novatian, " Put up again thy sword 
 Into its place, for all that take the sword shall perish with the swerd." 
 Matthew xxvi. 52. 
 
 The gentleman asked me to tell him in what objectionable sense the 
 bishop of Constantinople claimed the title of Universal Father, h 
 was in a sense never used before; he had no title to it; he assumed 
 too much in claiming it. Again, it was he who pretended that no 
 sacrament could be administered but by bis authority. The Catholic 
 church teaches that, however ilHciily he may exercise it, no authority 
 on earth can take even from a degraded priest the power of consecrat- 
 ing. Schismatical bishops, when duly ordained themselves, could 
 ordain bishops, priests and inferior clerflnr. We admit the baptism 
 of Methodists and Baptists by aspersionTor immersion, as I have 
 already explained ; and even the orders of the English Episcopal 
 church are contested, on the ground of the very serious doubt whether 
 the first of their bishops was, himself, consecrated by a bishop, or 
 if so, by a valid formulary. 
 
 My friend was not at all accurate in stating the number of bishops 
 present at some of the first councils. There were more present at 
 them, as I can easily shew, than he has stated. He draws a parallel 
 Detween the council of Nice and the house of representatives. I do 
 not understand the force of his analogy. If that council belonged ex 
 clusively to the Greeks, why did they permit a Latin to preside ! But 
 it was to shew the world that they admitted the authority of Rome 
 thai Osius, the pope's legate, presided — and without his signature, 
 and the pope's approbation, their acts would have had no force as rules 
 of Catholic faith. What analogy is there between Henry Clay and 
 Osius I Did they stand in the same relation to their respective assem- 
 blies? Did they ever dream that they would be placed in juxta posi- 
 tion I If the speaker of the house, or the president of the senate, were 
 to object to the passing of a law, would his veto avail anything 1 
 would not the majority rule! 
 
 My friend said, first, that CaihoKc was a new term; and next, when 
 lie found it impossible to prove that, insisted it was not used to designate 
 the chureh, by inspired writers. I have abundantly disproved both 
 of these assertions. The apostles were inspired writers, and it dates 
 from their time ; and they alone, according to the rule of St. Augustin, 
 had the right to institute it. Besides, what are all the glorious pro- 
 phesies of the universal diffusion of the church by Isaiah, &c. Au;. but 
 the evidence that it should be what its name imports! In fact, it was 
 Catholic before all the New Testament was completed. And the 
 apostles, aware of the doubts that error would originate on the autho- 
 rity of the church, gave a sure and unerring guide to every sincere be- 
 liever, teaching him to say, next after the profession of his belief in God 
 himself — not, I believe in the bible— it is not once mentioned — not ic 
 any sect — there were none heard of at that time— but "I believe ia tbt 
 holy Catholic church."— [Time expired.] 
 
 Mft« Campbell riiet— 
 
 Tkrm o'clock^ P. J£ 
 
 I may have mistaken In ascribing to the bishop of Rome what was 
 done by the bishop of Constantinople, in reference to the personal 
 consecration of the successor of Mauritius ; but this does not affect 
 the justice of my remark, or invalidate my reasoning : and I think 
 my worthy friend apprehends this, inasmuch as the consecration was 
 approved and sustamed by Gregory. I read those documents at the 
 same time, and may have confounded them, but we shall hear them 
 again and see how much is either gained or lost by the admission. 
 
 "As a subject and a christian, it was the duty of Greg;ory to acquiesce in the 
 established government, but the joyful applause with which he salutes the fur- 
 tune of the assassin, has sullied with indelible disgrace the character of the 
 taint. The successor of the apostles might have inculcated with decent firm- 
 nest the guilt of blood, and the necessity of repentance : he is content to cele* 
 brate the deliverance of the people and the fall of the oppressor; to rejoice that 
 the piety and benignity of Pnocas have been raised by providence to the impe- 
 rial throne; to pray that his hands may be strengthened against all his enemies; 
 and to express a wish, perhajM a prophecy, that, after a long and triomphant 
 reilCD, he may be transferred from a temporal to an everlasting kingdom."*— 
 Crutbon Hiti. Dec. and Fall Rom, Emp. vol. viii. p, 211. 
 
 Now this, if I mistake not, amounts in substance to my affirmation. 
 Gregory approved the usurpation, and sanctioned the induction into 
 office of a man who had wrested the throne from the legitimate master, 
 and who was both a murderer and a usurper. 
 
 I could wish that my opponent would select some of the great points 
 of my argument in his replies, and form an issue with me. Were this 
 piece of history blotted out of existence, what loss to the main argu- 
 ment! These are merely incidental and minor matters-^illustrations 
 rather than proofs, and leave the great facts as they were. I must, 
 however, briefly glance at some other little things before I resume ny 
 argument. 
 
 The gentleman's next remark was, ** that Joshua was the successor 
 of Moses.** True it is, that every man is in one sense successor to 
 some one who preceded him. But Moses was, for a time, captain, 
 prophet, priest, and king of Jeshurun. Joshua, however, merely com- 
 manded the people, and divided the land of Canaan among them. This 
 cid not Moses: Moses accomplished all that he was appointed to do. 
 He needed no successor in the peculiar work assigned him. They 
 were both extraordinary offices. . Moses was a law-giver, and Joshua 
 a savior. The law was given to the people by Moses : Joshua gave 
 them an inheritance. Neither of them, in the nature of things, could 
 have a successor in the same office, for its duties were all discharged. 
 
 I was pleased to hear the gentleman admit all that I said concerning 
 the Novatians. They had one fault which we both allow— they were 
 too severe in one branch of discipline— they could never receive thos« 
 who had grievously fallen— no repentance would obtain re-admission 
 if the penitent had very flagrantly sinned. The occasion was this: 
 
 * Gregor. 1. x\. epist. 38, indict, vi. Benignitatem vestrae pietatis ad impe* 
 riale fastigium pervenisse ^udemus. Lsetentur coeli et exultet terra, et da 
 #estrts benignis actibus universse reipublicte populus nunc usque vehenienter 
 affltctus hilarescat, &c. This base flattery, the topic of Protestant invective, ig 
 justly censured by the philosopher Bayle, (Dictionnaire Critique, Gregoire 1. 
 riot. H. tom. ii. p. 597, 598.) Cardinal Barrooiut justifies the pope at the ex- 
 peme cf the fklleo emperor. 
 
» 
 
 gMM DBBAXK lllf TUS 
 
 In llw interim of ilie Pwram persecutions, many new conTerts were 
 •iifl«d to tlie chmcliea. Br and by, when the storm of persecution 
 ■UNO, they withdrew and fell away: but when a calm ensued, they 
 •Oifliltobe restoied to the church. The Novatians opposed their 
 lestontidn; the other party contended for it. The Puritans got vexed 
 with the frequent indulgences and backslidings of such professors ; 
 tiid tbie occasioned that extreme on their part, which drew down upon 
 tlmii wmm anathemas from the other party. They had other ohjec- 
 tioM iiimes this against the opposing party ; but this was sufficient 
 m a 'iiTision. 
 
 I was sorry to hear the gentleman excusing the church for embrac- 
 ing in its bosom men of every sort of wickedness. He spoke with 
 £eat feeling and eloquence upon the subject of calling ourselves holy, 
 s. We admit that there Is no man free from all pollution, whose 
 licart it always and only pure. Bat what has this to do with the 
 0|i«iilf wicked and profane — reprobates of the deepest dye! Ought 
 dm efiiTBh to open her doors as wide as the human race, apd admit 
 •very human being without discrimination I Is there no medium I 
 Me pooled the parable of the tares and wheat. It is true, the Savior 
 commanded to let the tares and wheat grow together till Ltrvest : but 
 Ilia gentleman asfiijii€il that it was spoken of the ekureh' I admit the 
 dnetrine^ as applied to the world, *• The field h ths wc^ldy^ not the 
 ehoreh, said the Savior. Does this excuse us for toloi&tjti^ reprobates 
 •fi the homm tf the church? "You are not of lliis ^f>i\ f," says the 
 Savior to his disciples — *'■ My kingdom is not of thk iroild," ** Come 
 out from among them, and separate yourselves, and ! vill receive you, 
 
 ""ather. What concord hu Chii.l with Belial, or 
 
 the Almighty Father, 
 lie' that believeth with an infidel V* 
 
 As to the*<continuaiion of the Novatians till the Donatists, and the 
 Bonatists tiU the Paulicians," &c. my friciid emphasizes the word till, 
 as if those witnesses for Christ had died away when some new sect 
 aieee. The fact is, that when some great leader arose, his name was 
 iili|l08ed upon all that associated with kim ; and different leaders, in 
 various parts of the world, moved great masses of professors, who 
 wen eseenlially the same people; aira when they became acquainted 
 with eaffh other, they coalesced under one great profession, variously 
 ■idnamed by the opposite party. So are the Lutherans, Calvinists, 
 Wealeyans, Cameronians, ue. of our own time. 
 
 Sony was I to hear my libera] antagonist compare the Protestant 
 ■■•tn to the psalmist's description of a prosperous wicked man — "I 
 ■aw,'' says he, "the wicked great in power, spread himself like a 
 graenbay tree: he passed away; yea, he was not. I sought him, and 
 be could not be found.** I do not know how his Episcopalian friends 
 will thank him for this compliment. I have no doubt in this he was 
 pneam, for the Romanists often bewailed the long life of Elizabeth, 
 heeaiiae^ under her reij^n, a new race of Protestants was bom and edu- 
 cated, and alienated from the Roman hierarchy, who were proof a^inst 
 all the machinations of Rome. They hoped that the Protestant Epis- 
 eopalians would, like the green bay tree of David, (emblem of the 
 prosperous wicked,) have withered away, and been reabsorbed by the 
 mother church ; but for once the application failed, and the wicked 
 Frolialants have for three eentories grown and increased. In de- 
 ■piia of all the policy and effort of Home, and arc now in expectation 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC BELIGION. 
 
 77 
 
 of seeing tfie same S7th psalm rerified in the fates of R^man Catho- 
 licism. 
 
 Every sect and individual, as I said before, is passive in re- 
 ceiving a name. Sectarian names are generally given in the way of 
 reproach ; thus the disciples were first called christians at Antioch, 
 most probably in derision ; yet it was a very proper name. Call us 
 what you please, however, it does not change nature or race. The 
 disciples of Christ are the same race, call them Christians, Nazarenes, 
 Galileans, Novatians, Donatists, Paulicians, Waldonses, Albigenses, 
 Protestants, or what you please. A variety of designation affects not 
 the fact which we allege; we can find an unbroken series of Protes- 
 tants — a regular succession of those who protested against the corrup- 
 tions of the Roman church, and endeavored to hold fast the faith onco 
 delivered to the saints, from the first schism in the year 250, A. D. to 
 the present day ; and you may apply to them what description or de 
 ■ignation you please. 
 
 The gentleman spoke of these sects as waves passing by while the 
 tnie church remained like a wall, immoveable and nnchangeable. 
 History refuses him her suffrage in this assumption: for it deposes 
 that she has changed, in whole, or in part, her tenets and her disci- 
 pline, no less than eighteen times in all — that is, once, at least for 
 every general council. She is the mutable immutable church, con- 
 tending for uniformity in faith and variety of discipline. 
 
 My opponent has quoted the apostles' creed. Du Pin, and a learn- 
 ed host prove that the apostles never wrote it The doctrine contained 
 in it, I admit is apostolic. And it is worthy of remark that like all 
 old creeds, it states /ac/« ,• whereas modern creeds are human exposi- 
 tions of doctrines. For my own part, I can adopt every article of that 
 creed, ear arvmo ; except, perhaps, I would change one expression, and 
 say that * I believe in a Catholic church.' I believe that there does 
 exist such a thing as a truly Catholic church of Christ. But as for 
 human creeds, I make no such platforms a bond of union among 
 christians. We, like the Romanists, differ about church discipline 
 among ourselves : but all the Protestant world believes this * apostles' 
 creed,' as it is called ; and are as uniform in this Mth asthe ** mother 
 church" herself. 
 
 I was eony to hear the election of the pope, the pretended ricar of 
 Christ, as respects riots, and blows, and carnage, compared to that of 
 the president of the United States, and to have the excesses com- 
 plained of in Rome, excused on the ground, that sometimes we have 
 mobs, and perhaps a fight on a presidential election. Is the presiden- 
 tial chair of such dignity and sanctity as that of the vicar of Christ! ! 
 And is a riot or murder no more incongruous in the one case than in 
 the other! We opine, that he who holds that exalted station should 
 come into it without blood. And yet in all these political elections, 
 since the Protestant reformation, there is nothing to equal half the up- 
 roar, and tumult, and murder, that happened in filling the chair of St. 
 Peter, at the conflict between Damasus and Ursinus, not to mention a 
 second. Can it be compared to the election of the president so as to 
 transfer to the one the language which is pertinent to the other! As, 
 for example, " Take heed to the flock over which the Holy Spirit haa 
 placed you!" 
 
 The gentleman is glad that his church is » liberal as to authorim 
 e 3 
 
 « 
 
78 
 
 .miJlTS ON TBS 
 
 mwif ma of iMfliMi. eteii tli.t performea by liefttkt, pfOTiM <»1| 
 the proper name be pronounced ! This is certainly a modem excess 
 of liberality. If 1 am riRhily informed, his predecesnor, in this veiy 
 charge, was not so liberal as he — in one case, at least, which occurred 
 at Portsmouth in this state. There were two members of the Episco- 
 ptl church, one of the parlies the son of an Episcopalian minister, de- 
 ■irous of entering into matrimony. Bishop tenwick desired to know 
 ©f what party the) were, and on learning that they were Episcopalians, 
 Wifused to marry them, unless previously baptized by himself. There 
 may be many other instances of the same sort, certainly, in former 
 iiiM8 lliaM were many, and so far as they proye that the church is not 
 iinnutable, are hopeful indications of the possibility of reform. But 
 Ihia it not the question before us. We are not discussing baptism, ot 
 tlM eacharist, or any of the " seven sacraments,'* or any ordinance of 
 tla church. Will the jrontleman inform us whether his church regards 
 ilM administration of the eucharist, or any other of her seven sacra- 
 ments Talid, unless at the hand of those whom she authoriaea to min- 
 i»ister them. Let him not wave the Question by a reference to a prao- 
 tice which he knows can be explained on other principles* 
 
 1 shall not now stop to dispute about Sylvester and the council ot 
 Nioe: hut shall resume my general argument where I left off. 
 
 All agree that if primacy or supremacy reside in the chprch at all, 
 ft must reside in some permru If Jesus Christ intended to make Petei 
 the prince of apostles, the vicar of Christ; the title will prove it clear 
 ly. If this headship, on the other hand, was not given to Peter; none 
 ran derive it from him by succession. Was Peter invested with this 
 authority 1 If not, none can pretend to it as his successora. The 
 whole i|uestion rests on this. My learned opponent cannot show thai 
 Peler ever had such an office. He affirms, indeed, that Peter was su« 
 perior to the rest of the apostles : but does he show in what respect ! 
 How many kinds of superiority might (here have been in his case I 1 
 will answer for him and say that there are, at least^/otir. 1st. of age, 
 Snd. of talents, 3d. of character, and 4th. of office. Thuseare clearly 
 marked in holy writ, and fixed in society. Admit then that Peter is « 
 head of the list ; can he decide which of these four has pltfced him 
 flat. The bishop tmertM that he was first in tffiee. Bat bow can he 
 take this for granted, when theie are three other ways in which Pete? 
 ■il^t be at the head I Is this the reasoning that logic or Catholicism 
 sanctions <ir requires ! 
 
 I would request the gentleman to tell us, how he knows which of 
 tliese four sorts of superiority to ascribe to Peter ! He assumes one, 
 and is bold in asserting the Cfatholic doctrine of a supreme head of the 
 chuich on this assumption. Peter may have been the oldest, or the 
 irat called of all the apostles : or his character or talents may haT« 
 
 S'mm him a decided superiority ; why then assume one, to the exclu- 
 on of the othero. The greatest empires have been built on the most 
 bold aifsumptions. But never was there a more baseless monarchy in 
 the annals of time than that of papal Rome. I wish mv opponent 
 would for once assume, or take up some one of these grand points, on 
 which his church rests, and not waste his time in fighting about sha- 
 dows or peccadillos. Let him come at once to the great principles of 
 lbs debate. I challenge him to show cause, why he assumes for Petei 
 y of offiG% laiher than of age, of talent, or of character; 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 anyone of which is much more feasible and probable than that whicb 
 he has begged.— [Time expired.] 
 
 ffalf pad 3 o^dock^ P. 3f. 
 
 Bishop Purcell rises— 
 
 I was far from charging Mr. C. with a wilful dereliction of the tnith 
 when he stated, what he now confesses to be untrue, that Gregory 
 crowned Phocas. The imputed motive was very base, but he now 
 sees that it was not the pope's. I attribute this exlraordmary mis- 
 take, on the part of my friend, to the fact of his having been too apt 
 to believe that every thing written against Catholics must be true, and 
 to his memory's not having been lately refreshed in his early readings. 
 But it is due to the public that he should apologize for having, 
 through want of care on a matter of so much importance, fallen into 
 BO very serious a mistake in what was calculated so deeply to injure 
 the truth. He should first have inquired whether all he said was 
 true. I repeat, then, that Gregory did not crown Phocas at all, much 
 less for the express purpose of eliciting from the gratitude of the sover- 
 eign an acknowledgment of his ** papal supremacy" for this recognition 
 was as old as Christianity. Order was restored in Constantinople, lie 
 then sent him words of compliment on his accession. It is contrary to 
 the rules of sound argument to presume that Gregory approved ot the 
 circumstances which led to the change of dynasty. Napoleon grasped 
 the Iron crown of Italy, from the altar and put it on his brow tor he 
 acknowledged no Donor thereof but his sword. So would Phocas, 
 very probably have done with the crown of C, whatever bre- 
 cory mitrht have thought of the act. Moreover, Phocas did not 
 burl Mauritius from the throne. Mauritius abdicated, and the people, 
 not the bishop of C. P. made Phocas king, in the place of Mauritius, 
 a miser, and a tyrant; and Gregory rejoiced, not at the disturbances but 
 at the restoration of order. My friend now treats these matters as 
 liffht, and incidental. It was he himself who made then principals, 
 by the manner in which he introduced them. He was arguing a knotty 
 point, the manner in which Rome came to " assume" her high pre- 
 rocrative over the church. The plain, scriptural truth, that she came 
 tolt by divine appointment was before his eyes, but he would not see 
 it. Is It to be wondered at that he saw in history what was not there ! 
 I will say no more on the subject of Joshua. Eusebius confirms, p. 46, 
 what I have said. The object of the ministry of the old or of the new 
 law, of the coming of Christ, of the shedding of his blood, and all the in- 
 stitutions of his religion, was not the setting up of a tabernacle m the wil- 
 derness, or the crossing of the Jordan, or the surveying of a piece of 
 land and dividing it among a few tribes, but the salvation of man- 
 kind, without any exception, or distinction of age, or clime; and 
 this great work of regeneration and redemption is just as important 
 now, and will continue so while there are immortal souls to be en- 
 liahtened and saved, as it was in the days of the apostles. 'Pheir 
 oftce must remain, and their successors are charged with it. The 
 bishops and their assistant brethren watch over the safety of the fold, 
 and the sovereign pontiff sees that they and their flocks persevere in 
 unity. He watches over all. . -r» t • 
 
 Mr. C. persists in saying that the Novatians, Donatists, Paulicians 
 &c. &c. agreed in doctrine, and may be considered as the Catholic 
 
 % 
 
 !■ 
 
 
 *\ 
 
80 
 
 'DBBATB Om TlIS 
 
 BO.VATr CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 81 
 
 ehurch. I have already refuted this theory, hut here is Protestant tea 
 timony again to destroy it, and I hope wo shall not waste any more 
 time on it, for it is too ahsurd. " No heretic," says Waddmgton, 
 ji. 154, " was as likely as the Donatist to lay claim to the name Ca- 
 tliolic ; yet even a Dunatist, while he maintained that the true spirit 
 and purity were alone perpetuated in his own communion, would scarce- 
 ly hare affirmed that that was honajide the universal church, which 
 did not atknd bevmtd the th&res of jfrica, and which Imd not the mtk^ 
 jority etwi ihttt* Speaking of the sects in Dauphine and other errorists 
 condemned at Arras in 1&5, the same author says, (p. 554) " It is 
 proper to mention what these opinions really w^cre, which were con 
 demned at Arras, lest it should be supposed that iiuiy were at variance 
 only with the Roman Catliolic church, and siri(5tly in accordance with 
 ipiwtolic truth." "It was asserted that the sacrament of baptism 
 was useless and of no eflcacy to salvation, (what does Mr. C. think 
 of this 1) that the sacrament of the Lord's supper was equally unne- 
 cessary. — It appears that the objectin'^a of the heretics on. this point 
 went beyond the mere denial of tlie change of substance— that the 
 sacred orders of the ministry were not of divine institution^-that 
 penimee m'as altogether iiiefHcacious— that marriage in general was 
 contrary to the evangelical and apostolical laws — that saint-worship is 
 to beconined to the apostles and martyrs, &c. &c. so mixed and various 
 is the substance of those opinions to which learned writers on this 
 subject appeal wiUi so much satisfaction." A^rain, «« the; were all tainU 
 ed more or less deeply by the poison of Manichaesism : and since it is 
 urn object to establish a connexion, with the primitive church, we shall 
 scafcely attain it tlirough tliose whose fundamental principle was nn 
 cijuivocally rejected by that church, as irraUonal and impious." 655. 
 Mosheim says, 1st vol. p. 328, ** Among the sects that troubled 
 the Latin church, this century, (the 12th) the principal place is due to 
 the Cathari, or Catharists, whom we have had already occasion to 
 mention. 'Phis numerous faction, leaving their first residence, which 
 was in Bulgaria, spread themselves throughout almost all the European 
 provinces, where they occasioned much tumult and disorder. Their 
 reltj^ion resembled the doctrine of the Manicheans and Gnostics, on 
 which account they commonly received the denomination of the former, 
 though they differed in many respects from the genuine primitive 
 MaMcheans. They all indeed, agreed in the following points of doc- 
 trine, via. that matter was the source of all evil ; that the creator of 
 this world was a being distinct from the supreme deity ; that Christ 
 was neither clothed with a real body, nor could be properly said to 
 have been born, or to have seen death ; that human bodies were the 
 •radiction of the evil principle, and were extinguished without the 
 rospect of a new life. They treated with the utmost contempt all 
 the books of the Old Testament, but expressed a high degree of ven- 
 eration for the New." Speaking of the Waldenses, p. 332, Mosheim 
 says, •• They committed the government of the church to bishops, 
 presbyters and deacons, but they deemed it absolutely necessary that 
 all theae orders should resemble exactly the apostles of the divine 
 Savior, and be like them illiterate^ &c. &c. The laity were divided 
 Into two cla<«se9, one of w^hieh contained the perfect and the other the 
 impeffed christians.*' Of another sect, the Pasaginians, Mosheim 
 •ayis, p. 333, " They circumcised their followers, and held that the law 
 of Moses, in every thing but sacrifice, was obligatory upon Chris- 
 
 ^bna.** "What the same Protestant historian savs of the brethien of 
 the free spirit is too horrid. It is the foulest of the mr.ny foul pages 
 he has stained with the history of sects. *• Tlicy maintained that the 
 believer could not sin, let his conduct be ever so horrible and atro- 
 cious." The celebrated Ziska, not a Roman Catholic inquisitor, but 
 the austere general of the Hussites, another sect of Protestants, fall- 
 ing upon this raiserible sect in 1421, " put some to the sword and 
 condemned the rest to the flames." Mosheim, 428. " A sect of fana- 
 tics called Caputiati^ infested Moravia and Burgundy, the diocese of 
 A«3xerre, and several other parts of France, in all which places they 
 excited much disturbance among the people. They declared pubUcly 
 that their purpose w^as, to level all distinctions, to abrogate magistra- 
 cy, to remove all subordination among mankind, and to restore that 
 primitive liberty, that natural equality, which were the inestimable 
 privileges of the first mortals." Mosheim, p. 333. Luther repeatedly 
 declared that he stood alone, that all antiquity was against him. Here 
 are startling facts and no less startling admissions by sound Protes- 
 tants. Will my friend insult this enlightened assembly by making up a 
 monster-church, a very chimera, of all these sects, and give modern 
 Protestants all the honors present and prospective of being the tail of 
 the beast ? I would counsel him not to dream of doing so, and them 
 to look out for^nore reputable religious ancestors. 
 
 But the Roman Catholic church has changed at least in discipline. 
 Grant it. And what of that T Is it not the very nature of discipline that 
 it must be modified by times, places, peculiarities of nations and other 
 circumstances, in order to be adapted to the wants of man in all the 
 varieties of his being ? Truth is unsusceptible of change. Like God 
 it is always the same. But the form of the dress of the clergy, the color 
 of the wine to be used at mass, days of fasting and abstinence, and 
 of public meetings for prayer and certain unessential rites in the ad- 
 ministration of the sacraments, may be changed. The constitution of 
 the church should possess this element of good government. She has 
 the power to make these changes, and she has made them as the wants 
 of her children seemed to require. But the doctrine is invariable. 
 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but, of it, not an iota shall change. 
 
 As to the deaths occasioned in the election of a pope, I ask again, 
 what has that to do with the constitutionality of the office ? The pope 
 did not slay those people. According to the gentleman's theory, the 
 president of this union would have to answer for the blood, if any, 
 spilled at his election. I am astonished that such arguments should 
 be repeated. I can say with certainty of my venerable predecessor 
 mat he would not have pursued the course, he did, if the story be 
 true, if he had had reason to believe the individuals had never been 
 baptized — and if any two or more young people will come to me, who 
 have been rightly baptized in Protestant communions, I warrant them. 
 If there be no other obstacles, they shall be quickly bound together in 
 the indissoluble bonds of matrimony. 
 
 I am perfectly willing to revert to the point of the supremacy of St 
 Peter and the continuance of his hij^h authority in his successors, for it 
 is a cardinal doctrine. It solves a thousand lesser points of difficulty 
 and I am happy to argue it again from tHe New Testament, frunj 
 church history, from reason. I have already quoted scripture for th.» 
 dogma of the supremacy of Peter—-* upon this rock will I bviili my 
 church." My friend does not like to approach that rock, — lie take# 
 
 6 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 t 
 
 I 
 
'mA.n 0!f' THE 
 
 ctni to keep sliy of it, I also 'quoted " feed my liiinbs« — feed my 
 ■lieep'*— •«To thee I will dve the keys of the kingdom of heaven,"— 
 
 •* Blessed srt thou, SimoDr— and " when thou art anointed confirm thy 
 liretlifen/' &c. All these texts, and more, did I quote, and the gentle- 
 Bsn has had my authority before him. I shall now strengthen my 
 
 fitilt«tion from the fathers, adducing overwhelming facts to mov% that 
 'iter was bishop of Rome and that the bishops of that see have eveb 
 been regarded in the Catholic church as his successors. Many of my 
 liearers may suppose that this matter is buried in the night of time- 
 that history is either silent, or not sufficiently clear upon it. But 
 when they Mar the splendid testimonies I am going to adduce, they 
 will change their minds on this subject, and confess that, from time 
 ImnMiiorial, in the very earliest a^es, the church was precisely the 
 aame, in its faith, its sacraments, its hierarchy, its clergy, &c. &c. 
 that ike CaiMk church is at the present day. (Here bishop Purcell 
 held up the map of the succession of popes from the first, Peter him- 
 self, down to the present pontiff, Gregory XVI. ; the names of all the 
 moat eminent men in the church ; the date of the establishment of the 
 foapel In the various countries of the world, the origin and authors of 
 the various heresies and schisms, their condemnation by general coun- 
 cils, or synods, &c. &c.) let any other exhibit such an array ! 
 
 Christ Jesus said to his disciples " go, teach all nations.'* They 
 went! they preached everywhere, and the world believed ! before 
 their death they ordained others whose names are here faithfully re- 
 corded • Here IS the ecclesiastical history of Eusebius, and according 
 to the pun upon his name (you see by us) you will see by him what 
 a flood of light irradiates this subject. Eusebius wrote in the 4th 
 century, and to remove all suspicion I bring before you the translation 
 oChia hiatoijr by a Protestant minister, C. r. Cruse, A. M. Assistant 
 Pliofeiaor or the university of Pennsylvania, 2d. edition, revised and 
 wiifBcted by the author* [The reading was interrupted by the half 
 ionr't expiring.*] 
 
 Ibur o^ehekf P. J£ 
 Mm. Camfscix rites—' 
 
 li tht oflginal Greek of Irensus extant ! [The bishop intimates, 
 • JiS».T Of what authority, then, is the version from which he r«ads ! 
 I have never read in Ireneus nor seen quoted from him a warrant for 
 the aaamiiiCion that Peter was ever bishop of Rome 1 But of this 
 tgaiu-^' 
 
 Alter raising such a dust as the gentleman has about Phocas and 
 Gregory, it has become necessary for me to re-state my argument. 
 
 CfiegoiT the great wrote to Mauritius, requesting him to induce 
 John, bishop of Constantinople, to give up his claim to the title of 
 universal father. Mauritius would not do It. Gregory the great, is 
 ■opposed by all antiquity to have harbored a grudge, or bad feeling 
 towards Mauritius, because of this ; and therefore his exultation at 
 hit death, lid his easy recognition of the pretensions of his murderer, 
 which acqilescence, on his part, secured the compliance of Phocas 
 with the wishes of Gregory, and secured to his successors the title of 
 to versal patriarch, or pope— 
 
 f Bishop Purcell hero observed, that Phocas was not the murderer 
 
 m Mauritius.] 
 
 ^. — 11^—^—. 
 
 * Tli« ei tract relVrred to will be found io a rabfequent speech. 
 
 moMJiif eAiiiouc lELiGioir. 
 
 Very well, I hxre the authority of Gibbon for my assertion— not 
 Ibr saying that he kUled him by his own hands : but by his authority, 
 as he lays to Phocas the blood of Mauritius and his seven children, 
 on the principle, eut7a«7|)cr after urn, /octV/Mfrw. He does himself 
 what he does by an other. The said Phocas did afterwards, Barronius 
 bein^a faithful witness, give the title of universal bishop to Boniface, 
 Gregory's successor, and who can infer any tiling else from all the 
 circumstances, than I have done ?! , . ^ 
 
 I thought the gentleman was about to produce authority to prove 
 that Sylvester did call the council of Nice. This, I again assert he 
 cannot do. If he think he can, let him attempt it, and we will show 
 he cannot. We, however, do assert on the authority of Eusebius, and 
 all ancient history, that Constantine the ereat did call the council of 
 Nice ; and we affirm on equal authority, that the pope's legate did no/ 
 preside in that council. Whether Hosios did is problematical. It is 
 ' Inferred from the feet of his being present: but there is no historic 
 authority for it. But all this is very subordinate and of little value. 
 The whole question rests upon the inquiry, JVhat office had Peter? 
 What was his ecclesiastical power and patronage! Was Pet«r the 
 prince of the apostles 1 Was he made the vicar of Chnsti Ay, this 
 IS the question ! It requires explicit^nay, positive scripture authon- 
 
 ty — where is it? , - • t l n 
 
 The gentleman offers several passages to this point. I shall exa- 
 mine the prominent texts, and begin with the 16th chapter of Mat- 
 thew.— I read from Griesbach's Greek Testament. In this chapter, 
 Christ asks his disciples the question, "Who do men say that I miiI 
 and afterwards asks them, " But who say ye that I am ? and Peter 
 answered: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God ; "and 
 Jesus answered and said unto him, blessed are you, Simon Baijona, 
 for flesh and blood has not revealed it to you, but my Father, who 
 is in heaven : and I say also to you, that you are Peter, and upon tku 
 rock I will build my congregation and the gates of hades shall not 
 prevail against it." Matth. xvi. 13—18. _ , , . 
 
 " Upon this rock :" was Peter this rock 1 The words sound much 
 alike, (Petro* and Petra). Let us examine the passage. One of the 
 internal evidences of the truth of the apostolic writings is, that each 
 writer has something peculiar to himself. So has every speaker and 
 teacher, that has appeared amongst men. Jesus Christ himself had 
 hib peculiar characteristics. One of his peculiarities most clearly 
 marked by the four evangelists is, that he consecrated every scene 
 and cireumstance and topic of conversation to religion or morality. A 
 few examples, out of many that might be given, must suffice. When 
 standing by the sea of Galilee, he says to the fishermen, who were 
 easting their nets into the sea : " follow me, and I will make you 
 Ji$her9of metu** At the well of Samaria, ho says to a Samaritan wom- 
 an, from whom he asked a drink— ^' Whoever shall drirk of this wa- 
 ler shall thirst again ; but whoever drinks of the watei that I shah 
 eive him, shall never thirst: but it shall be in him a well of water 
 springing up to eternal life." While with his disciples m the 
 temple, and seeing the sheep going up to be sacrificed, he says : " My 
 sheep hear my voice, and they follow me;" and he speaks of himselt 
 as the true shepherd, who lays down his life for his sheep. His di* 
 ciples having forgotten to take bread, when embarking on the likH 
 and when talking about it, he took occasion to say : " Beware ol tha 
 
84 
 
 DKBATS Oir TlIS 
 
 BOMJLN CATHOLIC BSLI610N. 
 
 85 
 
 leaTim of tlie Pharisees.** Wheii on Mount Olivot, tmon^ tlie fines 
 ami oliTes, lie nays, ** I am the trae vine, and my Father is the Tins- 
 
 .*• And when looking^ at the temple, he says : ** Destroy this 
 temple, and I will build it in three days." — So in the passage before 
 ns. He asks his disciples an all important question, in rep*y to wbich, 
 one of Ihem who happens to be named Feter, utters the great truth, 
 upon which he is to found his church forever : ** Thou art the Christ, 
 (th« Mcssiam), th« Son or thk living God." Jesus turns to him 
 and says: **1iiou art gionct and upon this rock (on this great truth 
 vhich flesh and blood has not revealed to thee), I will build my 
 church." 
 
 Et m* IltT^flf, mt vrt Tsewr* tji flrrrj* — ** «t iw Petrm^ km epi taute te petra^ 
 — »* You are Peter and upon this pefra^* strikes the ear of a Grecian as 
 * thou art stone and upon this rock* strikes the ear of an English man; 
 and as we have seen is a part of the Savior*8 peculiarity. 
 
 The construction of language requires that uie word ** /At«" should 
 refer to something antecedent different from thou, or you. They are 
 different in permm and in ease. But not only does the 8avior*s peculiar 
 characteristics, and the change of person from " /Aoi*" the personal, 
 to IAm the demonstrative, fix the sense : but other considerations of 
 great moment, forbid any other interpretation. For let me ask, why 
 did J»i ') propound the question to his apostles— why did he elici* 
 from them so great a truth, if in the solemn declaration which imme 
 diately follti^s, he meant to fiass by that truth and all^ide to Petei 
 alone. This woold be a solecism unprecedented — a case unparalleled 
 ITie whole author!^ of the christian religion and all its excellency k 
 embraced in the radical ideas which had been for the first tim6 pro- 
 nounced by the lips of man. There are, indeed, but three cardinal 
 ideas in all christian doctrine : for there can he but three cardinal 
 ideas about any being* Two of these are distinctly embodied in Pe- 
 ler*s i^nfession of faith. The whole three are, 1st the person, 2nd 
 the office, and 3rd the character of Christ. Beyond these— perxon 
 jpee and doMider, what eoiieeption can mortals have of our Redeemer ! 
 Peter mouthed of these, the two which gave value to the third — ^The 
 permm and the mission of Jesus. He was the first mortal who, dis- 
 tinctly and intelligibly avowed the faith, in the person and mission of 
 Jesus the Nasuene, u|H>n which the empire of the ransomed race 
 shall stand forever. This is the good confession spoken by Jesus 
 himself at the hazard of his life, before Pontius Pilate, of which 
 Paul speaks in trnns of the highest admiration. 
 
 This great truth deservedly stands forward under the bold meta- 
 phor of the Rock. But still more creditable to this triith,— not ** flesh 
 mid blood," but the Heavenly Father first uttered it from Heaven. On 
 the hanks of the Jordan, when Jesus had honored his Father in his 
 t»apttsm, his Father honored him ; and was it not worthy to be honor- 
 ed hy proclaiming it from the opening sky, " This is my Son, the 6e- 
 Imeiin whom I delight,^ while the descending Dove marked him 
 out ? A Pagan poet said, 
 
 " Ni^vrr introduce a (Jijd unlets upon nn ocra^ion worthy of hini:"* 
 
 And who feels not the propriety of such an introduction here ; for 
 when first spoken, no angel in heaven, nor man on earth, could intro- 
 duce the Messiah, in his proper person, but his own Father. No%i, 
 
 • liec Bciia lutenil aU digwu vkidice nodm- -Inciderit.— //or. 
 
 beeanse Peter was the first to utter it, Jesus says to him: " I will give 
 to TOtt the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall 
 bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose 
 on earth shall be loosed in heaven." 
 
 What a controversy there has been about these keys. Jesus gave 
 Ihem to Peter ilone— not to him, his heirs, and successors forever ! I 
 was denoted as heterodox a few years since, because I alleged that 
 the opening of the reign or kingdom of heaven, by Peter to Jews and 
 Gentiles, was the true exposition of the keys. But I am glad to see 
 this view promulaed now from various reputable sources, even from 
 Trinity College, 'Dublin. Peter opened the kingdom of heaven on 
 the day of Pentecost, and by divulging a secret never told to that day, 
 ▼iz. " Let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has 
 made that Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ." This 
 annunciation of the coronation, or (Gristing, that is anointing of Je- 
 sus king and governor of the universe, was a new revelation made on 
 the Pentecostian mom by Peter. He declared remission on that day 
 to 3000 souls, and introduced them into the kingdom of the Messiah 
 Again, when it pleased God to visit the Gentiles in the family of 
 Cornelius, a Roman centurion; an angel sent from heaven, command- 
 ed him to send for Peter to Joppa to come and tell him and ^s/ela- 
 tions ^'words hy which himself and his friends might be saved. He 
 did so. He sent, and Peter came. Why thus call upon Peter 1 Be- 
 cause Christ's gifts are without repentance. He had given him the 
 keys. He therefore must open the two-leaved gate, and intrc^uce 
 both Jews and Gentiles into the kingdom. This being once done, 
 needs not to be repeated. The gales of heaven have not since been 
 locked. There is no more use for the keys. Peter has them yet. 
 He took them to heaven with him. He did not will them to any heir 
 or successor. The popes are fighting for shadows. Heaven never 
 trusted such gentry with the keys. They might take into their heads 
 to lock the heretics out. 1 thank God that he gave them to Peter, 
 that Peter opened the gates of the kingdom of heaven to us all, and 
 that as the popes cannot shut them, we do not need them a second 
 lime. Peter will guard them, till he who has the key of David, who 
 opens and none can shut, will appear a second time. Thus we dis- 
 pose rationally, and I think scripturally, of this grand text. 
 
 The next text upon which confidence is placed by my opponent, is 
 where Christ says to Peter, " Feed my sheep, feed my lambs. 
 Language has no meaning but from the context. Every word serves 
 to fix the meaning of its contextural associates. We must read the 
 21st chapter of John's Testimony, from the beginning, if we would 
 correctly understand this passage. The facts are: Peter and some 
 of his brethren had returned to Galilee, disconcerted and overwhelm- 
 ed with the events of the day. They felt themselves destitute, forea 
 ken, and in need. While their master was with Uiem he provided 
 for them in some way. He could say, when I sent you without scrip 
 or staff or money, did you lack any thing 1 They answered, no. but 
 he was gone, and they knew not what to do. In this distress, i'eter 
 says " I am going a fishing," and the rest accompany him : but they 
 toUed all night and caught nothing. In the morning they see the Sa- 
 vior walking on the shore; they know him not. He says to them, 
 ** Children, have you any meat?" They answer, **no. He te.ls them 
 Ui cast on the other side of the bark. They do so and take a large 
 H 
 

 BSBATI ON THE 
 
 munliif of itk Poter, when he knew it >ti <8 the Lord, gfVt his hsh* 
 erman^s garment aroond him, leaped into the lake, &nd swam ashore. 
 They dine together, and after they had eaten to satiety, Jesus says to 
 PeleSy ^Ih f oi» bwe me more than ikete T* 
 
 Hy mMtmction of these words Is, **Do you love me more thai 
 lHum i«h, or these victuals." He then says to Peter, **Feed mv 
 lambs :'* and the fact before him and all the circumstances say, I wili 
 feed you* 
 
 The bishop^s construction is, "Do you lore me more than these dia- 
 ctples love me!" But how could Peter answer such a question! 
 Wat he omniscient to know how much his companions loved his nriaa* 
 ter. In that case he would have said, "Lord I love thee, but I do not 
 know how much my brethren love thee; they also love thee, but I 
 know not whether I love tbeo mtire than they do.** But suppose he 
 QonM hmrn known, then I ask, was it comely to ask so invidious s 
 fMilion t Would not they have felt themselves disparaged, if Peter 
 Mil aaid, ''Yea Lord, I love th«e more than all my fellow apostlea love 
 the© !!!*• 
 
 Peter had erred. He had become discontented — ^had forgotten hia 
 duty to his master, and had betaken himself to his former occupation 
 of fishing, and induced tie rest to join him. Christ asks him sol- 
 emnly, " Do you love me more than these fish, these boats, nets, ap- 
 paratus, or these victuals, this worldly employment! if so, cease to 
 spend your time in providing food for yourself; but feed my sheep 
 and lambs, and I will provide for you.*' Besides, he having cauffht 
 iMtliinf till the Master appeared, was a very striking lesson, which I 
 piesume Peter never forgot. I confess, I think the gentleman's inter- 
 
 C rotation of theip as bishops, and lamb* as laity, most singularly ar^ 
 itiary and fimtasti?, and needs not a grave reply. So we dispose of 
 •he second grand l»xt on which the church of Rome has leaned with 
 in mwh confidence for so many ages^ 
 
 ■y leaned opponent has not yet afforded us evidence for his as- 
 mmption of official supremacy for Potior. These texts reach not the 
 They do not institute a new office bestowed on Peter but are 
 of esteem, for reasons personal. Every privilege he received 
 on account of some personal pre-eminence, not because of an of- 
 fine which he held. The canon law has decreed that a personal priv- 
 ilege dolh follow the person and is extinguished with the person. 
 Now as all the honors vouchsafed Peter were in consequence of his 
 p«iii|itiieS8, courage, penitence, seal, &e. they never can become the 
 ioaaons of an hereditaiy office. His supremacy, or rather superiori 
 1y, or primacy, most naturally arose from his being one of the first, if 
 BOt tktjbni convert — ^the oldest of Christ's disciples ; because he was 
 prompt, decided, couragieous, sealous, ardent, and above all, he was 
 m inanied man, had a wife and family. And although this fact might 
 Mil eomport with Ms being the fountain of papl authority, it obtaSn- 
 ed him an honor above John the bachelor, and all the bachelors of 
 that age !! 
 Once more on this subject— let me ask, who made a more volunta- 
 
 3' surrender of himself to his master^who more promptly foisook 
 1 that he had, than he— who, when his Lord asked, will ye also leave 
 me, with move ardor said ; ^ Lord, toiwiiom shall we go but to thee- 
 for thou hast the words of eternal life !** Who more courageously 
 Id the time of peril, drew his sword to defend his Master ! who, when 
 
 SOMAN CATHOUC REUOION. 
 
 87 
 
 the Savior foretold his own sufferings and indignities, more aflecUoii' 
 ately and devotedly exclaimed, in the warmth of his heart, " Lord, it 
 shall not be so done unto ihee !" ^ i . j . 
 
 It is true that this ardor of disposition, this promptness, this deci- 
 sion of character, sometimes betray their possessor into errors; yet 
 who will not say, give me the man of energy and decision, and ardor 
 of character 1 John was meek as a dove ; he was innocent and amia- 
 ble as a lamb, and the Lord loved him ; but those bold and stem, and 
 manly virtues he wanted, which gave so much interest to the charac- 
 ter of Peter; and so admirably fitted him to stand forward and fore- 
 most, amongst his colleagues and fellow apostles.— [Time expired.] 
 
 Haf-pad 4 o'c/ocAr, P. JC 
 Bishop Purcell. riae»~ 
 
 Do you love me more than these fish !! My brethren, if the subject 
 were not too serious, I should call my friend's construction a fish story ! 
 Jesus Christ said to Peter, »* lovest thou me more than these 1 ' plvM 
 Ati— what, if fish ! (i;t'"^) P^^ 9^"* ^' There is an end to all 
 that argument. , , , i .i ^^ i. 
 
 Mr. C AMPBiLL. That is the Latin version. Let us have the Greek. 
 Bishop Purcell. The Greek is not more plain, nor will it prove 
 your interpretation less revolting, less contrary to the obvious and 
 more common interpretation of the text. Sad conclusion this, which 
 my learned oj.ponent reserved as his main reliance, for the last hour 
 of the day ! And is it thus that he proves the church of Rome to be 
 neither catholic, apostolic, nor holy, but an apostacy from the only 
 true, holy and apostolic church of Christ! He is heartily welcoma 
 to the proselytes this argument may gain to his tottering cause. 
 Let learned Protestants now claim their champion's services in the 
 difficult task of interpreting the scripture— or let them, as 1 have pro- 
 phesied they would do, repudiate his advocacy. 
 
 The change of name from Simon to Peter, shows that Chnst chose 
 him to be, beyond the other apostles, a roek, or more firm, more con- 
 stant, more immoveable than they— and that forever— in the confession 
 of hip divinity, his real presence with his church and all the other 
 truths he had vouchsafed to reveal to the world. A rock does not 
 melt.— The winds may beat and the r^ins may fell, but the house 
 built upon a rock will stand, not for a few years, but forever. And 
 as the rock, in the physical order loses not its natuie, so neither do the 
 promises of Christ lose their efficacy. " Thou art Peter, (or a rock^ 
 and on this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall 
 not prevail against it." Matthew xvi. 18. 
 
 A professor of Andover College has published a volume, I think it 
 is entitled " Elements of Sacred Criticism." I have examined this 
 work, but my memory retains not the author's name, — perhaps some 
 ic the learned gentlemen present may aid it by the suggestion — ^how- 
 ever, he substantiates my interpretation, or rather that of all ages, by 
 incontrovertible argument. And I confess the American College has, 
 in this instance, a decided superiority, both in sound criticism and or 
 thodoxy, over the " dumb sister," as the English and Scotch universi- 
 ties have invidiously, or facetiously, named Trinity College, Dublin 
 There is one plausible difficulty, against the testimony of Peter's 
 having fixed his residence at Rome, which the gentleman has overlook^ 
 d, viz. that Paul does not mention Peter in his epistle to the Romans. 
 
i 
 
 .41' 
 
 Ml 
 
 DEBATE ON TUB 
 
 Ti «if lain tliit, it is on'y iHTessary to obfierro, Paul wrote A. D. 57. 
 in tli« lelgn of Claudius, when Peter was absent from Rome; and 
 this the illustrious convert of Damascus knew. But why waste lime 
 on a subject undisputed for fifteen hundred years. Pearson, Grotius, 
 Usher, Hammond, Blondel, Scaliger, Casaubon, DumouUn, Petit, 
 Basnage, all agree that Peter transferred his see to Rome and tbero 
 suffered martyrdom. , 
 
 And here another objeetion is overruled ; he said there had been 
 contests among the apostles, who should be greatest. He said that 
 if Peter had confessed that he loved him most, a greater controversy 
 would have arisen. But there was good cause to the contrary. An- 
 drew saw him first — John reposed on his bosom, &c. — for many rea 
 sons, these disputes may have arisen — surely such objections after so 
 great a mass of testimony deserved not serious attention. 
 
 I have long a^o seen, in a Utile mork written in Philadelphia, the 
 remarks of my friend about the Savior's saying he was the vine, when 
 among the vines, on mount Olivet, &c. &c. I'bis is not therefore orig- 
 inal or new. 
 
 I now take up a connected argument on the apostolicity of the church, 
 for I wish this matter to go before the public m its peculiar strength. 
 I look upon it as the most powerful argument that can be advanced in 
 fevw of the Catholic church. I read from Fletcher. His style is good. 
 
 •• ChriHt Jc»u» hatl called the apontles '^shers of nun,* he b«l told theiti to 
 •mmmd preach iht gotpel to every creature," assuriag them, at the same tiim% 
 IhH *tmpmmr was driven to him in heaven, and on earth,' and that * himself 
 woiuld be always with them.* Animated hy this commission, and these as!$urmiice«, 
 ■ad irad too with the luve of GoJ, and ^n ardent charity for men. Unite, heroic 
 Vtctliut of b««volence. did * go forth and preach: They preached; and although 
 the world with all its pasiiont. prejudi<:et and superstitions was leagued against 
 tli«n;->ftlthoiifh its doctrines, which they preached, were repug^naot to ali the 
 Iwd propenaities of the heart, and eiceeded far the measure otthe human under- 
 •tandiiir; j«t did an immense portion of the public, of the corrupted and 
 the vicious, of the learned and the enlig^htened, bear tlien, and believe. 71h«y 
 
 £ reached; and the lore of vice was converted into teal for innocence; {irejudice, 
 ilo the desire of truth: supentition, into the warmth of pietj. Vice itself was 
 exalted into the heroism orsanclitjr; and evenr defilement dt»iieawaj. which cor- 
 ruption had introduced into the sanetuaij or the heart, lluy preached; and 
 Sslsn, lihe n thnndetbolt, was hurled Iroiii hit throne; his templet ra^; hit 
 overturned; and idolatry, ibnsked and trenibltn|^, fled from those scenes, 
 
 beheld the virtue and it edified them; they listened to the wisdom, and it con 
 vinced them. In this manner did the first apostles of Jesoa Chrtsc completelr 
 •Miiae the firure of the ^jftthers ^f i»i#n,' completely verify the assurance which 
 their divine Master had given them, fhat ♦ himself would be always with them^ 
 completely illustrate that passage of St. Paul, in which he says, * God em^loM 
 ^ «0idl h eofnfbimd the strong, and the fbolish to confute the wise: It is tn 
 ^illflwi mission of the apostles, which are the sources of the call and mission 
 of their sncGessors, and it is the successes that attended the preaching of the 
 •polities, thst are the proof, not only of the divinity of their miision, but of the 
 ■iision of those who have replaced, and shall vet replace them till tlie end of 
 lime. In religion, as every thing was originaify oposioUcaU so everj' thing to 
 merit venention, must continue tgitosfoHeal, According to the definition and 
 import of apostolicity, it is necessary that the church which was founded by the 
 •postles, and the mission also which was imparted to the apostles, should, 
 without destruction, or interruption, have been perpetuated to the age we live 
 m, firm amid revolutions, unchanged amid changes. 
 
 I have said, that to ascertain in the Catholic church this stability of duration, 
 • more positive proof cajinot be adduced, than the spectacle of iU pastors (who 
 
 BOBIAN CATHOLIC SJCLIGION. 
 
 89 
 
 compose a large portion of its members, and whose functions are the most im» 
 portent duties of religion) regulaily in each age, succeeding to each other, and 
 transmitting to each, the mission which originally had been inherited from the 
 hands of the apostles. The only difficulty here, is by the light of evidence to 
 establish these important tacts. Well, my brethren, and this is what, without 
 any difficulty, the Catholic exults to do. To do it we need only to consult the 
 records of history; those records which the Protestant himself considers authentic. 
 The light of hbtory is a testimonv, which, beyond the power of reasonable doubt, 
 attests the regular and perennial succession of the Catholic ministij. ^ 
 
 The apostles, whom Christ had sent, ms his Fathef had sent htm; and with 
 whom, likewise, he had promised to remain all days to the end of the world; m 
 consequence of the above conuuission and assurance, chose for themselves co- 
 operators and successors in their sacred ministry :—co-<jp«fi«<or5, in order to 
 assist them in the government of the churches which their seal had planted ;— - 
 BuceessorSf to whom, on occasion of their departure torn this scene of their 
 labors, they might resign the burden of their functions, and the honor of their 
 sees. Now, fortunately for the cause of religion, we have in the annals of 
 history, and in the writings of the learned, the accounts very carefully preserved, 
 of the resignations, which the apostles made of their functions and sees to their 
 successors; and of the resignations also which their successors' successors made, 
 during a series of ages, to the pastors, who, in long order, have till the present 
 age, continually replaced each other. Among these accounts, that which of all 
 others is the most interesting, and which religion has preserved with the nicest 
 care, is the history of the continuation until to-day, of the apostolic powers which 
 Christ Jesus cbnterred upon the prince of the apostles, St. Peter. We have, 
 thanks to that Providence, which watches over the church, and which marks its 
 paths with beams of light, we have the proof of this continuation so luminously 
 attested, so evident, that not hostility can contest, nor incredulity doubt it. 
 Important testimony! itself a bright feature in the divinity of the church; a tes- 
 timony, which, proving immediately the apostolicity of the mission of iU supreme 
 pastors, proves also immediately, yet directly, the apostolicity of the mission of 
 all its other pastors. For, if you consult the rolls of history, you will find that 
 with our supreme pastors, the Catholic pastors of every age, and of every nation, 
 were always united In communion; acknowledging their supereminence, and 
 revering their jurisdiction; considering^ them as the great source, after Christ, 
 of spiritual power, and the centre of spiritual unity. 
 
 iliere have been several distinguished writers, who, incapable of misrepresen- 
 tation, and possessing the means of knowing the history of the successors of St. 
 Peter, and the order of their succession, have carefully handed down to us, each 
 to his own time, the lists of these illustrious men. The first of these I believe, 
 who is known to have preserved the important catalogue, is St. Ireoaeus. 
 
 After Tertollian, the next who continues the catalogue of St. Peter's succes- 
 sors, ii St. Optatus. He brings it down to the time of Siricius; that is, to the 
 year three hundred and eighty-four. • In this one cfeotV,' says the saint, speak' 
 ing of the see of Rome, *sat Peter first, to him succeeded Linus, to him Clement, 
 ic. ..... 1h tiberius succeeded Damasus; to Damasus, Hiricius, the present 
 
 pontiff, with whom we and all the world hold communion. And now: he adds, 
 addressing himself exultingly to the Donatist, *and now, do yoa give an account 
 of the origin ^yoursees,yoa, that pretend to caUyourselves the Cathohc church, 
 
 rcontra Parnien.) , , . , . 
 
 St. Austin is another writer, who had attended to the succession, and has preserv- 
 ed for us, the list ofSt. Peter's successors; derivinr from the long order of their con 
 tinuance, the same conclusions as did Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Optatus. The list 
 which the Saint has communicated, reaches down to his own time, to the pontifi- 
 cate of Innocent the first, in the year four hundred and two, and in its earlier 
 tras it exactly corresponded with the list which I have alluded to already. 
 • Come,* says he to the Donatists, •come, brethren, if it be that you wish to be in- 
 grahed on the vine. 1 weep to see you as you are; lapped off from Us 9<Kred 
 stock. Count up the pontiffs in the chair of Peter, antfin that order see whteh 
 succeeded which. This is that Rock, over which, the pro ud gates of hell eannnt 
 
 Hence, without the necessity of producing further testimonies, it follows, if 
 men will not contest the authority, or call m question the veracity of some of 
 the fairest characters, that the christian world reveres: it follows that from the 
 H 3 l» ' 
 
 \ ii 
 
DKBATB ON TOM 
 
 liM of St Peter to the time of Innocent, in the fifth centmy, there existed m 
 the lee of Romet an nnintemipted chwn of pastors, and a contmaatioo of aji 
 npottolic ini«ion. The continuation of that Mine apottohc miaiion which Chrirt 
 ie«ia had imparted to St, Peter. Onlj he, can doubt this, whose locrednhtjr 
 dm^hli of CYery thinC' 
 
 Aad hu the chain of Roman pastors,— for this is now the only point which we 
 ■Mst lavestigBte,— been continued and extended from the time of Innocent the 
 fffSt, to the present daj; an iotcrrat. it is true, extremely long, and filled ap with 
 ■lOIHHitand cbanres, and revolutions and ^reat events? Yes, the chain has been 
 continued and extended all this whole length of period; from Innocent, who 
 consoled the great Chiysostom. under the persecution of an ambitious princess, 
 to Pius the seventh, who himself is Ihe heroic victim of the persecution of a re- 
 lentless victor. Indee4 the ftiSt b so obvious, it is not even contested. It is 
 conceded bj the men, wlao are interested to deny it. To be assured of it, yo« 
 need only to consult the political annals of any considerable state, or to appeal 
 m oar historians to the mere tablets of chronologY. Yon will find that all rive 
 to our Roman pontiis the same line and length of succession, which I here 
 assign them. Their conduct has been always prominent; their influence always 
 conspicaoas. Few were the great events and transactions, in which, eithei 
 from a pioctple of {Ncty, or sometimes of ambition, they did not bear a part. 
 
 Yes, out if prompted by curiosity, you will give yourselves the trouble to con 
 Mit the anoab of the church, there you will trace, more distinctly still, the evi 
 dence of the truth, which I am now establisbine. There attending to the occur 
 rences of each epoch, you will observe, that the helm which had been confided 
 to the trust of Peter, is with the peatest regularitjr transferred from band to 
 hand; and with pious care, confided to the trust or each successor. You may 
 mark the name, and read the character of each individual, who directed it, the 
 dhte of the day when it was committed to his guidance; and the hour, almost, 
 when he resigned. In short, admitting the accuracy of the lisU which have been 
 preserved by Irenaens, Tertulllan, Ac., you trace in the annals of the church, a 
 ' r plain, and incontestible evidence of a line of Roman pontiffs, the sncces 
 
 ._ of St. Poter, during the lo^g course of above eirfateen hundred years. 
 
 If the aiseient lathers, in their tiuMn, Mid at the distance only of a few years 
 BO triumphantly produced the list of these holy men, evincing by it the divinity 
 of the church, and the apostolicity of the mission of its pastors, and bv it confu 
 ting the novelty and claims of heresy; if Tertullian, impressed with the force of 
 iliaatgiMient, victoriously called out to the hosts of innovators, " sfuta u» oiiy 
 Itliiir Me tkU, Ui^M mmi 9hem m the ort^tn cfymrehmxkea; ihew uttkeUH 
 ff four HtAcft. m rmvihr wdtr frvm ihe days ifihM tfottUa, tutcteUng to 
 iocA 9lktrr if be could say to them, *• IVko are you? Whence U your origin de- 
 'Wimdf WImt hme you to do in iii| ctfiile? Mem tkefomeuor. My /otset- 
 ifaslf flMcifiil. / em the heir of ike iqwtfict .*** if he could say all this; and 
 from this, after scarcely the lapse of two centuries and the succession of hardlv 
 • dmen pontiffs, demonstrate the apostolicity of the church; with how much 
 more reason and with how much more effect, might I, or any other Catholic, 
 demonstrate its apostolicity at present, at present when the continuance of Pe- 
 iief§ successors rorms a chain, of above ewhteen hundred years, and their num« 
 ber fills up a list of above two hnndred and fifty pontiA? Oh ! were only a Ter- 
 tullian now, or an Austin, standing in the same sitvation in which I am placed 
 before you, addressing yon from this seat of truth and pressing the same argu- 
 ment, which I do to oar, upon your attention; and pressing it recommended by 
 the circumstances which I have just referred to, how the thoughts would g^ow, 
 and the words bum, with which ' 
 ingi lo fou! How the cause of 
 
 fpfil vsAMibled enthusiasm would i , ^ _ _ 
 
 Uttf" li reality, if the argument which these great men have employed to 
 prove the apostoficitv of the church, proved aught in their times, it certainly 
 moves the same, and a great deal more, at presentv 
 
 To the thoughtful and the philosophic mind, there is much, I have already ob- 
 served, to admire in the stability ot the church amid the fluctuation of human 
 things. It is the same in regard to the lon^ continuance of the successors of St. 
 Peter. Wisdom and reason, when they consider it, are struck with wonder ; 
 and f4ety discovers in it the visible effect of an Almighty superintendance. Tho 
 InstilQtaons of men soon perish. The niod'tications of hnman policy do not bug 
 
 ROMAN CATHOUC RELIGION. 
 
 91 
 
 reUin their forms. Nothing human is permanent To contemplate, therefore, an 
 order of pontiffs reaching the whole length of eighteen centuries uncbanged. 
 whilst every thing else was changing; uninterrupted, whilst all other institutions 
 were perishingr-is a spectacle at once striking awful, and impressive ; calculat- 
 ed to inspire the protestant himself, if not with the conviction of Us divinity, at 
 least with a conviction of its wisdom ; with a respect for its strength ; with a 
 veneration for its antiquity. Let only reason cast a look into the annals of time^, 
 or recall to iU recollection the events and revolutions, which during the lapse ot 
 eighteen centuries, have taken placeon the theatre of life. During that internal 
 ineverv kingdom of the civilixed world, every government has changed its form , 
 every dynasty resigned its power ; every empire sunk to ruin. Rome 'tself. dur- 
 ine It, has experienced in particular, all the vicissitudes of human instability : 
 I u been ruleS alternately by Consuls, Emperors, Kings and Exarchs : has been 
 taken, plundered, sacked and reduced almost to a heap of ashes. In short, during 
 it. every thinic that is human and political.— the work of the power and anibition. 
 ©f the wisdom and art of men, has either perished or undergone a variety ol al- 
 terations—Kingdoms, states, cities, monuments, laws, opinions, customs, here- 
 sies. Nought but the succession of our pontiff's, and the institutions of our holy 
 relieion, hive remained unaltered. These alone, amid the general revolution ; 
 amid the storms of war ; the ravages of passion ; the conflicts of heresy, subsist 
 undecayedsnd um'.ecaying. They even subsist in spite of all those evils; 
 thourh assailed by the violence of persecution ; though combated by the machi- 
 nations of passion ; though attackecl by the artifices of error ; though assaulted bv 
 the combined efforts of vice. Satan and the world. Surely prejudice itself will 
 own it.— a succession of Pastors thus perpetuated for eighteen centurie8,and per- 
 
 memoa oi" accounting rationally .«» ..,•" '^ — -••» — . : — . t» j 
 
 institution ; and the consequence of that assurance given by ourgreat Redeemer 
 to his aposUes, that he would be with them all days, to ihe end of the world j^or 
 in other words, that it is the result and the proof of ^n apostolic mtssion. 
 
 From the evidences of the apostolicity of the church of Rome, is inferred the 
 evidence of the apostolicity of the various other Catho ic churches, which are 
 disposed throughout the universe. In reality, they are all of them the parts of 
 oncwhole ; the branches of one tree ; the streamsof one fountain ; the rays of 
 one son. They all form only one communion, whose centre and head is the 
 church of Rome. Of these churches, some were established by the apostles 
 themselves, and their immediate successors ;-some and a very considerable part, 
 by the successors of St. Peter, the Roman pontiffs, who in each age have with pi- 
 cas seal, deputed missionaries to preach the gospel in almost every region of the 
 rldbe But in every age, and in every region, the churches that were thus 
 rlanted, were only considered as apostolical, or as portions of the true church, 
 From thi evidence^ of their union with the church o| Rome. It is the reirmrk of 
 St. Jerome; that no bishop was ever acknowledged to be a lawful bishop, 
 except in as much, as he was united in communion with ihe cliair of Sit. 
 
 And why may I not adduce as another evidence of the apostolic mission of 
 our pastors, the venerable subsistence of a multitude of other churches, which 
 withouthaving lasted from the age, which saw the apostles live, have still lastea 
 from the ages that are not long subsequent to it T this is the case with severa 
 Churches in Spain, Italy, France. &c. In Spain, the churches of Toledo, Cordo 
 ve, &c. in Itely, those of Milan, Naples. &c. in France, those of Lyons, Tours 
 Ac have subsisted from the early ages of christian fervor ; from those ages which 
 lire often denominated apostolical, down to the present period of degeneracv 
 Their annals, more accurately preserved than the annals ot civil governmenis 
 exhibit to our astonished, but gratified reason, a line of pastors during this whole 
 lenrthofaices— unbroken and uninterrupted— uninjured by the violence ot per- 
 secutions, as well as unimpaired by the sunshine of prosperity ; a line of pastors 
 that in canonical succession have till the present day, replaced each other. 
 These are monuments of stnbility, compared with which profane history hHS 
 n3thinff similar ; Protestantism nothing analogous. These too attest the apostol- 
 Kity of the mission of our pastors ; and the apostolicity consequently of our 
 c-/ir.h. Aud now once more,let it berecollected, in relation toall thesechurches 
 Ibsi their founders, and the successors of their founders, were in communion with 
 
 ^U3»udMkB^MU 
 

 DEBATE Oil mS 
 
 tiM •«« of Rome:— the former depated perhaps immedi«ielj bj it ; the latter ei 
 ■iiiliK iliwijri in flieir union with it as the beat proof of the apoatoliciljr of then 
 own uelesratioR.** 
 
 f The above quotation was rmi Jo puti, in two diflereut apeocbei; but it has beea 
 tboafbl Mropar to in^rt it entire, bare.] ,, . /• i^ j t * j 
 
 I clfiS* Mere. To-morrow is the sabbath of our God. Let us de- 
 vote the remainder of the day to the preparaUott of out souls for its 
 holy duties. 
 
 MONDAY, Jamwaey 16th, Half pad 9 o\!nek^ A. M. 
 
 Mm. Camfbeix rites- 
 It is a trite and a true ohserration, that the material universe is re- 
 solvable into a very few elementary principles. And not a few of our 
 wisest philosophers suppose that the time may yet come, in the pro- 
 mss of chemical science, when material nature will be resolved into 
 some two,-or three rudimentary elements. The sciences, too, mental 
 and moral, are all resolvable into a few great cardinal principles. 
 
 The papal empire itself depends also upon a few points, indeed, up- 
 on one great point, and thai relates to the office upon which the whole 
 superstructure rests. The most fundamental question is not whether 
 the apostle Peter was invested with the office of pope, or vicar of 
 Christ ; but rather whether there ever was mek an office at all. On this 
 question we have not proceeded in the most logical manner. 1 have 
 been compelled to approach it at different times, and by different ave- 
 lilies, my opponent has not adverted to the rules of this discussion. 
 I am compelled to lead, and he to follow. He can only lawfully reply 
 to such matter as I introduce. But instead of replying to my ar^* 
 -mi B t f, ftlraady offered, he read you some dissertations upon succession 
 ti> m oile©, not yet canvassed and established. This reading of for- 
 eign discussions instedl of replving to me is contrary to our rules and 
 roost illogical. I hope we shall have no more of it. What was read 
 on Saturday afternoon on the question of succession is clearly irrele- 
 vanL Before we contend about succession, the question is. What is 
 to he tioeeeded to I We have had seven presidents, and the succes- 
 sion is indisputable; yet the offieo depends not upon the seven incum- 
 hoits, nor upon their rightful succession ; hut upon what is written m 
 Iht eiwwititioo— opon the positive and express instttnUon of the office. 
 If it is not found in the constitution, succession is of no virtue : 
 however unbroken and oideriy it may be, the present incumbent has 
 no power. The grand question then is, h there in ike ewsttiulum of 
 lie CkriMtian ehmk^ in ike New Owefuml, or Uui Daiamenij a ckaif 
 ^pdmaevj or mperinienieneyf This is the logical and the cardinal 
 qnwition. On this single point rest all the fortunes of the papacy in 
 an enlightened community. 1 wish all to perceive it, and I will pre- 
 sent it in different forms. The first question is, ifiii Jetm CJtmJ iw- 
 poinied the oMu tfpopef The second. Who wm iktfirtiqffieerl Third, 
 Woi there a meeeMnm oritdmAt and fourth, Hm ikai tueeemon been 
 mmmad wmmrwpi to the pmmt da\f ? In this way our reason, or 
 emnnon sense, or logic arraDices the matter ; and in this way only can 
 it be raUonally and scripturalTy decided. With all men of sense, the 
 controversy will hang on this point. A iitlure here is luin to the 
 
 KOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 03 
 
 cause. If this point cannot be proved, it is as useless to contest oth- 
 ers, as it would be to finish a house that is built upon the ice. Strike 
 off the head and the body perishes. Yet tliis capital point rests upon 
 
 an inference! , «, ^ -j 
 
 How would an American like to be told that the office of president 
 depended upon an inference 1 that there was no provision for it in the 
 constitution— that it was inferred from twenty clauses, scattered here 
 and there in as many sections? Could it be possible, that the 
 greatest office in this nation— the very head of this government, should 
 rest on the construction of these clauses ; that there is no chapter in 
 the constitution, expressly creating the office ? Yet, this is precisely 
 the case with the pope. The gentleman does not claim for him a po- 
 sitive grant in the New Testament. He must acknowledge that there 
 is no such office distinctly asserted— that it depends on the reasonings 
 of fallible men to ferret it out. Here I must expose the nakedness of 
 the land and sweep from the arena the dust of Uadition, which blinds 
 the eyes of implicit believers. 
 
 It is said by the Romanists that a belief in the supremacy of the 
 pope is essential to salvation. Boniface VIII. decrees in his canon 
 
 *aw in the words following: 
 
 " Moreover we declare, and say, and define, and pronounce to every human 
 creature, that it is altogether necessary to sakation to be subject to the Roman 
 
 '^^'it appears, if not pedantic, at least awkward to read Latin to an 
 Encrlish audience. However, my learned opponent, so often sete me 
 the'example, that he will allow me to quote this important decree : 
 
 " Snbesse Romano Pontijici mnnis hvmanee creatvroe declaramui, dtctmus, 
 deAnimus^ et pronttnciamm omnino esse necessifate salutis." . . 
 
 It is then solemnly decreed that a belief in, and submission to, the 
 Roman pontiff is essential to salvation. Ought not, then, his authority 
 to be as clearly pointed out in the Bible as the mission of Jesus 
 Christ? for the person and mission and sacrifice of Christ are to us 
 useless, without faith in the pope. Again, of what use is the Bible, 
 without this belief; and especially, if so important a matter is so ob- 
 scurely expressed in it as to rest upon a mere inference 1 Does the 
 person and office of Christ depend on a mere inference I Is it not as- 
 serted and re-asserted, a hundred Umes by the voices of all the pro- 
 phets and apostles of both Testamente? In the Jewish economy, the 
 high Priest was on earth : but in our economy he is in Heaven. There 
 was truth in the type, and there must be truth in the anti-type. 1 et 
 every thing concerning that priesthood was positively and expressly 
 ordained. The office, the officer, the succession, and the means of 
 keeping the blood pure. For, No man dare *'take that office upon 
 himself, but he that was called of God, as was Aaron." Aaron then 
 was distinctly called to be a high priest. Now we argue Oiat if we 
 had a high priest on earth under our high Priest in heaven, and if salva- 
 tion hang upon obedience to him : it ought to be as clear as that of Aaron. 
 But in reference to the Old Testament priesthood, we find ^ery 
 thing distinctly and unequivocally stated. Exodus xxviu. 1. "Take 
 Aaron and his sons from among the children of Israel, that he and they 
 mav minister to me in the priest's office." Again, xl. 13. "And thou 
 
 t "{. .'f*. A J u:~ •»»« «ka4' Via mov ministAT tn mo in the 
 
M 
 
 liailATB OH TH'B 
 
 ItWt tmd te llie pilieinieiit history of the Jew«, as it is in 1 Chron. 33d 
 mi Mth chiptcTS, do W6 ind the unequivocal insiituUon and records 
 
 of ills priesthood! . « .«j *^«.««,^ 
 
 Bit it is not only in a disUnct and unequivocal call and consecra- 
 
 lion, hut in the subsequent care evinced in sustaining this appoint- 
 
 inent, that we see the necessity of such » P^"*^«X /'Pn^wrrT 
 mm and undeittanding. The fehellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, 
 ■nd the destnictlon, by a miraculous interposition, of themselves and 
 of their eonipany, together with two hundred and fifty pnnces ot Israel, 
 for seeking to invade the office, is another solemn altestaUon of the 
 divine erection of this office, and the certain call of Aaron s family. 
 
 Acain: The appointment of God to select an almond rod tor eacn 
 trihe* and to inscnbe the name of each of the twelve families upon 
 those rods, ewry tribe's name upon a scpamle rod, and the miraculous 
 iMddlnff and blossoming and almond-bearing of Aaron s rod, in the 
 eoufse of a sintrle night, was another settlement of this matter, so spe- 
 cial, supernatural, and divine, as to put it to rest for ever. Here we 
 miiit to read in full the lOth and 17lh chapters of Numbers; but we 
 have only time to refer to them. Thus by a o osiuve call, »nd two 
 •plendid and awfully fflorious miracles, was the office of the high 
 pffiesthiiod established in IstmI. . ^ . ^ n « 
 
 And may we not ask, that if as Boniface has defined, and all Roman 
 Catholics believe, « ikai there it m mhmUmh hd in the admiition of Me 
 Mmm ten ^ the p&pm if Momet' ought not the tnstotuUon of a new 
 Older to be as clearly pointed out, and sustained in the now law, as it 
 
 was in the old?! , , • . u ^.:.:.« »• 
 
 Bui my opponent has to concede that there is no such positive of 
 •ipiww institution of St. Peter's chair, nor of his call and consecra- 
 tion, nor any law of succession whatever in the New Testament ; and 
 that It rests wholly upon inference. Now, if no man can take this 
 honor upon himself, but he that is called of God, as vjras Aaron, where 
 Is the office and the anthori^ of the popes of Rome ! ! There is for it 
 no such call. Or will my Mend say that nnere inference or assump- 
 tion is a proper foundation for such a call and office 1 
 
 On Satorday evening I began the examlnaUon of the prroiises from 
 which is ifferred this high and responsible office; and so for, 1 think, 
 proved that he iwinot even find a good logiial inference for it. In 
 Ifatthiv «»i ws f<*on^ ^ support to the Idea that the chureh ot Jesus 
 Chflsl was to be built upon tfii lleth and blood and bones of Peleri 
 Mither upon his pnoa nor office. We savr Uiat every role of ^m- 
 man— that the construction of langmje forbade such a transition as 
 was necessary to the hypothesis. To have addressed Peter m the 
 •econd and third persons as both present and absent, in the wme 
 breath, is wholly unprecedented. To have spoken of him, and to 
 him at one time, in one period, and on a matter so cardinal as making 
 him the foundation of his church. Is not to be admitted on the autho- 
 flty of mere assumption, without a single case parallel in all holy wnl 
 to lay alongside of It. . i 
 
 The case in no rational point of view will endure such violence. 
 Jesua asked for a cofife$moih Peter gave it. Tho conversaUon turned 
 upon that confession, and not upon Peter. The comment ought to 
 iave been upon the text, and not upon hiro that gave It. It was upon 
 the loit and not noon the preacsher. 
 
 BOXAK CATHOUC MELIOION. 
 
 We Protestants say that the chureh is founded on the thing con- 
 lessed. Christ himself is, indeed, the rock ; but figuratively the truth 
 which represents him. I was struck with astonishment when I heard 
 my worthy opponent say, that Peter was the rock, and Christ only a 
 stone in this spiritual temple ! 
 
 [Bishop Purcbll here explained, ' that he had said that Christ was 
 the corner stone which was to strengthen and give consistency to the 
 foundation ; and Peter the rock which was to strengthen and give con- 
 sistency to the superstructure.'] Mr. Campbell proceeded : 
 
 Christ the comer atone/ and Peter the rock ! ! Does this help the 
 matter l' 
 
 What says 1 Cor. iii. " Other foundation can no man lay than what 
 Is already laid," — ^very Peter ! ! No, indeed ; but Jesus Christ him- 
 self Is the corner stone, the rock, the foundation 1 Then Peter is but 
 a itone, as his name imports. But there were eleven other stones of 
 equal value : for, says the Holy Spirit, the church is built upon the 
 foundation of the apostle» — all the apostles ; and of the prophets too ! 
 When, then, all these stones are at the foundation, and Christ the chief 
 corner, where is the room for Peter the rock 1 
 
 But, we have other expressions that illustrate Matthew xvi. Look- 
 ing at the temple one day, Jesus said to those before him, **■ Destroy 
 thit temple and I will build it again in three days." Were the per- 
 sons he addressed in the second person and the temple the same thing 1 
 Here, then, are the persons addressed, the subject of convereation, and 
 himself-— you, (the addressed,) and the temple, (himself.) So have 
 we Peter, his confession, and Christ the builder of the chureh, in the 
 passage before us. They understood by his question that he spoke of 
 his body; but his body was not himself: neither was the confession 
 of Peter, Christ himself; nor Peter's person, the rock of ages. Sorely 
 the papal rock is not as our rock ; our enemies themselves being judges. 
 
 But petroB and peira sound alike, and therefore, though of different 
 gender, case, and person, they must be identical ! Of the pereon and 
 case we have said enough, (for my friend has not attempted to refute 
 It.) Of the difference in gender, he will tell us, that it was written in 
 Syriac, and that the word signifying stone in that language is of no 
 gender. This is gratuitous. He can produce no copy of Matthew in 
 Syriac ; the only authentic copy we have is that before me. It is the 
 Greek version of Matthew : " 5nbtt" is in the second person, and "Mt«" 
 Is in the third. Petrot is masculine and Petra is feminine. It is impos- 
 sible for language to do more to prevent mistake ; and he that would 
 attempt to explain away these thre»— gender, pereon and case, is not 
 tubject to the laws of language, neither indeed can be. 
 
 It Is commonly observ^ that Peter seems not to have been any bet- 
 ter qualified af^r than before the confession, to be the foundation of the 
 church : for he is reprovt^l for his woridly notions of the Messiah and 
 his kingdom, in these words ; " Get thee behind me, advenaryf for thou 
 lelishest not the things of God ; but the things of man." The word «i- 
 ianat signifies adversary. Jesus calls him not ho safancu, Satan ; hut 
 simply opponent. Stand aside thou who opposest me in this matter : 
 Thou dost not understand these divine things. 
 
 There i» another of the bishop's texts to which, out of courtesy, I 
 must allude: "Peter, when thou art converted, confirm your breth- 
 The meaning of which is,— Peter, as you have experienced tba 
 
 ren 
 
IPJ 
 
 DBBATl on THE 
 
 bitterness of f«f>entaiice, you can hereafter comfort and strengthen yont 
 penitent hrethren. My learned opponent interprets «^jhw«5 Feieu 
 when yoii are converted, ym* thall be my vicar mid prince if me ^poeilm ! 
 
 John iii, "Lowest thou tmrnore than ihem^^ it apin before us. The 
 bisimp will have iheae to refer to the apostles. My midieooe will re- 
 Biiiiber that when I read the Greek of the passage, he quoted Latin 
 (iplm quam Am,) as if to correct the Greek by deciding that theu was 
 mmcuHne and not neater, the very point in debate»-lhat when he wa« 
 challen^ to sustain his Latin comment by the original, he immedi- 
 ately af^er taking un the Greek Testameiit laid it down. 
 
 It will elucidate this passage to read the whole in the original^ Teia« 
 13th» , 
 
 In reference to which Jesus says, ^m l#r*, «>*«« /*» 'fMm'nmr, 
 The grammatical antecedent to t^»rm must be Toy a^or and tj 
 l^Jmm, which makes it neuier. Now, I ask, on what grammatical 
 aultiority does the Vulgate convert these into the masculmel 
 Ought a translator to judge for his readers, or ought he to give 
 the same latitude of inquiry to his readers which the original gives to 
 him. The latter, certainly. So decides the highest tribunal in the 
 commonwealth of letters. And neither my opponent nor his Latin 
 nor Greek supplements, nor interpolations, have any right to make that 
 masculine, which the original makes at least doubtful, himself being 
 judge : and according to my judgment, on the laws of language, cer- 
 tainly, neutert 
 
 On what precarious, inferential and illogical grounds rest the proud 
 aspirations of the pope of Rome ! He outrrivals the proudest mon- 
 archs of the east. He that styles himself " brother to the sun and 
 moon," and ♦* disposer of Asiatic crowns," is modest compared with 
 fhe vicar, who claims dominion over angels and saints in heaven- 
 over all the spirits in the wide domains of purgatory ; who styles him- 
 self, or permits others to address him as a God on earth— as •• his holi- 
 ness. Lord God the Pope," as holding the keys of heaven and hell, and 
 the two swords of ecclesiastic and political justice ; and all this might? 
 empire resting upon the words, "|ie<ra," ♦* Urengthen Iky brethren^ * 
 ^* ibiieiil ikm me more than /Aete," **/eeil my §keep and lamba,'^ &c. 
 Was there ever so proud a superstructure reared upon so many and 
 BO baseless assumptions I! 
 
 The gentleman quoted yet another verse from the Vulgate ; 1 Pet 
 V. 3, •* Be noi lord§ over the dergy^ Hence he infers, the apostle Pe- 
 ter had the dergy under him. But the apostle says, " not as lords 
 over the clergy,'^ there then, was a plurality of krder-^oi one su- 
 preme head ! Although this passage was quoted at an early period 
 of the discussion, by my opponent, f reserved my remarks upon it till 
 now. It reads in the original and the common version, ** not as lords 
 ©ter the heritage, lot, or people of the Lord." KAJim, the word here 
 translated elergy, occurs twelve times in the New Testament, and in 
 nine of these it is translated Jul. In Acts, xxvi. 18, and in Col. i. 12, 
 it is translated inheritance^ and in the passage before us, it may be 
 either A>l, heritage, or inheritance t but elergy is most whimsical and 
 arbitrary. As well might the Vul^te have said to Simon Magus, 
 «• thou hast neither part nor clergy in ibis matter:" or, in Col. i. 12, 
 •• lie has itted ns to partake in the clergy of the saints." In both 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 97 
 
 cases the word is the same In the original. These shew by what 
 a stretch of power and arbitrary dominion over words, these critics 
 would bring the clergy or christian ministry under the bishop of Rome. 
 8o fades from the face of reason the whole evidence from the Bible, in 
 favor of the grand office without which the papacy is as mere a fig- 
 ment of fancy as the visions of the prophet of Islamism ! 
 
 Having found the office of vicar, or general superintendant of the 
 m'hole church, the universal episcopate of Rome, without express or 
 
 roeitive precept or institution, and without even inferential probability; 
 proceed in the third place to show still farther, that it is anti-aerip* 
 iutal, not only in theory, but in the facts recorded. 
 
 I have said that the first church was the Hebrew. It was catholic 
 nnd apostolic : for all the twelve apostles were in it. This cannot 
 be said of any other society that ever existed. The whole college of 
 the twelve apostles had their seat in Jerusalem. The Samaritan 
 daughter of Jerusalem was the first fruits out of Judea. Philip, one of 
 the aroetles* evangelists, carried the word of the Lord to Samaria. 
 They had believed, repented, and been baptised. News is brought to Je- 
 rusalem. The cardinals all meet. — ^The twelve apostles are in session. 
 But where is Peier^s chair 1 The prince of the apostles, the vicar of 
 Christ, had not yet learned his duty, and his brethren had not yet 
 learned to call him pope. The fact is, they made a legate of him. 
 They sent two legates to Jerusalem. And who do you think were the 
 two first apostolic legites 1 They, indeed sent pope Peter and his broth- 
 er John !! Thus it is clear that the notion of Petf;r*s universal episco- 
 pacy, and princeship of the apostles was not yet conceived. This fact 
 speaks a volume against the pretended successors of Peter. 
 
 But—again, and still more humiliating to his successors, when Peter 
 had introduced the Gentiles into the church, the brethren of the circum- 
 cision rose up en maaee against him, not regarding him as having the 
 least supreme authority in the case. ** How," do you ask, "did Peter 
 receive the complaints from all quarters for his daring to innovate, by 
 mere authority on all the holy brethren ? Did he say, I am Christ^s 
 vicar— ohief of the apostle8,-^the supreme head of the church — I hold 
 the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; and do you demand of me, why / 
 should act thus" ?! Never thus, spoke Peter. He did not assume any 
 thing : but tells the matter over, and shows how God had opened the 
 door of iaith to the Gentiles ; " and what was I," he reasons, " that I 
 should withstand God V Ought I to have stood up and said to the 
 Gentiles, you shall not enter the kingdom of ^e Messiah, nor be en- 
 rolled amongst the children of God?- In the llth chapter of the Acte 
 of the apostles, we have a full exposition of the groundless pietension 
 of his successors, in the details of this case from the lips of the apos- 
 tle himself. A third instance of the entire absence of all such vicaro 
 in the primitive church, appears in the " council held at Jerusalem.** 
 So the bishop's party designate it, and for the sake of argument, let it 
 be a eouneil. 
 
 It was not called by Peter the pope, nor was it a council of the 
 whole worid ; but of two or three churches. Well, they met. Who 
 was president 1 Neither the pope nor his legates. Peter is not in the 
 chair; hut on the floor. He spoke first, as he was always accustomed 
 to do: but did he dictate the course to be pursued ? No. Had he the 
 honor of drafUng or submitting the decrees ! He had not. He arose 
 I T 
 
US 
 
 DSBATK OSf THB 
 
 and ipoke to the asasmlilyt and told what God had done hy him among 
 the Cientilea. Paul and Bamahas, also on the floor, then stated what 
 thi Lord had done by them among the Gentiles, and when they had 
 doMf James arose to present his views, **ify ienlenee ti'* aays he» 
 ** that we ought to write so and so to the Gentiles." In his views they 
 all acquiesced. They do not say in this letter, ^it seemed good to 
 Peter !" No, " it seemed good to ut." Indeed, if any was pope in 
 this assembly, it was James : not Peier. All the popes of Home as 
 ■neeMSOia of Peter, are therefore not only nnseriptniral ; hut anti-acrip- 
 
 'tiiial* 
 
 Again, and stronger still. In Gal. Ist chap, we are told of a cer- 
 tain controversy between Paul and Peter, — not about faith, nor moral- 
 ity; but about expediency. Paul never would have related this mat- 
 teir : but in self-defence. There were some in Gaiatia that regarded 
 hliii as a sub-apostle, not equal to those who had been companions ot 
 the Lord duriag his publie ministry. In self-defence, he affirms that, 
 in eonveiaations with thepilian^ as some called Peter and James and 
 loha— 4hree of the oldest apostles— he did not receive a new idea. So 
 lai from being dependant on Peter, or inferior to him, he was the only 
 apottle ii those days with whom Paul had the slightest dissension : 
 ••for," says he, "after Peter came down to Aniioeh I withstood him to 
 the hmffor he was to be blamed t for before certain persons came from 
 lanea, he did eat with the Gentiles ; but when they were come, he 
 withdrew and separated from them, fearing the Jews. And the other 
 Jews dissembled likewise with him, insomuch that Barnabas was car- 
 iwd away with their dissimulation. Seeing that they walked not up- 
 ti||htly, I Hid to Peter in the presence of them all ; " Why do you com- 
 
 ES the Gentiles to live as do the Jews 1" Thus Paul reproved the 
 ead of the church, his father, pope Peter, in the presence of all the 
 brethren for a sort of temporizing expediency in its practical details, 
 squinting at dissimulation. AH these facts show how contrary to the 
 doctrine and facts of the sacred writings are the assumptions of 
 popeiy. 
 
 A word or two from the last will and testament of the afiostle Peter. 
 Beiiif Iwr advanced in years he writes two letters containinpr his last 
 wMm to the brethren, in the first he associates himself with the el 
 dtfs of the Jewish church, and claims no other eminence than that of 
 feliow elder, and as such exhorts them to feed the flock of God wil- 
 liagly. In the second letter, be wills, that the brethren addressed, 
 •* should, ailsr his decease, be mindful of the commandment of to, the 
 motHa of the Lord and Savior." Thus, with his last words, he dis- 
 elsiins every attribute of official supremacy. He is known only in the 
 Nsw Teslsinent, as an apottk^ either from his own words simply, or 
 iiMe of Paul, or from aov other circumstance, which in the history c( 
 tlie church is recorded irom Peoteeost to the end of the New Testa- 
 ment. I shall leave other sciii^wpes for the calls of my opponent, and 
 ihe'OisoaiioD. 
 
 I aoWffooeed to show that as there is no' foundation in scripture, 
 so there is none in fact, nor in reason, for the papal supremacy. I 
 have shown, that it wants pomHve proof-- that it is built on inference— 
 that this inference is not found in the premises— and that other scrip- 
 tiiil facts and documents preclude the possibilitjr of such an inference. 
 
 We have.cmphalioally stated, that the first point is to establish tlit 
 
 BOMAN CATHOUC BKLI6I0N. 
 
 W 
 
 off ee. If there is do office, there can be no officer. But my friend the 
 bishop's system is still more at fault, for if he could prove (what he 
 never will) that there was such an office ; still he has to prove that 
 Peter was the first officer. — ^That Peter was that officer is as cardinal 
 a point to his system, as that the papal office had been set up by Jesus 
 Christ. The Scriptures are perfectly mute on that point ! What says 
 church history 1 It is only inferred that Peter ever wa$ in Rome! It 
 is only probable, Barronius only says it is probable he had a see 
 there : he does not moot that question. There is not a single word in 
 all antiquity which positively asserts that Peter was ever bishop o/Bome^ 
 mr was ever in Borne, The ^ntleman quoted Irenaeus. Can he quote 
 the original ? I affirm that it does not exist : and even the copy from 
 which he read was not found for centuries after Irenaeus wrote. But 
 admit it to be genuine. I affirm that Iren^us no where asserts^, that Pe» 
 ier was bishop of Nome. If neither he nor his contemporaries assert it, 
 what is the authority of Grotius, or Casaubon, or Usher or such mod- 
 em authors 1 ! It proves nothing. The assertion of my present opponent 
 is worth as much as that of any man who has lived for a thousand years, 
 to prove an event which happened a thousand years before he was 
 bom. 
 
 The bishop and his friend the editor of the Catholic paper and at 
 least fifteen hundred citizens heard me lecture when last in the city ; 
 and yet, so faithless is tradition, that I have seen it stated in a print 
 of this city— in a Roman Catholic Telegraph, too, that I had asserted 
 as a proposition to be proved, " that Charles Carroll, (f Carrollton was 
 not a Roman CathoUe .'" — words that never fell from my lips or pen. 
 If then tradition cannot be kept here for a single week, in this day of 
 light and knowled^, and good faith, how can you respect and believe 
 
 traditions descending through ages of darkness and superstition 1 
 
 why bring up men ^om the remote corners of the earth, who lived 
 more than a century afler the time in question, to tell us their hearsays 
 or the rumors of past ages. 
 
 I have affirmed, that there is no document to prove that Peter was 
 ever bishop of Rome. My friend disputes this point ; we are then at 
 issue, and this is a vital point Let him then meet me upon it, and 
 decide the controversy. Ireneus says not, that either Peter or Paul 
 was bishop of Rome; but, **over that church that was planted by Peter 
 aod Paul sat Lbus.'^ True, the inference is, that Peter and Paul must 
 have been at Rome; if not, how believe that the church was planted 
 by them! But the church at Rome never was planted by than. The 
 faith of the Romans was known through all the earth when Paul wrote 
 his letter to them, and at that time he had never been in that city. The 
 proposition is therefore not true; and Iren»us, if he wrote so, wrote 
 on erroneous tradition, and is not worthy of credit. Admit, for argu- 
 ment sake, that we take the testimony of the fathers on the succession, 
 which are we to believe 1 They tell us stories irreconcilably dif^ 
 lerent. The gentleman triumphantly held up a map, as if there were 
 some hidden virtue in it, and said he could speak upon it till dooms- 
 day. I have also a map here, which will prove that his map can 
 firove nothing without a tongue in it ; and if holding up this map be- 
 ore you couU convince you, I should soon carry the point. Bellar- 
 mine admits, that the fathers contradict each other on the succession of 
 the first popes. A phalanx of authors can be adduced to prove that the 
 
100 
 
 IIBBATB ON THE 
 
 :« 
 
 Mkmm aie not inuutefNU upon tny one poinl of importance, on tli&l 
 Of raj odier dotna of' 'the piipeej. 
 
 BMne aothonty cannot eiitt, but in the holy oracles : against any 
 other pietended infallible standard, all men should protest. The 
 Ihtheii agroed in bearing testimony to the scriptures, as far as they 
 Imilvidiially knew them ; bot their unanimooe consent on any thing 
 else has not yet been found. 
 
 Justin Martyr, for example, proves my interpretation of the 16th 
 ch. Matthew, on the rocft. He is one of the primitive fathers. He 
 gifM substantially the same Tiews of that whole passage as I 
 mm addoced here. Now it is impossible for my opponent to find a 
 unanimous consent of the fathers with him, as I have Justin Martyr, 
 of the second century, and many others, with me. My standing argu- 
 ment, on the consent of the fathers, is this : 
 
 I^md wmmjf ef ike faiherM tmequivoeaily agreeing with me. 7%e»e^ 
 ^mmm, mud exprem lie mnammom eomeni, if there be any { for it ear^ 
 mihwmmmmuwilkmatkem. Nam, f there be m mmmmom emueni, 
 mBommimhdMupmafaimfmmiaUonf and if then be, they bmM 
 m a fake /bmiJMiii , for we hme thai eoment, not they. 
 
 But this unanimous consent fails in the succession. Admittinff thai 
 Pijsf was first bishop of Rome, no living man can tell whether Linut 
 or ClflBMil was the second bishop of Rome. The ancients do nol 
 agree upon that point. Tertullian makes Clement second bishop, and 
 others make Linns. I have a chart, in Eusebius, which differs from 
 his own historr in various points. I have other charts and indexes 
 that nlace the bishops of Rome in a different order. Eusebius does 
 not place Peter first ; nor do any of the fathers. He places Linus first, 
 then Clitiis, then Clement. Another tells us, that Peter was first, then 
 Umm, then Clenient. A fourth, perhaps, on the authority of the last, 
 f laiMt fMar HisI and Clement 8econd.^[Time expired.] 
 
 Half pad 10 o'clock, J. M. 
 
 BlSiM» PI7BCBLL 
 
 It it v«ll, beloved Iriends, to keep our eyes upon the polar star, 
 whan mm we have embarked upon the sea of controversy. The 
 polar star of this question, is the attempted disproof, by my learned 
 ilMid, of the Roman Catholic claim, to be the holy, apostolic, catholic 
 church. He was pledged to show her to be an apostacy from the only 
 true church. Has he proved this! Is there one intelligent man in 
 ™ »■•«»% propwred to answer this question in the afllrmative? 
 I aakwl, firom what church was she an apostaey I He told us that she 
 had apostatised in the year 1054. But he has not yet told us what 
 f'f^y y *JJ **»« one tra« holy and apostolic church from which she 
 ■teaded. There was a good rsasoo for it: ao other catholic church 
 •lirtsd^at the epoch Indleated, but ours, the Roman Catholic. We 
 wws ti^ taken to the year 260, or some time thereabout. These 
 were indefinite words ; and I ask again what and where was the true 
 church firom which she apoatatiied in 260 ! Has he informed you I 
 we were referred to the Novatiaia— and a Protestant church historiaii 
 Moaheim, tells us«» 
 
 Pir. Camfsiu. heienslled Bishop Piticell to order as not speakinw 
 ^JTIT^ moderatora decided that he was in order and he pr<> 
 ^ .] The gentleman cannot oonliise me b^ these interruptioui. 
 
 SOMAN CATHOUC RELIGION. 
 
 101 
 
 My eje is on the star. I say, that Mosheim, a Protestant eedesiasti. 
 eal historian tells us that the Novatians embraced essential errors. 1 
 have quoted from that historian, for this sect and all other prominent 
 sects, to the beginning of the 16th century. They taught some doc- 
 trines which Catholics, and some, which Protestants hold. They 
 taught some errors which Catholics and Protestants agree to reject— 
 they taught disorganizing doctrines, which armed 3ie civil power 
 both Catholic and Protestant against them — and these doctrines, Ca- 
 tholics and Protestants mutually abhor. They were not then united, 
 pure, or apostolic. They were not the church of Christ. The ques- 
 tion then reverts noon us — which was the church of Christ, from 
 which the Roman Cfatholic church separated in the 3d century 1 
 
 I now come at once to the last speech of the gentleman. ^I have 
 
 already agreed that this controversy is resolvible into two or three 
 ^nd principles — and by the discussion of these we may succeed 
 m ascertaininff their ulterior consequences. If true that Christ has 
 established a head of the Church on earth, it follows that we must 
 recognize that head. So far we are right. If Peter was made that 
 head, we are ri^ht If Peter was to have successors, we are right. 
 If that succession was to last to the end of time, we are right, for 
 we hold these propositions to be irrefragable. If on the contrary, 
 these propositions could be satisfactorily proved to be untrue, the 
 Catholics would be wrong. 
 
 , I have proved the first of these, viz. that Peter was made the head 
 of the church, by Christ, from scripture. And what has my friend 
 discovered to weaken the force of the numerous and strong texts 1 
 have adduced,— the rock, the keys, the feeding of the lambs, and ot 
 the sheep whom the lambs are wont to follow, the prayer of Christ 
 that P^ter*s feith should never fail, the charge given him by Christ 
 to confirm his brethren, his confession of the divinity of Christ be- 
 fore the other apostles, and the Blessedness pronounced on him for 
 that confession by Christ, the deference shewn him — ^the poor illiterate 
 fisherman, by Paul, imbued with the sublimest lessons of the Law at 
 the feet of Gamaliel, &c. &c.? Why he says : " Peter, lovest thou me 
 more than these fish V* 
 
 My friends, I know not how to treat this interpretation seriously. 
 But since the gentleman is so curious an interpreter, let us see if the 
 text will bear him out. After the miracle of the draught of fishes, 
 the apostles, at Christ^s invitation, proceeded to some distance from 
 their nets and barks, for the purpose of dining. It is natural to sup- 
 pose they selected, for dinner, no more of the fish they had taken, 
 than they would probably eat Can my friend say that after they had 
 dined there were any of the cooked fish remaining 1 There might have 
 been some bones left on the table ; but would Christ point to thesn 
 fish bones, and say, Peter, lovest thou more than th^? What a ques- 
 tion for Christ to ask his leading disciple ! Surely such an inters 
 pretalion is absurd. But what is the voice of antiquity 1 My friend 
 says that Justin bears him out in his interpretation. Will my friend 
 point out the passage in that father's works f Will he say that it is the 
 principal sense, the sense that father approves t I pledge myself he will 
 not pretend to do so while refutation is near. Now if scripture is so 
 very clear, and this meaning as obvious as Mr. C. supposes, is it 
 not strange that this light should beam upon us to day for the first 
 I 3 
 
 ilHiiiJ 
 
 P 
 
|i 
 
 102 
 
 DEBATS ON THB 
 
 Hme! Hie gentleiiiaii chuget me witli IiaTiiif dared u change t1i« 
 
 fender of the word ■ignifving lA«te, from neuter to masculine. Does 
 e not know that the word rouran is both masculine and neuter? It is 
 generally applied to persons, though I do not deny that it may be ap« 
 |ilied to things. The Greek therefore leaves us as much in the dark 
 as erer* 
 
 We ind a prallel passage in the new Testament. ** He that loTeth 
 Htlier and mother more than me is not worthy of me.*' Matth. z. 37. 
 Heie Hie words are i^ vf (more than me). %ui is in the accusative 
 case— 'miraw is in the genitive case. But, my friends, this has nothing 
 to do with the question at issue ; it does not make for or against my 
 argument, whether we adopt the natural, or the gross inteq>retation« 
 Christ said to Peter, " loveU IAiki me." He demands an assurance of 
 his faithful attachment Peter three times replies in the affirmative, 
 and thrice the command is repeated to him, ** feed my lambs,** " feHi 
 my sheep.** The argument is entirely independent of either eon- 
 stmetion referred to. Hence I maintain that Peter was establishedy 
 head of the church by Jesus Christ. The ** rock," the ^ keys,*' the 
 fiiyer, the prophecy of the place and manner of Peter*s death, which 
 we reail in the same chapter, all prove it. 
 
 The gentleman says that a doctrine should be se clear, that it could 
 lel possibly be contested. This is really too soft for a man of Mr. 
 C.*8 strong mind. What is there so clear that it eoiM noi pcmblu be 
 emiikded. Does not the universe tell as elearly as Grenesis, that God 
 oeated the heavens and the earth, and is not that contested T What 
 doctrine more clearly revealed in the bible, or more important than 
 the divinity of Christ! and is not that contested 1 and by one of tlie 
 most learned societies of christians in the United States, I mean the 
 IJmitarians. They read the bible and they think it impiety and bias 
 fhemy to call Jesus Christ God ! 
 
 It was essential In the Jewish institution that there should be a hiffh 
 priest. If the old institution was a type of the new, where is the 
 anti-type ! And if the headshin of the high priest of the Jews dero- 
 gated not from the authority or God the Father, who was pleased to 
 be their special ruler, neither does the headship of the pope derogate 
 imn the supreme authority of Crod the Son, Jesus Christ, who acouii^ 
 •d the ehnieh by his blood and established Peter its visible head on 
 earth, to exercise the office during his natural life, and by his succes* 
 aers for ever. 
 
 Mj liriend flies from scripture to tradition, and from a lather of the 
 early age to a modem historian. I will pledge myself to this en- 
 lightened assembly that the supremacv of Peter and of Peter*s suc- 
 cessors in the Roman see can be abundantly attested by an appeal to 
 tradition : and I may here observe that Baronius has been misrepre- 
 sented. He does not say it is not improbable that Peter fixed his see at 
 Rome — of this he knew there was no doubt ; but that it was not im- 
 probable he fixed his see there bv the express command of Christ, 
 wMeh is, the intelligent hearer will perceive, quite a different propo- 
 sition, Peter acted as the other apostles did, under the guidance of in- 
 nffaHon, in the choice of the scene of his pastoral toils; but Baronius 
 thinks it not improbable that Christ expremly commanded him to se* 
 leet Rome for his — ^There he could " teach all nations.** Mr. C. 
 asserts that foi a thousand years there is not a voice hean! to attest 
 
 ROMAN CATHOMC SEUOION. 
 
 103 
 
 this fact My friends, not one voice, but five hundred attest it. There 
 is one loud chorus of testimony amonor the fathers and historians, 
 ffivintr almost universal consent to the doctrine. Some obscure indi- 
 viduals may have doubted, or denied it in late years. They are but 
 motes on the surface of the overwhelming stream of testimony. Agam 
 my friend went back to the bible. He read of the high priesV— but he 
 cannot open the bible without seeing his own refutation wntten there— 
 almost the first words that struck my ears were, the dresses and anoint' 
 ing of the priests. Where are such things done among Protestants! 
 Do they not make void the scriptures 1 Anointing the clergy and the 
 sick,— commanded by the bible— rejected by Protestants— superseded 
 by the fashions of the day ! Again ; Aaron was separated that he should 
 bless and sanctify— and yet if the pope bless or sanctify, he is an im- 
 pious assumer ot what belongs to God alone !! , ^ , 
 
 The case of Korah, Dalhan and Abiram was mentioned. God re- 
 ally appears to me to extort from the adversaries of his church the 
 most striking proof of her authority, vindicated in the Type, from 
 the sacrilegious contradictions of the schismatics of the old law. 
 The ground opened and swallowed them up ! So have all the sects, 
 that in the early ages opposed the church, perished. The grave has 
 hidden their guilt from the earth, too happy if they bear not its pen- 
 alty in the worid that expands- beyond the grave ! Again 250pnesls 
 perished for opposing the ordinance of God I the ecclesiastical guide 
 
 he had appointed ! « , , . 
 
 My friend asks, if the headship of Peter and his successors were 
 as certainly divine as the high priesthood of the old law, would it not 
 have been established by proof as plain 1 Why, he emphatically de- 
 manded, cannot the Roman pontiff, like Aaron, shew his authority by 
 an equally convincing miracle I My friends, I take the gentleman at 
 his word. He that has eyes to see let him see. Has not God wrought 
 a similar miracle— I will feariessly sav- a far more splendid miracle, 
 to attest the preeminence of the see of Peter 1 Has not the night of 
 Mahommedanism and infidelity thrown its sable pall oyer the once 
 flourishing churches of Africa and Asia 1 Has not the bright "ght of 
 the irospel become extinct in the most celebrated of the sees founded 
 by the other apostles— Crete, Corinth, Ephesus,Antioch, Alexandria, 
 Philippi, Jerusalem 1 Where is the hymn of praise to Chnst inton- 
 cd, the voice of pure confession heard, the tabernacle or the tes- 
 timony seen in any of these famous churches, where Su Paur had 
 formed such a multitude of adorers in spirit and in truth t which he 
 visited with so much solicitude, prayed for with so much fervor, and 
 loved with so much tenderness. Returning to visit these churches, 
 not on the following day as Moses did the rods of the twelve tnbes 
 but after eighteen hundred years, we see that the rod of Aaron, th 
 church formed by the high priest appointed by Jesus Chnst in th 
 New Law, has budded and blossomed, and produced fruit of which 
 all the nations have participated, while the churches formed by the 
 other aposties have been stricken with a melancholy stenlity, and 
 have utterly withered ! The murmuring of the children of Israel 
 airainst Moses and Aaron ceased when they beheld the prodigy rela- 
 t^ in the book of Numbers ; is it too much to expect that we will be 
 less insensible to an equally authentic declaration m favor of the 
 church and pontiff, the special objects of the divine protection and 
 caret 
 
 i 
 
 ti 
 
 tit J 
 P 
 
 c 
 
 i 
 
104 
 
 niBATS ON TUB 
 
 .V 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 \i>. 
 
 1/ 
 
 When Pioi, VI. died at Valence, in France, it was said thai quid 
 liine was thrown on his corpse, that no Testige of it might remain, and 
 infidelity hoasted that Christianity was buried in the same grave with 
 its pontiff. But a successor was soon heheld to ascend into the chair 
 of Peter— alas ! he too, is doomed to soffer contumely for the name of 
 Jesns. He is seised with violence, hy a ruthless soldiery, and car- 
 
 f 
 
 riei dr from Rome, an exile and a prisoner, to Fontainebleao. The 
 doom of his persecutor is written : ne is precipitated from the giddy 
 lieifbit of his ambition, and the meek, but invincible heir of Peter's 
 •aond |iow«r, contrary to all human foresight, is reinstated by a Pro- 
 testant ffoteniment, by 30,000 Protestant bayonets, in the peaceful ex- 
 ercise of hb duties, as the chief pastor of the Catholic world. Eng- 
 land, with all thy faults I love thee still. You are Protestants, but 
 you can be just* Rome, changeless amid change, Rome, free among 
 the dead, unaffected by earthly revolutions, by earthly conquests un- 
 ■ulldued, why have tbn nations raged, and the f>eop)e devised vain 
 things against thee ! The Lord is thy protector still. He hath won- 
 derfully sustained thee, amidst all the vicissitudes of human institu- 
 tions. "He that dweUeth in heaven," to use the language of the 
 Psalmist, " hath laughed at them that stood up against thee, and the 
 Lord ihall deride them.*' Mv friend would call it *" morbid'^ in England, 
 toniiipatliise with the Catholics, as he has called your generous Bjm 
 f&mm for your persecuted fellow-citizens ; but it is not morbid, it is 
 magnanimous, it is just to confess an error, to abjure an unfounded 
 pmudiM, and to side with the wrongfully oppressed. 
 
 I quoted scripture to prove that Christ was the corner stone, on 
 which the whole building securely rests — and that Peter is the rode of 
 the foundation, deriving whatever strength it has thus exhibited from 
 Christ. Thtre is no contradiction in this. I am compelled to follow the 
 zigxag eonrse of my friend. The reader of the printed controversy will 
 he at no loss to bring together the diverging rays of evidence and to find 
 myanswers to objections, where they may be, apparently out of place. 
 
 There is no distinction of persons in Syriac. In Greek it is once 
 mfrfHt and again ^nn^ — but this change of gender is merely to 
 avoid a repetition of the same word in the same sentence. This is 
 reason sufficient, to account for the difference. I give my friend thanks 
 for proving that Peter was not Satan. It is the correct reading:, and 
 therefore, 1 agree with his interpretation of the text; when Christ says 
 to Pelifft ** get thee behind me Satan,*' that is you, who differ from 
 me on this particular subject. This text has been much abused. 
 
 Again : Peter did think, that he loved Jesus more than the rest, and 
 Chrtst knew that he did. Do you remember, my friends, the scene 
 which took place shortly before the Savior suffered I When he told his 
 apoades, with a holy melancholy on his sacred heart, that one of them 
 would betray him — that the shepherd should be stricken, and the sheep 
 4it|i0iied ! Ah ! is there not something in the noble hearted enthusi* 
 asm of Peter, which is at once the cause of his offence and its pallia- 
 tion 1 **' Although all shall be scandalized in thee, yet not I." This 
 piiyves an impulsiveness, an ardor, and a strength of attachment to the 
 person of Christ, which Peter, too confidently it may be, but yet sin- 
 cerely, believed to be greater than the other disciples felt for their di- 
 mm iiiMler. 
 
 leans knew this, hut he warns him not to be presumptuoos. ** Amen, 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC KELIGION. 
 
 1C5 
 
 I 5ay to thee, to-day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice, 
 thou shall deny me thrice," Mark xiv. 30. From this, and other texts, 
 Peter's ardor, and the Savior's knowledge of his confidence in his own 
 Steadfastness are perfectly plain. Why, then, deny them both 1 
 
 I quoted the vulgate, not through ignorance of Greek, on which I 
 have shewn as much knowledge as my friend ; but not to boast of a 
 little learning on the wordSf nx^r t«/7»». The Greek, the Latin, and tho 
 English, as verbal criticism is necessarjf to elucidate the meaning of 
 the text, are by a singular coincidence, in this case, equally ambigu- 
 ous. How can an unlettered Protestant understand the text! 
 
 The popes do not claim to be lords, spiritual, and temporal. But 
 ▼ery few of them exercised any temporal power beyond the limits of 
 their own principality, where they rule, as Gibbon told you, by the 
 voice of a free people whom they have redeemed from slavery. Their 
 throne is established in the affections of their people, who, with rea- 
 son, prefer their pontiff's mild sway to kingly usurpation — the crosier, 
 to the sceptre. The popes have never taken the title of kings of Rome. 
 
 I can shew from Waddington and Southey, both Protestant histori- 
 ans of the church, that through centuries of darkness and doubt and 
 civil commotion, while the Turk was ravaging the southern regions of 
 Europe and the northern hordes were pouring down in swarms from 
 their ice-bound regions, desolating the blooming fields, and destroying 
 all that was useful and beautiful of the works of civilization, the pope 
 was the only savior of Europe, from their barbarian ravages. He 
 gave to science and to letters the only refuge which could then have 
 availed them— the refuge of an altar— and the now calumniated monks 
 who reproduced in more auspicious times, the intellectual ray. They 
 handed us the works of the sages, and heroes, the poets, historians 
 and orators of Greece and Rome across the isthmus of the " dark ages 
 80 called. They preserved for us a better gift — ^the Bible. 
 
 Stn^t* emtferred by the church.—** Yet should we be very unjust to the Roman 
 Catholic church, if we should allow it to be supposed, that she opened no recep- 
 tacles, for the nurture of true excellence; that in her general institutions, espe- 
 cially io her earlier age, she has overiooked the moral necessities of man— the 
 truth is far otherwise. We have repeatedly observed, how commonly, in seasons 
 of barbarism, religion was employed in supplying the defecU of civil government 
 and diffusing consolation and security. The Truce of God mitigated the fury 
 of private warfare, by limiting the hours of vengeance, and interposing a space 
 ' ' >■ of justice and humanity. The name of the church was associated 
 
 me ijeris woo auv*>M^t »,„„,^, equally _^,.. ~, _ 1 4- 
 
 peatedly employed. In her interference m the concerns of monarchs and nations, 
 she frequently appeared as the advocate of the weak,and the adversary of arbi- 
 trary power. Even the much abused law of Asylum served through a long pe- 
 riod, as a check on baronial oppression, rather than an encouragement to crime. 
 The duty of charity, during the better ages of the church, was by no meant 
 nerlected by the secular clergy, while it was the practice and office of the mo- 
 nastic establishments- And even the discipline, so strictljr inculcated by the 
 «ar1ier prelates, however arbitrary in its exercise, and pernicious in its mtnue, 
 WM not unprofitable in arresting the first steps, and restraining the earliest dis- 
 positions to sin. Confession and penance, and the awful censures of the church, 
 iriien dispensed with discretion, must have been potent instruments for the .m- 
 proveroent of uncivilised society." Waddington's Church Hist, page 546. New 
 York edit. 1835. 
 
 We now come to the word Kju^oc (cleros,) which the gentleman 
 ■tys means lot and not clergy. IM does mean the whole people of 
 
106 
 
 
 BOMAN CATHOUC KKLIGION. 
 
 107 
 
 HfM— clergy tnd laity* Now if the apostle could not lord it over the 
 whole people, he could not lord it orer the clergy. The pope does not lord 
 it mm the consciences of either clerinr or laity— he helieves as they do. 
 
 The apostles sent Peter and John to Samaria. Peter and John 
 prohaUy dffeted themselTes for the early mission— Peter* to whom 
 €od had given superior power— «nd John, who had leaned on the bo- 
 som of Jes«8 at sapper— both pre-eminent apostles, to confirm the peo- 
 |iie of Samaria. 
 
 No man can read the New Testament attentiTely without seeinsv at 
 mimost every page, the endence of Peter's divinely appointed and ae* 
 Inowledged primacy ; or the history of the church, without eve^ 
 where discoverinf the primacy of his successors. Not one council 
 has been received that the pope did not approve. His approbation is 
 in the last resort, the only certain test of a counciPs orthodoxy. 
 
 Peter si»oke first in the council at Jerusalem. Peter was justly w 
 primande« by Paul. The very fact of Paul mentioning his boldnesa 
 oil tfaii oielffiiia, confirms the laet of Peter's supremacy. So did Ire- 
 imt mniMMlfate with pope Victor in the controversy of the Quarto- 
 decicnans — about the time of observing the Easter— and the pope's 
 sentiments prevailed^-al though Ireneur diasuasive did good. So did 
 llie controversy about re-baptization terminate between St. Cyprian 
 and the po|>e8 Cornelius and Stephen. The popes' decision was every 
 where received. 
 
 Now Paul himself did the same for which he blamed Peter. He 
 knew and prized the freedom with which Christ had made him free, 
 yet he says, •• If meat scandalise my brother, I will not eat it forever." 
 
 He vainly persists in saying there is no good ground for asserting that 
 Peter was ever in Rome, afWr all the proof I have adduced. Here is 
 Robinson*! Calmet, a Protestant dicttooaiy of the Bible, a standard work 
 In Protestant libiaries. Calmet was a Mmmm Caikoae, He was a prodigy 
 of learning and ancient literature — and Robinson, a Protestant divine, 
 fiMmght he could not furnish a better gift to the public than this book. 
 
 *• If the reader wiihct to sectha evidence from antiqoitj, on which Peter's 
 having been at Rone rests, he will find it fully set Torth bjr Lar(!n«r. who con- 
 eludes his UM|«iiy as follows : This is the general, uncontradicted, disinterest- 
 ed testniooy of ancient writers in the several parts of the world, Grc^eks, Lat- 
 Ult, Syrians. As our Lord's prediction concerning the death of Pt-ter, is record* 
 ed in one of the four Gospels, it is very likely that rhristi»ns would observe the 
 •cisoiapliihiiieiit of it, which must have been in some place. And about this 
 place, there it •» dif ereoce among christian writers of ancient times. Never 
 any other place was named besides Rome; nor did any other citv, ever glory in 
 the martyrdom of Peter. It is not for our honor, nor for our interests, either 
 m rhrifltians or Protestants, to deny the trath of events ascertained by early and ' 
 well attested traditbn. If any make an ill nse (as hi calls H) of snch facts, we 
 are not accountable for it. We are not, from a dread of such abuses, to over- 
 throw the credit of all history, the conaeqnence of which would be latal." Rob- 
 ins(ra*s Calmet, p. 741. 
 
 The gentleman has said that not one voice has attested the fact of 
 the succession of the Roman see for a thousand years. I have quoted 
 Eusebitts, a Crreek lather of the fourth century, translated by a Pro- 
 testant minister, a splendid work. Here is a list df 39 bishops who 
 sat in the chair of St. Peter, all of whom he names in the body of the 
 work; also the succession in the ehnrehea of Jerusalem, Antioch, 
 Rome, Laodicea, dbc. 
 
 Of St. Petxr. 
 
 (Simim MagM) ''entering the dQr of Rome, by the €OH»pcration of that ma 
 
 lirnant spirit which had fixed its seat there, his attempU were soon so fcirsnc- 
 cSful. w to be honored as a god, with the erection of a statue by the inhabitants 
 ofihat city. This, however, did not continue long; for '^"^ff^j'yp""^*'^,^^ 
 reign of Claudius, by the benirn and gractons provtdence ^/^ «o*i. P«<er thut 
 wmerftd and /treat hpostle, who, by his coitra^e took the lead ofaUthe rttt, was 
 IZduciedTo llome ;gain»t this p^st of mankind. He. hke a noble comma.,der 
 of God, fortified with divine armor, bore the precious merchandise of the re- 
 vealed light from the East to those in the West, announcing he li^ht it»eU; 
 and salutary docrine of the soul, the proclamation of the kingdom of God. ,-* 
 Book 11. chap. 14. page 64. ^^ ^^^^ 
 
 "After the martyrdom of Piral and Peter, Linus was the first that received the 
 episcopate at Rome."--Book III. chap. 2, page 82. 
 
 "After Vespasian had reigned about ten years, he was succeeded by his son 
 Titus; in the Jecond year ofwhose reign. Linus, bishop of the church ofRpme, 
 who had held the office about twelve years, transferred it to Anacletus. -Chap. 
 13, page m ^^^^ \ , , ^^ 
 
 " In the twelfth year of the same reign. (Do";*5">) **^«' ^fJ'^I^S' ilf 
 been bishop of Rome twelve years, he was succeeded by Clement. -Cbap. 16, 
 
 pace 100. „ 
 
 I o Fttarestub. 
 
 •♦ In the third year of the above mentioned reign (Trajan;*,) Clement, bislwp 
 of Rome, committed the episcopal charge to Euarestus. —Chap. 34. page 120. 
 
 Alexander. ^ « u j 
 
 " About the twelfth year of the reign of Traian after Euarestus had 
 
 completed the eighth year as bishop of Rome, he was succeeded in the episcopal 
 office by Alexander."— Book IV. chap. 1, page 128. 
 
 X YRTIT8. 
 
 " Bat in the year of the same (Adrian's) "reign, Alexander, bishop of Rome, 
 died, havinr completed the tenth year of his ministrations. Xystus was his suc- 
 
 cessor."--Chap. 4, page 130. 
 
 Telesphorus and Hyginus. 
 - In the ftrat year of this (Antonine's) reign, and in the elCTenth year of his 
 episcopate. Tel«iphoros departed this life, and was succeeded m the chaise of 
 the Roman church by Hyginus."— Chap. 10, page 137. 
 
 Pius. • j •. 
 
 " But Hyginus dyinr after the fourth year of his ofilce, Pius received tiM 
 episcopate."— Chap. 11. page 138. 
 
 " And Pius dying at Rome in the fifteenth year of his episcopate, the chnrch 
 there was governed by Anicetus."— Ibid, page 138. 
 
 SOTER. . . , rxr 
 
 « It vras in the eighth year of the above mentioned reign, viz. that of Venis 
 that Anicetus, who held the episcopate of Rome for eleven years, was succeeded 
 by Soter."— Chap. 19. page 156. 
 ' Eleutherus. 
 
 " Soter.bishop of Rome, died after having held the episcopitelrflilytjm He 
 was swxeided by Elenthenis. the twelfth in oider from the j^iertlefc"—Book V. 
 Prelim, page 168. ^^^^ 
 
 •• In the tenth year of the reign of Commodus. ElenUierys, whohad h«Wti»n 
 •piscopato for thirteen years, was succeeded by Victor. —Chap, ^. pege 20b. 
 
 ZEPHYRUfXJS. 
 
 •But after this author (Victor,) had superintended the church. Zephyrimiswaf 
 appointed his successor about the ninth year of the rcign of Sevwas. — cnap 
 
 U. paKe 214. 
 
 '^ Callisthus and Urbanits. ..... r 
 
 " In the first year of the latter (Antonine's reign,) Zephyrimis the bishop of 
 Rome, departed this life, after having charge of the church .^'g***^/**™- "* 
 was silcceSed in the episcopate by CallistEus. who survived him five years, and 
 left the church to Urbanus.— Chap. 21 , page 242. *«^ 
 
OH 
 
 FllRIUUfflFS* 
 ••WUIitlliMirasllwitetoof tliia8i,Url»a,wlioliMll»ieiibiilioporRoiiM 
 
 •iglitf«M% ma ■nccendcd by Pontkii«u."--€lnp. 23, page 243. 
 
 AirrEROfl AMD FABlAIfUt. 
 
 '*€liiidiaii Mccteded Muimus in the soTereig^ntir of Rome, when Pontianiw 
 mko had heM tlie epigcvpate six years, was succeedMl bj Anterot in ihm chordi 
 or Rome; h« also is soccacded by Fabianus.**— Chnp. 29, paga 248. 
 
 ComiXLius. 
 
 *lltelii. . . . raised a persecution against the church, in which Fabianas 
 
 •tiirered martyrdom, and was succeeded as bishop of Rone by Cornelius."- 
 
 Chap. 39, page 254 
 
 Lucius AND Stephen. 
 ** Afler Comelins had held the episcopal office at Rome about three yean, ha 
 as succeeded bir Lucius, but the latter did not hold the office quite eirht 
 
 months, when dying he transferred it to Stephen.**— Book VII. chap. 2, page 
 
 211. 
 
 Stephen and Xtstus II. 
 •• Bnt after Stephen had held the episcopal office two yean, he was succeeded 
 byXystos."-Chap.5,page273. 
 
 DiONTSIUS. 
 
 •I Xyilus had been bishop of Rome eleven years, when ha was succeeded bf 
 Dionysius.**— Chap. 27, page 302. 
 
 " Dionysius, who had been bishop of Rome for nana yean, was succeeded by 
 Felix.'*— Chap. 30, page 308. r * j 
 
 EUTTCHIANUS, CaiUS, AND MAKCBIXINUS. 
 ** At this time Felix, havinr hrld the episcofiate at Rome five yean, was suc- 
 ceeded bv Eutychianus, and be did not hold the office quite ten months, when he 
 fall his place to be occupied by Caius of our own day. Cains, also, presided 
 about ineen years, when he was succeeded by MarceUinos.** — Chap. 32, page 310 
 
 MlLTIADEt. 
 
 **Con9tantine Augustas, to Miltiades bishop of Rome.'*— Book X. chap. /» 
 
 'T; 
 
 need only nfer to what I ha¥e vead from this authentic historian 
 for splendM and indisputable proof. Here is the iaccession equally 
 
 iilain in all the churches, but iongeii in Borne* Thence it has been 
 aithfullj noticed, and regularly perpetuated in an uninterrupted chain 
 of pontiffs down to the present chief pastor, auspiciously presiding 
 Of er all the church. 
 
 Minr, ray friend, in the name of God what is to become of this eon- 
 troveiay, when testimony like this la overlooked! And to close the 
 testlmonT of Eusebius who has embodied that of the preceding ages, 
 ao as to leave no doubt, that the same identical doctrinea, the present 
 onsanlsatioiit orders and sacraments of the Catholic church were those 
 of the list afea of Christianity, and heresy too the same then that it now 
 la. I cravo your attention for one of the most instructive chaptera 
 tliat could poaatbly be lead on a subject of such abaoibing Intdfeat to 
 Ihe Christian. 
 
 Qf JVbvn/iif, ki$ manntnamd Kahit$^ and hit herem. 
 About this tune appeared Novatus fNovatian) a presbrter of the church of 
 Rome, and a aiaa elevated with haughtiness against these (that had ftillen), as if 
 
 there was no room for them to hope salvation, not even, if they performed every 
 thing fiir a gmMuna and pare confession. He thus became the leader of the pe. 
 culiar heresy of those who. in the pomp of their imagiaationi, called themselves 
 '^-'*»*iri. A very large council being held on account of this, at which sixty in- 
 of the bishopSfbut a still greater number of presbyters and deacons were 
 nt ; tba pastors of the remaining provinces, accordmg to their places, deli- 
 ' lly what should be done: this decree was passed by all; "That 
 « and those who so arrogantly united with him, and those tlial 
 to adopt the uncharitable ai d'most inhuman opinion of the niao. 
 
 Cathan. 
 
 deed, 
 iwesew 
 berated aai 
 
 II* 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC RSUGION. 
 
 100 
 
 Iheie Ihey considered «m<>nL***°'* IliLJ?^ ' u'Tll^ 
 
 that brethren who had incbrred any calamity, ihonld be treated and healed wiin 
 
 ^•Trre1^"al"ep:;^/cor^^^ of Rome, addressed to Fabins W- 
 shop of Antioch, w*hich show the transactions of the <'^.""<'' . o^/^°™5/ !* T^^ 
 the opinion- of all those in Italy and Africa and the '^fijo"* '^f «;« * 9^^^". ^^j? 
 are a^»o written in the Roman tongue, from Cyprian, and the t>"bops w,^ h.m m 
 Africa. In these, it is shewn that they ai^ agree m the "f"*^ *UL^ of L? 
 those who had fellen under severe temptations, and also in the P^F^^^^ *»» ^ 
 communicating the author of the heresv. wid all that were of »>« PJ^y- T<> 
 these is attached also an epistle from dornelius on the decree, of the council, 
 besides others on the deeds of Novatus, from which we may add extracU, that 
 those who read the present work may know the 97"'"»^«"^* «*i;^>;"^^^^^ 
 What kind of a character Novatus was, Cornelius informs Fabius, writing as tol- 
 lows- ** But that you may know, says he, how this singular man. vvho foru.erly 
 Zm toXep s^o?ate,Ld secVetfy concealed wiUiin himself this precipitate 
 mSn. making use of those confessors that adhered to him from the beg.nn.n5 
 as a cloak for hi! own folly. I will proceed to relate: Maximus. • Prejbyter of 
 our church, and Urbanus. twice obtained the highest reputation for th^r con- 
 fessions. Sidonins also, and Celerinus, a man who. J^. *»»« fJ-^S^n^sShis ow^ 
 •▼erv kind of torture in the roost heroic manner, and. by the firmn«8 ot lus own 
 fauS^sSengSened the weakness of the flesh, complete y worsted the •^versa^. 
 These meJTtherefore, as they knew him, and haJ well sounded h» artificeand 
 duplicity. i» also his peijurieJ and falsehoods, his dissocial and savage chara^r, 
 retumel to the holy SSrch, and announced all hb devices and w'^^^edn^ which 
 he had for a long tiie dissembled within himself, and this too in the pr^^^/[ 
 many bishops; Ind the same also, in the presence of many P-^^y^e^^ *nd a 
 great numblr of laymen, at the same time Tamenl.ng and -""TO^'ng that tbey 
 Kd been seduced, ind had abandoned the church for a short time through the 
 agency of that artful and malicious beast." After a little, be further says : We 
 hive ^n. belored brother, within a short time, ^^^^^^^'^i^^J^^^.'S!^^ 
 change in him. For this most illustrious man. and he who •*'™^„!^'*J» |^ ™J*? 
 dreadful oaths, that he never aspired to the episcopate, hassuddenly appear^ a 
 bishop, as thriwn mnong us by some machine. Jo' this dogmatist, this (pre. 
 tended) champion of ecSlesiastlcal discipline, when he attempted to «J«e "^ 
 usurp the episcopate not giren him from above, selected two desperate «>"*ctera 
 as h£ assocmtes. to send them to some small, and that the smallest, part of ita^. 
 and from thence, by some fictitious plea, to impose upon three bishops there. m«a 
 altogether ignorant and simple, affirming and decUnug.that it ™ "fS!"'^* 
 theirto come to Rome in afl haste, that all the dissension which i^adA«* am- 
 en miffht be removed through their mediation, in conjunction with the other lu. 
 shops.^When these men hSd come, being as before ?»>»«'7«^',»'"V'""PII/^ 
 plaff in discerning the artifices and villany of the wicked. »«*! ^^'.^n /J\"* ."P 
 with men of theSsme stamp with himself, at the tenth hour, when heated wrtli 
 w AS and snrfeitinr. they forced them by a kind of shadowy and easpty imposi. 
 SrXXtoSkfe^CrpWte u^n him. and which, though by no means 
 SSSed to him he chums by fiSad s!^ treachery One of th^. not long after^. 
 turned to his church, mourning and confessing his ^^^J.^J^^^'J^^^^ Jl'f^; 
 muaed as a layman.as all the people present interceded for him.and we -eot sue- 
 cessoft to the other bishops. oVdalning them in the pbce where they were. This 
 asserterot the gospel then did not know that there shouWbe but one bishop m 
 a catholic church.* (** •-••>.««i im-».n»*«). ^^_^ 
 
 • The word catholic, in its Greek etymology, means aniveisal, a> we hawe ■«»»»««»«•"• 
 ■Uined it i«ThU trsntUtion. It is applied to the Cbristiaii. as a aniversal church, narllj 
 W^wtJL hf^the aneient churEbof the Jews, wKich wa.1 -sited, ?•««'. »"<rf^ 
 tLaUr Tui duratH«. subjects sod country. Tlw Christian » also caMed a aniversal or 
 Shiic ehVrcb b^^^^ in repsrd to docli ine bold ^ »»mp,r q*^ ub^qtie, qn^ 
 
 S smSJa? In uSutter view, wl.kh it shonld be welloUnred is the original ap,a.ea. 
 lLr7ir?vno«ymo«s with 0rtA^az. Th» is evident, fiom the fact that o.r aaihor applies 
 SrS SSwi^SXs in other psru of l.is history. And in the prei^nt .nstauce the ex- 
 liiiSnTmnSS e^tAo/ic ckStk. It is in a sense allied to this also, that we are, na 
 SSTU^fZindrbe title of our general, (culk^c) 7«' »«' J^,,^ Jf* .T^r.^r; 
 Thev are tmtkOie, because as consonant to the doctrines of tbe chaich w aU respects lacr 
 have^ien d««niver«iUy received. In tkis ..nss. ths let- is also syneoymoas with cam 
 
 •atco/ 
 
110 
 
 TB ON TlIK 
 
 BOMAM CATHOUC RSLIOION 
 
 111 
 
 i 
 
 r 
 
 Iiii4ieii,lMi«i«vw,kiWttUlnicw.(for kowooiiMlwtM ignoraat f) tlwi iheM 
 ^f^^'^J'^'^^y^'l^ijr^'n, Mvea deacoiif« m?«ii rab-dewxiiit, ibrtjr-two acolathi 
 (CMffca,) exorcists, rmulers. Mid janitors, in all fifty-two; widows, with tJbe afflicted 
 MM awMlj, more tliaii fiflecii-liuiidred; all whicli tlM goodness and love of God 
 d#tll npiiofl and noimsli. But neitluir this neat number, so necessary in the 
 church, nor those that by the providence of God were wealthy and opulent, toge- 
 llwr with the ianuniemble iitultitude of the people, were able to recall him and 
 
 t lliai nroin tnch a desperate and presumptuous course." And again, after these, 
 t.j "&*'"* ^ following: " Now jet os also tell by what means and conduct he 
 ■■alM ■aanruice to claim the e|iisco[Mt«. Whether, indeed, it was because hn 
 irasti^^igied in the church from the bt'ginntnr, and endured nwny conflicts for her, 
 and encountered many and great danst r« in the cause of true religion? None of all 
 Ihit. To him, indeed, the author and instigator of his failh was Satan, who enter* 
 •d into and dwelt in him a long lime. Who, aided by the eiorcists, when attackwl 
 ^thanobstinate disease, and being supposed at the point of death, was baptise*? 
 ■HL'IK*"**""^' **** *?*** **" which he lay ; if, indeed, it be proper to say that one ltk« 
 1 fwciv* baptism. But neither when he recovered from disease, did be par- 
 "*''*"*"'' .which the rules of the church prescribed as a duty, nor washt 
 
 m (m minuation) hy the bishop. But as he did not obtain this, ilow could ha 
 m IM Holy Spirit V' And again, soon allar, he says: " He denied he was • 
 _ bjtnr.thimli cowardice and the love of life, in the time of persecution. For 
 when reqoitM aiid exhorted by the deacons, that he should go forth from his re- 
 trrattio wMclllin had imprisoned himself, and should come to the relief of the bre* 
 tfaron, aafar •§ was proper and in the power of a preaby ter to assist brethren requir- 
 ing relief, he was so lar from yielding to any exhortation of the deacons, that hn 
 want away owuidad and left them. For he said that he wished to be a presby ter no 
 l«Mig«r, for he was an admirer of a different philosophy." After this, he adds 
 ■■other deed, the worst of all the man's absurdities, thus : *• For having madi 
 !■• oblation, and distributed a part to each one. whilst giving this, he compels th« 
 ■oh^pv men to swear instead of blessing ; holdinr the hands of the one receir 
 ipg • wiih both his own, and uotleUinir them go until he had sworn in these words, 
 for I ahaJI rapaaC the very words: * Swear to me. by (he body and blood of our 
 "**" Const, that you will never desert me, nor turn to Cornelius.* 
 
 And th« ttnhi^ip|nian is then not suitrred to taste until be had fintt cursed him 
 •Ml; and instead of saying Amen, after he had taken the bread, he says, •! will 
 no tonger return to ComeFius." And. after other uiallen, he again proceeds, aa 
 mllowB : ** Now,yoo most know, that he is stripped and abandoned, the brethren 
 lMmriq|him every day and returninic to the church. He was also excouimunicat- 
 od by Moses, that blcMed witness, who but lately endured a glorious and wonder- 
 
 2* '"S?'"!?*"* *"** ****** "**•*•* J®* among the living, seemg the audacity and 
 ■•*%«• *ho "lan, excluded him from the communion, together with th« 
 • Ck ^*^ that had cut themselves off from the church." At the close of iha 
 •piMk,hanr<t a list of the bishops who had como to Rome, and had discarded 
 tha moornpble ditpotitinn of Novatus; at the same timo adding the names, lo« 
 gether with the churches governed by each. He also mentioned those that wero 
 aot present ai Home, bol who. by letter, assented to the dociiion of the foimer. 
 S^iff!!?®**^"*'^ f^ **** particular citias whewse each om had written. 
 wnkialho aeoooat written by Cornelius to Fabius bishop of Antiocfa^— From 
 fyfjlW-l*«;^ Hist, transl. by Rov. C. F. Cmil, Book 
 
 .. ^ Mafpad II, X M 
 
 lIlL CmmBLi. risea— 
 
 1 ia¥e tomo iMfMct, mw frkoat, not only to the aodieneo wlio hear, 
 ittlto IkoM wki nay mtA this ditooitton ; and, tkerefoie, I with my 
 ainiMM to ha ai eonliniioiit and onbroken as pofsible. 1 eoold, indeed, 
 WMhlhat ay infeoioua and eloauent opponent would reply to my 
 ■piiaiMiain rafular aeauen«se, and thus give more of ayatem and tenacity 
 to oar debate. Before I trace his aigsaf course, I wiali to add to my last 
 
 rcka mm kiidmd eonsiderattona. While it behooves him to prove 
 PMmr was iraC bishop of Rome, I am fratuitonsly in display of my 
 lasoiitees, as the advocate of Protestantism, rather spontaneously prov- 
 
 ine a aeirative, or afaowiiiff that Peter never was bishop of Rome. Two 
 considerations may be added to my remarks on this hwd : let The 
 special commission, which he had to the Jews as Paul had to Uie 
 Gentiles, precludes the idea of his here devoting himself to any por- 
 tion of Oie Gentile world. The "ministry of the circumcision was 
 committed to him, and therefore not the Roman capital; but rather the 
 Syrian capital or Jerusalem should have been the place of his location, 
 ltd. His commission, as apostle, precludes the idea of his bein^ sta- 
 tioned as hUkop at any one place. You cannot place Peter as bishop 
 of Rome, any more tiian you can make the president of the Umteri 
 States mayor of Cincinnati. The duties of these officers are not more 
 incompatible than the duties of an apostie and a resident bishop. What 
 are the duties of Uie bishop's chair t Are tiiey not to watch over a 
 particular diocese? What does the aposties' commission say 1 " Go 
 ye into all the world, and announce the glad tidings to the whole crea- 
 tion." It would be as easy to prove that the bishop of London may 
 be vicar of Bray, or curate of St. Ives, as that Peter was, or could be, 
 bishop of Rome. These two considerations deserve the attention of 
 my friend, and 1 hope that he will not pass them too in silence. 
 
 That every important office, essential to the government of any com- 
 munity, must have a place clearly specific in the constitution is scarce- 
 ly necessary to prove; yet, as my opponent seems to slur over this 
 matter, I shall read a sentence or two of the Constitution ot the United 
 Slates, to show that in the estimation of its framers, it was necessary 
 to have a distinct assertion of the office and power of tiie president. 
 
 Art. II. Sect. I. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the 
 United Sutes of America- He shall hold his office during the term of foui 
 vears, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term as fol 
 
 Sect. 2. *♦ Each state shall appoint.in such manner as the legislature there- 
 of may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of senators and 
 representatives to which the state may be entitled in the congress ; but no senator 
 or represeiiUtive, or person holding any office of trust or profit under the Unit- 
 ed States, shall be appointed an elector." The Americans Gutde,p. 20. 
 
 Now the head of the christian chmch was, at least, as wise as the 
 convention which framed this instrument, foreseeing all the difficulties 
 of the church in all time, and as he was determined to make all things 
 plain, and certainly he was as capable as they to reveal and express 
 his own will, had he resolved to build his church on the shoulder of 
 St. Peter, he would have unequivocally expressed it. He would have 
 defined the office, appointed the first officer, and legislated the mode 
 of election. The practice of electing popes in the church of Rome is 
 a candid acknowledgment that there is no few in the case : for they 
 have had very different modes at different periods of their history. 
 What would we Americans say, if every few years a new mode should 
 be adopted, without regard to the constitution 1 Would they submit 
 to such a chief magistrate! 
 
 The gentleman proceeded to read and reiterate his remarks oa two 
 passages of scripture, often before us: he objects to my criticism on 
 the last chapter of John. His last remarks enable me to give it a 
 more thorough exposition. He says my construction "requires the 
 meusaiive for these,^' I say, with more of the philosophy of language, 
 his construction requires the nominative. The question would have 
 been plainly this : " Do you love me more than these love me." n^«>» 
 it is true, always requires tiie genitive; but the whole construction of 
 
 ^-■m H" -n^ 
 
1 12 
 
 DIBATS OW THIS 
 
 HOMAir CATnOLIG RELIGION. 
 
 113 
 
 |ji, 
 *■ 
 
 B 
 
 tli« aenteiioe wonia limTe been ehanfed, Iftkem w«n> to be the tiomina- 
 tive to tlie mth befe understood. My constraction is critically correct 
 ■8 the sentence now reads, but it will not bear his coosiroction. But 
 Itiere is yet another g^eat assumption in the quotation of this passage 
 on which I have not yet emphasized. He says, •*/«rf niy sA^^" means, 
 feed mjpmton, and "/eerf my /am6»" means, feed my JheJL Mark the 
 mmmpHmh that sheep sij^iftes pastors, and lambs the people ! Where 
 4m§ he ind authority for this I If «*aAM»" any where else signified 
 ••efar^," and "lambs" laity, there would be some plsusibility in it; 
 but with the absence of such usage it is supremely whimsical and 
 arbitrary ; and yet the point of this passage rests upon the assumption 
 of sheep for clergy. So far he presses it into his service, for that 
 hishofm are to feed the flock is^ not dii^puted, but that one of them is 
 before the others is the question in debate. 
 
 The gentleman, on Saturday, called my interpretation of this pas- 
 sage a fish storjr ; this mode of treating so holy an institution, so 
 soFemn a matter, is not in the true dignity of the subject, nor of the 
 oimition ; nor is it very tespeetful to the great personage on whose 
 words we comment; bat the audience have not met it with a laugh, and 
 thciefore I presume they felt the incongruity. In the same style are 
 llie mornlng*s remarks on the bontM^ &c. but the bishop might remem- 
 ber there was more in the premises than the spoils of a single meal ; 
 there were many fish and all the apparatus before them, but no ono 
 would interpret the words of the question in that style on any othet 
 oecittioiL It was sustenance in general, and not a particular meal, 
 eoneerning which the Savior spoke. 
 
 The gentleman suggests that, in the 1st chap, of John, Christ in his 
 first interview with Peter changes his name to Cephas; and he as- 
 ■winee **that it was that he might afterwards make him the rock of 
 llie elmieh !" It was a very common thing in the history of the patri- 
 ■lehs and Jews to change names. Thus we find from the beginning 
 of their history, various instances of this: "Sarai" is changed into 
 Sarah i « Abram" into Mrahamt "Jacob" into hraeL Two of the 
 apostles were called " Boanerges" mm» (f Tkundert but that did not 
 convert them into thunder; neither did the name Cephas convert Peter 
 into a stone. If I were to give a reason for the addition to Peter*s 
 name, (but it was neither change nor addition, rightly considered,) I 
 would say that it was most probably occasioned by the fact, that Daniel 
 ■fHilEe of lie kingdom of the Messiah under the figure of a ttone cut 
 ont of the mountain. With an eye probably to this kingdom of the 
 stone, (as Peter was the first convert,) his name is improved by being 
 tranaiaied into Syriac ; for after all, it is rather a translation of Fetrm 
 than an addition to it! He was, however, the beginning of this new 
 ■piritpal edifice, and a foundation stone ; but only one among many. 
 
 This kingdom of the stone, it is foretold by Daniel, was to com- 
 aenee in the days of the Cesars : but it was to become the kingdom 
 of the moantain. It was, indeed, to become a great mountain, and fill 
 iie whole earth. This building is composed of a succession of foun- 
 iaiiens, provided only that all the popra are successors of Peter, m 
 liftne of his being the rock. To have this whole building at the 
 iMndation, or to be always laving new foundations in every election 
 of a pope is rather a singular idea, which grows out of the extravaganee 
 of the Romish assumption. 
 
 The bishop observes that a headless trunk is worth nothing, and 
 would seem to think that our argument on that subject leaves the 
 church without a head. Has the church no other head than the pope! 
 Of whatever church the pope is head, that church is the body c^ the 
 pope : And Is it Christ's body too ! The Romanists are the body of 
 the bishop's church— cut the head off that body, or annul the pope's 
 assumption and you destroy its organization. The gentleman rightly 
 apprpciates my argument: he feels that it makes the church of Rome 
 a headless trunk : but the mistake is in supposing that this annihila> 
 tion of the pretension annuls the church of Christ. Jesus Christ is in- 
 dependent of the pope. He is head ; and the saints of all ages are the 
 component parts of his spiritual, his myiiical body. 
 
 The gentleman's allusion to the High Priest was peculiarly unfor- 
 tunate There never was but one high priest at a time : one in hea^ 
 ven and one on earth is without a single hint or allusion in the Bible. 
 We cannot now descant upon such an incongruity. 
 
 The word *ifw (Hierus)^*es^ occurs not once in the New Testa- 
 ment, in reference to christian bishops, or deacons. It is only found 
 once, and that in the apocalyptic style, in all the. christian scriptures: 
 for the idea of any one officiating on the earth as a sacrificing priest, or 
 that christian bishops have aught of a priestly character is anti-christ- 
 ian. But Christ is the anti-type of Aaron. The order of Aaron is ex- 
 tinct. The order of Melchisidec is the model of the Christian High 
 Priesthood. Christ is called of God as was Aaron : but he is called 
 to officiate after the order of Melchisidec. The doctrine of Protestants 
 is, that their High Priest made one great sacrifice for sin on earth : 
 and that he offered it in the heavens ; and that by one offering of him- 
 self, he has perfected the sanctified. " Brethren, consider the high priest 
 of our profession, Jesus Christ." He ever lives and ever intercedes, 
 and is able to save to the uttermost all that come by him to God. We, 
 therefore, need no high priest on earth. 
 
 The gentleman has told us too often of his lore for America, and hie 
 love for England. If he repeats these declarations so often, we shall 
 begin to think he loves too much in word, and too little in fact. He 
 tells you of 30,000 English bayonets employed in defence of the pa- 
 pacy. And what of this 1 England is the cradle of all political free- 
 dom. Our notions of free government were all promul^ed in English 
 books, and taught in English schools before they were imported here. 
 We have, ind^ practis^ upon the science of free government mora 
 than our mother country. But as in America, we tolerate all religions : 
 so the British empire in erery country where she has territory or sub- 
 jects, supports and protects all. England tolerates every thing. She 
 supports Catholicism in Canada, Episcopacy in England, Presbyteri- 
 anisrfi in Scotland, and Paganism in the East Indies. Is she not too 
 free and tolerant for my opponent, and for many Protestants ? ! She 
 takes no part against any religion. The popular doctrine in England 
 at tills moment is, that Church and State ought not to be amalgama- 
 ted, or consociated under the same earthly head. Indeed, she is dis- 
 posed to follow her American children very far in this doctrine. 
 
 The bishop seems to apply to Peter what was common to all the 
 
 apostles, "Whatsoever you shall hind on earth, shall be bound in 
 
 heaven ; and whatsoever you shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in 
 
 heaven." I remark upon this passage, that when the Messiah gave 
 
 k3 8 
 
114 
 
 UfWBmMl^ A Mt 1#*» M al ii 
 
 BOHAN CATHOLIC BEU6I0X. 
 
 lU 
 
 "4 I 
 
 Urn ktft to Peter to open the klnfdom of hea^eii to Jews and Gentiles, 
 lie iM not appropriate to bim the sole and ezeloilTe power of binding 
 tod loosing: this ^wer he bestowed on mil the apostles* For after 
 iMer opened the kingdom, they all introduced citizens into il, as well 
 •8 he; and had the same official power; for as John says, chap. 30: 
 he adidraseed them all — " As my Father hath sent me, so do I send 
 f on; wheat aoefer sins yon remit they are remitted to them, and whose 
 •oefvr wbm you retain they are retained !"-~This was spoken, in sub- 
 •mnee, repeatedly to them all. It is therefore asserting too much, to 
 nay that Peter alone was gified with this power. He only used it 
 irst. They always exercised it in its true intent and meaning. I shall 
 be glad to iesume again the regular order. ^ 
 
 We baie heard much about the bishops of Rome and how they can 
 hn traoed back even to Peter, &c., ^. I wish my learned opponent 
 would eooine himself to the proposition in debate, and permit me to 
 go through with this argument, for succession. Then I will show of 
 how much value are the traditionary enumerations found in Eusebius^ 
 from whoee authors I can make out two or three snccessions. 
 
 The gentleman brings up the erudition of the 4th century. I would 
 as soon call on people in this room for testimony that the battle of Bun- 
 ker's hill, or Blenheim was so and so fought — not one of whom lived 
 at that time ; as on persons living in one century to prove what hap- 
 
 rned in centuries before they were bom. In the fourth century there 
 OM writer testifies to the succession. What a decisive proof ! Is 
 there any testimony for the first two hundred yean affirming this suc- 
 cession I I affirm that there is not. All the tradition on earth fails 
 just in this radical and essential point ! 
 
 Again : tradition is wholly silent on the election of the first popes. 
 Ho one pretends to tell how Peter and Linus and Clement were in- 
 leeted with the offiee. Tradition is even in the hands of Catholics 
 ashamed to depose any thing upon this point We all know how to 
 disfMiee of tradition three hundred years too late* in other matters; and 
 I Ihink to the matter of fact people of this generation, it must appeal 
 
 Cposterous to prove an event by those who lived one, two, and three 
 ulied years after. 
 
 Ivemius was introduced as a witness of Peter^s having been bishof 
 of Rome : but Irencus does not sa¥ so on bb own responsibility : foi 
 he lived at the close of the second centnry. With him it was only 
 MmMam, Again, his testimony of the church of Rome, having been 
 ^ImlMf by Pan! and Peter la cartainly false ; and his saying that Poly- 
 carp was appointed bishop of Smyrna bv the apodUtf greatly weakens 
 his traditionary statements concerning the Roman see : for Polycarp 
 ■mH havn been ordained in the year 97, as he died in the year 147, 
 having been 50 years bishop of Smyrna. Consequently it was impos- 
 sible he could have been ordained by the apostles : but of this again. 
 While my 3ppooent speaks so fluently of early fathers, and of the 
 short interval of two or three hundred years from Christ, he seems to 
 forget how long a hundred years is, and how few know much about 
 the events that happened a hundred years ago. Even now, in this age 
 •f books and printing, and steam presses, and steam-boats, and rail- 
 oads, and general reading, how few of us could accurately, from me- 
 mory relate the history of the American Revolution ! And yet the gen- 
 tleoian talks about the opportunities of a person to ascertain these hit- 
 
 y 
 
 toric facts, one or two hundred years after they occurred, fromtradiUon 
 too, in an age when all these facilities which we enjoy were unknown. 
 Is not this tradition a very loose and uncertain witness! — [Time 
 expired.] 
 
 Tvodve d^clock, M* 
 
 BiSBOP PimcBLL rises — 
 
 Iren«us lived in the second century. He was a disciple of Poly- 
 carp, who was a disciple of John the evangelist. Irencus, was bish- 
 op of Lyons in France. The chain of testimony consists of three links. 
 John the evangelist, Polycarp of Smyrna, IreuaBus of Lyons. John 
 told Polycarp what Jesus did— Polycarp told Irenaeus what John had 
 told him, and Iren«u8 bears testimony here. This edition was pub- 
 lished by a Protestant divine, named Nich : Gallaisus. It is dedicated to 
 Grindal, bishop of London ; and as I do not like to advance any thing 
 merely en Catholic testimony, I prefer the Protestant to the Catholic 
 edition of this father's works. Irenaeus distinctly says :«* Since it 
 would be very long to enumerate in this volume the succession of bish- 
 ops in all the churches, by appealing to the tradition of a church the 
 
 GREATEST AND MOST ANCIENT AND KNOWN TO ALL, whlch WaS found- 
 ed and established at Rome, by the two most glorious apostles, Peter 
 and Paul ; a tradition which she has from the apostles, and the faith 
 which she announces to men, and which comes down to us through 
 the succession of bishops, we confound all those who in any way, 
 either through evil self complacency or vain glory, or blindness and 
 perversity trather otherwise than is meet. For with this church, on 
 account of^'her more powerful principality, it is necessary that 
 EVERY CHURCH AGREE, that is the faithful who are on all sides, m 
 which church, the tradition of the apostles has been preserved by the 
 faithful who are on all sides." Iren. lib. iii. chap. 3, (adversus haere- 
 
 ses 1 
 
 Eusebius, has preserved for us a letter, written by the martyrs who 
 suffered in Gaul, in the 19th year of Antonius Verus, and who were 
 charffed by the Pagans, as they say in their address to their iellow- 
 citizens in Phrygia, "with feasts ofThyestes, {who ate pari of hu 
 oum «m,) and the incests of (Edipus, and such crimes as are neither 
 lawful for us to speak nor to think, and such indeed, as we do not be- 
 lieve were committed." In this document the martyrs commend Ire- 
 naeus,- then a presbyter of the church of Lyons, to pope Eleutherus, 
 whom Iren«us appealed to on the subject of the Quarto-deciman con- 
 troversy. I have this letter here in Greek. It may perhaps have 
 more authority if I read the originaL 
 
 Thus do we perceiVe that Eleutherus was styled " father and bishop 
 of Rome," by thes« 'Ilustrious confessors of Jesus Christ, and hu 
 favor invoked in behalf of their brother. 
 
 In book III. chap. 3, (the title of this chapter is, of the apostolic 
 tradition, or the succession of bishops in the churches from the apos- 
 tles.) " These blessed apostles (Peter and Paul) founding and insli- 
 tutino the church, delivered the care of administering it to Linus, of 
 whom Paul makes mention in his epistle to Timothy. To him suc- 
 ceeded Anacletus, after whom Clement obtains the episcopacy, in 
 the third place from the apostles, who had seen and conferred with the 
 apostles, who had heard their preaching sounding in his pars, and bad 
 
116 
 
 
 BOHAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 in 
 
 \ I 
 
 with bit own eyes beheld llieir tradMont. Nor was he the only 
 them weie many more yet Imof who had been taugrbt by the apostlea. 
 Under this Clement, when no inconsiderable discussion oc^^uned 
 amonp the brethren at Corinth, the charch of Rome addressed to them 
 most forcible letters, gatherings them together in peace, repairing iheir 
 fmUkf mnd armounein^ to them the ^rmiiiom they had recently receiff 
 edfrmn the mm»iie». To Clement succeeded Euaristus, and to Euaris- 
 tns, Alexanoer; next was Sextos, sixth from the apostles, and after 
 him Telesphoras, who also endured a most glorious martyrdom ; then 
 Hyginus, afterwards Pius, and after him again Anicetus. But when 
 fifiier had succeeded Anicetus, now in the twelfth place from the apos* 
 ties, Bleutherus hath the episcopate." There is then the fullest mani 
 festation that one and the same vivifyinjr faith has been handnd down 
 in the church and preserved to the present day. I would fain read 
 the rest of this admirable chapter, but enough---here is the volume to 
 which all who are anxious for more proof are invited to refer.' 
 
 Tertullian, a little later says, confounding the heretics of his day— 
 "let them produce the origin of their churches, let them display the 
 Biocestion of their bishops, so that the first may appear to have been 
 flidniiied by an apostolic man, who persevered in their communion.** 
 Lib. de praiscrij). He then enumerates the pontiffs from St. Peter, to 
 his own time in the Roman see, and concludes by the memorable 
 words, ** Let heretics exhibit anr thing like this." The evidence 
 of Bmehius is also before you. On this subject I have one remark to 
 malie« which no one in this assembly who sincerely desires to know 
 Ihttmth, and of such I trust, the number is not small, will hear with 
 indiierence. This is, that in the letter of Cornelius, bishop of Rome, 
 to Fabiiis, bishop of Antioch concerning Novatus, which is given in 
 full by EoMbins, and is a faithful exhibition of the doctrine, of the 
 whole church at that early period, there is not a single doctrine or 
 isage mentioned, which is not taught and observed in the Catholic 
 ehirch in this very ci^, at this very hour. Is not this an admirable 
 mmi of the apostolicity of our church 1 The supremacy of the pope 
 in the supplying of vacant sees, the sacraments of the holy eucharist, 
 baptism, confirmation, orders, a hierarchy, bishops, priests, deacons, 
 subdeacons, acolytes, exorcists, readers, porters, or janitors; asylums 
 for the needy and afflicted— one bbhop in a Catholic church ; the 
 light of excommunication, acquiescence of other bishops, personally 
 testified or by letter, in the judgment of the bishop of Rome, &c. 
 lee- &c. In the same letter we see heretics pictured to the life, the 
 erroro and evil practices of some modem sectarians described and 
 strongly reprobated, viz : the forcing of communicants to take an oath 
 never to quits church they have joined. This I know tu have oooio* 
 red in Maryland, and I presume it is not uncommon. 
 
 Mn, Campbeix ri»€.i — 
 
 l%ree o\loek P, M. 
 
 The last half hour of the gentleman was spent in culling antiquity 
 to find some collateral evidence in attempting to defend the great point 
 of the succession of pontiffs ; and with what success you have all seen. 
 His senstbiitty on the present occasion is truly gratifying. His con- 
 duct here shows that he perceives it to be vitaf, supremely essential 
 to his system to make Peter bishop of Rome, and to fix the first twen- 
 
 ty nine links in the apostolic chain. But the barrenness of ancient 
 history cannot be remedied in the nineteenth century. He brought 
 forward one fragment of antiauity on the subject; and it is the only 
 fragment on which Eusebius himself relies. In truth that fragment, 
 the Latin version of Iremeus, is the only fragment of antiquity now 
 extant, or extant in the time of Constantine, from which any thing 
 jan be gleaned on this subject. And he never once says thai either 
 Paul or Peter separately or jointly were bishops tf the church cf Rome ! 
 And here again I cannot suppress my astonishment at the choice of 
 the Romanists; — ^Why they did not make Paul rather than Peter 
 bishop of Rome. In the first place he was a bachelor ; and that is 
 now a most cardinal point : again, he informs us that " he had the care 
 of all the churches." He says, moreover, that he is not behind the 
 chief of the apostles. This is rather disrespectful of pope Peter ! 
 It could be so easily proved, too, that he was once at Rome (though 
 a prisoner for two full years.) Now, if he did not plant the church 
 of Rome ; he certainly watered it. He labored more abundantly than 
 all the other apostles. Is it not then ten fold more probable that 
 Paul rather than Peter was bishop of Rome 1 But probability will 
 not do in the case. We must have the strongest evidence : we must 
 have contemporary testimony : we cannot prove a fact by witnesses 
 who did not see it. We require the evidence of sense. We should 
 not believe the records of Christ's actions, even, unless we received 
 them from eye and ear witnesses. To illustrate the difficulties that 
 environ my ingenious opponent, I will suppose a case like the one he 
 has to manage. Suppose that in the year one thousand, a tradition 
 had been current that a certain bridge over the river Tiber had been 
 built in the time of the apostles, and that Peter laid the corner stone 
 of the Roman abutment. Some incredulous persons began then to doubt 
 of the matter, and called upon those who affirmed that Peter laid that 
 stone to prove it. They go to work. They found very many believ- 
 ing it in the 10th century; fewer in the 9th, fewer in the 8th, fewer 
 in the 7th, till within 200 years of the time, they find only one person 
 that affirms faith in it, and with him it is an unwritten tradition, AH 
 record ceases. There is a perfect chasm of 200 years without a sin- 
 gle witness. Hew shall they throw a bridge over this chasm I 
 Where is tradition during this period! Is there not one voice? Nor 
 ONE. But they say it is only two hundred years ! But according to 
 all the laws of mmd and society, these two hundred years should 
 have the most witnesses : for, the nearer we approach any true event, 
 the more numerous are the vouchers of its reality and authenticity. 
 Therefore the total failure of testimony during that period is fatal to 
 tlie credibility of the tradition. But they say, it was traditionary for 
 two hundred years: but who can prove the tradition! It is as hard 
 to prove this tradition as the fact ! To prove the existence of it first, 
 •nd then the authenticity of it aflerwards, is only rising from the po- 
 sitive to the superiative difficulty. We can as easily build a house in 
 the air eighteen stories high, leaving out the two basement stories, as 
 prove the truth of an event 1800 years old, finding a chasm of 200 
 
 J ears in which there is not one word about it. The church of Rome 
 elieves many miracles of her own on mere tradition. There is a le- 
 gend in Ireland to this day, commonly believed, that St. Patrick 1200 
 years agq Jliterally sailed from that country to Scotiand on a mill stone. 
 Now, tf we trace this back we shall find the evidence diminishes 
 
Ilfi 
 
 no 
 
 IIEBA.TS ON TIXM 
 
 witli eieiy e^ntarj until you cone within two or three centariea of 
 tlie time tsaigned. 'Fhen it comes to a solitary indiTidaal, who heard 
 some one say, that he heard another one say, that such a ono 
 
 I think it would be well to advert more pointedly to that law of 
 mind, that the testimony of a fact is always best and strongest be- 
 cause of the number and opportunity of the witnesses at the tim&, or 
 near ike time it actually existed. For examjile, at this day, there are 
 many biojrraphies of Washinirton and narratives of the revolutionary 
 «rf BorTLr or five hundred yeara hence there wUl be but one Z 
 two. This is the established order of things. Genuine evidence 
 diminishes as we descend from, and increases as we ascend tip to the 
 events, or facts recorded. All history is poof of this. It is a law 
 of evidence, and a law of the human mind. Therefore, had Peter 
 been bishop of Rome, we would, as we advanced upwards have found 
 muell more evidence of it than in the third and fourth centuries. But 
 on the subject of tradition, I will gratify my audience with a few re« 
 marls from Du Pin : certainly he had no teuiptation to weaken its au- 
 thority. , , . 
 
 "Criliciani it « kind of torch, that lig^hts and conducts us, in the obscure 
 IfBGtii of antiquity, by making Ui able to distinipiish truth from falsehood, hi8> 
 toiy from labte, and antiquity from novelty. *Tis by this means, that in our 
 tinHt we have disengaged ourseivea firom an ininite number of very common 
 anmrtitito which our fathers fell for want of exaiuining things by the rules of 
 tni« crilJRiaiii. For 'tis a surprising thing to consider how many spurious booki 
 W* iad in antiquity ; nay, even in we first ases of the church. Several reason! 
 MhmI nien to impose books upon the world, under other men's names. 
 
 fhl int and most general, is, the malice of heretics; who, to give the great- 
 er TCpliiition to their heresies, composed several books, which they attributed 
 to persons of great reputation ; in which thej studiously spread their own er- 
 fors, that so they mignt find a better reception, under the protection of thetfi 
 celebrated names. And thus the first heretics devised false gospels, false acts, 
 and fiiise epistles of the apostles, and their disciples: and thus tnose that came 
 •fief then published several spurious books, as if tbey had been written by or 
 tilodom autliors, that so they might inaensibly convey their errors into the minda 
 of their readers, without their perceiving the cheat. 
 
 Ihe second resMon that incUned people to favor books under other mea*i 
 names, is directly contrary to the first; bein^ occasioned by the indiscreet piety 
 of some persons, who thought they did the church considerable service in lorg* 
 Im ecclesiastical or profane monuments in favor of religion and the truth. And 
 this idea prevailed with some ancient christians to forge some testimonies in be- 
 half of the christian religion, under the name of the SUjltt Mercurias Tris- 
 aiifitfiit, and divers others: and likewise induced the Catholics to compose 
 aoiiMl books, that they might refute the heretics of their own times with the 
 |rcale«t ease. And lastly: the sane motion carried the Catholics so &r, as to 
 tnaeitiy&lss kUtories^mbe mtrecles, tmdjkdit Unu ^ the taints^ to keqp ty th§ 
 
 • ••••••••••#•• 
 
 Tho third reason of the for|^ry of some books, keeps a middle way between 
 thoM we have alrrady mentioned ; for there have been some persons in the 
 world, that have been guilty of this imposture, without any other design, than 
 to divert themselves at the expense of their readers, and to try how nearly they 
 could imitate the style of other men. Hence it is, that some anthors havecom- 
 poted treatises under St. Owrwin;*, St. Jtmhrose'B and 5/. Austin's names — 
 • • • • • desiring rather (as the Abbot of Billi says,) to ap- 
 pear abioad,and be esteemed under other men's names than to continue despis 
 ed. and be buried in darkness^y writing in their own. And these are the rea* 
 soils that may have occasioned the forgery of books: malice, indiscreet piety 
 •lid the humors of men. 
 
 Bat be>iit:s these reasons that have advanced this trade of forgery, there are 
 
 BOMAir i;athomc kwjgion. 
 
 119 
 
 I 
 
 aevet^l ©thwi that have occasioned the setting authors' names to several booka, 
 
 "^ Tii terj rdle'^o conclude that such a book is «P»"0"-; beaiujje U mndb- 
 es us. and afterwards to starch for reasons why it may be thought so. [fw- 
 
 '""We select only one of all these judicious and weighty remarks, 
 from one of the most learned of Roman Catholics, viz. ^^ that ihe Catk^ 
 oUcs thtmselvet have iitvented false histories, false miracles, and 
 rALSE LIVES OF THE SAINTS," to promote piety in their own membem, 
 from which I emphalicallv ask the question: What u ^ /'f''\% 
 faith worth which is founded alone upon the tradtttons of that church .^. 
 1 will only add, these are the words of Du Pm, a learned and authen- 
 tic ecclesiastical historian, whose work is published by the authonty 
 of the learned doctors of the Sorbonne. 
 
 I have, let me now add, strong suspicions of the, authenticity of 
 that passage of Iremeus. The Greek original m the first plawj is 
 lost: and in the second place the Latin translaUon was not found for 
 some hundreds of years afterwards. In the third place, two things 
 asserted by IrenKus are not true: 1st, that Peter and Paul founded 
 the Roman church; whereas it has been shown by Paul s letter Ui 
 the Romans, not to have been the case. 2d. This same Irenaus says, 
 that Polycarp was ordained by the apostles, when according to Poly- 
 carp himself, he was not ordained till the year 97, when all the apos- 
 ties were dead save John, and there is no document to prove thai even 
 John lived till that time. Thus dispose we of Boman tradtttom. 
 
 The ffentieman first introduced this authority which I have in my 
 hand-an Episcopalian doctor— one of the most learned authors of the 
 
 pre.8ent day, George Waddington-" History «f ^t»« P^**"'*;** 'L «t» 
 'This author enumerates the bishops of Rome; but listen to his own 
 candid testimony. In his chronological table of eminent men, and of 
 
 the principal councils, he says : , ,^ -, .- r *i • .— 
 
 " The succession of the earliest Bishops of Rome and the duration of their go 
 vernment. are invoked in inexplicable confusion." r-^-- 
 
 But I have here before me the Romanorum Ponitfiewn Index)— ^ 
 chronological index of the Roman pontiflfs, prefixed to Eusebius. 1 
 have compared it for the first two centuries with Eusebius and some 
 of the primitive fathers, on whose authority it partially rests, and I can 
 tay with confidence there is no faith can be reposed m it. I find the 
 authorities on which its assertions rest sometimes obscure, frequent y 
 contradictory, and oOen at variance with other facts which they assert; 
 involving the credibility of the whole story of the successions froin 
 different chairs. There are the following traditions to »>f f ^"fcted 
 from Eusebius and his fatiiers for only the first five links of this chain 
 
 l#f . Lineag§. 
 1. Peter. 
 
 5. Linus. 
 
 3. Cletus. 
 
 4. Clement. 
 
 6. Anacletus. 
 
 2nd. Lineage. 
 
 1. Linus. 
 
 2. Anacletus. 
 
 3. Clement. 
 
 4. Sixtus. 
 
 5. Alexander. 
 
 3rcl. Lintagt. 
 
 1. Peter. 
 
 2. Anacletus. 
 
 3. Clement. 
 
 4. Alexander. 
 
 5. Evaristus. 
 
 Aik. Lineagt, 
 
 1. Feter. 
 
 2. Clement. 
 
 3. Linus. 
 
 4. Cletus. 
 
 5. Alexander. 
 
 I miffht argue this subject for hours and hours, but it is not worth 
 it. I do not like to imitate my opponent in dilating upon matter8,wbich, 
 whether true or false, do not aflfect the points at issue the weight of a fea- 
 ther. But the display we have now made of the beginnmg of succes- 
 sion, according to various traditions and statements, '« ««««^P'^^^^^ 
 immediate proof, and shows iiuw vacant and dubious these oral and 
 
li i 
 
 19^' 
 
 DEBATE ON TlIS 
 
 kUllAN CATHOLIC S£LIGIOI>l. 
 
 121 
 
 i III 
 
 \4 i 
 
 lioinay tradittona are. Is not Waddington justified in saying »*^*f 
 maiier is imohed in inexpHcabk eonftmon?*' and well it is that saving 
 faith depends not upon such testimony! 
 
 1 have said the Romanists ha^e never been unifonn in electing their 
 popes. I can show some six or seven different modes of filling 
 the chair of Peter, equally approved by the church of different 
 ifsa. The chair has of\en been filled by bribery, by force, by the 
 bayiNiet, and by all sorts of violence. It has been filled bv men and 
 Doys, and by all sorts of characters. But of this more nilly at an- 
 other time. 
 
 The gentleman remarked, on Saturday, that the pope is not infalli- 
 ble. The question was not about the iwan, but the pope. I take him 
 al bis word, and will now prove, that neither the present pope nor his 
 nrwleoessors are successors of Peter; because Peter was infallible, 
 both in doctrine and in discipline. How, then, can these fallible 
 gentry — these fallible popes— be successors to Peter, in the capa- 
 city of officers, when they have not ike grace of ofllcef— my opponent 
 himself being judge! 
 
 I shall now attempt continuously to show, that if even Peter had 
 been placed by a positive precept in the office of vicar and head of the 
 church, all the official grace of such an appointment has failed by the 
 various schisms in the Roman see. The chain has been broken ; for 
 Roman Catholics themselves admit, at least, iweni^two schisms; 
 •enie count twenitf^x. Protestants can find iweniif-nine, I have al- 
 ready shown that the AooA and the first link must be better secured, 
 if not welded; for Peter the hook and first link has not yet been fas- 
 tened to the right place ; and some of the first links are so entangled 
 that Eusebius, the pope, and G. Waddington, cannot strengthen them. 
 And to quote the words of J. Pope, not ike pope, if one link be missing, 
 ** Tenth or ten thoutandth breuks the ehmin mUk*.** 
 
 Ah me ! I am jostled out of my course again ! The mention of 
 Eusebius reminds me that the bishop has quoted him against the No- 
 vatians, &c. But what avails the testimony of Eusebius as a teeUtry? 
 It it quoting a Jansenist against a Jesuiw-a Calvinist against an Ar- 
 Biinian— a Romanist against a Protestant. Eusebius speaks as a AtV 
 ioriam and he speaks as a 9eciaryt sometimes Jirian^ perhaps, some- 
 times Trinitarian f but certainly opposed to Novatus and his party. 
 It is very hard for a warm partlian, in any case, to state his opponent^ 
 views fairly. I have never yet heard any one oppose Calvinism, or 
 Arminianism, just precisely as it was. lliere is some little difference 
 or other in the most equitable hands, which the opposite party would 
 ot have stated just so; and we know how often the menu of contro- 
 versy rests upon these minute matters. Novatus and Cornelius were 
 both elected bishops of Rome, and a controversy arose on their respec- 
 tive claims. In the course of the controversy, we learn, that it turned 
 on these two points : 
 
 •* Thmi Commu* admitted those who had hetnmmUy of Idolatry tocommtmion; 
 and Novatus taiishtthat the church neither could nor ouefatto admit those to the 
 €Oiiiiiinnion that had apottatiicd." Du Pin. Vol. I. p. 135. 
 
 Hofatcis was the rival of his friend Cornelius, and he regards hlin 
 at an anti-pone ; he is, indeed, called anti-pope 1st. And, at this day, 
 we oannot tell whether Novatus or Cornelius was the successor of 
 ! So the first schism commenced, and we look for the faithful 
 
 witnesses against Roman assumption from that hour amongst the Re- 
 monstrants'—call them the Novatians, Puritans, or Protestants. 
 
 The second schism we ahall notice is that between Liberius and 
 Felix, A. D. 367. 
 
 **Constantius beings enraged ag^ainst St. Athanasius, as supposing him the cause 
 of that enniity which his brother Constans had against him, Liberius as to this 
 answered wisely, you ought not, sir, to make use of bishops to revenge vour 
 quarrels ; for the hands of ecclesiastics ought not to be employed, but onfy to 
 bless and to sanctify. At last Constantius threatened him with banishment ; * 1 
 have already,' says he, * bid adieu to my brethren at Rome, for the ecclesiastical 
 laws are to be preferred before my living there.' Three da^s time were given 
 him to consider of it, and because he did not change his opinion in that time he 
 was banished two days after to Berea a city of Thrace. The emperor, the em- 
 press, and the eunuch Eusebius, offered huu money to bear the exjpenses of his 
 loumey, but he refused it, and went away cheerfully to the place of his banisli- 
 nient. The clergy of Rome having lost their head, took an oath to choose no- 
 body in the room of Liberius as long as he was alive ; but Constantius, by the 
 management of Epictetus bishop of Centumcellar in Italy, procured one Felix a 
 deacon to be ordamed bishop, who was himself also one of theni that had sworn 
 not to choose a bishop in the room of Liberius » • » But Liberius, who had 
 given proof of so great constancy in time of ueace, could not lon^ endure the 
 tediousness of banishment ; for before he had been two years in it, he suffer- 
 Cfl himself to be over persuaded by Deniophilus bishop of that city, of which he 
 was banished, and did not only subscribe the condemnation of St. Athanasius ; 
 but he also consented to an heretical confession of faith." — Dm Pin. Vol. I. p. 190. 
 
 Now, if we take Liberius for the true pope, we must take an Jrian 
 head ; for it must be acknowledged that he subscribed the heretical 
 and Arian creed ; and, perhaps, at this time the majority of the Roman 
 Catholic church were Arians ; but that is not the present inquiry. 
 
 We shall now read an account of the third schism : 
 
 DAHABUB, BISHOP OF ROME. 
 •* After the death of pope Liberius, which happened in the year 36S, the see 
 of Rome being vacant for some time, by reason of the caballing of those that pre- 
 tended to fill it, Damasus at last was chosen by the greater part of the clergy 
 and people, and ordained by the bishops. But on the other side, Ursinus, 
 or rather Ursicinot, who was his competitor for the popedom, got himself 
 ordained by some other bishops in the church of Sieinus. This contest caused 
 a great division in the city of Rome, and stirred up so great a sedition there as 
 could hu^ly be appeased. The two parties came from words to blows, and 
 many christians were killed in the churches of Rome upon this quarrel. Tba 
 governor of Rome called PrcttextuSy being desirous to allay the heat of thia 
 contention, sent Ursiciniis into banishment by the emperor's order: but his 
 banishme it did not perfectly appease the quarrel; for the partizans of Ursicinus 
 assembled still in the churches of which they were possessed, without ever com- 
 municating with Damasus; and even when the emperor had ordered that their 
 churches should betaken from them, thev still keptu]) their assemblies without the 
 citv, 10 that it was necessary at last to arive them quite out of Rome. And vet all 
 this did not hinder Ursicinus from having his secret associates in Italy and 
 at Rome. The bishop ofPuteoli called Florentius, and the bishop of Parma wera 
 ■lost sealous for his interests. They were condemned ia a council held at Roma 
 in the year 372, and afterwards banished by the authority of the emperor. How- 
 ever they found means to return into their own country, and stirred up new 
 troubles there. They got pope Damasus to be accnsetl by one haae^ a Jew. 
 This accusation was examined in a council of bishops held at Rome, in the year 
 378. which declared Damasus innocent of the crime that was laid to his charge. 
 This council wrote a letter to the emperor Chratian, praying him to take some 
 order for the peace of the church of Rome. The emperor wrote to them, that 
 Ursicinus waa detained at Cologne, that he had given order to banish Isaac in- 
 to a comer of Spain, and to force the bishops ofPuteoli and Parma, out of their 
 country. This did not binder Ursicinus from returning into Italy in the year 
 381, where bestirred up new tunnilts,and endeavored to pre-engage the empe 
 ror : but the bishops ot //o/y being assembled in a council at Aquileia, m tlia 
 
123 Mmrrm on thk 
 
 fMi- 381, wrolis Ml ftinaftly to bim, tliat he banitbed Ur$ictmi§ foreTcr, uul leM 
 Mmmmi in peaceable posoetiioii of the tee of Rome, io whkb b«C0Dtiiitied iui> 
 til tbe jmr 2U." Dm Pirn, F&l L p, 226. 227.— [Time eipired.] 
 
 Jffa^pad 3 o'cloek^ P. M 
 Bishop Pumcell riw*— 
 
 Ii the 2iid. century lived Tertul1ia»-« priest in Africa. He showed 
 how dear was the chain of tradilion— he says distinctly that Peter waa 
 bishop of Rome. I am goin^ to quote another splendid passage from 
 Ms testimony. But first let me ask, how could a massive, an enormona 
 volpim like this (holding it up) of which the zeal of the early Christ- 
 imt, baa made so many copies ; and a portion of which, the admirable 
 Mmlogetic, or defence of our Christian ancestors, was addressed to the 
 Pfefaii Emperors, have been vitiated ! It was spread over the whole 
 woridp— it was read with avidity by Christhins and heathens. It is 
 authentic history and based on testimony far more credible than we 
 possess of the genuineness of Homer, or Horace, of Tacitus, or Cicero. 
 We could not believe any fact of history, not even our title to our houses 
 and other goods and chattels, without admitting it How else but by 
 such records, do we know with certainty of events of which our senses 
 have not taken cognizance, of which we have no personal knowledge, thai 
 a few years ago we fought a hard battle with England and gained our 
 ildepiidence I That our general was named Washington, and that he 
 WIS aided by La Fayette ? Comparatively recent as these events be, they 
 are matters of tradition '. and tradition is but another name for history. 
 Admit my learned opponent's principle, and the world will be turnea 
 topsy-turvy. We cannot be sure of any thing. I now cite Tertullian; 
 and mark, I pray you, the clearness and force of his reasoning in the 
 fdlowiif syllogism, for apo^jtoiical succession. 
 
 Teftnllian de prre»criptioae adveraus hsreticos, lib. p. 394. " If the Lord Jesut 
 Ciribt sent his apottle* to preach, no other preachers are to be received than 
 thOM whom he conimissioned : for no one knows the Father but the Son. and 
 thev to whom the Son lath revealed him, nor is the Son seen to have reveal- 
 ed him to any others than the apostles, whom he sent to preach what he reveal- 
 ed to them. Wow what they preached, that is to sav, what Christ revealed to 
 them,! will here lay down as a principle (hie prsescnbam) cannot be otherwise 
 prevM than bv the same chnrchet which the apostles, themselves, founded, by 
 preaching to them, themselves, both by word of mouth, as they say, and, tfter- 
 wudttby their epistles, if this be so, it is therefore plain that all the doctrine 
 which arrect with these apostolic churches, the matrices and originaU (or eieni- 
 plars) of faith, is to be reputed true, as undoubtedly, holding that which the 
 chnrc:hes received from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, and Christ froBl 
 God : but that all other doctrine is to be prejudged false, as teaching contrari 
 Ir to the churches and to the apostles, to Christ and to God. All, therefore, 
 that remains now to be done is to demonstrate that the doctrine we preach, as 
 already explained, has been handed down to us from the apostles, and thus con* 
 
 victall other doctrines of falsehood " They, (the heretics) object that Peter 
 
 was reprehended by Paul. Bat let those who make this allegation shew that 
 Fanl preached a dlnerent gospel from what Peter preached and the other apos- 
 Utoa. If Peter was reprehenijed for withdrawing, through human respect, from 
 tntercourae with the Gentiles, with whom he previously associated, this was a 
 iwit of conduct (conversationis) not of preaching. He did not, on this account, 
 preach a different God from the Creator, a different Christ from the son of Ma- 
 ly, a different hope from that of the resurrection — and, (to refute these here- 
 ticit) I will answer as it were for Peter, that Paul, himself, said that he made 
 himself, all things to all men. a Jew to the Jews, and no Jew to those who were 
 m Jews, that he may gain all. So that Paul reprehended, under certain cir 
 eumsciuccs, in Peter, what he, himself, under certain circumstances, did.'* 
 
 SOMAN CATUOU€ BXU6ION. 
 
 123 
 
 But I mi^ht read the whole book of prescriptions by TertuliiMi 
 against heretics. 
 
 The fish story again— here is Henry's exposition of the Bible. The 
 principal meaning, in his view, is that which I have given. 
 
 Could Paul, my friends, claim to be the chief of the apostles 1 He 
 had probably done more than any man then living against Christianity, 
 until prostrated by anger and mercy, on the road to Damascus " Saul, 
 Saul, why persecutest thou me" changed him from a wolf to a lamb, 
 from a persecutor to an apostle. 
 
 Eusebius informs us that Panl of Samosata, was deposed by a coun- 
 cil in consequence of the heresy introduced by him at Antioch, of which 
 a detailed account had been rendered by the council to Dionysius, bish- 
 op of Rome. Paul being unwilling to leave the building of the 
 church, "an appeal was made to the emperor Aurelian, who decided 
 most equitably on the business, ordering the building to be given up 
 to those whom the christian bishops of Rome and Italy should write." 
 Another Pagan, Ammianus Marcellinus, giving an account of the 
 persecution raised by the emperor Constantius against the famous 
 patriarch of Alexandria St. Alhanasius, tells us that this emperor 
 strove hard to procure the condemnation of Athanasius by Liberius, on 
 aceount of the supreme authority enjoyed by the bishops of the Roman 
 see." " Even from the mouths of babes and sucklings," says the 
 Scriptures, " hath God made perfect praise/* I may observe, that he 
 has extorted testimony from Pagan kings and historians, to prove the 
 authority of the bishop of Rome throughout the Christian worid. 
 
 My friend has introduced the subject of unity, in connection with 
 tradition. We shall argue that, if he pleases, from the Bible ; but in 
 the mean time let us hear Cyprian, a bishop of Carthage, in Africa, 
 on this subject, in the 3d. century. I am bold to say, you have never 
 heard argument stronger, illustration more apposite, or language more 
 beautiful, than what this father employs. 
 
 Cyprian, de Unitate Ecclesiae Catholicae, p. 181, and De Simplici Pr«s. The 
 primacy is given to Peter that the church and the chair of Christ may be shewn 
 to be one. And all the apostles and shepherds, but there is seen but one flock, 
 lied by all the apostles ' with unanimous consent ; can he who boldeth not 
 this unity, believe he holds the feith 1 Can he who resisU and opposes the 
 church, who forsakes the chair of Peter, on which the ciiurch was founded, flat- 
 ter himself that he is in the church, while the apostle Paul teaches the same 
 thing and shews the sacrament of unity, saying, "one body and one spirit, 
 OHK HOPE or your vocation, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one 
 God.** Let no man deceive the brotherhood by a lie ; let no man, by perfidi- 
 ous prevarications corrupt the truth of faith ! The episcopacy is one, each se- 
 parate part being consofidateil in one. The church too is one, with luxuriant 
 fertility extending her branchi s ihrouehout. As there are many rays of light, 
 but no more than one snn, many branches, but only one trunk, held fast in the 
 earth by its tenacioui root, many streams gushing from one fountain, but all 
 blended in their source. Sever a ray from tlie sun, the unity of light suflera 
 no division ; break a branch from the tree, the broken branch will bud no more, 
 cut off" a stream from the source, the severed stream will dry up. So likewise 
 the church, irradiated with the light of the Lord, diff"uses hei rays throughout 
 the universe. The light, however, which is every where diffused is one, nor it 
 the unity of the body separated. She spreads her copious streams, but there is 
 one head, one origin, one blessed mother with a numerous proeeny. We are 
 her offspring, we are nourished with her milk, we are animated with her spirit. 
 He can no longer have God for his fiither, who has not the church for his moth- 
 er. If any one out of the ark of Noe could escape, so likewise he that is out 
 of the clmrch may escape. The Lord tayi, I and the Father are one : again, it 
 Is written of the Father, and Son, and Holy Ghost: •• and these three are one," 
 

 HBATK ON THE 
 
 ■Ml caii mw «■« tnMKiM thut the unity which proceedt from dirine ftrength 
 SS miik i maintai?«i by dif ine fwiniiiienti, can be toro MUiider tii the church 
 9mA destroyed bj the opposition of discordant hearts? ' 
 
 I will now go over the ground, my friend travelled tiiw mom- 
 ioff. He mid we allowed that we had two high priests on earth. I 
 proteat against the gentleman's sayhig for me what I have not said. 
 One high Priest we have in heaven, God. He has a vicar on eartti, 
 the pope. But that vicar wields no authority but from God. 
 
 1 have, again, been reprehended for endeavoring to gain friends by 
 ■ipiessing a liking for the English people, the Irish, and the Amen- 
 MDS. But, my friends, have I done them more than ju^ce ! Have I 
 •wen d4 from the troth 1 Have I not said that the Engtist had a 
 thoiwtnd faults!— [Time expired.] 
 
 Jhur o^ekekf P. if. 
 .Mb. Camtokix rise*— 
 
 Wfe have had a learned discussion on the unity of the church. Wt 
 can sit and patiently hear ray opponent while he Ells up his time by 
 leading the views of the saints on unity or any thing else he may 
 deem ediMng. But as this is not the business now before us, we 
 ■hall be glad he would choose some other time for it. On this sub- 
 ject we have no controversy at the present time : and that the church 
 should be one, and that she is one virtually and in fact, we doubt not. 
 All that has been read by my opponent on this subject is wholly a 
 free will offering, instead of that argument which the occasion demands. 
 
 Was Peter ever bishop of Rome! That indeed was a question : but 
 is it a standing question! How often will my opponent recur to it 
 without proving it ! He says, indeed, that Irenaeus says that he was : 
 Init I tmy, not a line can be shown from Irenaius nor any other wntei 
 of the Erst two centuries affirming in so many words ihai Pettr wa» 
 Mkm if Mome! Let himlhen refute me at once, by producing the 
 Mitagea. He might have heard so. He has produced Tertullian as 
 tcoi^entator or a retailer of tradiUons. That you may Itnow some- 
 thing of Tertullian as a theorist, and commentator, 1 will read you bj 
 *•¥ of dlset a sample or two, simply to show how much these opi- 
 nions are worth. He speaks very advantageously of custom and 
 tradition, and relates several remarkable examples of ceremonies whicfc 
 Im pretends to be derived from tradition. 
 
 ••To begin." says he, "with baptism, when wt, are ready to enter into the wa 
 ter, and even before we make onr protestations before the bishop, and in th« 
 chnrcb. that we renounce the devil, all his porarw and nuiiiiters : afterward, we 
 are plmiged in the water three times, and they make us answer to some things 
 irhlch are not prw:isely set down in the gosp^; after that they make na tajte 
 Mtlk and honey.and we bathe onrseires every d;iy. during that whole weel. W«i 
 raceire tlie sacrament of the eucharist, institute' by Jesus Christ, when we eat, 
 ■ad ■■ the moraine assemblies we do not rcceivf it but from the hands of tirwe 
 that preside there. We offer yearly oblations for the dead in honor ot the nrnr- 
 tpt. We believe that it is not lawful to last on a Sunday and to P«*yto Goo 
 fBMlinf. From EmMter to Whitsumlide we enjoy the same privilege. We take 
 CiMlcare not to suffer any part of the wine aiid consecrated bread to mJI to the 
 SnMwd. We often sign ourwilves with the sign of the cross. ^ wtu demand a 
 Smjbr iki$* vrmetkn iakmptm tcHfiurt, wt emmotjind oim (h*re ; but we 
 mmk answer, that *«# /fwJtHim Omt haw established /Aem, eu$Um hut ai'/Aor***^ 
 ■JlilM, lJjyi/i ha* niade them to be observed." Tertiill. De Corona Militia. 
 "'""When Tertullian asserts a fact, I believe : but when he relates t 
 dreamt a guess, an opinion, or reports a tradition, I listen to him as 
 to the speculations of a contemporary. You shall have it both in 
 Latin and English. 
 
 BOMAN CATHOIiIO BELIGION. 
 
 1% 
 
 Age iam qui t oke curtositatem meliits exercert in negotio mlntis tnfle. per- 
 Curre eccfesiasapostolicas, apud quas ipsa* ad hue cathedrae apostolorum suis locis 
 prsesideatur, apiid quas ipse autheuticee lilerse reciiautur, senates vocem, et 
 repraesentantes faciem uniuscujusque. Proxima est tibi Achaia? Habes Corinthum. 
 Si non long« es a Macedonia, habes Philippos, habes Thessalonicenses. Si po- 
 tea in Asiani tendere. habes Ephesuni. Si autem Italiae adjacea, habes Roman* 
 iinde nobis quoque auctoritas prsesto est." 
 
 ** Coabe now, you who are desirous more fully to devote yourselves to the great 
 affair of your salvation, hasten to the apostolic churehet. Still do the very 
 chairs of the apostles yet stand in their own places : still are their authentic Ittttrt 
 fecited. which sound forth their very tones, and which faithfully exhibit their 
 very cuunteiiances. If yon are in Achate, you have Corinth: if in Macedonia, yon 
 have i'hilippi and Thessalonica. If you jouraey into Asia, yon have Ephesitt. 
 If Italy be your residence, you have Konie." &c. 
 
 On this precious excerpt I will only remark that it fully proves, 
 
 1. That the authentic copies or autographs of the apostolic epistles 
 were extant in the time of Tertullian, in those chuidies to which 
 they were addressed. — 
 
 2. That the superiority of these churches named above others, so 
 far as mlvation was concerned, was, that they had these authentic 
 epistles carefully preserved and read.— 
 
 3. That as respected authority in the ^nd affair of salvation, in 
 the judgment of Tertullian, Corinth, Philippi, Thessalonica, Ephesus 
 and Rome were equal. — Pardon the digression. The extract is worth 
 a volume in prostrating the arrogant pretensions of Rome. 
 
 One word on the text, as commented on by Matthew Henry. I 
 have had his work in my library for twenty five years. He is a high- 
 ly esteemed practical commentator : but is not ranked among eriiics. 
 But ^et he decides nothing for my opponent. He admits that it may 
 be either the one or the other explanation. But mind me. The Roman 
 Catholic doctrine requires the explanation ** lovest thou me more than 
 these love me ;'* because it was on account of a supremacy of love 
 over all the apostles, that it claims for Peter the supremacy. But 
 Henry admits that Christ may have alluded to the nets and boats and 
 occupation of Peter; while he refers to or says, "do you love me 
 more than vour companions.*' The Messiah never, indeed, had any 
 jealousy of that sort. His comment on John zxi. 15, reads : 
 
 " Lovest thou me more than these"? Better than James or John thy intimate 
 friends, or Andrew, thy own brother and companion? Those do not love Christ 
 aright, that do not love him better than the best friend in the world, and make 
 It appear, whenever they stand in competition, or, more than these thirds 
 these boats and nets! Those only love Christ indeed, that love him better than 
 all the delights of sense and all the occupations and profits of this world. Low- 
 est thou me more than these? If so, leave them to employ thyself wholly in 
 feeding my flock." Henry's Commentary. 
 
 But I would like to read what this commentator says about iheroek,' 
 MmitiUw xvi. 18. ** And I say onto thee, that thou art Peter; and upon this 
 rock. I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it** 
 
 Peter's confession contains that fundamental truth, respecting the person and 
 sISces of Christ, upon which, as on a rock, he would build his church. Nor 
 could the powers of death or the entrance into the eternal world, destroy the 
 hope of those vriio should build on it. Nothing can be more absurd than to sup- 
 pose that Christ meant that the person of Peter was the rocJfc, on which the 
 church should be builded ; except it be the wild notion that the bishops of Rome 
 have since substituted in his place! Their rock is not as our rock, our enemies 
 themselves being judges. Without doubt, Christ himself the rock — and tried 
 foundation of the church, and woe be to him who attempts to lay any other, lb. 
 
 If then, Matthew Henry is good autnority on one point he is good 
 n the other. ^ 
 
136 DEBATE OH THE 
 
 BMmp Otey of Tennessee has been unceremonionsly dragged intr 
 this controTersy. He if a gentleman for whom I entertain a Tery 
 high regard : and while we mffer on some questions, concerning dio 
 Mtiii episcopacy, we perfectly agree on the import of 'i^jw (HienisJ 
 a priest, as applied to christians. He has no idea, more than myself 
 of a christian Merus, or priest offering sacrifices for sins on earth. He 
 has not answered, indeed, seven letters addressed to him by myself on 
 liahop Oiiderdonk*s tract on diocesan episcopacv : but yet it is not 
 too late. We expect one of these bishops to rejily to them. 
 
 The Roman Catholics alone contend that priests, by which llicjr 
 mean an order of clergy, can offer tacriBce for sins. Nay, indeed, 
 Mr. Hughes in his controversy with Mr. Breckenridffe, says, " To offer 
 saerifice is the chief official business of the priests?' p. 288. Hence, 
 we learn that even in this enlightened land and 19th century, there 
 are persons amongst us claiming the power of making sin offerings 
 and expiating and forgiving sins !! 
 
 We now resume the history of schisms in the succession: 
 
 Wt last read yon the contentions and havoc of human life on th« 
 ■tioeession of Damasus. The emperor at that time decided the con* 
 Iroversy by banishing Ursinus, and on the decision of that emperor 
 now rests the faith and salvation of the Roman church — themselve» 
 Mng judges. And yet, my learned opponent, in some of his speeches 
 albets to tell you that emperors have nothing to do, — no right to in 
 titiiPB in councils, or with church officers ; and here, and on numer 
 ««■ Iweasions, we find them filling Peter's chair, making vicars ot 
 Christ, and heads for his church I! 
 
 We cannot rehearse all the schisms, and shall therefore give only 
 • aiiecimen. We take another instance of an imperial pope— one of 
 ■a tmperor's eieation. 
 
 **Afl«!r the dcRth of pope Zoiimns, the church of Rome was divided ftbotit 
 the election of his successor. The archdeacon Eulallus, who aspired to the 
 biabopric of Rome, shut biiiistlf up io the church of the Lateran, with part of the 
 people, tome priests, and some deacoui, and made them choose him in Zoziroui* 
 room. On the other side a great number of priests, several bishops, and part 
 of the people, beinr assembled in the church of Theodora, elected Boni&ce. 
 Both were ordained ; Eulalius was ordained by some bishops, among whom was 
 the bishop of Oslk, who used to ordain the bishop of Rome, liooiface wai 
 likewise ordained by a great number of bishops, and went to take possession of 
 St Peter** church. 
 
 Bjwmmthm, governor of Rome, having tried in vain to make them agree* writ 
 !• ih« iMpMur Honorius about it. In his letter of the S9th of December, 418, 
 I* apeakt ia Enlarras* behalf, and Judres Boniface to be in the wrong. The 
 Muperor hdieviog his relation, sent nim word imme<liately that he should 
 «xpel Boniface and uphold Eulalius. The governor having received this order 
 — Mbr Bom/mee to acquaint him with it, but he would not come to him, so that 
 nmmfnor sent to him to ngnify the emperor** order, and keot him from re- 
 f kMo the city. The bishops, priests, and the people that sided with 
 ee, wrote imniedbtely to the cnperor to entreat him that he would order 
 hoUJtTEulmUm and Bimyi€€ to go to court, that their cause might there be 
 Cadged. To satisfy then, the emperor sent to Swmmmeku* an order of 30th of 
 lanuary, 419, signifying that he should enjoin iomfaee and EtdaHus to be at 
 " about the 6th of February. Htmnriui convened some bishops thither 
 
 to judce of their cause; and that thev might not be tusDected of liavorinr any 
 one aide, he commanded that none of those who had ordained either of toem, 
 •hould be a judge in the case. The bisbom that were chosen to judge this 
 cause being divided, the emperor put off the judgment till ^ay, and furbade 
 JJiiloliii* and Bomifmt to go to Rmu; and sent thither j^c^tlmct, bishop of 
 *%olclo, to perform the Episcopal functions during the Emst$r bolydayt ; ie 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC BELIGION 
 
 127 
 
 which time be prepared a numerous lynod, and invited the h«hops both of j3/rM» 
 r«^ GaS- bulNcSaUus could not endure that delay, and spoiled his busmesi 
 K^h^moaSence- for whether he distrusted his ri§ht, or wbether he was of a 
 Je^.t^"«.Xpe" be rl7ned to Rome the 16th of Jarc/., and --1^^' ^- «'^^ 
 Iherr^otwiLtanding the emperor's orders, which obliged Symmachus to use 
 tiJL^rtrdrive him out of Rome; and the emperor having been inforn^d of 
 h s Sedienc^e, w" it^ f>r no other iadgn.ent. but causei2?on/«ce to be put 
 in 4?ses.ion m t'he beginning of Aprif. 419."-D« An, ^ ' I^' ^17 
 
 The Holy Spirit, then, by the emperor HononuM,^ Jrtan, too 
 fif I recollect Vighl) establishes a vicar for Christ m the Person of 
 
 knifacel. wSat, says bishop Purcell, ^^'^^'I^Pf^Z* An tlht- 
 Christ's church 1 ! Once, then they had a great deal to do with it, 
 
 and where is infallibility now 1 ..,.,.,„ t,^. j :„ *»!• 
 
 Next comes pope Symmachus. Again the church's head is the 
 
 fruit of bloodshed and war. .... j ^ .v a ^r ^u^ 
 
 "After the dtath of pope ^nattasius. which happened at the end of the 
 vear 498 here was a fieVcrcontention in the church ot Rome between Lau- 
 iZi^lnTS^machus. which of them two was duly P---X'°Jea"te;";&- 
 machus who ias deacon, was chosen, and ordained by the far ^Yas^lTiZl 
 but FtMtvs a Roman Senator, who had promised the Kniperor -^"^j"**"*' J^»} 
 hU «iict of agreement with the bishop of Rome «houd be 8,|ned procured 
 Xin^titole chosen and ordained.*^ This schism divided t^e church and 
 thJ dtTof «om€, and the most eminent both of the clergy and the senate took 
 Srt wth onrof these two bishops: but at length both part.es arreed to 
 C^t u^n KwsTheodoHc at Ravenna for his decision in the case, which was 
 to Xt he!hm,ld continue bishop of Rome, who had been first chosen and 
 ihoLu be found to have the far greater number of voices for htm. Symmacht^ 
 bad^eXantageof Xa«r/n«u,on both these accounts, and so was confij^edm 
 
 The possession of the holy see, and he ordained ^^ff^^j'",' »;'«J^P,t-SleT; 
 if we may believe Anastasiits. At the beginning of the next year «« f a"?f a 
 corned wherein he made a canon against the ways of solicitmff nuns voices, 
 S weTe rn ul'd for obtainiii^ thfpapal dignit^^ 
 
 ordination of Symmachtis. seeing hm. possessed of the hoi v '^^^f^'"'* i^^^i^J'^^ji 
 used all their endeavours to turn huu out of it, for which end they cnargea mm 
 wUh manv crimes! they stirred up a part of the people and senate against him 
 7^^nZr^^lZlohepreJnieSio king T/reorfoWc, that he would appomt 
 1 dekite to Ur the cause!^ He named Peter bishop ot ^//tnn, who dej^sed 
 iep^S from the government of his diocese, and deprtvec him ot the F«se«« o^" 
 nftE^ church This division was the cause of so great disorders niRome, that 
 fmm woXth^yialm^^^^ times to blows and every day P-d"ced JighUng and 
 Srrs: many ecclesiastics.were beaten to death, virgins ^«;^ .^^M'^^J,^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 •wBtr from their habitation, many lay-men were wounded or killed, insonmcninai 
 
 Sir^.Dd the. prevailed so far by their importanlty, that the king WM satufied 
 
 2hJ^i.^&.nd both the peopl? .na the '^"-'l^J^^X^ZZV^Y^ ' 
 fentMted against Symmachus, were pacified, and acknowledged him tor pope, x « 
 'S^ Se dUc^re-ted paky. ,.Urre.„ai„ed, «•>" d«w „o. wntjng .g.™ttt« 
 
 tnod end .pre«l their clomnie., forged •g»'°«' Sr'S«.S^„ "Lt' ,o^« 
 nmimatm AmuhuUu obkcied thenitohim.whichobliged SwniiuicAwtowntB 
 ilSSto^m for wToto vindication; but notwithrtanaiog the* eSorU of on 
 li:^l>'XeTj\.«^^ ?<>»'''io.o{\b.hoij «e .ntiltW year 514 where.-- 
 
 "'ift; cann'ot' find C& church T " ^''^'^ T^'.^'i'"""' 
 church at this time, we shall have a hard task to find her there ! 
 
 K?i^^tiryr&i;i"^Sot^Pt^oVx"c^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 
I 
 
 WWMATM an TBM 
 
 fonnerij om of the depntiai scot into the east bj Hmrmiidm». Boaifiic« 
 itmi in the church of Jalias, wad Dfoacorat in that of Coostwitiiie. But 
 lUl iMt died the IStb day of Kovemher. Boniface leein^ hinuelf left in sole 
 p feni on used his utmost endeavors to bring over thote who had been of the 
 
 oliarjnftjr: Iw threatened them with an anathenia, and forced them to subacribe. 
 lie CMled together the clergy, and condemned the memory of Dioacomat accniing 
 of aimony. He proceeded yet fortber, and, aa if tt were not enough for him 
 
 to be secured of the noly see for himself, be would also appoint himself a sue* 
 cosioff,MKl ha? ing caU«d a aynod, he engaged the bishops and clergy by oaih, and 
 nnder their hands, that thev should choose and ordain in bis room the deacon 
 Vtgilius after his death. This bein^ against the canons, he himself acknowledged 
 finblicly his fault, and burned the writing which he extorted from them/* Dn rin. 
 Vol- I. p. 542. 
 
 What an excellent head, trulT, for the church of Christ ! 
 
 We shall next see, that omer women besides queen Elizabetht 
 wkom my opponent denounces for being head of the English church, 
 Itad somethiof to do in pope manufacturing. — Pope Sylverius and 
 pop Tigilius come next : 
 
 **The deacon Vlj^ilius remained at Constantinople after the death of Agapetus, 
 mrhii had for a long-time aspired to the bishopric, and made use of this occasion 
 to get himself nroniotcd to it. He promised the empress, that if she would 
 maka him pope he would rtceive Theodosius* Authimus, and Sevenis into his 
 commiinion, and that he would approve their doctrine. The empress not only 
 promiaed to make him pope, but also offered him money if he would do what 
 she desired. Vigilius having given the empress all the assurances that she could 
 wish, departed with a secret order addressed to Bellisarius to make him success- 
 fill ill his design. Viriltus being come into Italy, fount) all things well prepared 
 Ibrhim, the siege of Rome was raised when he arrived there, but during the 
 •iage Silverius was suspected to hold correspondence with the Goths, and so he 
 tvaa mideffwi odious lor refusing expressly to accept the empress's proposals of 
 neaif iiy Aalhimus. Thus VigiUus having delivered to Bellisarius the ordex 
 whieh he brought, and having promiaed him two hundred pieces of gold over 
 and above the seven hundred which he was to give him, found no great difficulty 
 to persuade him to drive away Silverius.** 
 
 • • • • • 
 
 *' This was put in execution, he was delivered to the guards of Vigilius, and 
 he was banished into the Isles of Pontienna and Panctataria, which were ovei 
 against the mount Cirrellus. where he died of a fiiniine in great misery, if we 
 may believe Liberatus. Procopius, in his secret history, seems to insinuate, that 
 he was killed by one named £ngenius, a man devoted to Antonina— the wife of 
 Bellisarius: but what Procopius says, may be understood not of the death of 
 Silt arius, but rather of his accusation or apprehension." 
 • • ♦ a ♦ '^'^a • ♦ • • 
 
 '•Although Vigilius was promoted to the see of Rome, by a way altogether 
 wyost, yet lie cootiaued in the possession of it after the death of Silverios, and 
 !••• nelinowledgcd for a lawful pope, without proceeding to a new election, of 
 •f ■• conimiing that which had been made. The conduct which he had observ- 
 ed during this pontificate answered well enough to its onhappy beginning. He 
 had at first approved the doctrines of Authimus, and that of the Acephali, to sat- 
 isfy the empress: but the fear of being turned out by the people of Rome, whom 
 he hatod, made him ouickly recall this approbation; yet he did not, by this, 
 gain the hearts of the Komaiif . They could not endure an usurper, who Laving 
 mm thacaiiae of the death of their kwiul bishop, would aboae them also. Thay 
 MCiia«i ham also, of having killed his secretaiy with a blow of his fist, and of 
 havini^ whipped his sister's son till he died. The empress who was not satis- 
 iad with bim because he had gone back from his word, sent Authimus to Rome 
 with an order to bring him into Greece, and at hb departure the people gave 
 him all sorts of imprecations." lb. FaL J. pttgt 551. 
 
 We shall only at this time gi¥a the details of another eolnmn o^ 
 tie liistory of the popes in the work before m. It sp«i]cs for itself 
 — 4ii]ls how all the evil passions of human nature eo-operated in the 
 
 •leetion and creation of Cbrisfs vicars. 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 120 
 
 Under head—" An acconnt of the popes, and of the church of Rome, from the 
 time of Sylvester II. to Gregory VII. • After his death there was a schism in 
 the church of Rome, between -Benerftci VIII. son to Gre^ry. the count of 
 Freicmii, who was first elected by his father's interest; and one Gregory, who 
 was elected by some Romans, who outed Benedict. He fled to Henry, king of 
 Germany, who immediately raised forces, and marched into Italy to re-establish 
 him. As soon as the king arrived, Gregor}- fled for it, and Benedict was re- 
 ceived without any opposition. He conferred the imperial crown on that prince, 
 uid on queen Chunegimda his wife. Benedict died in the year 1034, and some 
 authors say, that after his death he appeared mounted on a black horse, and that 
 he showed the place where he had deposited a treasure, that so it might be dis- 
 tributed to the poor, and that by these alms, and the prayers of St. Odilo,he was 
 delivered from the tormeats of the other life. We have only one Bull of bis, 
 infavoroftheAbby of Cluny." „ • u- r i a 
 
 •• The count of Fresratu that the popedom might be stUl in his family, caused 
 his other son to be elected in the room of Benedict VIII. though he was not 
 then in orders. He was ordained and called John, which, according to us, is the 
 firhteenth of that name, but according toothers the twentieth. 'Tis said, that 
 Seme time after this pope being sensible that his election was vicious and simo- 
 niacal, he withdrew into a monastery there to suflTer penance, and that he forbore 
 performing any part of his function, till such time as he was chosen again by tha 
 
 * •%hn X VIII. dying Novr. 7, in the year 1033. Alberi count of Frescati, caus- 
 ed his son to be seated on St. Peter's chair. He was nephew to the two last 
 popes the count's brothers, and was not above eighteen jears of age at the most. 
 He changed his name of Thophylact into that of Benedict IX. 
 
 Peter Darnien, speaks of him as a man that lived very disorderly, and was vciy 
 onworUiy of that dignity to which he had been advanced by the tyranny of his 
 fether. However, he enjoyed the popedom very c|uietly for ten years together; 
 but at last the Romans, weary of bis abominable irregalarities, outed him, and 
 
 gut up in his phice, the bishop of St. Sabina, who took upon him the name of 
 ylvesterlll. He enjoyed his dignity but three months; for though Benedict 
 voluntarily resigned the popedom, yet he returned to Rome, and with the assis- 
 tance of Frescati's party, drove out his competitor, and re-assnmed the papal 
 chair. But being altogether uncapable of governing il, and having nothing mora 
 in his thoughts than the gratifying of his brutal appetite, he made a bargain about 
 the popedom with John Gracian, archbishop of the church of Rome, and made 
 it over to him for a sum of money, reserving to himself the revenues due from 
 England to the holy see. This Gracian took upon bim the name of Gregory VI. 
 in Uie meantime, king Henry, who had succeeded his father, Conrad, in the year 
 1039, being incensetfagainst Benedict, who had sent the imperial crown to the 
 king of Hungary, after ne had defeated that prince, resolved to march into Italy 
 to put an end to that schism. After he came thither he caused these three popes 
 to be deposed in several synods as usurpers, simonists,and criminals. Benedict 
 fled for u ; Gregory VI. was apprehended and afterwards banished; and Silves- 
 ter HI. was sent back to his bishopric of St. Sabina. He caased Suidger, bishop 
 of Haroberg, to be elected in their stead, who took upon him the name of Cle- 
 ment II. and was acknowledged as lawful pope by ail the world. He crowned 
 
 papal chair, which he held for eight months, notwithstanding the emperor had 
 sent from Germany Poppo, bishop of Bresse, who was consecrated pope under the 
 title of Damasus II, but he did not long enjoy that dienitv, for he died of potsoa, 
 as is supposed, at Palestrina, three and twenty days after his coronation." 
 
 ** It is no wonder that these popes have not left us the least monument of their 
 pastoral vigilance, either in councils or by letters, since all their care and aim 
 was how to gratify their ambition and the rest of their passions, without watch- 
 ing over the flock' of Jesus Christ.*' Dn Pin, vol. ii. p. 206. 
 
 Observe, a single count has the controlling power of some three 
 popes during this administration ; and may be said to have the church 
 under his special management! Comment on such a narrative is un- 
 necessary.^ — [Time expired.] 
 
 if 
 
DSBATie 0!r tm 
 
 Baf'pmi 4 o'clock, F. M, 
 
 .pmnv Pimstit. n§m - 
 
 I diouM wmtm nplyinf to the last part of my firieiid*s arf^meiit tt 
 
 OfWOiliiiioratr rooiiifet that I thould follow him Uiroafh all his points. 
 
 W« w«pB told the *oId Irish story' of St. Patrick sailins oo a inill- 
 
 I. Well, the Irish have always been remarkable for telllof a good 
 
 '; but this is told for them, and it is not even witty, much less has 
 
 / bearing on the argument. There is not, I presume, one educated 
 
 CaiholMS in the world who believes a tale so ridiculous. For my own 
 
 Krt, I had never even heard it before ; but I have heard of a life of St. 
 tiiek and St. Bridget, written by some yoang Protestant wag who gath- 
 «ffwl togedior all the absurd stories he could find and gave them this name. 
 My friend must have felt the want of better arguments when he Intro- 
 duced such a silly tale, at this debate, for the purpose of weakening 
 the authority of the most sacred documents. I will not call this pro- 
 ihilf t hil I must say, that, in my opinion, it is indecorous. 
 
 I hmm been eharged with eieiting the laughter of this audience, at 
 the expense of my friend ; this is not my fault ; what alternative hot 
 ridicule for the story we have just heard 1 It was thus that Elias 
 mocked the false priests of Baal, by saying, " Cry louder on ^our 
 fodT— peiadventure he sleepeth and must be awaked." 3d. Kings 
 Iftf 97* 
 
 Admit my learned opponent's reasoning, and yon cannot be sure that 
 tver there was such a man as Peter : admit it, and you cannot pre- 
 tend to say that you have had grandfathers or grandmothers, or at least 
 that they had had any themselves: you have never seen them ; how then 
 can you be sure they ever existed ! Sometimes forged notes get into 
 circulation ; conclude with my friend, that you may as well part com- 
 fany at once with the genuine notes jou may post^ess, for you can no 
 lim|er prove them, to any man's satisfaction, to be worth having. I 
 will go still farther: admit Mr. C's carious reasoning, and you can 
 never be sure that such a personage as Jesus Christ ef er existed, much 
 less that he wrought miracles to prove the divinity of his mission ! 
 You did mot see the miracles ; the book that records them was written 
 long aHer they occurred ; and many of the most important portions of 
 this very book were doubted of for upwards of 300 years after Christ 
 even by Luther himself, in the enlightened I6th century ! His author 
 Du Pin, says there were abundance of ialse gospels, false epistles, false 
 acts, in the early ages. Mow iken, according tn his principles, can we 
 fte mtre of tJk muikmiidi^ tf m mngk book rf the Old or New Taiamenif 
 mmag we have no voucher for lie truth but the testimony of men I 
 Hen are chasms to be bridged, and links in the chain of scriptural 
 testimonv, to be welded, for full 300 jears, ay, 1600 years, before the 
 various books of scripture were collected together : and when they 
 were collected, this collection was made by men, who, he says, were 
 liable to he mistaken like ourselvea; and who knows to this dav but 
 they were mistaken ! Such are the horrid consequences of his illogi* 
 cal reasoning — another sad illustration that, for tiie deserter from the 
 Catholic church, there is no resource but to deny every thing, to be- 
 come a deist. I would advise my friend, when he goes back to Bethany, 
 to prove in the Harbinger that such a thing as the present controversy 
 never occurred. I am sure that he can make some people believe, all 
 ediloritis to the contrary notwithstanding, that it is all a hoax. 
 
 SOMAir CATHOLIC MBLIOION. 
 
 131 
 
 He gratuitously mixes up the names of the first five or six popes. In 
 1 way unknown to antiquity, whereas Eusebius, Opiatus, Tertullian, 
 and IreuKUS, digne perfectly in the enumeration of Peter, Linus, Anacle- 
 tus, Clement, Evarisius, Alexander— and two of these authors have 
 been translated by Protestants ! The mixtnre of the books of scrip- 
 ture is for him a far more insurmountable difficulty. There was much 
 disputing for hundreds of years as to the time and place where the 
 epistles and gospels were written; must we, therefore, reject them 
 aUoeetherl According to his rule of reasoning, we should reject 
 them : but, thank God, Catholics admit no such rule. A fevv discre- 
 pancies about the minor points, where there is perfect unanimity as to 
 the substance, only confirm our conviction of the histonan s good faith. 
 And there is as much indisputable testimony of the succession m the 
 chair of Peter, as there is to prove any book of scripture whatsoever. 1 
 mieht, in facU say there is more. 1 have already nailed Dupin to the 
 counter ; he .eans on a broken reed. He quotes St. Paul, to prove that 
 neither he nor Peter founded the church of Rome, whereas St Paul 
 rays no such thing, but only that they should not indulge in fo^ish 
 disputes about the ministers who had preached to them the word of 
 life, "I am for Paul, I am for Apollos," but give all glory to Uinst 
 who died for them. There were christians at Rome before fc>t. Petei 
 or St. Paul went thither. The Roman soldiers who saw Christ cruci- 
 fied, and witnessed the prodigies attending his death, were, doubtless, 
 many of them, as well as the centurion who smote his breast, and cried 
 out "/rtt/tf thit man was the Son of God,'' converted to Christianity ; 
 who, when they returned home to Rome, related what they had seen, 
 to their countrymen, and made others converts. The apostles, after- 
 wards, went to Rome and founded the see. So it was m England. Long 
 before Gregory sent St. Augustin to that country, there were Catholics 
 there— even in the days of pope Eleutherius. 
 
 What was the use of quoting Waddington as an anthor of infallible 
 weight with mel He could not avoid making splendid acknowledg- 
 ments to the church of Rome. The truth was too strong for him. But 
 if we believe a man when he testifies affatmi himself, is that any rea- 
 son we should believe him when he testifies/or himself 1 In fact, the 
 Inexplicable confusion of which Waddington speaks, is not to be found 
 in any of the historians I have named and whose works I have exhi- 
 bited—from which too I have read to this assembly. If any confusion 
 exist, it is with respect to the time when each succeeded each, al- 
 thouffh in this respect the eariiest historians agree, as you have seen. 
 Linus, Cletus, (or Anencletus,) and Clement, are all spoken of in the 
 epistles of St. Paul. They held a conspicuous rank in the church ; 
 their namee and services in these high places were often seen, and 
 hence could have occurred a mixture of their names and of the dates 
 of their pontificates, among now remote historians. But m every case 
 of doubt as to scripture, or ecclesiastical history, the tests of sound 
 criticism must be applied, and then the sibyls and the Mercunns Tns- 
 meeistus are sure to go overboard. " Opinionum commentadelet rfta, 
 •ays Cicero, 'inaiurx judicia confirmatr Time exposes felsehood-- 
 mnd confirms truth. What Cicero says time does, a more respectable 
 ■front, the church, has achieved— she has selected the genuine books 
 oFscripture and stamped forgery upon such $« J%^« ?K;"°"f ' "^^ 
 •he not done this where would have been the Bible! There are othei 
 
DIBATB fy!f THB 
 
 wif i of detectinf orroi^Ihi Pin hm toM yon of them. "A third cliw,'' 
 says he, *• foigc for thpir dlwrsion/' Yon ht¥« ill hoard of tho lmt« 
 prodigious humbuff at Eieter Hall, England. The kinjf suppresses the 
 Orange lodges. The bigots of the nation rally. They invite a general 
 convention of their brother bigots throughout the empire ; t champion, 
 it was the notorious Dr. McGhec, is invited from Ireland. He pro* 
 fesses to have discovered a document penned by the reigning ponti^ 
 tiMliiddressed to the clergy of England and Ireland, that recommended 
 all the crimes that could be thoaght of to be committed against the 
 FwHestanls. The crowd is gathered. The conquering hero comes. The 
 air is vexed with the cries of "down with the Catholics,"— " long 
 lifetoMcGheeT He opens his mouth, but be cannot speak. His emo- 
 tions overpower him — some broken accents — the title of the document 
 is lM«fd. *• Simpleton,** says a tremulous voice from the crowd, " the 
 Kov. Mr. Todd, of Trinity college, Dublin, forged and nublished that 
 document for his own divermon and that of his friends, jttst to see how 
 lie could imitate the pope's Latin, but never dreaming that any mat 
 of sense could believe that he intended to impose it on the wortd as a 
 genuine production of the pope !" McGhee was thunderstruck— the 
 meeting horrified, and one by one they slunk away to their homes, 
 muttering benedictions upon Irish bull-makers! This was diverting; 
 but the consequences of such diversions were not always as harmless 
 to the poor Catholics; in fact they had frequently cost them torrents 
 of blood. The celebrated Dr. Parr, Dr. Johnson, Nix, Whittaker, all 
 ■flee that the Calhoiic is the most calumniated society on earth. 
 
 My friend should know that the Latin translation of Ircnasus is good 
 authority, according to the soundest rules of criticism. It was made 
 in the lifetime oflrenasus, who wrote the preface to it himself; by 
 birth a Greek, he was bishop of a Latin see, (Ljrons,) and he says 
 he hopes the reader will excuse the roughness of his style, for he had 
 been so long among the Celtae that he had lost the purity of his native 
 tongue. His proximity to the apostles is proof of the clearness of 
 the testimony m his day. Polycarp was converted in the year 80— 
 and St. John lived to the close of the first century— so that John 
 tasght Polycarp, and Polycarp taught Irensns. We all know why 
 Jacob (supplanter,) Sara (Lady,) Isaac, (laughter,) Peter, (a rock,) 
 weie so called— was there a reason for the giving of these names to 
 all but Peter! The reason my friend alleges m not it ; Peter was not 
 tlie first convert, it was his brother brought him to Christ. John i. 
 41, 48. The word head is figurative ; this remark cuts up the web 
 ©f sophistry my friend has spun around it The pope is Peter's suo- 
 •essor without being all and every thing that Peter was, withontbein|f 
 a fisherman, a sworasman, a man of impolsiveness, a martyr. He 
 succeeds to all the power necessary to ffnlde the church. The other 
 amtlea were in^lible, as mv Mend adraita, and yet their sucoeseora 
 claiiii mot to be ao, IndiTidnally ; it is enough for every purpose of 
 good government that they are so when they abide in the doctrine of the 
 entire church. Liberius never erred in faith ; and Du Pin hiniKelf la 
 proof of his orthodoxy. He defended the faithful Athanasiua against 
 Oonatantina and the Arians his accusers ! And vet Mr. C. would 
 have ua believe Liberius an Arian ! He preferred, he said, to go into 
 exile rather than break the ecclesiastical laws against his own consci- 
 ence. Is not this one of the most heroic sayings recorded of popes I 
 The formula he signed in exile atPerea, in '1 brace, was not heretical. 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC EMJGION. 
 
 133 
 
 but wben this act was abused by the Arians, Liberius wept bitterly 
 tieidoknt interpretation the 'document was made to^e^- J^« 
 c^eiiY of Rome appreciated the pontiff's magnanimity, they had no 
 doXof his faith; they would have no other pope-Felix, Uie crea- 
 tLre of the emperor Constantius, they justly despised ; and, as m 
 fv^ry similar Instance, the righteous cause prevailed; God was 
 stronger than the emperor, truth than error, bo did the synod ap- 
 -nrove Damasus. and reject his rival. ^ , 
 
 ^ mCTw^s quotid about the Eucharist, and P«ye™_f«f *« 
 deadTl will show you how his testimony is in our feyor. Talking 
 SfCorinth, Ephesui and other ciUes, he says to the inqmrer, if you 
 wantto fiid L established doctrine and live near Connth, go to 
 C^nA to find U out; if near Ephesus, to Ephesus; if near to Borne, 
 go to Rome, and so on. This' only proves that the doctnnea^all 
 Z«, places was exactly the same ; but what is «»"' W,^"*' f °*? 
 it Drove that all these churches were equal in a"*""'?. *° ^'f."'?. ' 
 Supp^ a^an n New York writes to me to know what^^Catholic 
 Sine in any point i^I,tell him he must apply t" _*f^'''f5Xw 
 clergy of the churches of New York for 'nfofinf' ""vj^^f n^Z 
 from^this that I question the preeminent ay*»"'i "^ ^""^ . „?„^//^ 
 Drove any thins whatever 1 It is so far in our favor that it proves o 
 C/^mUy}doctrin.-\i}ie the unity of that light which proceeds 
 
 ^Mr'c" u"Sricken wTth the authority of Peter-it haunts him like 
 . sD^Ue'ufr^Sot Ais discussion-it meets him at every turn and 
 corS^ rf WrarCSent,_well ! The Greek word n.,u«. means rule, 
 Sb aovem S^well as « feed." See Homer,;w»«m. " tlci^ Mm 
 S'i' thf :^S;t"p;U^"suaUy to Agamemnon Jeed my lamtem^ns 
 .11 the flock, with Uie subordinate pastors spread over the universal toiu. 
 The Iv^ffelUt Ukes care to toll Ss. in the parable of Uie temple, that 
 fa ^^flt WfeV *" Ix^y- He explained, as St. John says, more 
 A^aU 1 bJoTfof -Ihe whole world ^Id contain, to his d.sc.ples^ 
 dSing the forty days from his resurrection to his ascension, spent, as 
 STSmoture assures us, in speaking to them of the kingdom of God, 
 M h^everwhere called his^hurcT.. Mr. C says there 's "o pnest 
 "nc^ Ch7st. I pant it, in the sense that the ^if P."««„^°'^'h ^^ 
 place of Christ, lerives his power from Christ. In this sense Christ 
 Lploys the priest as his agent, and exercises by,*"" 'Vf °*" P"^^ 
 hood 10 which God the Father hath (Ps. 109) confirmed him by an oath 
 foTever Bulin the sense that no such priest now exists, I cannot agre^ 
 Khi gentleman, for St. Paul says, thirty years afterChnst's ascen- 
 sion. «V<I every Mgh priea taken from among men, « <>^^P"^f"r^^^ 
 inAe OUngM t^l appertain to gJ, that he may offer up gifts and sacn- 
 S^fOTsS Who can have compassion on them that are ignonmt 
 Sf ea! b^use he himself also » compassed with ""fi^^i- apf 
 fterXre he ought, as for the peonle so also ^'^'T^ Aa^^^^ 
 •ins; neither doth any man take Ae honor to him^l^ but he Uiat is 
 ealli^ bv God as Aaron was." Heb. ch. 5, v. 1, 2, 3, 4. "oes not 
 S^'tUsPe apri^thood distinct from the body of chnstians Jh^rty 
 years ader Christ, as it exUts at present? Does. "»' ^t. Pa"! ^y> 
 We have an altar of which they cannot partake *ho»rveAe taber- 
 nacle « Heb. vi. 13, 10. And what was that altar for but for the sacn 
 Jices which the priesta were taken from among men toofferT-[l ime 
 uxpirod.] jj 
 
mmATM OM THB 
 
 TUSSBAY, JAKVAmY ITtHi Hay^patt 9 o'clock, J, M. 
 
 ^ I intend if possible« to sum up this argument on my second propo* 
 ■ition this forenoon. I could wish that my friend, the bishop would 
 feply to me instead of anlicipating propositions in advance, and of 
 leMting or speaking of matters which are wholly irreleTant. He ia 
 mm now occasionally on my first proposition ; anon, on the second ; 
 and instantly, on subjects which we have not agreed to debate. ' He 
 talks about my getting into thickets and circuitous labyrinths, with* 
 mtt seeming to perceive that I am in pursuit of him. He make^pro* 
 positions and assertions for me which I never uttered, and spends hit 
 time in deseanting upon his own misapprehensions.* 
 
 I Biiiit liovever, intimate to him and my audience, my purpose of 
 emtiiif to respond to any thing he may introduce not in reply to my 
 ■peeislies. If I must lead the way ; he must follow. I cannot be de- 
 Mf ed into all the minor and remote points he may originate. I must 
 go on to sustain my propositions, whether he respond to them or not ; 
 and shall appropriate half an hour occasionally to such matters in his 
 ipeeclies as may call for my notice. 
 
 I cannot, therefore debate the priesthood, or any foreign topic. But 
 as the gentleman has again reiterated the charge, */e«d my aheep,^^ 
 and seems to make the whole merits of the question depend on the 
 iMUliiiil of the word aheepj I will once more, and I think only once 
 mote toVert to it. It is universally admitted by Protestants and Cath- 
 olics, that it is the duty of pastors to feed the Jlock of their charge. 
 If thene be a common dutv iu the ministry of the old and new law, it 
 is this. But it is essential to his argument to make the word nkn^t 8ig>> 
 li%inf tkeep denote clergy. This is an extraordinary assumption. 
 It would be a waste of time to argue against it. But that you may 
 ■ee itf tbsurdity, I will read from the Catholic rersion a part of tho 
 imli tkmp. of John, substitating the bishop^s definition for the term. 
 
 *• I]« that enti^th not by the door into the lold of the ckr^^, but clirab- 
 •Ih up lome other way, he is a thief aiid a robber. But lie that entereth by th« 
 door, it the pastor of the cUrgu. To this man the porter openeth, and the eUt' 
 fy hear hit voice; aodhecalletli his own cltryy by name, and leadeth them forth. 
 Andwhen he halh let forth his own clergy, he ro«>th before them, and the 
 dtmm iaUmr Mm, because they know his voice, i am the door of the clergy, 
 Arf low mmy soever have come are thi^res and robber*, but the eUrgy heard 
 them not. 
 
 11th ve«e. I am the good pastor. The good pastor giveth his life for his 
 cicf^. But the hireling and be that is not llie pastor, whose own the elergw 
 •re not. seeththe wolf coming, and leaveth the cjergr and fleeth; and the wolf 
 imMth and disperseth the eUrry. And the hireling liceth because he ia a 
 MMiiag; and he hath no care of the clergy, I am the good pastor, and I know 
 nilBe, and mine know me. As the Father knoweth me, and Iknow the Father; 
 aadl yield my Ufe for niy cUrgy. And other clergy I have that are not of this fold." 
 iMUiiiilt this without comment to the good sense of my audience. 
 Tli« gentleman may find it more to his account, or he is more ao- 
 «ftomed to speak to the prejudices of that part of the community 
 
 • The other day the bishop asserted that / affirmed^ the aposllet wrote only to 
 Grt^ eUiti,* This is not found k my speeches; for it is so gross an error that 
 I Milld nut have uttered it, even in a dream. I request the reader to examine 
 my inee&het £or my own assertions; for he will frequently find the bishop in* 
 ■tead of meeting his opponent, demeliibing men of straw of his own cieation. 
 
 BOXAN CATHOLIC RELIUION. 
 
 135 
 
 who rely on the authority of the Roman church without askmg ques- 
 Uons, who are told not to think or reason for themselves; but to be- 
 Ueve in the c*«rcA— to them he may hold up his map triumphantly. 
 The face of Tertullian or Irenaeus on paper is as good to them as ten 
 armiments. But I speak to Protestants as well as Catholics; and. 
 therefore, I must reason, for they are a reasoning population. 1 ex- 
 pect them to d jcide by evidence, and not by authority. 
 
 Reference has been made to Waddington, on the papal succession. 
 His words were not correctly quoted by the gentleman. Bts interpre- 
 tation is rather an evasion of the question. It is to the succession lU 
 self he alludes. He cannot make it out: he acknowledges he can^ 
 not; nor can any living man. , .„ , ^ __ . 
 
 To resume the history of the schisms. I will read a few extracts 
 tiiat I have marked in a chronological table of tiie popes, which wiU 
 exhibit a bird's eye glance of the fortunes of the Roman see, for lit- 
 tle more than a single century. 
 12U1. Alfcxaader IV. dies June a4. The holy see vacant 3 months and 3 days. 
 
 The cardinals who proceeded to the election, not being able to pitch on one 
 
 among themselves, chose Francb, patriarch of Jerusalem, who lakes upon 
 
 him the name of Urban IV. and is consecrated Sept. 4. 
 1965. After a vacancy of four months, cardinal Guy . the Gross, born in Provence, 
 
 b elected pope. Feb. 5. and consecrated Maich 18, under the name ot Lie- 
 
 1268. Clement IV. dies Oct. 29. The holy see lies vacant for two years, nina 
 months, and two days. ^ ^ , , :..• 
 
 1271. The cardinals after a long debate on Sept. 1. by way of conipromisal 
 elected Thibald, arch deacon of Liege, native of Placeniia, who was then at 
 
 1876. Vrero'ry X. dies Jan. 10. Peter of Tarentaise. cardinal bishop of Ostia, is 
 elected the 21 st. under Uie name of Innocent V. After his death, which 
 happened June Uie 2d. cardinal Ottobon, a Genoese, is elected in his place, 
 July the 12th, and takes upon him the name of Adrian V. He die» at V itcr- 
 bo. Aug. 18. witiiout having been consecrated. Twenty-five days alter, 
 cardinal John Peter, the son of J ulian, a Portuguese, is elected and consecra- 
 ted, Sept. 15. under the name of John XXI. r 17*— 1,« 
 
 1277. John XXI. is crushed by the faU of tiie ceiling of the palace of Viterto, 
 and dies May tlie 20th. Nov. 25, John Cojestan is elected, and takes the 
 name of Nicholas III. and consecrated Dec. 26. 
 
 1280. Nicholas dies Aug. 22. The holy see is vacant six months. 
 
 1287. Honorius IV. dies on April 5. The holy see vacant till April of the next 
 
 1292^ ^Nicholas dies on April 4. The holy see vacant two years three montht 
 1304^" ThTdeYth of Benedict July 8. The holy see remained vacant till the 
 
 iW.'* Clem Jit y. is chosen pope June 6. He is crowned at Lyons Nov. 11. 
 
 and resides in France. ... .. l 
 
 1828. Lewis of Bavaria causes Michael Corbario to be chosen Mti-pope, who 
 
 takes the name of Nicholas V. and u enthroned May 12. He was driven 
 
 Ws!*" Grego^ XI "Sed March 27th. The cardinals entered the conclaveiat 
 Rome. April 7th. The Romans required a Roman or an Italian pope. Fhm 
 arch-bishop of Paris is chosen in a tumultuous manner. April 9th,and crowned 
 the 17th. under the name of Urban VI. The cardinals fly into Anarnia m 
 May. and protest against the election of Urban. They came to Rondi 
 Aueust the^th. enter the concUve. and chose. September 20th. the cardi- 
 nal of Geneva, who took the name of Clement VII. which caused a schism 
 
 in the church. . . . 
 
 1379. Clement VIIL flies to Naples, and from thence goes to Avignon, whera 
 he arrived June 10. The competitors for the papa :y condemn one another. 
 Du Pin.—Fol. ii. . 
 
ini 
 
 DSBATB ON TME 
 
 Tondiiiig all that the gentleman hat said or may say of the anthen* 
 tkity of Du Pin, I observe that the reportera have recorded my de« 
 fence of his reputation. They wilt alao have stated the fact that I 
 only quote him as authentic on such matters as all other historians tes- 
 tify. I will not then repeat the same defence a^in and again. 
 
 I know, indeed, that what is authentic with Jansenists may bo he- 
 terodox with Jesuits, and vice versa. When the Romanists are 
 iaid pressed, they have no English authentic historians. And when 
 we quote a Latin one, we are sure to err in tbo translation. Bellar- 
 mine is repudiated by one party ; even fiarronius is sometimes disal- 
 lowed. Still being in Latin, he is more authentic than any other. 
 We shall therefore take from him a few words in confirmation of what 
 we read from the Decretals of Du Pin. Barrottius,vol. vi. p. 562, A. D. 
 498, tells us that the emperor^s faction sustained the election of Lauren* 
 tius to the papacy. In this struggle " murders, robberies and numberless 
 evils, were perpetrated at Rome." Nay such were the horrible scenes 
 iiat, says Barroniua, ** there was a risk of their destroying the whole 
 eity." In the schism between popes Sylverius and Vigilius in the 
 ■iiOli oentury, the latter, though an atrociously wicked man, " impli- 
 eiled,** says Barronius, " in so many crimes" that all virtuous men 
 opposed him, was raised to the papal chair. Yet this man was pro- 
 nounced a good pope. Barronius says he is not to be despised though 
 a bad man. Let every man recollect, "says he, that even to the sha- 
 dow of Peter, immense virtue was given of God!*' (Bar. vol. vii. 
 p. 4S§.) 
 
 *Im the midst of contentions which rent the Roman Catholic church, 
 pope Pelagiuj I. was chosen. This pope approved the council which 
 |Mipe Yigiuus had condemned. This increased the flames of eccle- 
 siastical war to such a degree that the pope could not find a bishup of 
 Rome, vim could consecrate htm ; and he was constrained to beg a 
 biahopof Ostium to do this service ; ** a thing," says Barronius, *«which 
 mmei had occurred before." (Vol. vii. p. 475.) 
 
 The popes Formosus and Stephen lived in the ninth century. The 
 latter, says Barronius, was so wicked, tbat he would not have dared 
 lo enroll him in the list of popes, were it not that antiquity gives his 
 name. In the exercise of papal infallibility, he not only rescinded 
 tlie oelf and decree$ of his infallible predecessor Formosus; but collec- 
 tiilff a council of cardinals and bishops as bad as himself, he actually 
 had the old pope taken out of his grave; and he brought him into 
 court, tried, and condemned him; cut off three of his fingers; and 
 Dlimged his remains into the Hber. See Platina's life of Stephen 
 ¥1. and Barronius do.' 
 
 *Barronius under the year 1004, names three rival popes, who per- 
 petrated the most shameful crimes, and bartered the napacy, and sold 
 It for gold. He, though a Roman Catholic writer, calls them Cerber* 
 11, tlM throe headed beast which had iwued lirom the gates of 
 Imll !• 
 
 iii»r his words in his life of pope Stephen VII. A. D. 900. • The 
 MM it ■loh, that scarcely anv one can believe it, unless he sees il 
 with Ms eyes, and handles it with his hands, viz. what unworthy, 
 vile, nnsi|htly, yea, execrable and hateful things the sacred apostolic 
 ■ee^ on whose hmges the universal apostolical church turns, has been 
 •ompelled to see, &c.* 
 
 * Geubrard in his chronicles, under the year 904 says, ** for nearly 
 
 SOMilN CATHOLIC BKLI6I0N. 
 
 13f 
 
 1 50 years, about fifty popes deserted wholly the virtue of their predeeeti* 
 sots, being apootatb rather than ArosroLicAL !' 
 
 * And to crown the climax, Barronius, under the year 919 adds : 
 *» Whal is then the face of the holy Roman church ! How exceed- 
 ingly foul it is ! When most potent, sordid and abandoned women, 
 (Meretices,) ruled at Rome: at whose will the sees were changed; 
 bishops vere presented ; and what is horrid to hear, and unutterable. 
 False Po^ tiffs, the paramours of these women, were intruded into 
 the chair ot St. Peter, &c." He adds,—** For who can affirm that 
 men illegally intruded by bad women, (scortis) were Roman pontiffs !" 
 Again : ♦* The canons were closed in silence ; the decrees of pontiffs 
 were suppressed : the ancient traditions were proscribed ; and the sac 
 cred ceremonies and usages of former days were whollt extihct. 
 See his Annals A. D. 912.'* 
 
 Again : he relates that pope Alexander was elected by cardinals, 
 some of whom were bribed, some allured by promises of promotion, 
 and some enticed by fellowship in his vices and impurities to ^ve 
 him their suffrages. He refers to various authors who complained 
 that he was famous for his debauchery ; he tells us of his vile exam- 
 ple in keeping a Roman strumpet Vanozia, by whom he had many 
 children ; that he conferred wealth and honors on them, and even cre- 
 ated one of them, Cajsar Boipa (an inordinately wicked man) arch- 
 bishop of the church. Vid. Bar. Annals, vol. xix. p. 413 et seq. 
 
 'The same writer (vol. ix. p. 145) records the election of Bene- 
 dict IX. at the age of twelve years, which he says was accom- 
 plished by gold, and he calls it (" horrendum ac detestabile visu") 
 "horrible and detestable to behold ;"* and jret he adds that the whole 
 christian world acknowledged Benedict, without controversy, to be a 
 
 true pope ! 
 
 Stcpmen vn. The anparalteled irickedneM of this pope it cooTejed in a sin- 
 gle line : [Ita quidem pa$$usfacinorv$ homo quique ut/ur ei latro tngretsui ttt 
 m ovilt ovtttm^ laqueo vitam adeo infami exitu vindice Deo ctoufif.] •• Thus per- 
 ished this villanoiis man, who entered the shet pfold as a thief and a robber; and 
 who in the retribution of God, ended his days by the infamous death of the hal- 
 ter." (Bar. vol. X. p, 742.) 
 
 Again, Barronius says of the lOthoentarr: 
 
 •* What then was the face of the Roman church ? How very filthr, when the 
 moat powerful and sordid harlots then ruled at Rome, at whose pleasure seea 
 were changed and bishoprics were given, and — which is horrible to hear, and 
 most abommable — their gallants were obtruded into the see of Peter, and made 
 faht popes; for who can say they could be lawful popes, who were intruded by 
 such harlots without law ? There was no mention of the election or consent 
 of clergy; the canons were silent, the decrees of popes suppressed, the ancieat 
 traditions proscribedg—Iust armed with the secular power, challeogcd ul 
 
 Ihinrs to itseld 
 
 • » • » » • • 
 
 What kind of Cardinals, do yon Imagine must then be choaen by those mon- 
 sters, when nothing is so natural as for like to beget like 1 who can doubt, but they 
 in all things did consent to those that chose them ? Who will not easily beliere 
 that they animated them and followed their footsteps ? Who understands not, 
 that such men must wish that our Lord would have slept continually, and never 
 have awoke to judgment to take cognizance of, and punish their iniquities.'* Ann. 
 Vol.x.91t. 
 
 Now if the gentleman objects to any of these quotations which 1 
 have hastily, but I believe most correctly made : the originals art 
 
 * Browule«*s Letters on Row. Cith. controversy, pp. 36, 37,38. 
 M 3 18 
 
 ' ■Til II II II —.—i- .J.!^!— ^M-MH .UMtm 
 
Ji'VW 
 
 'SBMATS mi TUB 
 
 iMiii tnd let them be exwiiined : For, theM belnf idmitted it is m 
 less to object to Du Pin, who neror usee to serere lanfuage agiinfl 
 the wMiet at Baronias wui Genebraiid, Plalinm and others. 
 
 ffnallf on this subject For mrmtf years, there was no pope in 
 Rome, beridee all the other interregmrais. The pope resided at Ayigr- 
 non in France and left Sl Peter's chair empty. For almoat half a 
 eentary there were two popes, and two lines of popes existing at one 
 time— one reigning in Italy, and one in France. And at last there 
 were three popes— Benedict XIII. the Spanish pope, Gregory XII. the 
 French pope, and John XXIII. the Italian pope. Then the conncil of 
 Constance met— A. D. 1414, and raadea fourth, or true pope, and depos- 
 ed the three anti-popes. Snch was the 29th schism in the papacy ! Is 
 theier-oiay I not ask with all these facts before us,— Is there any 
 man on earth that can have the least confidence in any pope as the 
 ■nceemor of Peter! A thousand questions the most learned and m- 
 tiimtte, which no living bishop has time or means to examine, must 
 b« decided before he could rationally or relieiousljr believe that the 
 ■necesiion from Peter has any existence at all: or, in truth, it cannot 
 iMMIeved but upon iiMf«iitilAm7y/ * :, j r 
 
 We now proceed to show that there has been no fixed and nnifonii 
 ■Mlhod of electing the popes. Indeed history and tradition furnish 
 14 with no less than seven different methods. 
 
 1. Iransus says, •that tradition said, that Peter appointed his sue- 
 
 wmrJ And if he did, why do not all the popes follow his exam 
 
 plet for Irensus is as good authority for this, as for that concerning 
 the founding of the chureh of Rome. , , . -__. 
 
 «. The priests and people are said to have often elected the first 
 wipes; or, rather the btsiiops nominated and the people elected.--I 
 ought to have observed disUnctly, that there is as much sophistry in 
 the word pmi ti evet wan played off on earth. The word pope, m 
 the east was firet applied to all bishops, and is so used in Russia to 
 thin day. It was in the 5th century applied to the senior bishops and 
 metropolitans of the wesU But it was not until the time of Gregonr 
 VH. that it was eateAwiWy appropriakd hfM»9vm ifutomHon, to Me 
 ljil0M efMome, , . 
 
 Hence, in this ▼arlety of acceptation, popes many were always in 
 the church, and were elected by the people. But the pereons firet 
 called popes and those now wearing the title, have no other resem- 
 blance tiian the common name. 
 
 X The emperoia nominated and bishops elected, and the emperora 
 'itpiwinlei en 'their own nsponsibility. 
 
 4. Leo VIII. transferred the whole power of choosmg the pope to 
 iie emperor, being tired with the Inconstancy of the Romans. 
 
 fi. Iwronius in his Annals. 113, 8, and sect 141, 1, says, «They 
 (the popes) were introduced by powerful men and women. M wm 
 frmmnih IA0 prke ofjprmiihmm /* 
 
 £ By the decree olpope Nicholas II. in his L«teran Synod : *The 
 whole business was given over to the eafdinals, an order of men, not 
 heard of for 1000 yeare after Christ. The popes n-w make the 
 Mliiials, and tiie cardinals make the pope. What a glonous repub- 
 Ik! My friend, a staunch republican, agrees that a few men m 
 Rome should elect a head for the universal church ! But sometimes— 
 
 7. General councils (as that of Constance, Pisa and Basil) took 
 upon tiiemselves the nakhif of popes, and, as we have seen, made a 
 
 SOHAN CATHOLIC RKLIOION. 
 
 139 
 
 fourth pope, when there were already three acknowledged by different 
 parts of the church. Can these facts be denied 1 They camnot and 
 
 I preaumcy will not. , , . 
 
 It is now affirmed that the intrigues of papal elections incomparaF 
 bly surpass the intrigues of any court on earth. The politics of 
 France, of Italy, of Austria, are so incorporated with the schemes of 
 tiie cardinals, or so bias or bribe them, that on the election of a pope, 
 it is usually said, " Austria has succeeded" or " Spain," or " France 
 has prevailed this time !" In one word, the papal chair is tiie most 
 corrupt and conupting institution, that ever stood on earth. The Ro- 
 man Cesars, or the Egyptian dynasties, were pure and incorrupt, coni- 
 pared with this mammoth scheme of iniquity. On the whole premi- 
 ses, I ask, would the head of the church so jeopardize all the interests 
 of his kingdom as to make the popes of Rome, or faith in them es- 
 sential elements of his system of redemption, or necessary to the sal- 
 vation of any human being 1 !— , , . .1 
 
 To recapitulate.— This being a fundamental and pnmary essential 
 element of the Roman church, I have labored it more than any other 
 and yet I have not said a tithe of what may be said, or even what I 
 have to say on the subject. But I have aimed at establishing four points 
 in demonstrating this proposition. And to adopt the positive and 
 dogmatic style of my learned opponent, may I not say that / have 
 
 ^TC5;;office of pope, o, sup«,n.e head on eaxA. has no s^ip- 
 tore warrant or authority whatever. Indeed, that the whole heau ideal 
 of a church of nations, with a monarchical head, (which, in the es- 
 timation of tiie bishop, is equivalent to the word church of Christ,) is as 
 gratuitous an assumption as ever graced a romance^ ancient or modern.^ 
 
 2. That it cannot be ascertained that Peter was ever bishop of Rome 
 —nay, indeed, it has been shown, that it is wholly contrary to the 
 New Testament history, and incompatible with his office.— 
 
 3. That Christ gave no law of succession.— 
 
 4. That if he had, tiiat succession has been destroyed by a long 
 continuance of the greatest monstera of crime that ever lived ; and by 
 cabals, intrigues, violence, envy, lust, and schisms, so that no man can 
 believe that one drop of apostolic grace is either in the person or office 
 of Gregory XVI. the present nominal incumbent of Peter's chair! 
 It would be now as easy to prove that Solomon's mosque built by the 
 Turks, is Solomon's temple, in which Jesus Christ stood; as that the 
 popes or church of Rome is a christian institution. - , . 1 
 
 On what, now, rests Roman Catholicism 1 ! If the foundatton be 
 destroyed, how can the building stand 1 I need not tell my opponent 
 that tiiis is a blow at the root of his apostolic tree. He feels it, and 
 J am glad to think that if any American bishop can sustain these pre- 
 tensions, my learned opponent is that man. He has asked, and he 
 may again ask, where was the Protestant church before Luther's time? 
 In reply, I ask, where was the pope before Constantine's timet 
 He brought Mosheim to offset Waddington and Jones on the subject 
 of the Novatians. And what did Mosheim prove contrary to these 
 historians 1 You have heard with what success my opponent seeks 
 to tarnish the reputation of Novatians, Waldenses and Protestants. 
 As a general offset to all his declamation on this subject, I will give 
 you the testimony of a g:ood Roman Catholic : for he was an/w^wm/or 
 —I mean BUnefim Saeeho^ one of the most inveterate enemies of 
 
L4fl 
 
 DKBATS ON TllB 
 
 these old fasMoned Protestants. I have tlie orifftnal before me, hm 
 •kail not read it unless it be required : The translation reads : 
 
 "Among all thenscti" (there wer« icct% you perceive, before the Reforma- 
 tion) •• If hush ttill are, or have been, there it not one more permckmi to Uie church 
 than ilMl of the Leonitea;" (a name by which the WaKlenses were iometiniet 
 
 " I,) •md that for three rmsons. The Itt la, becaute it is tJic oldeat, for 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC EEL GION. 
 
 141 
 
 aome aay it hath exiited from the time of pope S>Wc«t€r; othen/wm the Ifiiw 
 of the Jpoetlee. The 2nd, because it is more general, for there » jcofce any 
 country when tM* $€ct is not. The 3rd, because wtu n all others lecta beget 
 horror by their blaaphemies against God, this of the Leonitrshath a ^emt show 
 ^pmtw because thev MveJMtly bejbremen, and believe nil thinffMrtghUjf cmt,- 
 enmi God and all the aHtcka contained in the creed. Only they blas- 
 heined the church of Rome.'* JRetn. Sanho, edit. GrCzett 0. S. J. etqt. 4. 
 
 I coiild five much more Roman Catholic testimony in proof that the 
 doctrines of Protestantism continued from the dap of the first Roman 
 schism till now : but this at present would seem superfluous. Nor 
 will I speak now of tlie old English and Irish churches which the 
 Roman bishops sougrht in vain for many centuries to bring into their 
 fold* There is nothing betrays a less discriminating regard to the 
 facts of ecclesiastical history, than to ask where was the church be- 
 fore the days of Luther 1 — ^But I hasten to the point yet before me, 
 whidbflike some others, I may not remember, was reserved for a more 
 eomvenient season. It was an objection drawn in part from E ph. iv. 
 II, and from the alleged difficulty of obtaining a ministry hot 
 ivongli the popes of Rome. 
 
 Tliit|iM8age, viewed in common with Matth. xxviii. 18, 19, seems to 
 me, rather to remove all difficulty on the subject. Matth. xxviii. gives 
 all authority to the apostles to set up the christian church, and pro- 
 niaes them miraculous aid, till the work was done. " I am with you 
 continually HU the conclusion of this sttde^-^ m^ mmu.t^t tw «i^wc. Of 
 which I must here speak more particularly. At present it suffices to 
 lepeat the fact of such a commission, and such a promise to the 
 
 asiistles. , . , .*. 
 
 How let ns hear Paul. When Christ ascended, " he gwoe gtps to 
 men."— What, let me ask, were they ! " He gave apostles, prophets, 
 evangelists, pastors, and teachers" — all miraculously endowed. They 
 were'^not raised up, out of the church ; but given directly from heaven 
 to the church, or for building a church ! What, again, let me ask 
 . Paul, were they given fori " For the perfecting of the saints: or, 
 according to the Douay bible, "for the consummation of the saint* 
 unto Ihe work of the ministry, unto the edifying of the body of Christ. 
 And for how long, let me ask, still more empnatically ! " Until (it 
 is Mj;t« in Greek, dome in Latin, adverbs expressive of the time how 
 long) " Until we all come into the unity of the faith and knowledge 
 of 3ie Son of God, to a perfect OTan" (not men— that is, to a perfect 
 body) «' into the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ." — ^The 
 Roman church beingjudge, then, these officers were given to the church 
 allvr the ascension, for a special work, and for a limited time. — ^1^11, 
 out of Jews and Gentiles, they had made one ptarKcr up, or church. 
 
 Now, these apostles acted in exact accordance with the nature of 
 the case. They preached, baptised, and congregated disciples, in 
 particular places. These disciples had, from the nature of the case, 
 to receive from them the whole christian institution. They knew 
 neither what to believe or do, but as they were taueht by these Ib- 
 ■pired men.— Hence, the apostles preached, baptized, taught, served 
 
 tables, and dispensed all ordinances, and performed all offices amonf 
 them, till the body of the church had learned iu duty. Then they 
 taught them to select from among themselves certain officers— gave 
 them the qualifications, and showed them in their own persons how 
 they were to be set apart and ordained to these offices. — For example 
 the deacons^ or public servants of the church of Jerusalem, the mother 
 church. Again, they taught tliem to send out missionaries or evan- 
 eelists, as in the church of Antioch ; and finally, to ordain elders or 
 bishops over the flock, as soon as they had persons Qualified for that 
 ofIi*,e.— Tliey taught the church, then, to have bishops and deacons, 
 and evangelists (or general missionaries, as the case may be). They 
 gave the law, the qualifications, and the mode of inducting them into 
 office. They never taught any one church to depend always upon 
 Jerusalem, or Antioch, or Rome, or Corinth ; but ihey taught the w^ 
 cessity of all these offices— gave the qualifications of the officers, and 
 assisted in ordaining them in many particular congregations, of which 
 congregations with the same laws, authority, and order, there never 
 have been wanting thousands from that day till now. 
 
 Order has its foundation in nature. The highest officers were call- 
 ed seniors or elders ; because of their age ; and bishops or overseers, 
 because of their office. Deacons, not having so much authority and 
 glory, and not having a salary, like bishops, there never has been 
 among them any controversy about succession ! But had there been 
 any great honor or reward in that office, we should doubtless have had 
 as much ado about an unbroken line; and could as easily find one in 
 this case as in that of the bishops of Rome, or Constantinople. The 
 same order obtained in the christian church— I mean, substantially, 
 that obtained in the synagogues of the Jews. The same word 
 jrfftrCi/TiMor or presbytery, is found in the New Testament in reference 
 to both the synagogue and the church. « Stir up the gift," ^cc" tl»it 
 is in thee, by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." Indeed, 
 the synagogue, much more than the tabernacle or temple, was the 
 archetype o? the order, which the anostles set up. In every case the 
 question was put to the people, " Look out, choose out, select from 
 among yourselves," &c. . • n 
 
 My friend is almost a Protestant on some points. He occasionally 
 recommends the bible to his flock, and he says that the ordinances of 
 religion do not receive their virtue from an unholy or holy pope— that 
 he has his authority to administer from Christ rather than from the 
 
 Indeed, I know not why the spirit of God should be promised 
 through such a wretched and polluted channel as the popes of Rome, 
 rather than to operate from heaven in all its holy influences upon those, 
 who by its appointment, are chosen and ordained by prayer, fasting, 
 and imposition of hands, as deacons or bishops of the christian con- 
 Kre<rations. We lose nothing then, in abandomng the leaky and 
 sinking ship of pontifical authority in the Roman Catholic church.— 
 [Time expired.] 
 
 Bdf^pad 10 o^loek, J. M, 
 Risnop PurceIjL imea~~~ 
 
 My friend has set me the example of recapitulating. I shall not 
 fail to do so in due time. He has talked around one of the invincibla 
 texU of Scripture which I had adduced for Peter's headship : " Simot 
 
DBBATX OF 
 
 —..«,.., lielioW Sataa httli desired to hmw yon, (the plurtl) that k« 
 tnrnr mh you as wheat : but I hare prayed for tbib, that tbt faitb 
 ihil mot; and thou, being converted, eonfirm thy brethren." St. Luk© 
 wi. 3S. And he ffratnitously asserts that " Confirm" here means only 
 " Comfoft" But will any man say that such an interoretatioii has 
 weakened the force of my argument from the text, or destroyed the 
 avowed eifect and object of the Savior's prayer, namely that the fiiith 
 of Peter should never fail, and that, in it, he should confirm his bre* 
 tliPM I Let him shew that Christ addressed a special prayer, for any 
 ■iniilar pnrpoee, in favor of all, or of any of the other apostles, and 
 then he may summon Christ's anpointed chief of the apostolic band, 
 to surrender his preeminence. It he cannot do this, Peter must for 
 ever retain his supremacy — not of age, nor of talents, nor of priority 
 of call, nor of conversion, but of or ficb. 
 
 He again asserts, for Mr. C. seems to think we must ^nnl every 
 thing to his assertions, that I cannot find a solitanr proof m Irenaeus, 
 or ID any other author of christian antiquity, that Peter was ever bish- 
 op of Rome. Now in p. 169 of this Protestant edition of Irensua 
 w find that warranu It is in chap. I. book 3, *« against heresies.'* 
 Ho speaks as follows : 
 
 •• Far we have not learned the ditposition, or econoinj, of oitr Mlvatioa firom 
 tnj others than those throu^^h whom the gospel came unto us, which, indeed 
 lh«j firM preMhed, and alterwardt, bj the will of God, del'iTered to ut in writ- 
 ing, to be the pillar and ground of our faith. Nor is it lawful to saj, at soma 
 do, who pretend to correct the apostles, that they preached before they had had 
 psflect iKMrledge. For after uie Lorid had arisen from the dead, they wert 
 dMMd with virtue from on high by the Holy Spirit who came down upon them, 
 ■■d they were filled with all knowledge and attained to perfect understanding; 
 tlmy WMit to the ends of the earth announcing to ut the good thing* which ara 
 liNHitGod, and proclaiming heavenly peace to men, having both all and each of 
 tht m the gospel of God. Thut Matthew, in their own language, wrote tha 
 Ktfipel scripture ia Hebrew, while Peter and Paul were evangelising and found- 
 lag the church of Rome. AtVr their departure, Mark, a disciple, and Peier*§ 
 Mllpntfer, likewise announced to us the prescribed doctrines; next John, th« 
 dileijple of the Lord, who also reposed on his breast, published likewise a gospel 
 rcficiiig at Epheant, in Atia. And all these delivered to us the doctrine of On« 
 God, th« Creator of heaven and earth, announced by the Lord and the propheta, 
 and one Christ, the Son of God; to whom, he who assenteth not, despiseth the 
 partaken of the Lord, despiseth Chritt the Lord, despiseth the Father, and it 
 condemned by himtelf, for he retltteth and oppoaeib his own salvation, which 
 all heretict do." 
 
 Ttaeiag the tncceition of bishop in the tame chair, he alwayi make Peter the 
 ifat bUop, at I have already Miewn fntm the very next page— 170, of this 
 volume. 
 
 There Is Iiensns, a wiiter of the 2d century— year 150. I shall 
 oUow the devions track of the gentleman at well as I can. 
 
 My friend denied that I could adduce a solitary testimony to prove 
 that the legale of the pope presided over the first great general conn* 
 ell of the church, after the council at Jerusalem, Now I am going 
 to addooe Baronins, p. 395, vear of Christ 325, rear of Sylvester 12, 
 CoMtanliiie 20 : (how fiiithnil and eiaet oar Catholic histories are !) 
 
 **'Btiam we proceed to narrate the history of the acta of the Nicene council* 
 I wmy yon, liriendly reader, to pause with me,* to notice the most eminent prelates 
 of that illustrious company of saints, that most flowery crown of fathers, and niost 
 illttinguished assemblage of holy bishops, whose names thine forth from amidst 
 the obscurity of so ancient a period. He who first attracts our attention, con- 
 spicuous for having been twice legate, is Osius, bishop of Cordova, in Spain, re- 
 MreMuting the bithopt of Spaia, and, at we have already said, holding tne place 
 {iIm Latin it itill itfongtf--^raonam genaa— panooatuif ) Sylvester, bitbop el 
 
 BOBtAN CATHOUC RELI6IOK. 
 
 14S 
 
 RoMa. aad chief of the legatet, hit colleaguea. Now, continues Baroniua, what 
 Mod iround could there have been for Osius' sieninf. before his colleagues, the 
 W«. before the bishops of the second and tLird sees oi the cbristiaii world, 
 viT Alexandria and Ant.och, and belore Ccecihan, the primate of all Africa, not 
 to soeak of others, unless he held the place and represenlea the person of the 
 hiffhwt power of alH He then quotes the commencement of the letter which 
 thi legate, immediately after the council, addres«fd to the pope: "To Sylve.- 
 ter, most Wetted pope if the city of Rome, and enUtled to all reverence, Ojius. 
 bishop of the provmce of Spain and city of Cordova, Victor and Viocentius. 
 priests of the city of Rome, appointed by your direction, Ac. &c. So far 
 
 N^lTlex. says, vol. tii. p. 68, "The synod of Nice, first of the oerumcnirals, 
 was convoked by the emperor Constantine, with consent of the Roman pontilt, hy l- 
 fetter— the president of the council, in the name of St. Sylvester, and his le 
 rates were Osius. bishop of Cordova. Vitus or Vito, and Vmnentius, priests, ^r.&c. 
 It was the custom of the bishop of Rome to send a bishon and two 
 inferior ecclesiastics to represent him in the councils. Osius was 
 lecate and Victor and Vincentius were his two assistants. 
 
 ^'alalia Alexander says the same, p. 68, 1 vol. Fleury, another most 
 authentic historian, a man of prodigious learning, a contemporary of Bos- 
 suet, and one who has been very severe against the popes, so that we 
 have quarreled with him for it, says the same, p. 107 and 108. He adds : 
 " St? Athanasius says that Osius presided at all the councils, and it is certain 
 that he presided at the council of Sardica, twenty two years later. 
 
 Now we cannot see why a simple bishop of Cordova should have presided, 
 bv anv rirht of his, over all the bishops of the world, even those of Alexandria 
 and A'nti«:h, who were present in person-Gelasius of Cyiicum savs expressly 
 that Osius held the place of Sylvester, bishop of imperial Rome, with the priests 
 Victor (or Vito, as he was also called) and Vincentius: and his testimony should 
 not be suspected, as he was a Greek and writing the acts and records of Greeks. 
 Subsequent usage » conformable to what is here obterved.— In the oecumenical 
 councils whose acts have come down to us, we see the papal legates at the head, 
 and they are commonly, a bishop and two priests." 
 
 Here are Baronius, Noel Alexander, Fleury.— The gentleman rays 
 that I deal in rhetoric, hut he may say what he pleases ; I deal m 
 nothing but stubborn facts. These are the irresistible arguments by 
 which Catholic truth is upheld. ., ^ , i 
 
 As for Peter's executing the decrees of the council of Jerusalem, 
 I said no such thing. He acted with the resU-but he did, I mam- 
 tain, lead, and his authority was wanting to give sanction to every 
 decree. When he spoke, the " muck digputing" ceased. He spoke 
 humbly, but authoritatively. James and Paul and Barnabas acquiesced. 
 The opposition to his gentilmng wzs wron^ and much in the spirit of 
 more modem opposition, but Peter's authority then as it has ever done 
 prevailed ; for it any thing is certain in historical testimony, it is proved 
 that his authority was acknowledged to reside, in ancient days, m 
 his successors. So is it now acknowledged. We were referred to 
 10. John, where Christ speaks of the fold and the sheep; and ob- 
 jections were made to my interpretation of the words "lambs Md 
 ♦• sheep," as contradictory and absurd. But now mark, my friends, 
 the signal diflference between the two passages. In 10. John, tlie 
 Savior speaks of theep ahne. He says the sheep are scattered, and 
 never mentions Iambi. When therefore Christ says in the other pas- 
 sage, feed my lambs, do we not remark that he afterwards changes 
 the passage and says, feed my sheep ! and as 1 observed yesterday 
 Christ means pastors, by the sheep whom the lambs, follow. 
 Wide as the worid, is Christ's fold— and there are over its va- 
 rioas provinces, or pastures, many shepherds, but one above the 
 
144 
 
 WEBATM Om THl 
 
 iMt, whm» duty it is to watch orer them all, to aee they do their datf . 
 —This is Peter, this is reasonable, it is as it ought to be. Thus, thf 
 nek, tlift kejt, the charge to confirm his brethren, the acknowledge 
 meit oCPamf that he went to see Peler, lest he might have run in vain. 
 the acknowledgment of the authority of Peter's successors, the very 
 necessity of such an office to keep order, &c. All this is proof positiyo 
 from BCTiptuie and history and reason, of the supremacy of the chair 
 of Peter, and not rhetoric— or if so, it is logical rhetoric. Let not 
 nsfipiure, history and reason be thus dismissed in the nineteenth cen- 
 tury, with a wave of the hand. 
 
 That elcmal Du Pin, my friends, you have had my reasons a^inst 
 his authenticity as a Catholic historian : certainly he is^no testimony 
 against the Catholics. All my friend can adduce to prove that the au- 
 thenticity of Du Pin was ever recoffnixed in this country, is that some 
 Catholic paper in Kentucky, m he «ay«, allows his authenticity— 
 Who the editor of this paper is, I know not. He may be a resocctable 
 Catholic. The bishop of Bardstown has nothing to do with it, the 
 editor is liable to be deceived. His opinion ought to have no weight 
 whatsoever in this controversy. 
 
 What led my friend into such an error respecting the book itself, 
 was, probably his seeing prefixed to it the censor's license for its im- 
 pression; but he should have known that the king of France appoints 
 tudi persons as he thinks fit, to examine wheiher publications con* 
 tain any thing dangerous to the state. And Louis Philip is more 
 strict in this respect than ever Charles X. was, who was exiled 
 from France for the same thing. 
 
 The Doctors of Sorbonne, to whom the work was submitted, may 
 have said the book contained nothing against fiuik and moral*. They 
 do not say that he is an auikentie Catholic historian. We apply criticism 
 to every work, and our maxim is nuUiu* addietus jufnre in verba ma- 
 gigtri. The opinions of two or three Doctors of Sorbonne form 
 no rale of faith for Catholics, although, in this instance, they say 
 nothing, I presume, to which we may not very safely assent, while 
 we describe Dn Pin in his proper colors. After all Du Pin says noth- 
 ing that does not go to prove my views, if considered fairly, al- 
 though he was expelled the Sorbonne for heterodox opinions ! 
 
 Now there were vacancies, breaks, in the chain; but the lapse of 
 a few yuars, before binding together the links of the apostolic succes- 
 sion, llii«i not affect the great principle for which I am contending. 
 Wem no believers in meiempmfekmig.' or that, like the supposed divinity 
 of the Lama of Thibet, the soul of a deceased pope goes by shop, skip 
 and jump, right off, into his successor. We will wait six months, or six 
 years, to find a good pope. Time is taken for this, since so much de- 
 pends on the result. Now in this chain were some bad popes ; we 
 weep over the fact, my friends, and lament it. Mr. C. ought to have 
 thrown the mantle over his shoulders and walked backwards with me 
 and covered these frailties, for the sake of our common Christianity. 
 llw mass of the succession is sound. But there were some bad points. 
 
 It is not the name^ but the religion they represented, that we regard. 
 Whether the stream of testimony came to us through conduits of 
 fold, of silver, or of brass, it is not the channel of communication we 
 itftid, but the pure chrystal and transparent waters of celestial doc- 
 trine, of divine truth. Men are liable to err— Jesus Christ said there 
 must needs be scandals. We look for them ; we expect them to occur 
 
 SOMAN CATHOUC BELIOIOIf. 
 
 145 
 
 while there is yet remainioff one single human being on this earth. 
 None but God is perfect and man is good only hy divine assistance. 
 I have no special apology to offer for a pope who is a bad man. He 
 should be the pattern of the flock from the heart. He should be the 
 salt of the earth— the li^ht of the world. He should remember that 
 the " mighty shall be mightily tormented*;" and that " a most severe 
 judgment shall be for them that bear rule if they walk not according to 
 the law." I should not be surprised if these bad popes were at this moment 
 expiating their crimes in the penal fires of hell. But what is the pro- 
 per inference to be deduced from their melancholy aberrations 1 If 
 they like Lucifer have fallen, bright lights from the firmament of re- 
 ligion, do the heavens no longer proclaim the glory of God 1 Do 
 the praises of God resound there no more t Why it is truly wonder- 
 ful, that, bad men as they were, they should not only have never se- 
 vered themselves from the faith but should have been the instru- 
 ments of perpetuating sound doctrine at home and abroad. Nothing, 
 my friends, gives me more faith in the genuineness and truth of our 
 holy religion, than when in reviewing the history of these disgraceful 
 enormities, I find the church, in the very midst of scandal, enough to 
 blacken and overthrow any earthly institution, still supported and up- 
 held by the almighty hand of God. A church that has stood through 
 all that the gentleman has laid to the charge of the merely mortal 
 men who have presided for a season over its destinies. A pkw op 
 
 THEM ERRED IN MORALS, BUT NONE OF THEM IN FAITH ; SOUnd doctriue 
 
 and sound morals were seen and admired, during tliese sad eclipses, 
 and infidel nations were, during that passing obscurity in Rome, re- 
 joicing in the beams of the orient sun of justice, heralded by Catho- 
 .ic missionaries. Let this be borne in mind when my learned oppo- 
 nent undertakes to prove that the pope is the sea-serpent ! And let 
 my Protestant friends understand that the Roman Catholics detest 
 immorality as much as they can, wherever it may be found : and most 
 of all, where superior virtue was required by exalted station. We 
 too had labored for a reformation, not of God's truth, for it needed 
 none, but of men's morals which are always liable to corruption. 
 We may cry out like the apostles, when we behold such scandals, O 
 Lord, save us ere we perish — ^but we hear the divine answer, " why 
 fear ye,,0 you of little faith." No cloud has ever yet impended 
 
 OVER THE CHURCH, THAT THE RAINBOW OF PROMISE D'D NOT SHINE 
 THROUGH THE 6L00M. 
 
 The object of the institution of the church being no other than to 
 establish the true worship of God, by the overthrow of idolatrjr, and 
 to sanctify a chosen people for everiasting life, by the purest virtues 
 of religion, we are not to wonder that Satan, the jealous enemy of 
 human happiness, should exert his utmost powers to obstruct the be- 
 nevolent design. In fulfilment of the Savior's prediction, and from 
 the very nature of man, it was necessary that persecutions, heresies, 
 schisms and domestic scandals should happen ; but Jesus Christ had 
 likewise foretold that they should not prevail. The Pagan tyrants of 
 the earth may rage; the courage and patience of our martyrs will tri- 
 umph and multiply. Heresies may start up in various forms, and 
 for a while seduce thousands into error; they will, at length, sink 
 hack again into the dark abyss from which they first emerged. Gui- 
 ded by the spirit of truth, and confirmed in the unity of her belief, 
 the church will ever successfully oppose to their impotent attempts, 
 N 10 
 

 DEBATE ON TMB 
 
 ihe promisea of her dWne Foimdei. the antiquity of her faith, the con- 
 sent of nations, the order of her hierarohv, t^^Jiolv seventy of her 
 discipline, the bright example of thousands of her feithtul children 
 the sacred history of her doctrines, and the decisions of her councils 
 Seiims may at times perplex and divide the faithful, but the church 
 by her authority will either close the breach, or separate the refracto- 
 ry members from her communion. The vicious lives of sonae of her 
 diililraii may contradict and disgrace their christian profession, they 
 inay violate her laws, they may insult her authonty, and invade her 
 sacred riffhts ; they never will be able to overturn her ministry, to 
 •hake her hierarchy or to alter her doctrine. She will never cease to 
 wata linners of their duty, to correct, to- instruct, to direct mankind 
 k the way of salvation. ... ri. 
 
 By her persevering zeal for God's honor, by the force of her ex 
 hortaliODS, by the solemnity of her public service, by the morality of 
 her pieeepts, and by her practice of the evangelical counsels, she will 
 continue to prepare souls for heaven, while she exhibits to the world 
 a rich assemblage of the most heroic virtues. It is thus, that our his- 
 toif attests the care which God has taken of his church. 
 
 The whole number of popes has been nearly two4iundred and sixty. 
 Of these, the first forty were saints, or martyr8,a small number only, not 
 more than twenty, can be called bad men ; the rest were remarkablo 
 for eminent virtue, charity, leal, learning and patronage of letters. 
 Feter was twenty-five years bishop of Rome ; and non videbts annoa 
 Fetri, you will not be pope as long as Peter— is a proverb which 
 everf new pope hears. Pius VI. and Pius VII, came nearest to the 
 yeaw of Peter, but they did not attain them. But says the gentle- 
 mant the pope transferred his see for some time from Rome, to 
 Aflgnon. I grant it ; but have I not said, were he a wanderer m A- 
 byssinia, he would still retain his title and authority. 
 
 We were told of a council which cashiered three popes, and made 
 a fourth ! My friends, what sophistry is this? Does my friend think 
 be is addressing people but one remove from barbarism, instead of the 
 enlightened and liberal cia^ens of the queen of the westi I wish hina 
 to understand that we, at least, are equal to the people of Bethany in 
 intelligeftce. Among these ciiiiens, I thank God, my lot is cast. 
 Does Mr. C— suppose thai they cannot answer his sophistry by the 
 tree statement of the fact! The council cashiered three doubtful popes, 
 or rather no popes at all, and elected one true pope. What has become 
 
 of his logic 1 , jm,< c 
 
 Stephen VI. had thebodj of Formosus dug up and cut off his fingers. 
 My friend has taken this from Pope and McGuire's discussion, and hat 
 ■een the answer there. In this unpardonable act of Stephen, we at 
 least discern zeal for the rules of discipline, which forbade the trans- 
 mmm of a bishop from one see to another. For this offence the need- 
 iest act of severity was done. It shews the popes expose what the/ 
 think wrong in popes ; just as my friend would know nothing of their 
 nMeeds, if Catholic historians had not had sincerity, piety and zeal 
 to denounce them. Genebrard said that the popes were more often 
 apostates than apostlet. I am sure that, in this case, truth was sac- 
 rificed to wit, and faithful testimony to virtue as well as faithful ex- 
 misition of vice, for the jingle between the words apostates and 
 ipoatles. But Genebrard says not, absolutely, they were apoa- 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC KMJGIOff. 
 
 147 
 
 tattt, but that they had fallen short of the virtues of theb predecet* 
 sors. 
 
 My friend qaarrelt with the name, cardinals. The name is Latin and 
 at old as that language. But I will not contend for the name. He 
 says the cardinalt, were not so called for 1000 years, but did not show 
 bis authority. This was, however, the title given to priests charged 
 with the care of large churches, as far back as the year 150, or at 
 least in 300. But call them what you ma]^, they were a portion and 
 an eminent portion, of the Roman clergy in all ages. Now, as for 
 merly, there are cardinal priestSt cardinal deacons, and even cardinal 
 laymen. They are a superior order of men, the patrons of the arts 
 and sciences, as well as the ornamentt and supports of the church, 
 and the benefactors of the poor. They liberally entertain and treat our 
 travelling fellow-citizens with great civility — for instance, Mr. Dewey, 
 an Unitarian minister, lately in Rome, and cardinal Weld, a dis- 
 tinguished English nobleman, in whose father*s castle, at Lulworth, 
 if I am not mistaken, our first archbishop, the cousin of Charles Car- 
 roll of Carrollton, was consecrated bishop Read Mr. Dewey^s ele- 
 gant and thrilling pages. They will almost make you a Catholic. 
 Certainly they will liberalize your minds already raised far above vul- 
 gar prejudices. The cardinals elect the pope — but if the pope creates 
 the cardinals, surely he does not create his own electors ! 
 
 Mr. C. — has not told us yet, from what true and holy apostolic 
 church, the Roman church apostatized. He has told you of the Albi- 
 genses, Vaudois, Novatians, Donatists, &c., but they furnish no con- 
 tinuous church. They are, I say again, ignoble ancestry. My friends, 
 read history for yourselves if you wish to see what a miserable set of 
 wretches these sectarians were. 
 
 My friend says, that Peter was married — ^but I defy him to prove 
 that be retained his wife after he became a bishop. I will meet Mr. 
 Campbell on this doctrine of the celibacy of this clergy, and shew 
 him in the words of St. Paul, 1st Cor. i. 26, and in those of Jesus 
 Christ, Matthew xix. 13, whose expressions, although he was purity 
 itself, I dare not repeat in Mr. C — ^'s fastidious ears, ** that there are 
 not many wiu according to thejlesh.** St. Paul, who was a bachelor, 
 says, 1st Cor. vii. *^ I would that all were as myself. I say to the 
 unmarried and the widows ; it is good for them if they so continue 
 even at 1. ▼. 8. He that is without a wife is solicitous for the things 
 that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. But he that is with 
 a wife, is solicitous for the Uiings of the v.-orld, how he may please 
 his wife : and he is divided. And the unmarried woman and the vir- 
 gin thinketh on the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in 
 body and spirit. But she that is married thinketh on the things of the 
 world, how she may please her husband.^* Read the entire chaptei. 
 Marriage was ordained by Almighty God for the propagation of tht 
 human race. The Catholic church not only approves the institution, bat 
 teaches that Christ hath exalted it to the dignity of a sacrament. St. 
 Paul, while he wishes all to be like himself, unmarried, still acknow- 
 ledges that all are not called to that state; and they who cannot prac- 
 tise continence, he wishes to marry; so does the Catholic church. Her 
 ministers are not allowed to take a vow of chastity until they have at- 
 tained an age when they can, aided by divine grace, decide on their 
 capability for its pure observance. And now, young ladieti and gen- 
 
^':liS 
 
 mmAvm ii?i the 
 
 SOMAir CATHOLIC EUJOION. 
 
 149 
 
 ^ggl9 pM mmm hotnmm WlMt Mr. O. wovM mke yon, 
 the .ncce-wft c/Pimlkiiiis- They eondemned all ^^^/^^^^J^JJ^*' 
 Zviiiff that niifrim came ffom the evil principle. B«^ ra™^*^^' 
 SZ lei us S^l that oar daya In this life aie iminbered ; the 
 mw^Z Z^n^denth^n earliest victims. - For the/«.A^of this 
 SSStrys^e ap Jtle,pas8eth aw.^" Lei prksts then ^ogocAerea 
 rCalhofio lelimooa haw done, to the whole human family, lenoone- 
 Zg llTSea that would hind them to a few only, that they may be like 
 -€od, the lathers and henefectors of many* _ ^^^ . . . - ., ... 
 Mi. C. spoke of ministering to the siek. l^^^^J^^ ^el ills of 
 In d«da of eharity, the Cartiolic priesthood, '^'f ;?!i^^^l:£ZlwI 
 all oiders, are unsurpassed. Their ' labor of love' is seen in the hospiial, 
 
 the fm^m, ihe*^ dungeon, the ^P^^^^^^'^'^iJlZl^nf^^^^^ 
 makeTlts dreadful rava«es, where the peattlence atalketh at noonday, oi 
 
 ■lidniffht I Hear Waddingtoo^ . , ... 
 
 *S UmuUhm. Of th* more modem orden. there it tisoone wfcich asy mm 
 
 10 wMwm^ amr 7'T7_~|r«- ti,«„^k the laint from wrboin it received iti 
 di Bi«ia, ,•*?»* •^rJ.^J' J n5^^^^^^ yenn afterward.. lU 
 
 ■MMJrt »k B*"*".^ • "^^.f J/K^^^ ^Sm prmirtive form of atretic 
 clMificter wai pecalmr, and recall* our anenuon lo um P""" . . . . -:--,i- „f 
 SIvotiM. Thidutiea of tho« holy sittert were the puretl within the circle of 
 hI2rbi«etaU»ce--to minbter to' the .ick. to rtlieire the poor, to co»«>l« '^J 
 Sr^rS^ IW^h the penitent These charilmble ^^^J^^^^flf^^ 
 to«x™tiwi&?tthebondSf any coinuiunity. without the obl.gation ofanj^ 
 
 !1!«^ ToiTwithout any leparatioii from society, any renouncement of theii 
 riSk dXi «d .frtSS: Tnd m admirably wire t^se office.> mil .on. ol 
 ia^S.pSformed. that had all other female order, been really a. use le^ and 
 Ti^^lSey •!« iometime. fiilself deicribed to be, the t.riue. of the Lnm- 
 
 calwuaiea." Waddlntto • i Church Hiit. PK« 3;^. New York edit. 183o. 
 
 STr! C. spoke of lad popes, Nicholas HI. &c. &c. and of monksj-- 
 Hear a^nl-what this Protestant historian says of them and of this 
 
 ^^ k'lSISLiit mmm that Roman Catholic writer, iraunt the di«ntere.t^ 
 
 wiritual want, of the poor, how frequ.nt .n priwni «id ^.^ 'ccLio.u X^ 
 
 £rt*rafon:;tKlrh7i:Wl - -tjoduced i°to *he -^h of Furo^ 
 SfVre the middle of the eleventh centur|. In the twelfth, we objer^e Bole., 
 huu duke of Poland, opening the path for It. reception in Pomerania by the 
 Ir;dTl!^ L like mannrr. Sk the Wonian. •«i*\»^;:i^^ 
 tar convenion bf conquett Again, Ufbas Vlll. cooiecrated Mamnwa, an ■■- 
 
 z^^m:zz:^^ooo^ *^'T*-''iss*Tthe'i:^'dTa:?n'::; 
 
 iheiii- the bi.hop conquered hk M>e, and promulgated at the head oi an armr 
 STSkSfi of oSngelfcal concord. The lame nietEod. were pur.ued by Innoc^^nt 
 ni. iTiSm thaf time forward m. ind much more 5fT«*»* .•«*^^ ^^ 
 .bakmariea, who«* labour, wene directed to •«^««af^"l^*^,8^'^^ 
 
 intimate, w, -i leaat. by pmceful meanp. **^ »Y^„S™!;^*^KX k »^ 
 iSmi^tiif bil ^ w th mere nominal conver.ion9, and that otber. naa coieny in vi^w 
 SSrSlrow. ndt-iicement, oj the extension of the P^ff'^^^^^^'l'^.S^ 
 Se^wete Hkewiwi many who were animated by the "7* «J™7JJ* "^^'i*** 
 
 SHhoae e«Hion^ if thej feiW of «W»-^%XThi^^th"^ ZSeiS 
 want nf diiintercfted devotion. The miwioM of the Ihirteentii and ioiin«e«i« 
 
 Si*. :2JrjSciH«y diryrted to lb. -'* o^ -^^ ""^^^ i^.'sr' J^ 
 
 Mmt an embawf. compoMsd of Dominican* and FranciMJan., to tn« V/^^v/^^; 
 rSe^ly Sunica^on wa> to maintained, tliat Uie enroy. of Abaca, thei. 
 
 kine, were present, in 1371, at Iha second coancil of Ljona. NicbdM III. (is 
 1278) and Nichola. IV. (ra 1289.) renewed those exertion.. John of Monta 
 Corvino. a Franciwan, wa. distinguished during the cooclu.ion of the century 
 by the success of his bborp; and in 1307, Clement V. erected an archiepiscopid 
 we al Cambalu, (Fekin,) which he conferred upon that missionary. Seven other 
 bishops, also Franciscans, were sent to his support by the same pope; and this 
 distant branch of the hierarchy was carefully nourished by succeeding pontidi^ 
 especially John XXII. and Benedict XII. It is certain that the number of Chris- 
 tians was not inconsiderable, both among the Chinese and Moguls, as late as the 
 year 1370.— and they were still increasing, when they were suddenly swept 
 away and almost wholly exterminated by the Mahometan arms. Howbeit, th« 
 disastrous overthrow ot their establishment detracts nothing from the merit of 
 those who constructed it; and it must not be forgotten, that the instruments in 
 this work were Mendicanto, aad, for the most pert. Franciscans." lb. p. 547. 
 
 The Methodists have done themselves honor by the praises they hare 
 bestowed on Francis Xavier, a Jesuit. They have published his life, 
 and to day, if I have time, I will quote from it some beautiful extracts. 
 
 They and other Protestants have also published Thomas a Keropis, 
 or the christian pattern. Where, except m the Gospel, can purer mo- 
 rality be found t And Thomas a Kempis was a monk. We are told 
 that Sacchi said that the Albigenses and Vaudois made a thow cf piety. 
 TTiat is a fact, and a pretty show it was. I will not read the indicated, 
 but forbidden page of narrative sincere — ^better blot it with a tear ! 
 
 If the pope 18 charged with severity to kings, it is because kinp 
 were tyrants and the pope was the advocate of the weak, and the 
 enemy of arbitrary power. The people were crushed, and had no re- 
 source but in the influence which God gave to the head of the 
 
 church. 
 
 " With all Its errors, (the pnpacy^s.) its corruptions, and its crimes, ft was, 
 morally and intellectually, the conservative power of Christendom. Politically, 
 too, it was the savior of Europe; for, in ail human probability, the west, like 
 the east, must have been overrun by Mahommedanism, and sank in irremediable 
 degradation, through the pernicious institutions which have everywhere accom- 
 panied it; if, in that great crisis of the world, the Roman church had not roused 
 the nations to an united and prodigious effort -commensurate with the danger. 
 
 In the frightful state of society which prevailed during the dark ages, the 
 church everywhere exerted a controlling and remedial influence. Every place 
 of wor.hip was an asylum, which was always respected by the law, and general^ 
 even by lawless violence. It is recorded, as one of the peculiar miseries of St^ 
 
 S hen's miserable reign, that during those long troubles, the soldiers learned to 
 isregard the right of sanctuary. Like many other parts of the Romish svstem, 
 this nght had prevailed in the heathe» world, though it was not ascribed to 
 every temple. It lad, as it had done under the Romish empire, to abuses which 
 became intolerable; but it originated in a humane and pious purpose, not only 
 screening offenders from laws, the severity of which amounted to injustice, but, 
 in cases of private wrong, affording time tor passion to abate, and for the desire 
 of vengeance to be appeased. The cities of refuge were not more needed, under 
 the Mosaic dispensation, than such asylums in ages when the administration of 
 
 instica was cither detestably inhuman, or so lax, that it allowed free scope to 
 idivklnal resentment. They have, therefore, generally been found wheraver 
 there are the first rudiments of civil and religious order. The churchyards aU* 
 were privileged places, whither the poor, people conveyed their goods for secu- 
 rity. The protection which the ecclesiastical power extended in such cases, kept 
 np in the people, who so often stood in need of it. a feeling of reverence and at- 
 tachment to the church. They felt that religion had a power on earth, and that 
 It was always exercised for their benefit. • r i^r 
 
 The civil power was in those ages so inefficient for the preservation of public 
 tranquility, that when a country was at peace with all its neighbors, it was liable 
 to be disturbed by private wars, individuals taking upon themselves the right of 
 deciding their own quarrels, and avenging their own wrongs. Where there 
 misted Bo deadly fetid, pnttttts weft eawly nmd* by tnrbalcat ami rapaooiif m*m, 
 m2 
 
I 
 
 'pgBATB ON THS 
 
 awl DMM»able p«rt of the community (.wwayi ui«5r^»*» /*, , . „,»—-- 
 
 iiwlcr whoM protection tJi«y tbpt.four night. <>*«». 7«**'°PS^»J;"^^^ 
 X <bir«N>Hd hat* b««i in pert' •'«! ^««''- !*»« T!^ i^JJir^ltioS 
 
 mmmm; if the monarch fro» eiKitngered or <>PP;*^,„??J^ 
 SSTwby a combiiMitioii of hi. baron., ^f^Tie J/lhl^l^BhMdwZ 
 r!Ii7 Jl^rt fnr an elTectual inlerpo. tioo in hit behalf; and the nme iDieia wm 
 could rf»ort tov a ^^ ^y'^^^lCZ -^i-j noon the pope to defend them again.! 
 
 We are told that Peter exercised the ^.commission of Apostle^ 
 SdI that therefore he could not have been bishop of Rome, and ^ 
 dot Paul was sent to the Gentiles and Peter to the Jews, But Feter 
 was *e first apoeUe sent to the Gentile»-Av the angel af God. He 
 Tceived CornSius the centurion into the cliureh. He founded ^e 
 mm of Antioch-a Gentile city. If Peter was ^m^^^ u .» af R^l 
 Zld, where should he place Sis head qujiiter. ! ^^he^^^^^ 
 the nistiess of the world, worthy field for a chief apoefle s seal, 
 wheThlwiild at once he heard by Gendles and bj Jews. by Greeks, 
 
 Barharians and Romans, -d—-- <>« 
 
 We are told there are no vices to be discovered in the ^^J^ 
 perofs more flaunt and jjloomy than •^«^*»^ *^J,^^£™^ 
 £it they became proverbial for their imquity. But I l»«r "''^J.^^^^ 
 ihese sweeping denunciations are glaringly untrue. Jhere were 39 
 nartyfa mtJ^m or 270 pop^, 1? there were a few ^«d men i^ong 
 them, shall we for that reason fling awav our felth ! »<f«^^h^^^^ 
 ■o1 Did he not say that it must needs be that w^dals come i Ana 
 wm lot the vast majority of the popes enUtled to ▼«nera^>on] 
 SuppoM there were ahout a do«en that were "^''^JJ"*;.*"**,?^*!*!^^^^ 
 wcreeven fifty of various rfiades of guilt, or imperfecUon, there were 
 ■ail uDwards of 200 worthy. Christ has said that "many are called, 
 hut few chosen." Show me 200 of the Roman emperore or a likt 
 proportion of any other rulers, to the popes, who were as good men, 
 Ld who have 'deserved to go to heaven. Shall we pomt to Nero 
 Mdiiif ap the da^r which he h^f Pliing«i '"^^^^^^^^^^ « Z 
 — iiMitherl to Diocletian, the man of sin, — ^ine anucnn» ai um 
 
 spMtliit, who mowed down hundreds of meek and peaceful disciples 
 iToiicel-to Caligula, the murderer of the «aints T-to M^^^^^ 
 m m mm^tm Majumin I Where is there a paimllel to their atroea- 
 tiflst Mf friend has talked of the inquisition, and on that ooint alio i 
 will meet him. The inquisition was the vice of the age and fw< of W« 
 flwiish. It was unknown for many centunes. In many Oatnoiic 
 MUtfies it was never received. Other churches and times Have, 
 likewise, their sins of blood to answer for. [Time expired.] 
 
 Haff-pad 11 o'ehek^ Jt M 
 
 Mr. Campbell ri8es~-~ 
 My Mends if we proceed in this course we never shall di'^iff J^e 
 .A^ — ^g have before us. If we iw to ait here and Ustea t# 
 
 SOMAH CATHOLIC BBUGION. 
 
 151 
 
 such a variety of matter wholly irrelevant *« ^he que^*'^'! f f,„^^*l' 
 Mver prove any thing, or know what Is proved. Must we haycques 
 Tons iS^^ncS reaching back to the beginning of the discussion and 
 fonvaid to its close, and touching upon the whole system ?f theology 
 inTe^ siILht I have said llreVdy I will not lose sight of my 
 duty so as to respond to every thing in one speech. 
 
 Tafmost trembled when my opponent arose with «o niudb pomp 
 and appearance of having found a triumphant P'«f °^„^*« ^^^^^t 
 ksomrhidden,and by me, unexplored c^^-^.^'/ 'ff "^^^^^s u 
 said I to myself, have f not thoroughly examined this jn^"^;^* »J 
 
 P«ible thit there yet remains ?f P*«««^%«"^b"Jj; was Tven^ Ut^ 
 my assertion, and have I committed myself 1 But it was even a iii- 
 
 tle less alan^inff than his blustering about the consecraUon of Fhocas. 
 lie less alarming u a s - , ^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^ 
 
 deed. It was ine same uiu owij ucw T-wf.-- .j ,. v:i„ t>,^ 
 
 X'jSer^e at all, to the present debate. lren«us said, wh.^ P^ 
 i^va Paul were founding the congregation at Rome. J wo"'* 
 Mk. T there in this audienci, any stripling n. knowledge, who und«. 
 ■tauldB that founding a congregation makes a man bishop ot that 
 eh^h Tmm^ ^Missiolarifs p ""oad they plant con^egations 
 
 in particular places; and they go R"™ /'•>»"n *° «°""V7: C" ^ 
 to citT. to found other churches. Are they bishops of all the cong" 
 pS Sat they establish 1 It is essential to a missionary not to be 
 ^.ionary. But why expose a matter, already evident »« all ! It^s 
 the ffentieman's last effort. He has explored all antiquity, and all 
 fclMn find after three or four days' search, is this single fragment of 
 ..21 SiliC^on h^ay, that Pm\ and Peter ;,fa»/«i. the church at 
 Rome^ So ends the controversy on that point, the main pillar of the 
 Roman church. There is anothir little matter (there are too man, 
 Uttle matters) which I wish to dispose of. 
 
 The gentleman affects a great accuracy in his k""* ^-^gf ' ""f^S^'J 
 precision on the part of his authorities. He seerns to glory in Ito 
 ioit of reputation, else I would not select this trifle. Ho* <>f^» "^ 
 heassertJd that Sylvester summoned the council of Nice, and that 
 Sfe^^lepes presided over it ! And how often has he med to 
 move It ' Like some other matters already disposed of, after sleeping 
 r^ nights upon t^ subject, as one that had a pleasant dream, he 
 
 Slak^^s anraffinns\gaii, that Osius ?,f>-tttd''heTroW 
 of Sylvester, and as such presided at Nice. But did he P^^e " • 
 I sh^l read you some tesUmony on this .""bjfct. d» *»• "°*^^^,'^ 
 tn the weisht of mv argnmenU one gram of sand ; but to prove tnai 
 when nSxi any tkng as a fact, I dolt advisedly, and will stand to lU 
 Pe^itmenow to corfect a mistake into which the gentleman has 
 aE that 1 rriied upon the testimony of an ephemeral paper in Ken- 
 SckT. I did not say, that it was upon wch authority 1 read any au- 
 &re. M? al luLn to *»t paper was a pure „rg»-«/u». «rf^ 
 minem, and was made for bishop Pnreell and "» °»f. '''^; L '^e 
 bUhop of Bardstown or some of his clergy admitted that tusebius 
 Md l?u Pin, though not good Catholics, " were authentic historians 
 But that admission gives them no new weight, or ^d^^^ no weight at 
 .11 w th me I havl already given my reasons for the authority ot Uu 
 pL Brwherfmav I asLls his authority for Sylvester's calling 
 Sf'coun^il^f Ni;se! ^The emperor did it at the general suggesuon 
 
 I 
 I 
 
 ^ 
 
152 
 
 HfllATK 071 TRX 
 
 of tlie eastern bishops. And If Osius presided, we have no reason 
 to think that h© m it as tho pope's legate. For Uiis we have an- 
 dtlt wthority. The goiieman spoke in warm admiration ot Usi- 
 118 : but did he not apostatize, or some way lose his orthodoxy 1] Ho 
 was, indeed, a learned and talented man— a sort of standing presi- 
 dent in the early councils ; and in thai age of the world as among ee- 
 clwiMtios there were few men of general learning, we therefore find 
 Mit OOMilciious in all assemblies ; and his name stands first in tho 
 Bobtofiptions of the decrees and creeds of the early part of the 4tli 
 century, hut that he presided as the pope's legate in any council, esp© 
 cially that of Nice, is insusceptible of proof. 
 
 We shall however hear antiquity on the subject. 
 
 "Coiiilmitiiie «eeing that lie had labored Id mm to allay Ihaditputei whicli 
 Jivldad tiM church, thought it would be the inoit ready and elTectual nieam to 
 restore peace, to call a nuuieroui synod composed of eastern and western bubom. 
 Thii council was called acumenical, i. e. a council of the whole world, or Ui« 
 wlwle earth, because it was called together from all parts of the Ronian empire, 
 to which the title of the world, or earth, was given, and which did almost in- 
 clude the Catholic church. This council was assembled by oriler of <««««»- 
 MMT at Nice, a city of Biihynia, about the monlh of July, in tbe ye«r3^, la 
 the second year of Constaiitiue's reign. St. Sylvester was then bishop w «o^ 
 who sent thither Victor and Vinceotius, his legates. It is commonly held that 
 Ihb couacil consisted of 318 bishops; but those who were prwent at it do not 
 precisely dttemiiiie this number, but say onl? that there were about 300 bishops. 
 Tia not caitainly known who presided in ihia oonncil, but it is verr probable 
 llwt it WW HMOS who held the chief place there in hb own name, because h« 
 had aliedlj taken cognizance of this affair, and was much esteemed by the em- 
 peror, who was then present. _ . , . i • j . r n 
 
 Athaiiatius, in his second apology, calls Hosius the father and president of all 
 the cowirlli. The name of this bishop is the first in all the subscriptions. Alex- 
 aiader was much esteemed, as appears by the letter of the council. l!Aistatliius. 
 of Antioch, was called the chief bishop of the council by Proclus and by lacun- 
 dua; but it is more probable that Hosius presided there in his own nanie. and not 
 in the pope's, for he no where assumes the title of legate of the holy see; and 
 none of the ancients say that he presided in this council in the pope s name. 
 OelaiiusCiMceims. who first affirmed it. says it without any proof or authority. 
 
 Dm JPtii, vol 1,/Jf. 598, 599. 
 
 Now where is the gentleman's authority for the nature of the bish- 
 op of Eomio or his legates, either calling or presiding in this council ! 
 lIpoB tieii disregard of ancient history rest many such assertions now 
 in common ciroulation and in common belief. But as I said before 
 on this point, I should not have dwelt a moment upon it, had not my 
 opponent affected peculiar accuracy in his details. 
 
 The bishop admits Barronius to be an authentic histonan. Now, 
 neither Barronius nor Du Pin even admitted so much in reference to 
 iie demerits of the popes, as bishop Pureeli has admitted -in the pre- 
 sence of this great congregation : For he says " 1 have no doubt 
 but these bad popes he now expiating their crimes in the pen- 
 al firoo of hell." While these words were sounding in m¥ ears, 
 tho f loslioii simnltaneously arose, with the sensation produced, What ! 
 Has the Lord Jesus his vicars — his representatives on earth, now 
 roasting in the flames of hell I I put it to intelligent men, whether 
 ■loh an idea is not repugnant to every principle of the christian ro- 
 
 ligiiOn. 1 
 
 l¥hen Simon proposed to purehase the gift of the Holy Spirit, 
 what did Peter say to him ! " Thy money perish with thee !" Does 
 this look like winking at such enormities ! Were not the apostles 
 all persons of unblomished reputation! and if such holy men, the 
 
 I 
 
 EOMAN CATHOLrC HBLIGION. 
 
 159 
 
 I 
 
 models of every virtue, were firet appointed by the Lord to condurt 
 the affaire of his kingdom, how comes it to pass that he has changed 
 his administration ani trusts it to such a succession of pretended 
 Representatives 1 Has Christ changed his purpose with respect to 
 his chureh, that he will allow its supreme head on ear h ,to«ct every 
 species of crime, and yet be his acceptable vicegerents ! May I not 
 sav, that the darkest hour of midnight is not more opposed to the light 
 of noon, than is the general character of the popes of Rome to that 
 
 "^•^rg^ntmin exclaims "How precise these 9?^»»«^i«\:^J«y: 
 in their dates!" There is however, an over precision, that creai^ 
 suspicion. When a man begins to swear very cireumstantially before 
 his word is called in question, 1 begin to suspect his evidence, and 
 when I see authore testifying that Peter reigned twenty four years 
 five months and ten days,'bis\op of Rome (as I have it on some^ 
 Dies of the popes ;) I think he ought also to come down to hwirs, 
 mi^u^s and seconds ! and then we would know how to appreciate hi^^ 
 This resembles Peter's putting away his wife after he bec«ne 
 bishop of Rome. « What accurecy 1" Let the ^f "J^^^"™^" Pjo^ fi's 
 that he was bishop of Rome, and then we shall show that he suil 
 
 '"TT^etemlem^^^^^ citizens of Cincinnati, however 
 
 well deserved on their part, will not so blind the eyes of this audience 
 r»1^a?rrderstand th^e argument ; and the design of their pane^nst. 
 Nor will his gratuitous denunciation of the Albigenses, Donatists, 
 Novatians, Pafucians, and others, pass for historic truth They were 
 such " vile heretics" in the estimation of " holy niother,' as are wo 
 « schismatical Protestants." Their reputation we have fully sustain- 
 ed from unexceptionable authority. 
 
 The genUeman will have Du Pin m every speech. Can he prove, 
 or has L proved him unfaithful in stating a single historic fact 1 Not 
 one. Nofcan he disprove Oiose Roman Catiiolic vouchere for him 
 
 on whose testimony 1 rely. * j -. i «,« «*.* «!». 
 
 Bat as the reiteration of assertion is no proof, and as I am not ob- 
 
 liffed to repeat arguments as often as he makes assertions, 1 shall 
 
 nStice one or two new mattere to which he ;^««^/£^« ^^"^P^^^^I^k^d 
 But it is thne to examine the philosophy of the plea for wicked 
 popes. The Messiah descended through a long line of an«f«^«;!;«^™J 
 Sf whom were wicked men. That is, tTie human "f »f ,°^^^« '^^.^^"^ 
 descended through some wicked progenitore. I°/f * ! Po the ho^^^^^ 
 of Jesus Christ, be it said, he humbled himself for our exaltation 
 he condescended to be made of a woman, to be descended ^om Adam, 
 NoSrand othere. In such a long line, he «^««^ "«^^««*"*/' ^"^^ 
 had ail tiie varieties of human natnre in his \»f «^«f ' "^/jf^^^^ 
 to make himself of no reputation— to be bom m a stable, of the hum- 
 West and poorest parentage. Bm who would argue f^om ^J"f U^^^^ 
 because his flesh and blood were so descended ; .^^f^^^f^/^'/^^^^^^^^ 
 Spirit must descend to the chureh, in all its official gifts of authority 
 and governmental influence, through a lineage of P^^f "«' ^,h««2n« Jh 
 were^uU of murder, adultery and all »l"«V'T'''l'."nl^mis^^^^^^^ 
 the hands of such persons all the graces of the <>!;d»"f "^f, ™"«^ J^ 
 to all the partakers of the christian institution ! »««? "<>^^J "^ *?! 
 tSedefence make the matter woree 1 Is there any analogr between ti^ 
 descent of flesh, and tho Spirit of God! Is the formaUon of tiio 
 
 r 
 
i 
 
 UMIATK OH 'THM 
 
 bod|, iBd tlie cietlion of th« myitictl body of Christ, mttten 
 
 of oqml w&m wad iMportanoe t , ^ • n .u^ -«.;«- 
 
 God has geneiillj, employed tho host of our race in all the affiura 
 of our salvation. His agents have often heen angels or Uie OeH men. 
 Me did not often impart such sacred trusts to men of bad character. 
 A wicked Balaam or a treacherous Judas may have been amongst 
 those employed, for special reasons in some great crisis. In the case 
 of Balaam, he caused even an ass to open its mouth and reprove Uie 
 madness of the prophet: but that he ever set such persons over his 
 chiicbt aid gave the affairt of his kinedom into such hands— that 
 lie went so far as to select these wicked popes to speak his word, 
 it npiifiMiit to aU history, and our experience of his dealings wilh 
 
 men 
 
 The ffentleman says there were lioo hundred goad popes. I do not 
 ■dmit this : but I am wUling to help him so for as to say I can count 
 /orff fitn« saints out of the lial^f popes according to my calendar, 
 iil they lived long ago. Not one of the last fifty has been a saint— 
 
 Bnaor PotciLii— ~Yes there is one. 
 
 Mil Camtoill— I beg the gentleman's pardon. There is one saint 
 liiMi, out of the last fifty popes ! It is a happy thing for human na- 
 ture, that the vices and faults of those who have redeeming qualities, 
 die with them, while their virtues live and magnify, long alter then 
 death. . Hence, our remote ancestors and thoae of ancient times, if ^ 
 all distinguished, are canoniied In the admiration of the living, and 
 are supposed greatly to excel our contemporaries. 
 
 The bishop says, that if the pope were a poor wandererin the 
 mountains of the moon, it would not destroy his authority.--Thou|h 
 the see of SL Peter should be vacant for seventy years ! If so, the 
 whole argument for Roman episcopacy falls to the ground. If the gen- 
 iieman admits that the pope has as much authority in the mountains 
 of the moon as in Rome, why all this controversy about Rome I 
 
 The gentleman made himself very merry with the council's depos- 
 log three popes and creating a fourth. But I repeat, there were in all 
 four popes created and destroyed at that one time. I feel no mis- 
 givings of conscience for making this asserUon. I a«k now, how are we 
 5) decide which of these four had the best title to Sl Peter s chair I 
 Where is the authority for a council's creating one and destroying three 
 popes ! No council before ever took so much on them. But if we 
 •ay with the bishop, that not one of the three popes was a true popej 
 then what a long link is wanliiig in the succession ; and how could 
 the council of Constance furnish it I 
 
 My friend the bishop spoke of marriage quite in jocular style—: but 
 he told one great truth wMch I hope he will stick to, to the end. It was 
 this: He said that ike dlureA kad made marriage one of the Mven 
 sacraments— mark it. Tke ekwrek has made it a sacrament; and she 
 liaa made other things sactanieats : wMch the great unlveraal Father 
 #f heaven and earth has not so made and dealgialed. 
 
 Peter was sent to convert the Gentllea. — ^He opened the kingdom 
 of heaven to Cornelius and his femily : but this does not interfere 
 wilh his being specially the apostle of the Jews. 
 
 There were various vacancies in the Roman see of shorter and 
 longer duration— several of two or three years' continuance, rhe 
 chureh was often witliout a head lor years at a time. 
 
 Was it the intention of the great Anthor of the christian inMituUon 
 
 BOHAN CATHOLIC KOTJGION. 
 
 155 
 
 to hiiiaid iiich a contingency! Would he J'^ '^^,?^ ^^^."^i^ 
 to li»^iaiu wrcii- chair often vacant and often filled withvncked 
 
 "^•^ ''^Knl^il^riLrcrcouW gel along for years without a pope, 
 P%'u?ot^Ultew^^^^^ Fof if faith in the pope 
 
 could »tno*5^P®"^f^",A//Wi7A would Jesus Christ have suflfered 
 be an essential part of '^V^'f^P^'^f salvation to be so often and 
 the whole -<^«^»":.™^/j^/^^^^^ and died durin. 
 
 80 long «"«l?^"?«i- i^^^^^^'lLr were detained in purgatory; an3 
 rcSSnle^^^^^^^^^ by thLTnavoidable 
 
 Interruptions!— [Time expired.] 
 
 Twelve o^chdc^ M» 
 
 Bishop Purcell risesr— - , #m .v it* feui, «nil 
 
 The auestioB for UndaT is the uniformity of the Catho ic feiA and 
 me «l"e™°° •"' if, the subject of apostolicity. Mr. y. 
 
 practice ; and we »" «'» "P°" ^fieipaied. He^ has discovered that 
 
 of arms, and ne laKes up wim wi^ » . latter, as he is a 
 
 dington have said a good word. Well l«^^^f ®JT 'holic testimo p. 
 
 SsHTthe^SreC'^uVtXutlfa^^ 
 
 Donatisu and P'«'«t"r''ru^*oWi^d hfir derw »X p~r InS 
 rim " while they (the Vaudois) obliged tneir ciergj '^ •" , 
 todustrirus. they compelled them to be illilcraU also." This, at least, 
 
 %™1'l«etC"tand dreamed for two nights on the subject of 
 He says, l nave s'^i:' » , :jj„„ ;„ the name of Sylvester, 
 
 my testimony. «7?f ™'"B ^^^LPej nit Already produced Baronius. 
 rndtavTril^brnfoftf.^^^^^^ 
 
 rn tha"tte"4s^o„' »'" W^ 'J ^tl^rmf S s ^s^iJ 
 of learning in that age, in the East. Why, when my ir , 
 
 he admits ril, Mmjelf, and '«=''«« ™«"°^f;"^'o!»J;^«^'^^„ 
 fourth century was the gMden fg^^^stbrt^n the East, and if he will 
 """^\Tal^'hTwilffi^d tKe« has'"r^rely been presented to 
 
 \^^"viT^:'''^tZ^}^^^^'^ -y ^- victo' '»- 
 
 Vincentius..were legates of »/ Iff • , complete effect to their 
 
 To give more ■;»'«■"»% "^tefw^rWrnTto^^^ Arianism 
 decision, the bishops of the ^"'"f''?" T°" „, A,- divinity of Chris^ 
 and establish *^ B«»«> "'"''JjtfSe wL Ae«Tbit\e acknow- 
 which the Arians impugned, '^""**?»"^^3hor^ We hear of no 
 ledged the disUnctness '^^J^^^^^^^^l^^TZii^^ bishops, 
 collision between him and »? J*^'- " '1^ °y h„t as it was freely 
 The church «»i^,X t«d. The"^ we« no'".lLs, rail-roads^ 
 given. It was gratefully accepieo. • l^' munificence, the fathers 
 Sr housls in those days. In *««">?«'?' LZ?, denied them. To 
 of Nice found tho^e resources which their poverty oeniw. 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
1 
 
 ''.laiATB ON THR 
 
 *| 
 
 lit Ml C®«ileitfes, it wit, howew, ihu Otma fearlessly said, " Da 
 
 lot iitmlM* in acclsiiastital matters, for to you God gave the empire ; 
 but to OS teeletlMtiiial concerns. Now as he who should deprive you 
 of your kingdom would resist the ordinance of God, so do you bowait 
 lent yom fill into some grievous sin by taking away the indepeii- 
 dbmoe of the church* 
 
 My lewmed friend says he will not go further on these matters. It 
 is well— 4lscretion is the better part of valor. The voice of all anti- 
 fulty has spoken— The authority of Rome has ever stood preemi* 
 nent. 
 
 I did not say, / did tud doubt these popes were in hell. I beg the 
 genlliiiiai to quote m® currectly. Far be it from me, to arrogate a 
 right which belongs to God alone, to decide on man's eternal destiny 
 *-but I said, ItkmM mi be mrpmed^ at it, when I consider their de- 
 Ibeis and sins on the one hand, their knowledge, responsibility and 
 grace, on the other. The more eminent their station, the more con- 
 spicuous to the whole world, like spots on the sun, were their frail- 
 ties— the brighter the example of their predecessors, the darker, by 
 contrast, did they appear. But the circumstances of the times in 
 which they lived, must be taken into the account to palliate, if truth will 
 not permit us to excuse, their failings. The ItBhtM and thadowa are 
 blended, perhaps necessarily, in the moral as well as in the physical 
 world ; and as we do not deny the existence of an infinitely wise and 
 good God, because we discover apparent imperfection in the material 
 world, the volcano, the poison, the venomous reptile, the whirlwind, 
 the pestilential malaria, so neither do we conclude that religion, or the 
 church, is not his work, because we sometimes meet with examprles of 
 moral deformity and disorder which mar the beauty of the heavenly 
 design. But Mr. C. thinks that God would never allow men whom 
 he had selected for the high function of Roman Catholic popes, to fall 
 into sins that would merit for them hell-fire. Does he then forget that 
 God created Lucifer, as a bright leader of the angelic throng, and yet 
 LiciliBr is now a reprobate spirit in hell ? Does he forget that Judas 
 was selected to share in the infallibility, which he allows was granted 
 to the twelve ! Did not Jesus train him up in his own school for three 
 years! And did not Judas, after all, betray his God and sell him for 
 the thirty pieces of silver! Did he not afterwards go and hang him- 
 self in despair, and his bowels gushed out. Was it not because of the 
 eBcess of lit own favor to Judas, and the inconceivable ingratitude of 
 tlie apostle, that the Son of God had said by the mouth of his prophet : 
 Ps. liv. 14. *• If my enemy had reviled me, I would verily have borne 
 with it, and if he that hated me, had spoken great things against me, 
 I would perhaps have hidden myself from him : btd ikmh a num cfom 
 atfMl, mv ,gmde mnd my famiUor,^ This is what makes a priest's, 
 or a biahop*i sin so great This, awful as it is, is what sustains us 
 when scandals befall the church, when the lights of the sanctuary are 
 eclipsed and its pillars broken and scattered on the earth, for we say 
 to ourselves Christ has allowed all this beforehand in that miniature 
 band, his own apostles — ^the exemplar of his church : and the number 
 ^ had me* hm not yet equalled ike pmporiiim ff one to twelve ! God 
 has allowed all this to teaeh us, that if men fall away, the faith for 
 which his holy promises are pledged, is invincible. *' The gifle (fGod 
 mewithuuit^pmlame^ Rom.xi.&, in other wonls, Christ established 
 
 ■OMAN CAWOUC WMJ6I0N. ^^7 
 
 eessore of Peter are b«d men ; the ■"•r?' " beha»e8 b»d W, it U for 
 
 •"K {iL^^t^ptea to .how *at *h- ^p^ toTl ^Z. tS 
 .nceetry of ChrUandAesuocess^ofS^e^^ ^^ ^^^ 
 
 if the mnceslry of Judah •»?»''»*' ^^ p^^j had many and great 
 tined to be the forerunner of Hun, oJ whom ram j s^ 
 
 Sing, and hard to be "'^«»*^/.';^rtlT'a^sK .Secession, i. . 
 of tSe worst smnem, why « g**' "?* ^uahuo holy as He to whom 
 _i.ii.)iwsu> individually or collectively, nougni BO iioijr" .u ,l. _i^ 
 Sf Ae p^iieu bore vAtne.., in whom was seen on earth. aU the gi<K 
 
 ''l"' f'te-^f cLCof'Ma™ht' where the temporal genera- 
 
 • ' ^l^^,^L tSfrom David, and my arFimenl is thui ; th^ 
 
 toon of *»<• f?"»^'Li'!^g;Sty of Jesus to come according to the 
 
 u It ha. not impaired »ne sancuij ui -,v._, „ho sinned a. he 
 
 fcd.. from him. ''l^t^}f.''Tf^^ff„^J'^^iCliii>^ office of 
 h»l rinned, «. neither did •\,^';»!* ^."n^e nSer. The cas- 
 pope, that there were some bad men ?f °»8 »« P"^ , ^ », 
 
 ^**'"f'^':SiThow'.wr"0h 'r Sr^h of the°nW and of 
 may exclaim ^th » holy awe—wn . u. v incomprehensible are 
 the knowledge, of the wisdom of God! »»«' "«^P ^alh known 
 
 his judgmente. and how »"««?'P»'»»''tu^nZ«lior« St Paul, Bom. 
 
 the mild of God, or who hath been >"« coanseUor^ vM r 
 
 «. 33, 34. My friend says ^hat ho^y men were al>^y.«>l^y^^ 
 
 Holy Ghost for holy P-^^^f ;„ ^ ^ri Jonv, hi^lf to have beer 
 proves, a. I can show by his owri «f •'"'""y' vSTfolio-a Daniel 
 
 r' Vi. ra.lSrf™^«*'»nd a hfrd heaV But 1 wUl no. 
 J^k ofltAer nor of Calvin, "arf. »nle».^-P«^<t firet fifty, 
 •^e gentleman say. there ''"^ .^f-TJ^ZnZT Since that, theVe 
 1 «ud .Sere were 39 who ^J^^^'^^,::^C^r^i^il the vir- 
 have been many pontiffs, saints. J'"^ '?« "^ P go did his predeces- 
 lues which may entiUe ""^ ^ be so cons^ered. ^ii._So 
 
 «,r PioB VI. «. did BSP'-J'^'Jiy-Z o^e^ morals, profound hnmil. 
 doe. the present ponuff, a «*» jf, *°^'^f| "we have heard many 
 Ity. enligWned »«/' f * JS " *f Kmporal inflaence in Rome, 
 
 thority does not reside m the stones, ana oocils a ^ 
 
 "^^l gentleman speak, o[ *« «f^- /"-^f ffiuffaU? ^W 
 ftink. that if the pope *oud lea- R^ne Ae^Cath^ ^^ ^ 
 
 be anmhilated. ^ d^s not mow of a ree to pensh. 
 
 follow the pope. \Ve "«»" «"f" f^re it has. once, been established 
 If Christianity forsake a country, ^^^^ ^^'J^Z^^^, learned and 
 
 the name, of the sees ^'>f^^^"'JX\^llXt^^^^^^<^c^'^ •"^^S' 
 piou. Coadjutor-b,*opofPhaade Ph.^^ p,,||. 
 
 nation from Arath in fartibu* tnpdtltum. i ne uun r 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
lis IIMA« on TEl 
 
 tMiiiii it liliiia fiom his front ugB. The bisliop of Bawlsiown m 
 ■itoi nominally, bishop of a foreifii oee. 
 Now lot no, once for all, «ay that mj friend has seYoral times mia- 
 
 lakei mj ▼iews and words, on the suoject of appointment to offloe. 
 I need not repeat what I have said on that subject. We do nothing 
 wiiMiil tlie pope's concurrence and sanction, in spiritual matters. 
 This MUHMiiiion is a peculiar trait in oar church. We exult In it. 
 It keeps us together as the sheen of one fold. " He who gaiherclli 
 IMI with me scattereih," saith the Lord. By this communion with 
 the see of Peter, we know that the church is orthodox a<id sound. 
 On this account we yield all due deference to the ^pe« On this ac« 
 eounl we ask of him the " cauonical investiture," which signifies that a 
 person is authorized by him to be made bishop, and inducted into the 
 iiered office by his authority. 
 
 We were told that councils met together and elected popes. There 
 % nothing extraordinary in tliis. Why, my dear friends, com.non sense 
 teaches Uiis oourse. Christ's foreknowledge of all the ocourrences 
 that were to take place in the government of the earth, caused him to 
 iMIgMllae society. If not, disorder would ensue. On such a principle 
 ■• the gentlenianX there could be no common bond of union. If Christ's 
 ■oeiety in the world and men will not consent to be held together by 
 ■octal rules, his design is baffled. The church is a society. Hence 
 St. Paul says, "Let every soul be subject to the higher powers, for 
 they who resist, purchase for themselves damnation." Rom. xiii. I. 
 Again, " Remember your prelates who have spoken to you the word 
 m'EhA ; whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.'* 
 £ai again *♦ obey your prelates, and be subject to them. For they 
 wateh as being to render an account of vour souls, that they may do 
 tils with joy and not with grief. For this is not expedient for you." 
 Heh. xili. 17. Without suboroination there can be no peace, and 
 MMefiwiitly DO happiness, in anjr society of men, but parUcularly in 
 ft saiigioiia loeietY. The church is the pillar and the ground of tha 
 troth, Isl Tim. iii. 15. [Time expired.] 
 
 TAreeo'cibcAt J*.Jf. 
 
 p f Pr Cmmwbmul rif«s— 
 
 Beibis the third proposition is read, I beg leave to offer both an ez- 
 ]^MHition and an apology. 
 
 Ii reference to the preposition which has just been discussed, 1 
 have lying before me an index of the popes from the time of Peter to 
 Innocent lI. A. D. 1676. Here are two hundred and forty po|>es. In 
 the first fifty, forty-nine were saints. We notice a diminution in sanc- 
 tity at we descend to our own times ; for in the last ninety popes on 
 the list, there is only one saint The church made her own saints. 
 She ought, therefore, to know the reason why. It rests in her own 
 jndgnieQt : but, in my judgment, she has made in her popes as many 
 •s, in any decency, she possibly could ; and many more in name than 
 ■he even had in reality. 
 
 The pntleman (and it was one of his most lucky hits) compares the 
 Ihet linl there was one traitor among twelve apostles, to the fact, that 
 there were illy had popes amnn^ two or three hundred popes. This 
 it a haopy salvo. Judas has relieved many a hard case ; but the con- 
 Jnet or Judas is no apology for the popes. It baa another meaning it 
 ■eripture, than to justify or excuse such flagitious eases. The Savior 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC KBLI6ION. 
 
 19^ 
 
 
 y™ Will ^member, in hi. p»yer (John x^i.). -JT^ ir^^^^X *:^ 
 
 spoken of in the Old 'f»"™*°'' "'",_-„ j„i_ appreciated. But for 
 J^M among the t»eWe, is not riways auiy »P^ ^^ 
 
 him, as respects the cred.bmty of the «»'™^y;^*f3 ^cM,t; 
 said, that the twelve apwU^ '^""j'Srir testimony was that 
 and. althoogh persons »f. ^' "P tiS^'^^irto^S^ke U perfect in e»ery 
 of friends. To prevent th s «fl»««^' ' „Mant of Jesus, as much as 
 •*'"* "^ 7Z'jr K.dnS't^l t*^llX l^^reu of the' scheme, of 
 r Zm- n-ucVa^'hTs other -W.fr Ye^nXXr! 
 wretch, and sells hi. master for «««!" ^""Y*- \o',he hW. priest, 
 Tiction of his guilt, «<te'/ l'">t„'«"«^f';-. J'lCebetraye'' '■'»»««»' 
 t?L""' TOs"^TthV2S:, "^rr !;i«>nms«nU is=[he best te. 
 ft of^e%welve! It was essential to *« ««"f "^^sf ^ 
 
 ZiJm .gainst the i-X^^i^/^ttf' C^sSy, a^a^^^^ »f 
 Judas is as much a maj^ ^„?1,*"„* ^ hu own honor, but to th. 
 hi. companion. : a '^'^^I'^'f^' J'J ^""^r of the chrisiian faith, 
 blameless reputation of the author a"" J™™" • that case. But, 
 Thi., then, "P'ains the reason of such a p^m^o".""!**^^^^^ ^^ 
 
 hearken to the sequel. To P«ven a »>«• »~ »^?"";"g to'^cast lots-to 
 allowance even, the Lord «"Bg««'ffJ°to Wa^Xa, t^ might not 
 appeal to heaven in electing a «"<^*f'" *f/"^ue and that he might 
 bS endangered in the reputauon of """^''"^"^^fXis character to 
 be sent from God. To have pemitted J«.reoM o^^ 
 
 stand forward in the front "''V^*^ W' *° "J^ ,„ the plan and 
 the cause. The delinquency ?f*e popes is OPPJ^ » P ^ ^ 
 government of ^echnst.^^^^^^^ 
 
 ^^u^^Tct'il w^ril. Wumphed ere now. Thi. is tt. «y^ 
 
 nation, ,«-¥♦;« fnr the difficulties, which our worthy 
 
 Now, for the apology. J^ .f„ J°J^^^^^^ the bishops of Rome, 
 
 friend had to encounter in ^"^^l^^^^^ZVx^^^ a part Jf this book, 
 that we offer an apology. /^^^*Pf ''f/^^'Slve not leisure to trace the 
 for the sake of a particular class, who Have noi iei»u 
 
 causes of these things. »•««„« :„ KAKalf of Peter's having had 
 
 The bishop couldfind «>*^'^l^^^l^iZ which th!t «» 
 the see of Rome; because »'».VT".^'" ** g^j have had plenty of 
 first claimed the auprem^ =^e ancie'nTand Uue ^onnd of ascribing 
 old traditions to sustain it. T"*. """'*"„„ ,„j -.fhis arro<ratine an* 
 
 U, the bishop of Rome ^JP*"" {"'"'^rC hU s^ «a^ '"P- 
 ««ofsuperiontyo».roA»tashopsj^was^J*atn^ ^^ ^^^ 
 
 riJ city: '>»'}>^'^''JZ""oX^ra'I"poiis of the empire, th. 
 Home was mistress of the woria, me v moreover, 
 
 great city, the emperor . residence ^»»« JJ'^5°P ° „b,e afocese ; and 
 
 Kd the Richest church in the ''»''*• '^"~'TfS,^id he to him- 
 being neighbor to the emperor, he became proud • J*^.^'" 
 
 ^X(S As'the «™PS"7°"'" M;tpr"nfthe a;,s-u;iic tree^ 
 
 V.^^tt^me%S««£ifm^^^^^ 
 
 IP 
 
ROMAN CATKOUC EWJOION. 
 
 lei 
 
 .TX ON THB 
 
 m 
 
 im 
 
 tvwii iM md iKm Il<mie* Soon there are two empires (for the empire 
 was ditiilod), on« of tho oast, md one of the west. 1 here must be, 
 now, two peat imperial bishops; and the east and west churches, or, 
 tte Owok and Roman, began to feel the spirit of rival agipndizement. 
 TlMMWlrofOiȴ began, and the prospects of the new city outnvaled 
 tiMio of tlio old city. But, just as the sceptre and mitre were about 
 ptttinf fiom Rome to Constantinople, some ingenious person, whose 
 kme no monumont records, thought of a happy expedient to save the 
 ■inking fortunes of the eternal city. It was, that Peter and Paul had 
 fouiided Hie church of Rome : nay, thai Peter and Paul were buried 
 ,1 
 
 Cowstanlina, the empress of the east, at the close of the sixth cen- 
 tury, finding that this discovery was unfortunate to the rising majesty 
 of the ea«t, tent an express to Rome to obtain the remains of Paul, and 
 have them conveyed to Constantinople. She was willing that Peier 
 ■hMiM leniain in the Lateran ; but she wished to possess Paul, bbe 
 liinigit thik would equaliie the preteosions of new Rome and old 
 Rome, and give her equal claims upon the devotion of the saints and 
 pilgrims of the church. Had it not been for her failure in this strata- 
 gem, no one can tell whether Rome had not :>een, ages since, like 
 Thebes or Babylon. On this subject, thus speaks the elegant Gibbon : 
 
 " Like Thebes, or Babylon, or Cartlia^e. the name of Rooie mi^t have been 
 m9md (mm the earth, if the city had not been animated bv a vital principl«» 
 Iffhidhagain restored her to honor and doiiiinroa. A vague tradition waa embraced 
 that two Jewish teacher*, a tent-maker and a iihemian, had formerly been eie 
 cnled im tha circus of Nero, and at the end of five hundred vear» their genuinj 
 or fictitioiit wsliei were adored as the palladium of christian Rome. Decl. and 
 Fall Rom. Emp. Vol, viii. p. 161- . « ^ ^i. 
 
 ^^JimgmiradiUon,'^ This is happilj expressed. But the sopenor 
 laet of St. Gregory saved Rome from this misfortune ; and he managed 
 the petition of Constantina with flfreat address, as we shall presently 
 ■how. I hog leave to read from Waddington : 
 
 Revirmce fit Relics. The empress Constantia, who was building a chnfch 
 ■t CoiMtwitinople to St. Paul, niMle application to Cjrcgory for the head of that 
 Apottb/ or at least for aonie prtion of bis body. The pope berins his answer 
 bfi verv polite expression of his sorrow • that he neither could nor dared to 
 mnt tlMit iavor; for the bodies of th« hol^ apostles, Peter and Paul, are so 
 rapltadMit with miracles and terriic prwligies lu their own churches, that no 
 oiwaw approach them without great awe, even for the purpose of adoring them. 
 When my predacessor, of happy memory, wished to chanre some silver arma- 
 ment which was placed over the most holy body of St. Peter, though at the 
 distanco of ahnost fifteeii feet, a wMmiuf of no sniall torror •pP««'«a **> «'»«• 
 ■van I inyself wished to make some alteration near the most holy body of bt. 
 Pkul, and it wis necessary t%dig rather deeply near his tomb. The sopenor of 
 the place found some bones which were not at all connected with that tomb ; and 
 haviag presumed to disturb and remove them to some other place, he was v>«ited 
 lir e«rtain fcarfiil apprittoas, mi 4mA suddenly. My predeceMor, of boty 
 »if , alio undertook to make ioaia repairs near tha tomb of St Laurenco: 
 were digging without knowing precisely where the venerable body was 
 ih ih«v happened to open his sepulchre. The monki and guardians who 
 . at the work, only because they bad seen the hodj of that martyr, though 
 HMivdid not presume so much as to touch it, all died witbin ten days; tothceMl 
 ihet BO man might remain in life who had beheld the body of that just aiaa. 
 
 • Haroaias, who cites tlM po|»'t lefly with eonsiileralile admtration. attribat«« the em 
 Mass's ejuirbilaot request to eccleiiiastical amliiiioii,— to a desire to eisli ihe see or Con 
 ■taniiUiMlelaa level with tlist uf Rowe. hy latiiiif Into tor !«••«•*«••• '!^P"P*'"J_i^. 
 
 AiiKjI^gM., jUflr'' 
 
 gieal aa aposile. Pleary ^mm Sm toitW obitfy'ia piaof ibat the tron^tr at 
 £>rbiilden io tha Rtunau ehaieli. while that abase was nermilied in ibe cast. 
 
 to it than known to yo., th^ 'iT 0^ -^f^ o'f Z M^or^TXe^i^ 
 ^ reWcB, not to venture ,»« ••"^J2^P?'i'Jfeh j^ tJe hoVbodies; 
 
 X... piece oHinen^lk^^^^^ *« church Vhich. « 
 
 Ihen It IS withdrawn ami ">"* "P.r'r* " .^ -roueht by t as if the bodies 
 to be dedicated, and as «««y C^'^'^ 7« .t lI^J^iTtbitintbe times of St. 
 tSemaelve. had bee. carrk-l »hitiier ; wheuce ^ J^l^^J;*S'^ed tb" virtue of 
 Leo, (es we learn from our ancestors^) ^»>«» •««;* anTcut X linen, and blood 
 iuch ielics. that pope «"«* Jj" * P"5 ^^^^J"^;!; b"? S«>ugh the whole of the 
 flowed from the ricision. \°^ °«* ** ~»^?^*^Jf7he^ "W does such te- 
 west. It is held «'".leg.ou. to touch the l^i^f the «««^ ..tonished at 
 
 verity ever rema n unpunirfied. *«r ^ ^i^^of the sainU, and we scarcely 
 Ih. citojn oj the Greek, to tjke jway ^^^^^^ ^,^ .^ ^, »»^»7 •P^f*!' 
 gif e credit to it. But wnai ""»" * "V jTtheir martyrdom, a number of the 
 when it is a known fact, that a »^« *'"V^i^*/;"ejA had carried them out 
 feitl.ful came from the e«t <<>,<^»»"»^^""J .^^^^^^^ S^catacombs, the whole 
 tf the city, to the second ™«»«»\^"^» *J,Xf^^^^ of thunder aod 
 
 aulUtude was unable to more them farther,— sucn a w p« 
 
 lightning terrified aivd ^j"!^"^^.!^*™- b_ „„t .^ the same time. U with the body 
 ^The napkin too, which you ^^'^^^i^!*'^!;* "Jpproache^^^ But that your 
 and cannot be touched more than the P^y/Y^^.TPten to send xo you some 
 religious desiit. may n<^.be ^^'^^^''^'''l^.^Ze^^^ if '»d«*d » 
 
 part of those chain* which St. Pj^V^gT^hem Forsiace many continually 
 Shall succeed in getting off any filings *~™ "*^": ' dhiwis someJmall portion 
 
 A„/u.»s, when t^:ic^!v:^:L:^^ir^*«^^><^y'^ 
 
 be the ^r"'' ^yi,t''^VStT™ few centuries' .ooner. my 
 
 Uonary witnesses, assuring us that Fetor was mane owa p 
 '1,5fa:^l» tw rr^a-the thW proposiUon. wfcieh 
 
 . kio .«i »nible as any other sect of philosophy or ^"^^^TT^^^^V^ „ 
 
 be douhted.— . ^-onosition, the Roman church cWras 
 
 To narrow the debat« on thw J'^'P^?'"!^^^ as resulting 
 
 nnivereal homage on the P^^^ °f "^^^^^^1^^ ^^ 
 
 eon 1 No ; nor to »U indivldaal V^^J«^^ ^^^ ! The Pio- 
 
 testaat church ts then just »» i"™ "'"' "V . j^ jg the fountain of 
 faith and moral code are wntten I" » •'^J^'^j ,« ^ ask, what 
 
 all moral truth. We ""\» ^fjL.^*^;^^^,^ S a fiX<»octriPe, or 
 does the gentleman mean by /«^?^^««^^ J^ ^^ l,i„, 
 
 opinion 1 It cannot f'™"^*!!?^- iZre U the pre-eminence ol tm 
 iomethiog in the head or heart ; then, wnere w mi. r 
 
Iw 
 
 HBBATB Oil THS 
 
 cliireli, wfioi© apiDbeft IndiiidiiJlj ti» ill Mibk I wtd tf H 
 
 It mill m written In iie creed : ■g«intJw?«S ^^'^^r w 
 pteninenee of the Runwn ehurcli, over the lii|^h chnrcb I for fiUe 
 
 k m wfcllllile In hei cfeed as the Bible iteelf. ^. ^ . ,_, 
 
 The lenlleniin eajri, 'thmt the eymbol of hit railn is mmmtm 
 trmd.^ If that he the elements of his feith ; all Protestwrti Mi^e it : 
 hut if he mewis doctrine, opinion, speculation ; then folli* woiiW not 
 contain the differences. What is faith mdfjedivefy considered, butm 
 belief In tnstiiliiMif, divine or human ! and what is religiows faith o(h 
 ieeHid^, iMt Ae Bible I Five words comprehend the order of thinp 
 In regwd to feith : let the fad, m the thing said or dono-3nd the 
 Mibtftf , concerning it— 3rd the heMef of that testtmony— 4th the 
 IblfiC, eonsentaneoua with that faith— and 6th the mhmh correspond. 
 Lf wih that leellng«— These are the golden links, in that dinne chain, 
 which hinds onr hearts to God, and explains all the mysteries ofthe 
 ■Kial power of the remedial scheme. The gospel facts, as Paul 
 sums them up, 1 Cor. xr. 1, 9, 3, which engross the whole, are the 
 death, the buiial and the resurrection of Jesus. The whole Protestant 
 world heliefes these fects. England, Scotland, AmericaP-aU chnsten- 
 doni believe, or acknowledge tiieee great gospel fects. So far nil are 
 «f one faith. The Romanist and Protestant here, are equally infellible 
 as respects faith ! And do we not all acknowledgje the same perfect 
 moral code ! But while there is, indeed, but onefmih, there are many 
 inoHlMt, opinions, and traditiona; and these are what make the 
 « jWJfe** and the ** One JhtW of the Bible of little or no account! 
 Honee, has not the Roman church, like the Jews, made Toid the law 
 «| Ctod by her traditions I It is not because the scriptures do not 
 eenlain the right faith : but because men have chosen to add t«i it 
 folios of human opinions, that the divine faith has lost "Js power. 
 
 It is a serious question, why is the Roman church infelhble in faith 
 and not in discipline l^n theory, and not in practice! in the head, 
 and not in the heart 1— Is it not of more value and importance, that 
 she should be perfect in the order and moral discipline of her mem- 
 bm ; than in the theory or doctrine of religion ! She found that she 
 never could make herself infallibl&— why then, does she choose t» 
 daia infellibility in the theory, and give it up in practice ! Bemuse 
 Imt plea of infallibUity on that ground, she well knew, she could not 
 at aU sustain ; and how well she can sustain it on other grounds will 
 sppear in the sequel. She has changed her discipline in every cen- 
 tniy i and her theories and doctrines of order and government are as 
 wmms as the Protestant sects. In the 19th century, she is not the 
 iMMi !• in the I8th; nor in the ISth as In the 17th, nor in the I7th 
 an In 'the lith, Ite. 
 
 My friend has made concessions here, which I never expected from 
 Um. He has avowed principles, which, till within a few yeare, were 
 unknown in the Roman Catoolic churoh. I look upon this fact as an 
 evidence, that better days are coming. I could wish that the Roman Ca- 
 tholic feith, under the mild genius of our institutions, might become so 
 modiied, as to be suited to the character of our republic ; especially 
 to abandon the absurd pretension of infellibility, which indeed, she 
 must di>, if ever she can become American. ^ ^ 
 
 Bnt ths Roman church is not united, nor uniform in this notion of 
 infellibility. There are four theories and four parties on the question, 
 wkim tkmll mfrlUhiiiig be fmmif The geutieman believei that tha 
 
 XOHAK CATHOLIC BBLIOION. 
 
 \m 
 
 Ml is as fallible as himself. T^is. I conceive, is not Ae commoa 
 ief amone Roman Catholics. The Jesuits, if I am rightly mtorm- 
 ed, teach thit infalUbility must, of right, be m ^^^A^od. Indeed, so 
 1 should reason: for what use would be an infallible body under a 
 fallible head 1 and would not that be most unnatural \ Is not the body 
 subiect to the head, naturally and necessarily 1 and ought not every 
 body political and ecclesiastic, like the natural body, tol>e governed 
 by Its head 1— [Time expired.] 
 
 Half poMi 3 o'ehek, F. M. 
 BraHop FURCELL rises— 
 
 I would prefer, for the satisfaction of the audience, and to do Uw 
 tubject justice, to enter at once on the proposition of the infallibility 
 of the Church. I should go over the ground, my learned opponent 
 has traveled, and if permitted, should make a regular argument on 
 the subjects to which he has alluded. My good fnend is dissatisfied 
 with himself for having made any concessions in favor of the punty 
 of the popes, and he has re-examined, and found for the last mnety 
 yeare but one saint in the calendar. If there was hut one can- 
 onixed, does it follow that there was but one worthy ! There were 
 many worthy. There have been many great and ^ood men among 
 the popes who have not been canonized. Rome is very particular 
 whom she proposes as models for her children's imitation. She is 
 anxious that there should be no blemish in the splendor of holiness, 
 no faded flower in her coronal. She must be so well assured by the 
 evidence of facts and miracles of the eminent virtue with which U 
 has pleased God to endow the subject whose life is examined with 
 reference to this holy distinction, that she has appointed a personage m 
 Rome, called the Devil's Advocate, whose duty it is when a candi- 
 date is proposed for beatification, to rake up all he can against htm, 
 and thus prevent, not his entrance into heaven exactiy, but the admis- 
 sion of his name into the calendar of saints. So that, what an illustrious 
 Protestant has said, " it is a miracle to prove a miracle at Rome, is 
 in fact, a proverb in the Ancient City. ,11 
 
 Well, now, my friend says that it was necessary that there should 
 be a Judas,— that he was mentioned in the Old Testament^his is a 
 special case— unique. But my argument is so strong on this point, 
 that I will give up even the strong case of Judas, and yet prevail. 
 Even Peter, witii oaths, denied tiie knowledge of his God and Savior 
 Jesus Christ. The other aposties also abandoned him— a crime, be 
 it noted, which the Novatians would have never pardoned. Ml this 
 was foretold as well as the particular instance of Judas. {?>o that, if 
 he please, I will abandon this particular case, and argue as follows : 
 
 Peter fell and was resuscitated ; the rest of tiie apostles fled; they 
 were ashamed, or afraid, of being tiiought the disciples of Christ. 
 They were not, however, rejected. The gifts of God were without re- 
 pentance in their regard, who having seen and conversed with the 
 Word made Flesh, witnessed his miracles, and beheld tiie examp e 
 of his virtues, were, therefore, to human judgment, less excusable 
 for their desertion of tiie stricken Shepherd. Why may not, at least, 
 equal mercy be extended, if not to tiie popes, who were in this re- 
 spect less highly favored, at least, to the dMtnne of truth which the 
 aposties, and the popes were appointed to announce and to preserve 
 among men! Mubt God's holy law be broken to pieces, and trutb 
 
194 
 
 DKBArE OH TH« 
 
 SOXAlt CATROLIC l»LtCION. 
 
 185 
 
 !■, 
 
 p«rid. Item th. «»&, k«»M;e ?Ti"I^n9^ " u'«^nt4f^ 
 Uo bow to the goJden «J«^ >5'' P?ff!^ J«^^ofGoS, 
 Mine to l«»e b«» specially ordained by the g^P^'^f'^^i^lS; 
 tet Borne, once the miBtress of the enttre f "P" Tf^J' T™ „<^ 
 Sever the chief see of the ChnsUan w<^d ; *"""l7'»B "^ »'™<^' 
 
 propheUc words '{j}" /. ''"J„f^,t^«"'^^^ Tim." 
 r:£r?5=tSKJ2:"lif a^-t ri«l. of the see of P^ 
 tor s~ wi Aree huadred years too late to ertabl.sh «.y clarm to 
 Z htdsW? of the church, a'nd especially "y »ch -»^ '^^J^ 
 rf Coirt-finople. Now, my fiiends, whv did Constant wantto 
 
 JSTtot: ^r tn'^^^S^thorit^ n^^^^ l^^^^T- ^^ 
 
 Zmaey was stUl at Rome, and like another Queen of 1?"X »°° »"»- 
 
 griSt«»io»., Const»^» aspired to re«n •»P'^^' "•. ^^'^^ 
 SaitoPoUtics. Accordingtotheid^ of Aat t^mewju^^^^^^ 
 
 vkatTCMtatira relics were held, she could set up "° 8'?°",'VC: ^i^ 
 SHplSS independence of Con.t«.|a.gge, urf^ she h»l the he«l 
 •r 8b Paul brouirht from Borne, and in this she taiiea. 
 
 SibTsays, and it is one of the few sterling trnths he ew aaul, 
 (Ih™* it^s a bull) that Rome would have per&hed amidst so r^nj 
 
 P|oU r,1.knol;'X':^«t ^"'""eTr^fbyteT?^^ 
 fMniiMls m© o» what mj wormy ainag"""'- »»*»' ^r.Uo rnUptm 
 
 rZIiZ nnniimr a French iihysician, during the session of the College 
 Sr-Si^n^^thatir^^ IWe'forevIr if we could J.ve M^ia^ou^ 
 
 ifaj?i Rome lives, andTa ^^^-\^J^^^^'^l''':\^ 
 
 iST tlMMJfption of Tital alinient, or by the "«i f^^^'^J^'*'"'^* 
 
 Xfc sxJSis all peceaf kuf^.iiiB unimportoiit ^o^^^^; ^.^^ 
 
 Now I cannot see the applicability of '*» V^^fJ^^ Thev^^ 
 hom containing the answer of the ^^pe to ConstanUa. ^g^ J^^^^ 
 
 Sar story, ind I belieye P'«>«««?"^ ^'^^^^ '^/n™^^^^^ 
 
 Christ, i?H«f SLT!i^lL d^t?^^^^ Globes of fire, as his- 
 turo eonsigiied by Ood to endless destrucuon. '^^""^. , . ' |^. 
 
 liiflHUi say, issued from thfl foundations, and so ^^^"»^*^^;°^^^^^^ 
 ZTas to^^mpel them to desisL 1 think it like y ^^^^^^^j'*^^^ 
 happened, buClike the story of Om^l^ n f^ "^j^^^f,^^^ ^ 
 
 Now we comt to the important doctrine of "'^*"3^""r. " ^"^ 
 doSriiis of the mmm CaoSlic ^^l^'^j^^Mhat, wh^^^^ 
 was In inor, when mm thing was adored as God, 8*^®^ J^f , "T„^ 
 Wd vice kept pace witli errol the Almighty, piiying ^^^f/;'^°«^ 
 Mt Ms Son, dhrist Je««s, the Word "^^^ ^^^^^^^^.^ji^^^ 
 iMh and to redeem mankind. Jesns Christ wy ^jd, eq^-^^m to 
 FiiMT la efoiy diviiio ptwrfectioii. He possessed i™*** Jf^^^ 
 ZS,"«d iSLto poP to nse^e me«j. J^^f^^jy^^^^^ JX. 
 plishmont of tkj grott Task imp<^ on him by ^'^^"^'^Jf^^^^^^^ 
 
 L performed miSicles. «« -^T?/^'] "t"* 5!!t7ln ^cS^ a^^^^^^^^ 
 and Mied, "Laaarus come forth," and the dead m*" a^***® ^"^.'^^f. 
 
 hlewTi hiseKticied siste^i. He ?i»^\»»- t^^^^d U.e m^^^ 
 whidi was borne the only son of the widow of Nairn, and "»e J"**]!"^ 
 «r% teaia were dried in that son's living embrace- He gave heanng 
 
 to the deaf, lie opened the eyes of the Wind, he healed the pmhrtie. 
 The evidence of these wonders was such that even the skeptical Je# 
 was convinced, and all the people exclaimed that man had never 
 
 done the like. i *-• j 
 
 When he had thus, by miraeks, proved himself to be «od, as it was 
 no part of his divine plan to remain always in a homan form, nor to 
 visit any other nation, than Judea, althongh all the nations of the earth 
 throuffhont all ages were to have the gospel preached unto them, he 
 chose twelve men, whom he dili^ntly instnicled, as friends, and not 
 as servants, in all the mysteries of the kingdom. These he sent, as his 
 apostles, 10 preach the gospel to every creature. But before he sent 
 them, he assured them that he would abide with them forever. His 
 words were these: "All power is given me in heaven and in earth. 
 Going therefore teach ye all nations ; baptizing them in the name of 
 the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to 
 ohserve all things whatsoever I have commanded you ; and behold I 
 am with you all days even to the consummation of the world." Matt, 
 ixviii. 9, 20. And that they might be infallible, he breathed on 
 them, saying, " Receive ye the Holy Ghost, who will teach yOn 
 ALL TRUTH, and bring all things to your mind whatsoever I have said 
 to you." John xiv. 26. "'Pie Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot 
 receive because it seoth him not, nor knoweth him; hot you shall 
 know him, because he shall abide with yon and be in yon. ' St. John 
 xiv. 17. This is the reason why the Catholic church believes in mfalh- 
 bility : If every man enjoys the privilege of taking the bible according 
 to his own understanding thereof, the Catholic should not be molested 
 in the exercise of a common right. He does take the bible for his 
 guide, and strong as any in Holy Writ is the proof he finds therein, 
 for the doctrine of an infallible authority established by Chnst in his 
 church. The Savior tells the apostles, that he will be with them ail 
 day9-^nd says, "he that hkaretm you heareth me : and he that 
 despiseth you, despiseth me : and he that despiselh me, despiseth him 
 that sent me," &c. In the name of God, why did Jesus Chnst say 
 these words, and inspire his disciples to record them, if we were 
 not to believe them 1 I cannot conceive how it is possible that we 
 should take these, his most emj^atic declarations, to mean any thing, 
 but what they obviously signify. Why did St. Paul say that the 
 church was the '» pillar and ground of truth," if this pillar and that 
 foundation were to give way as soon as the apostles died, that is to say 
 in a few short years 1 Why did the apostle command all to obey their 
 prelates, if the while edifice of truth would give way as soon as he 
 had disappeared from the earth 1 No, my friends, of the kingdom of 
 Jesus Christ there shall be no end, until all nations shall be gathered 
 into the one fold under one shepherd : until we all meet m the unitt 
 or rAiTH : and not as bishop Home says, jumbling together an undi- 
 gested heap of contrarieties and jarring sects into the same mass, slid 
 making the old chaos the plan of the new reformation. 
 
 I might dissert for hours on this subject, but I am compelled to 
 leave off here; yet I beg my Protestant, I sincerely and from my 
 heart say, most respected fellow-citizens to reflect on these matters, 
 that they may not believe the misrepresentations of our doctrines, vehich 
 Ihey have too oflen heard, as if we had no good, scriptural grounds for 
 our faith. Such misrepresentation has done us much injury. It haa 
 
"I'iMt 
 IIP* 
 
 OH TB* 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Hm, it hiJ; io many iMtooces, ;"»1"'^\7»,*" "'^TSU^Stte^^ 
 iillin of Protestants an mpmor, I oould almoBt "T '^■^""fl^; 
 |!SS,J of iw-lhey abhor iu Some of^tNm^re ^oajSJ^j^^l 
 
 •TT'«.5?!^dl'dtr:^»ces.io«., h.toohMb«»-l»nfcj™. 
 My mena saia t "»" "' j««triii*i ftince the oommencement of this 
 
 !?'"'^>"T,„"'i;7eferknJnXl He tm allow me to «iy.th.l 
 diaim^oo, thw» he ever kiww t«ore^^^^^^ ^ j ^^ ^.^^ 
 
 I — « W ili nj •«»»«*'»8.™,'^wwt itt iWn Bortnit, and not a carU* 
 
 Slnr.SlC'Xl^n^ei^ H'^^-"" S""«'Tr'^ 
 tan, and iiiii leai *"***"■,"» «;«.iU to God thev would eTeo believe 
 
 11 mm sing te arucie m wia* vi««« _,w^, «*«u1a in thu same creed, tn 
 chmd.." *Bat they do njt : or r'^l'^^ Chri^^ 
 «»,,.».«« of the worfs;'lhd.eTe^^^ «■» ^ «« 
 
 Sbppo»« 1 tell a man that l o*"""."'™'. ..J .;.„„,,„ -.u.th* 
 &«!ln^te of hU repeated assereraUons, that he did not say whatue 
 fSStaSd? Do IbeWe himi Suppow 1 »y Hoje h'™' «»f J« 
 5?!ll I ». to hia inlufT, are my protestatioiis what they ought to be T 
 t: U il rth'^J^^.tS'.U u/oS belie., in "^7^ "•^f^^ji^.^if^ 
 Srfhear htsehnrch which he ~™«™>» 7~ J?^' *iak«P hU 
 «. 1 beliere in Jews Christ, nnlesa wo follow hm »>•». '^ ^P ^» 
 S»a«lme«t.. If we do not w. w. are hyp~n<«. ^l^^^^^Z 
 
 MMikivAlT that we despiie hiinseit. »* ii any inniH "*" j".' .a; 
 
 SS^l^r'o.rchaTrhVhim be to the. as the heathen and the pubU- 
 
 ""lillt^I: «'toM Itat the meuOng of «««<*»«*"» 1';"''t«tJ"l 
 
 pStir^A. ftithW «r"^,*^:±r1Sji^^ be^l^'er T .J 
 teamrae the whole earth and appeal to every mdmduai oeiiever lot »n 
 nation of the tow, or a defence of my mnocencel This is 
 
 SSSrS^*^ Whereas ChHsfs im-^^^r^f'^^ii'^ 
 eSe if a tTunal, which he commands me to h«r, "• *°7*^ 
 toii which be eoauMnd. me to >»?"' ?"^«' ^tiPfA^nouii 
 S»Jed a heathen and a pnhlican. If this 'J?''°°»» "°»" ^"""T 
 
 Xly, wonld OWjt k«~ «»»7«"*f »* '^'^ JL^Sl ^wer wS 
 as I iould hear and obey himself 1 I hope the desired answer w«i 
 
 -jfe my^srrsr.- -j. ,^rr„'^«-^^jni.r,d"'S: 
 
 n.* •■■»Lma n ^■at Utwan nf the Uiutanaii denonunation snoum way, 
 
 t..«*8«*m omdit it t A Unitarian heUeves in Jesus i^nnsi, nui now ««©• 
 Wie;:^^^^^^^ whl He denies h^di^^^ t rSurctiri t 
 mm of the Proteatwit system. T^ej all wy, 1 J^»l«/^J^^^ ^^^ 
 mm the bihle ; when Oiey make Christ and the ^^'"f!^^ 
 Dontrary doctrines ; and all think they are going to ^^J^P;-^l^^}^{^ 
 ZTlSieve the same SaTior. Alasl how many «oul8 has notthia 
 rZ Inred from the only path that conducts to ete^^^^^^ Me ! J^The^ 
 b a way which temdk to a man to be ri^ht, Jjayslhe hol^^enp "re^ 
 "but the end thereof leads down to hell?' The ^^^^J^^^"^^ 
 MB diametiicilly opposed to each other. They are at greater aiiu 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC E«LI6I0N. 167 
 
 Aodw Hitn the two Indies. Two men of diffeieiit sects will meet: 
 m9 one, " Do yon believe in Christ 1" ** If es." ** But you do not be- 
 lieve in him as God t" **No." "No matter, we are both good believers." 
 Airain, two others — **■ Do youbelieye in Christ 1" ** Yesl" "But you do 
 n<H believe in a hell I" " No." " No matter, we aie both sound ortho- 
 dox chrisUans." Or again, "Do yon believe in Christ!" "Yes," "But 
 you don't believe in baptism" — and so if goes. 
 
 Now Jesus Christ cannot contradict himself: he cannot say things 
 incompatible with each other, as that two and two make four ; and 
 two and two make five. My friends, I come here not to attack other 
 sects. I come only to defend the truth. Of all religions, all teach- 
 ing, as they do, contrary doctrines, one only can be right. If one 
 only can be true, all others must be untrue. Have you ascertained 
 which is that true one 1 And if so, how have you ascertained it! To 
 whatever denomination you may belong, your Protestant neighbor, as 
 enlightened, as conscientious and as pious in his own opinion as you 
 are, thinks you have embraced dangerous error, and Jesus Christ 
 sounds in your ears the dreadful words, " He that believeth not"— 
 not what he thinks is right, but what is rightp— " shall be dumnedJ'^ 
 Mark xvi. 16. — [Time expired.} 
 
 #bur 6*clockf P. Mi 
 Ma. Campbell rises— 
 
 I hope we shall better understand each other. The question be- 
 tween Protestants and Roman Catholics, on the subject of infallibility 
 as respects the faith, is usually propounded in the following form: 
 • /* there an infallible rule rf faith T Both parties, answer in the af- 
 firmative. Then, • Where shall it be found r Each party then sets about 
 defining and wrestling about this said infallible rule. The Protestant 
 says, the bible alone is his infallible rule ; and the Romanist says the 
 church, or the bible explained by the church, is his infallible rule ! 
 Thus the Protestant rests upon the bible and the Romanist upon the 
 church— neither of which make men infallible. We apprehend there 
 is a sophism some where in the phraseology : for both parties have 
 exhausted folios on this subject and seem often to have retired from 
 the arena equally perplexed. My antagonist seems to be much in 
 advance of me, and sometimes so far in my rear as to be out of sight. 
 Meanwhile, he will please not to forget that it is my province, at least, 
 to sketch out my own method of discussion, and lead the way. My 
 last speech is certainly yet unanswered. 
 
 I do not choose the phraseology which has been popular in some 
 discussions, on the subject of the rule of faith. There is too inuch 
 ambiguity, too much room for logomachy in some of these definitions. 
 There is, in strict propriety, no infallible rule of faith. Nor is it pos- 
 sible there can be: for men and angels have erred under all rules. I 
 wish to be understood. The terms fallible and infallible do not at all 
 apply to things ? they only apply to persons. We may have a per- 
 fect and complete— or a sufilcient rule : but we cannot have an infal- 
 lible one. The fallibility, or the infallibility is in the application of 
 the rule— not in the rule itself. The mechanician may have a perfect 
 rule ; and yet err in measuring any superficies. It is not possible in 
 mechanics, nor in morals, nor in religion, to have a rule which will 
 nrevent error • so long as those who use it are free and fallible agents. 
 As Paul said on an occasion, not exactly similar, we may here say ; 
 
M 
 
 WKBkTM ON THE 
 
 iien could hiTO hmn a law glvwi to freo tfeiits, wWk wmM 
 litve proeliidod error, ▼«fily God woold have pv«« it. But as he 
 las not mrm any such law, tlieraforo, there has been error in heaven 
 as on earth. Angels feU and Adam apostatiaed. I own, it may be 
 iaid, tbat in common pmkmt*^ wo igaiatiTely talk of an uitallible 
 mle^ 1 admit that we do, and that is the reaaoa, when we come to 
 debate Hie matter, the parties are confounded : for the bible aloiw, or 
 the bible on the table; and the chnich alone. Of the church and the 
 bible together, have made no one free from error. Therefore, there 
 is no iifaiHbk rule in truth : but we have a perfect rule, and if we 
 apply it perfectly, it will make us perfect. So far, then, as infallibi- 
 lity IS concerned, if there be truth in these remarks, both parties are 
 again equal. Oua auLi is the iibli alohb. The Roman Catholic 
 lule contains mm hunorid ahd thirty rivi laroi polio volumes 
 OTPcaAiiPBD TO THE BiaLB, omI l*e AWKjaYFHAl Those are composed 
 of the following parts and parcels: Ist Apoetolloal Fathers 36 folios, 
 tnd Bight volumes of Decretals, 3rd Ten volumes of Bulls of the 
 Popeil 4th Thirty one volumes of Canons and Decrees of Councils; 
 fitfc Pifly one folios of the Jclii Amclomm— Acts of the Saints, amount* 
 ing in all to,— one hundred and thirty ive volumes folio. Our rules, 
 then, differ exceedingly in point of length, breadth and thickness. The 
 Buiiian Catholic role is exceedingly unwieldy. It requires a whole 
 QMiMii to move it, and apply it to a single opinion. Ours is, at Iwt, 
 portable— But still the phrase rule if faith is not Protestant. Hie 
 bible is the faith ; and that testimony is the rale and measure of our 
 belief: for in logical troth testimony is the only proper rule of faith. 
 However, the question is not strictly, what tf the role of faith! 
 
 We both agree that the true reason of infallibiliiy is inspiration. 1 
 was glad to hear this noble concession from my learned opponent. 
 lesus Christ was able to give a perfect role. He therefore inspired 
 twelve apostles to form that rale, and enjoined us to hear them. So 
 far, there is no difference between us. We both have a perfect rale, 
 and Aat perfect role is the bible ; and the reason of its perfection is 
 ita immrattQfu But where is the inspiration of the one hundred and 
 tkiri^jM folios? Does it require this immense library to make us 
 undeiataiid the bible 1 However, if ray friend can establish their in- 
 spiration, and show that Jesus Christ has spoken in these volumes ; 
 we wUl adopt them without controversy. But there is a want of uni- 
 formity in the Catholic faith (even with the help of these volumes :) 
 and hence the four sects mentioned just before I sat down, on the 
 question, where shall this infallibility be found: for after all the one 
 hudied and thirty five volumes lying on the table, are no better than 
 the bibk lying on the table, the Roman Catholics being judges — ^They 
 must have an infallible interpreter of these volumes. Where shall he bo 
 irand ! " Some say that infallibility resides in the head of the church : 
 tnd. Others, that it resides in a general council, in which the church 
 la represented : although such a general council never sat. 3rd, Others 
 argue, that it lies neither in the pope, nor in the council separately : 
 but in the two combined— a 4th party says that it lies neither in the 
 pope, nor in the council, nor in both: but in the whole church, re- 
 sponding to any question. Now might we not call these four parties f 
 Do our controversies about atonement, or election &c. make us more 
 tfuly jcc/j, tlian do these different interpretations make parties in the 
 dimch 1 But where shall infalUbility bo found ! If this caa- 
 
 SOXAH CATHOLIC BKLI6I0X. 
 
 169 
 
 ■ot be shown, it is of no more use to us in time of need, than a 
 mountain of gold in the bottom of the ocean ; or a field of diamonds in 
 the moon. I hope the gentleman will clearly ascertain this p<Hnt, and 
 make us all understand where we shall find this infallibility. We 
 would like to know, how the combination of a given number oi falli- 
 bles will make one infallible being ; or, by what laws of neutraliza- 
 tion the lyiibility of every member of the church is destroyed, and 
 the whole mass becomes infallible. But if the infallibility of a dogma 
 depends on inspiration, what is the use of councils, unless the pro- 
 ■lise of infallibility be made exclusively to councils 1 
 
 But I have no necessity for the argument which I had framed on 
 this point. The bishop attributes infallibility to inspiration— not to 
 combination : So do Protestants, Therefore on this cardinal point we 
 seem more likely to agree, than I expected. Protestants have then 
 tn inspired creed, and this gives to them all the infallibility, which 
 Roman Catholics claim to themselves : but should any one say that 
 the majority of a council constitutes infallibitity, then we should have 
 to enquire into the reasons of the infallibility of said majority ; and 
 for the sake of some of that class, I would here state that these roa- 
 iorilies oflen are very lean minorities of the church. The council of 
 Trent debated eighteen years, during which time she held twenty five 
 sessions. In one session there were but forty eight bishops, and they 
 not the most learned. A majority of these determined that the apo- 
 crypha was inspired, and that it with the Vulgate Old and New Tes- 
 tament ; was of paramount authority in the church. Twenty five 
 oishops, a majority of forty eight, represent the whole christian com- 
 munity ! The question now is, were these men inspired while they 
 Were voting this dogma? I wish the bishop to state his views on this 
 point clearly, if indeed he thinks that inspiration is at all an attribute 
 3r a gift promised to majorities however lean. 
 
 But, my friends, when you have got this ponderous creed from the 
 decisions of general councils, must it not be interpreted 1 Must not 
 the dogma of a majority be also interpreted! And who is to interpret 
 them I Every man for himself I Then are you Protestants ; or, Ro- 
 manists workinpr by the Protestant roles. After all, I see nothing 
 E lined by all this expensive and ponderous machinery. Is not every 
 oman Catholic obliged to judge for himself on the meaning of every 
 dogma, and whether he ought to receive or reject it? Then, I ask, 
 are not the inspired verses of the Old and New Testament as easily 
 interpreted, as the inspired decrees of these councils ? Did not the Spirit 
 that inspired the apostles, teach as clearly, as the fathers in their couo- 
 ails 1 I wish to understand the bishop more accurately on these points. 
 
 The gentleman (I regret to state it) spoke of Protestants as hating 
 Iha Roman Catholics, from a supposed ifirnorance of their creed. For 
 myself, and for Protestants generally, I disavow the idea, and the 
 Ungua^e of hatred towaida Romanists, as such. We feel the sane 
 humanity and benevolence towards Roman Catholics, as men, aa^to 
 Protestants. We alwajrs discriminate between tenets and men, a 
 ay stem or theory, and those who hold it. With open arms, I would 
 welcome to our shores the oppressed of all nations, Romanists and 
 Protestants. I would extend to the Roman Catholic every facility to 
 improve his condition by immiopration into this fiivored land, provide*^ 
 only I were free from all suspicion, that his faith in the pope and 
 P 32 
 
no 
 
 PSVATR ON THK 
 
 ■mlifmslnifrh, wowW net iidnee him or hit children to wfwt from in« 
 Off BiiM, that freedom »nd liberty wkkh 1 would glidlir partiripiw 
 villi him. I oppose liis religioii ; beciiws*, I tincerely think ii ensiavet 
 liiiii, and would epslaire mf», if it had the power. Bui, in all this th«>re 
 it no koired to Roman Catholics as men. Wo are devoted to American 
 iMitntiont, because they are humane. For the ealie of Romanists, n« 
 Hrflil an ProiMtants, we d%j»ire to see them permanent. We fear the 
 eiclusive, praneriplive, and despotic tf ttmi of Romanism ; hut we 
 feel nothing but benevolence to Roman Catholics. 
 
 My worthy opponent has done us great honor in saying, that be 
 Inmrt JMUf eieellent ProiettMits, whom he esteems highly as good 
 1U». Of eeniie, then, iliey Biav be sewed oat of the Roman Catholio 
 cbireli. If so, what is thediierence between bis infallible and our 
 fiilUble Imith 1 I eannet find time to reply to any remarks of my oppo* 
 nent, mot made in reference to my arguments. — [Minus 5 minutes.] 
 
 Maff-foti 4 &*thekf P. J£ 
 
 Bisoor PumcEix mm-- 
 
 I shall reply to what has been said, and then pnrsne mj own line 
 of argtment. The Catholic church claims to have an infallible rule 
 rf faith and an infallible code of morals. The former would be of 
 little use without the latter. So intimate is the connection between 
 found faith and sound morals, that we hold that if the Catholic code 
 of morals is vicious, she is not infallible in doctrine. If the working 
 of her code of morals is proved to lead, or to have led, into vice, she 
 is mot inMliWe. This never has been proved, nor ever can it be. 
 But lie contrary to this has been proved, and its proof is cumulative. 
 The darkest zma furnish some of its brightest illustrations. She 
 does not pretend to be infallible in discipline, in the sense of its im- 
 Biitability. The gentleman confounds discipline with morals, anil 
 Ihit want of clearness of ideas is the source of the entire difficulty. 
 Biaeipline, I think, I have explained. It regulates the dress of the 
 cleiwy, the litnrgical language, the time of flinginff hallelujah, the 
 wmim of shaving the head, or making the tonsure, the giving of the 
 eiip to the laity, the use of leavened, or unleavened bread for the sa« 
 eranent, selecuon of davs for leasts and fasts, &c. &c. The church 
 laialliaTe the power of^changing in these respects— in other words 
 ef aiaping her discipline to times, and oenntnes. And all this, so 
 far from being an iaperleotion is a proof of her nerfeciion, of her 
 laving been established by Jesus Christ to teach, and guide, and sanc- 
 tify iifi nations fm ever, I did not state the crude proposition, which 
 the genlienwn has attributed to me, via. that the pope is as fallible as 
 I am. I would not compare myself thus to him. I occupy an humble 
 elation compared lo his, and 1 an eonseious of the want of those em* 
 iiently distinfuished qualltiee of head and heart which compose his 
 ilMineler. He has grace and lights which I have not. The gentle* 
 * tells Protestants a flattering tale, that they have is infallible a 
 ^ as Catholics. This is keeping the word of promise to the ear 
 «... breaking it to the heart. Does he not in the same speech, ao- 
 ksfVirledge that their fallible opinions, doctrines, traditions make their 
 Mn mle, the bible, vain and nothing worth ! The bible is a dead let- 
 ter— all pretend to find their conflicting tenets in it. Where is then» 
 the iniafible rulo » Doen he not charge Protestants as well as Cath- 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC ESLIOIOTT. 
 
 •lice witk error. Ajid why I The gentleman said, where is the use 
 of the headv without the body I I ask where ie the use of m bodf 
 without a head I And he said, if the body regulates the head it is 
 anomalous. But what is it that sends vitality to the hesd I Is It not 
 the heart with its healthful pulses and its quickening cunent 1 The 
 pope is the head — the council is the heart — and I have no objection 
 to his calling the laity the members, to continue the fiorure. While 
 there is no schism in the members, no separation of the head or of the 
 heart, all is soundness and life*— so in the church — pope, pastors, and 
 laity. United ufe stand, divided you fall. The true theory of the 
 church, like that of the human body, is union. Ask not, does the 
 heart, alone, or the head alone, or the members alone contain the vital 
 principle— thev sympathize ; they live and move and have their being 
 together, God seems to address himself to the head and to the heart 
 in the revealed definitions of his essence. ** I am who am,*' and *^GoD 
 IS Lovs," one of these definitions is for the reason, the other for the 
 affections ; one for the Old Testament, tlie other for the New. Both, 
 however, come from the same source and tend to define Him — Lifc, 
 Wisdom and Love. 
 
 The division of truth into objective and subjective is correct— but 
 objective revealed truth is the whole truth revealed by God, wherever 
 found and in whatever manner conveyed. What is the use of this, 
 without subjective truth, or our own knowledge and conviction that 
 we possess objective truth, and that we are eure of possessing it 1 Of 
 this, the Protestant, who rejects authority in religion, and pretends to 
 find out religion for himself, from a book, which he acknowledges, fal- 
 lible men handed to him, can never be sure. The fact, the testimony, 
 the belief of the testimony, the feeling consentaneous with the belief^ 
 and the correspondent action, are all human faith and natural feeling, 
 Struggling, and striving for some higher and belter gift*, which it cdn- 
 not attain without infallible assurance, without the Catholic rule. What 
 is the testimony that might be deceived itself and might deceive me t 
 
 He says we Catholics have a very broad rule— 135 folios. No such 
 thing. We have a quite convenient pocket>rule. It is the pearl of 
 
 Ct value— a diamond, with which we cut the brittle glass of mere 
 an creeds in pieces, and with which we solve every difficulty. 
 It is this : " I believe in the Holy Catholic church." They were the 
 apostles-^he was Christ who gave it to us. It does not suppose if- 
 norance, or servile acquiescence. It lifts us above error, giving us i 
 divine warrant for every tenet of our faith, and directing our undeiv 
 standings and hearts to Goo, who speaks to us by his church. I 
 hope I did not understand my friend correctly this morning, but if I 
 have he has uttered horrid blasphemy. I understood him to say that 
 God could not have given a perfect rule (to make man infallible, and 
 prevent him from error.^ 
 
 Mb. Campbell explained. He had said that God could not create 
 m hill without a valley — could not make man a free agent and bind him. 
 
 Bishop Purcell. Could not God have created the angels so that 
 they could not fall into sin 1 
 
 Mb. Campbell. There can be no virtue nor vice, without liberty 
 of choice : neither in man nor in angel. 
 
 Bishop PurcelL. My friend has said that God could not have cre- 
 ated angels or men virtuous without making them free to sin. The 
 angels of heaven are not free to do wrong, are they not virtuous ! 
 
 m^ 
 
lit 
 
 1MB ATM Off 1*HB 
 
 Mm, CAMfBiLt.. If siHsii ii iIm iMtnre of uiflvlSf thjfty sre ▼irtnoiiB 
 
 %f mum. ¥m§Bm, lilierty eooiittf in ^aitiiif m waimm with our ns- 
 
 BOMAH CATHOLIC BBUOION. 
 
 178 
 
 BisBOP PimciM.. Then the •iiflelt are Tinuoos withont being free. 
 If the febel antels were Tirtiioiit oy mature^ how did they happen to 
 ftll I And could not God hare made the angrels who are now good, 
 liy nature, or by grace, such from creation 1 I will now continue mj 
 ■ffmment. It doea not exceed the power of God to make man infat 
 lible. Christ was infallible ; for lie was God. Now if he could 
 make twelve men infallible, as Mr. C. admits the apostles were, why 
 mmM he not Mrpetuate the same power in favor of his entire church, 
 ■inee nioh inrailible authority to teaeh his true doctrine it at neceami* 
 ly now, ■■ it was at any former time 1 
 
 Now 1 have another strong argument here— it ia old with ua, bol 
 MigmlMl anew by reading one of the Protestant papers, from New 
 York. It is the Palladium, and my friend seems to know the editor, 
 for he himself has given occasion for the very article in question. The 
 argument is this : If tradition be fallible, and it was not known foi 
 3M years, what books of the bible were genuine, and what 8pu« 
 rioue, how shall we ascertain that we have the bible ! How shall wa 
 «ver know that the book ia the book of God ? The making of the ca» 
 BCM or list of becks composing the inspired volume, was a difficulty 
 yieldiii| to hut few otlwra in magnitude, during the firat four hundred 
 jMira of Christianity, when, if we must believe my friend, infallibility 
 M ieparted, with the last of the apostles, to heaven. How then can 
 ire be sure that our present canon is correct I Catholics can be sura 
 on this vital point, for they have the voucher of an infallible guardian 
 of the holy deposit, for its correctness; but Protestants, who have no 
 ■ueh tribunal to enlighten them, how can they be sure 1 Catholics 
 'luld Ihntlnfkllibllitv was promised to the cfihrch by Jesus Christ. Its 
 tiiiniiifeiir is heard in a general council, or in the pope's decision in 
 which all assent. The church can subsist without a general council. 
 General councils are not essential — thojgh frequently of use, because, 
 thonf h we all believe witkoui exeepHoth that the pope's decision, in 
 wbich, after it has been dul^ made known, all the bishops of the Ca- 
 tholic world aecfuiesee, is infallible, still the decision of a general 
 ■teieil declares in a more in^iressive and solemn, though not more ao- 
 liientic, manner, the belief of tlie Catholic world on the contested doc- 
 trine, and thus more eflbetnally proscribes the contrary error, llie 
 «0liib»tiid Protestant, Leibnitz, remarked that there could be no cerw 
 tiira^ of a correct decision on religious matters, equal to that afforded 
 by tne decision of a ^neral council. The four sects Mr. C. speaks 
 of all aeree in the belief of the infallibility of the church representa- 
 tive ani of the church responsive ; if 1 must employ these technical 
 I«rm8--and as he asks ** could not the Holy Ghost, who inspired the 
 •postles, teach as cleariy as the Fathers in their councils 1" I answer, 
 • Yss,* and he has so taught us to **HKAn the chdbch," for, mproj^ 
 tjfg'mrijpiim u rf anyprimU interprdaUmu 
 
 Let me now vindicate the humblest Eoman Catholic of my flock, or 
 of the worid, from the charge of pinning hia faith to the sleeve of any 
 man, or of surrendering his conscience to the keeping of hia priest. 
 Catholics do not believe because the priest tells them to believe, butbe- 
 mmm they . consider him to bo the fkiiliful interpreter of Christ and thn 
 
 organ of the church, but should be dissent from the onelos of God and 
 
 his ecclesiastical superiors, that moment they would quit him. They 
 see his teaching accords with that which they have heard from otbera, 
 which they have read, as the Catholic doctrine. If they doubt, they 
 ask other priests, or the bishop. Thus while they know the priest to 
 be orthodox, they hear him, or rather the church, they hear God and 
 they believe God. And in this there is no servility. The faith hn 
 teaches and the moral law he expounds, have both come from God, and 
 to God they owe and pay their vows. My friend misapprehends msb 
 I did not say that Protestants hated Catholics. I say that some Pro- 
 tcRtants are often prejudiced against them, and I wondered they are not 
 more so. If he could prove the odious proposition so long before yon, 
 the Catholic church would be a monster. 1 am sorry my friend has 
 misunderstood the doctrines of the Catholics, and I am glad of the op- 
 portunity which is thus afforded me, of coming before the public and 
 showing what are our real sentiments. 
 
 I come to the doctrine of infallibility again. I will begin my argn* 
 roent this evening, and conclude perhaps to-morrow morning. 1 beg 
 leave to read what I have myself written on this subject : 
 
 VVhoever reflects upon the countless varieties of human character, 
 the ignorance of some men, the prejudices of others, the passions of 
 all, will scarcely require that we should expend much time or labor to 
 prove, that as long as men are commanded to form their religion 
 for themselves, even though the book they receive for their guide 
 should be the plainest in its language that divine wisdom could bestow, 
 the sources of error will be never drained. No matter how pure thn 
 doctrine of that book, how holy its precepts, how luminous its evi* 
 dences, occasions will occur, when these doctrines will be contested, 
 these precepts denied, these beaming evidences obscure to the pride, 
 the voluptuousness, and the love of independence, inherent in a per- 
 verted nature. Man, under the influence of such feelings, will read, 
 will write; he will communicate his doubts and impart his prejudices 
 to others ; he will originate new creeds, and form new sects ; he will 
 raise altar against altar, and desk against desk; nor will any one, 
 consistently with Protestant principles, have a right to ask him why 
 he does so. At the beginning of the sixteenth century, when the right 
 of forming religion, every man for himself, and the bible for us all, 
 was first promulgated, the fierce self-constituted apostle sounded a 
 deafening peal of defiance, and denounced all authority in religious 
 concerns as spiritual tyranny. " Read the scriptures !" he vociferated 
 to the astonished crowd of wise or foolish, learned or unlearned, that 
 thronged to hear him. ^^ Read the scriptures, and judge for yourselves : 
 your reason and the spirit will enable you to understand them, as eas- 
 ily as you can discern hot from cold, or sweet from bitter. Read the 
 scriptures : they that run may read. Judge for yourselves !** They 
 did read, they did judge for themselves; and they decided against 
 their apostles, and against one another ! 
 
 "When hell," saya an illustrious writer, ** prepares some terrible 
 calamity for mankind, it flings upon the earth a pregnant evil, consign- 
 ing its development to time." The time for the development of this 
 mischief was brief. The word was uttered, and it could not be re- 
 called : the principle was established, which it was too late to rescind. 
 The disciples of the new apostles, reading, judging, deciding, became 
 p2 
 
 iH 
 
i«*n A •■•* mw *i'' ti w 
 DEBATE vlf XniS 
 
 ■ ip i ii ii tilt Jiielves. Tliey claimed the rfgfit their teachers eiereisetl. 
 
 IpMf aMunJ It to chaige, as they had changed. The Lutherans, 
 •iwliltlM of them, became CaMniste; CaWinists, Independents; 
 ImlilMiliMilSt Anabajptists ; each sect the prolific parent of twenty 
 mlitrs, all diierinf from one another, as much as each one differed 
 flUMi its parent— innovation. Mark now the inconsistency to which 
 Hm •vil workiof of this scheme reduced the first claimants of a right 
 IMilii»d of for fifteen centuries. •* Obey !" they now cry aloud, with 
 Itnor, ••obey your superiors; submit to the pastors whom God hat 
 ■fpoialeil to rule the faithful. It is their duty to instruct you, yours 
 to follow the guidance of their wisdom." •• What,** they exclaimed, 
 f becomes of the subordination which the scriptures so frequently en* 
 |oin, if each one can be the arbiter of his own belief! What becomes 
 of humiltty, which relieion so forcibly inculcates, if every individual 
 
 Inesumes to be an oracle and a jud^e f What would become of civil 
 tw and social harmony and order, if the acts of our legislatures were 
 Ml to the interpretation of every interested litigant 1 Forbear ! for- 
 bear !*• Such was the restraint, as every one knows, which Luther 
 was under the Inevitable necessity of imposing on the first followers 
 of his levolt, in order to counteract the effects of the disastrous prin- 
 dplo of raeotal emancipation, so highly eulogized when it was first 
 pfOelaiiUMl, mm! received with so much enthusiasm, until it was found 
 to bo • Wf Btbel of the confusion of a' I creeds — another name, or 
 tise a eloal, for deism and positive infidelity. When we reason on 
 principles rightly understood, whose immediate bearings and remotest 
 •ofliti|iienoes have been exposed to the examination of the reflecting 
 world, for the list three hundred years, these arguments are as coo- 
 •litifo to^ay, as they were when first urffed ; and when the right of 
 amy iiulifldual to believe whatever errors ne honestly conceives to bo 
 tmCha H!¥ealed in scripture, is contested, he may say to his accusers. 
 In the eloquent language of the Prot^tant remonstrants to the synod 
 
 luat lafoniiers, declared to be fallible; and, consequently, to exact 
 •ibiniasiofi to its dictates, they, with great consistency, defined to be 
 tyranny. Thus they decided with regard to the church of Rome ; and 
 you, yourselves, have sanctioned their decision. Why, therefore, ex- 
 •Kiae a dortiination over us, which you stigmatized as tyranny in a 
 eiiifeh, compared t*» whose greatness yon dwindle into tnsignificaoco^ 
 If iaaialaiico to the decisions of our pastors be a Grime, then let us 
 ,«fl|ia oat the stain of ow origin, and run back together to the fold of 
 Catholicity, which you and we have abandoned. If such resistance 
 w no crime, why require of ns a submission which we do not owe 
 |o«. Allow us to differ from you, as you do from the parent church." 
 From tho laanaweiable logle of this remonstrance, the conclusion 
 fallows irretiftibly : I. That every society formed on Protestant prln- 
 dples, being essentially fallible, none should assert the inconpistent 
 ppetension of controlling feith by authority, or of regulating creeds, 
 wider pretence of superior wisdom. 2. That no such society, and, 
 therefore, no individual, in such society, can be sure of being in the 
 right, as long as his Protestant neighbor, with as many resources of 
 lif#fiitalioii, and as piously inclined as himself, has embraced the very 
 
 SOMAN CATDOLTC KBLIGION. 
 
 175 
 
 eontrary of his opinion. 3. That as the entire system is based on tho 
 possibility of each one*s being mistaken, where the most learned and 
 pious have adopted such opposite conclusions, no one can ever make 
 an act of divine faith, which is incompatible with uncertainty, and 
 much more so with error. 4. That, as long as such a principle is up* 
 held, there is no hope of union, no security ; consequently, that either 
 the whole system is false, or some expedient of union and unity muft 
 be discovered, 1o induce any conscientious and rational inquirer after 
 truth, to believe that the Protestant society exemplifies the efllicacy of 
 the prayer of Christ for his disciples, the night before he suffered, that 
 ** they may be made perfect in one.''* We entreat our readers seriously 
 to look into the different religions professing to have been founded by 
 Jesuff Chrisl, and seriously ask themselves the question, in which of 
 all these, that "perfect oneness" (which, better than all other proofs, 
 establishes the divinity of the Son of God, and convinces the entire 
 world how much his heavenly Father loved him, and those whom he 
 had given to him) may be found. Let not this inquiry be neglected, 
 nor yet performed lightly : eternal life or death may be the consequence 
 ot its good or had prosecution. 
 
 Krror in religion, when it results from the neglect of sincere and 
 prayerful enquiry, is criminal. This no intelligent Christian will de- 
 ny. God is as essentially the God of truth, as he is the God of vir- 
 tue. He can no more sanction error, than he can tolerate vice. His 
 right is as absolute to the submission of the understanding, as to the 
 obedience of the will; and as he, who violates one commandment 
 will not be saved for the observance of the rest, so he that rejects 
 one truth, which Almighty God has revealed — not that we may ex- 
 amine, contest, adopt or reject — but that we may believe it, has lost 
 the merit of saving faith. It is to fix the otherwise perpetual raria- 
 tions of the human mind, and secure the anchor of our faith, not in 
 the movioff sands of man*s vacillating judsfments and uncertain opin- 
 ions, but by lodging it deeply and indissoTubly in the rock which the 
 Divine Architect has made the foundation of his church, and against 
 which the winds of error and the rain of dissolving scandal will rap^e 
 and beat in vain, that the Word made Fieth Toochsafed to bec(»me the 
 Light of the world. 
 
 The misfortune of the great majority of mankind at the present 
 day, is not so much a blind fanatical attachment, (bad as thi ) is) to 
 the sect in which they chanced to be born, or were first instructed, 
 as a certain latitude of principle, which has obtained the specious 
 name of liberality, and which resolves itself into a fatal and unrea- 
 aonable indifference to all religions, true or false. The infidel who 
 has had but too frequent occasion to exult at the success of a wily 
 system of hostility to revealed truth, affects to be unable to restrain 
 his delight at beholdin? oartVy pervading the religious, as well 
 as the physical world. Diversity of creeds is as pleasing to his eye, 
 •s the discrepancy of features in the human countenance. Incapable 
 ei reascniug, out of tlie sphere of matter, of which it is his inverted 
 ambition to be a part, he holds the different religions professed by 
 men to be so many institutions, prescribing for eacii country a uni- 
 form manner of honoring God in public; all founded and having their 
 peculiv reasons in the climate, the mode of govfjrnment, the geniua 
 
rs 
 
 PKBATll OIV T ' HB 
 
 of ihm |efifle, or in sodm ntlier local caii«e, whieli renders one Ibm 
 of leligioii Dieferable, 0r them, to anotber. 
 
 The concliiiioii to be drawn from this doctrine, in is mueh as It 
 levels all distinctions between truth and falsehood, ^ood and evil, it 
 hi niliatinf to reason— but the infidel, for once consistent, recoile not 
 before it : me following is his language—-" Sincerely profess, piously 
 
 Eiaetise the religion of the country in which you liye. In other words, 
 orn in a pagan country, adore its gods — sacrifice to Jupiter, to Mar8« 
 to Priapus, or to Apoflo. In Egypt, you will render divine horora 
 to the sacred ox, and the crocodile ; in Phenicia, you will pass ysur 
 ehildren through the fires of Moloch ; jn one country, you will im- 
 molate human victims to your idol ; in another, you will humbly bow 
 before a block of marble, or of woo<l — before an animal, fossil, or a 
 plant Be not afraid ; God will not send one man to heaven for hav- 
 ing been born in Home, nor another to hell for having been born in 
 I Constantinople. Ilierefore, in the latter place you will cry. * God is 
 God and Mahomet is bis prophet;' and in the former, you will ana- 
 Iheniatise the impostor. A Christian in Europe, a Mussulman in 
 Persia, an Idolater in Congo, on the banks of the Ganges an adorei 
 of Vishnou, let not truth dictate tlie choice of your religion, but 
 chance — let not reason decide, but the measurement of a degree ot 
 latitide, or longitude. Your credulous parent paid divino honors to 
 an onion ; preserve this domestic worship — a son can never do wrong 
 in following the religion of his father," But all this, it will be said, 
 is unworthy of God and degrading to man. Not at all, he replies* 
 all religions are equal — you were bom in this, to practise another would 
 be presumption. Such is the reasoning of the instructor of Emile, 
 the theology of Hobbes, the profession of faith of the author of Zaire. 
 
 **Chrfti«iinfidaiis Parts, Mumulnwiie en ces lieux, 
 
 J'sarois tvec la Grec« adorf let faus Dfeui." 
 
 11ia» the unbeliever should thus eat promiscuously of the fruit of 
 the tree of good and evil, life and death, should not create surprise. 
 Bis joy consists in his being able to doubt of the validity of the proofe 
 of religion— his only peace in life, his only security in death being 
 made to depend on the delusive conviction of the improbability of ever 
 arriving with certainty at the knowledge of revealed truth — the only 
 Initl*, aHer all, it must be admitted, which it is necessary for man to 
 Inow— «nd consequently tlie only truth which God is bound by all his 
 essential and unchangeable attributes to enable us to attain. 
 
 The basis of Protestant belief is, that the Scnpture, this book ofdi* 
 vine revelation, is the only rule of faith ; and that Jesus Christ having 
 Wl on earth no livinfr Infallible authority to interpret it, every man is 
 oblifed to expound it, for himself, or in other words, to seek in it th« 
 lelipon, In which he is to live and by which he must be saved. Hin 
 iwty Is to believe, what, it seem to Mm, this book clearly leaches and 
 what as far as he has ascertained by subjecting it to the test of privsl* 
 examination, eontradicts not Ms reason : and as no man has a right to 
 ••I toaiiother, '* my reason is more vigorous, my judgment more sound 
 than yours," it follows tnat every man should abstain from condemn- 
 iiif the interpretation of another and should consider all religions, at 
 least, as good and as safe as his own. This is the infidel principle in 
 disguise. The Deist takes the book of nature, the Protestant takes 
 Ihe^ible. The former reads in Aia book, that the Supreme Being musi 
 
 SOMAN OATHOLIC S£U6I0N. 
 
 ITI 
 
 be pleased with the diversity of worship rendered him by his creaturcii 
 that no one is to be more accountable for errors which, however discord- 
 ant in themselves, when softened and mellowed by being mingled with 
 Ike errors of others, ascend to the deity in the grateful harmony of uni- 
 versal praise. The latter, with this only difierence that he contracts 
 the range of the Infiders misapprehension of religion, and for the book 
 of the universe takes the bible, contends for the same erroneous prin- 
 eiple. 
 
 1 need not shew its workings to this enlightened audience. The 
 ■TO ruinous in the extreme.— [Time expired.] 
 
 WEDNESDAY, Jaauart 18th., HaJf-pa^ 9 o'clock, J, Jf. 
 
 Mr. Camfskll riae»— 
 
 I appear before you this morning, fellow-citizens, in prosecution of 
 (ny third proposition : and as this is the fifih day of the discussion, 
 we must proceed with more despatch. We shall then advance direct- 
 ly to that part of our proposition which speaks of Roman Catholic uni- 
 ty and uniformity — only intimating to my hearers, that the bishop's 
 remarks in his last speech upon the infallibility of tradition; and his 
 effort to make the succession of the popes to rest upon the same au»- 
 thority with our faith in the bible, will be disposed of under proposi- 
 tion the 6th. 
 
 There are two bonds of union in all societies, general and special,— 
 the first connects with the whole ; the second with a part, one or more 
 individuals. We explain by examples: 1st. Take the Turkish em* 
 pire. It is united on the divine authority of the Koran, and the divine 
 mission of Mahomet. Acquiescence in these is the general bond of 
 union. But 3nd. There are special bonds, such as unite the respective 
 orders of Mahometans, as the orders of Ali and Omar. These orders 
 are distinct : they are united by a special construction of tlie Koran. 
 Belief in the Koran is like general attraction : agreement in a particu* 
 far view of it is like attraction of cohesion. So among christians. 
 Roman Catholics are united in one great generic idea which char.io- 
 terizes the whole sect. That is, the belief in a supreme head of the 
 church on earth — a vicar of Christ: and add to that, the exclusive 
 power and authority of the bishops. ** Bishops are the bond of union 
 amongst Catholics." The clergy, indeed, are the general bond of 
 union amongst Romanists. But there are also special bonds and par- 
 ties in that society, of which we shall take some notice. Protestants 
 have a general bond of union in a generic consideration, as distinguish- 
 ing as that of Mahometans and Roman Catholics. Ackm wigging 
 the bible alone, as the only perfect and sufficient rule of faith and ma»> 
 iiers,and the duty of all mankind to examine it for themselves, accord- 
 in? to their respective abilities and opportunities, is the generic charao- 
 tertstic of Protestants. It is one of the general ideas, in which are 
 united, and which unites all Protestants. But in the second place they 
 are united in a most perfect and unanimous renunciation of that hier- 
 archical authority which is the very t^ssence of Roman Catholicism. 
 1 affirm that all Protestants are as perfectly united in these two grand 
 piinciples, as the Roman Catholics are iu that of a supreme head in 
 
m 
 
 iii i 
 
 lome, and in the Wicf of tradition. Different sninte md their . 
 lisrlties in the Roman Catholic chareh areapecific bonda of union, aii4 
 aa much heads of orders, as are the leaders and views of Proteatant 
 iecia. But the Protestants are as much united in acts of worship, at 
 Eoman Catholics. There are one or two Protestant sects, who diffei 
 in soaie important matters, and are as repugrnant to each other as are 
 lanaenista and Jesuits in the Roman church : but all Protestant sects 
 mite in acferal essential acts of religious worship — ^in the acknowl 
 •ikineiit of the same cod© of morals, and in the uosiiite institution 
 of Christianity, such as the Lord's day, the Lord's supper, bapti«ii,. 
 iifaftr, praise, Ac. Sects and differences eiist which ouarht not : but 
 •till they harmonixe as much in their general and special bonds of 
 onion, au do the Romanists themselves. What are the Augustiniana, 
 Bominicans, Franciscans, Jansenists, Jesuits, &c. but orders (or sects) 
 called after different saints, and united under special bonds and peeuli- 
 •riiiea ! Theae parties in the Roman church areas pugnacious as Pro- 
 lestant pftffltM : coinmuniiig with each other not more frequently, nor 
 ■on ooniiallf Iham do Lutherans, Calvinists, Arminians, &c. They 
 CMilitMi wamily affainst each other. Their quarrels are as rank and 
 feice as those of Protestants. But this it not all, my friends. Their 
 ily is divided on all the great orthodox points of Oatholicism. 
 
 KOMAM CATHOLIC KBUOION. 
 
 nti 
 
 Some say the pope of Rome is supreme in all thinga on earth, tempo- 
 nl Mid •pirimtli that he is a perfect representative of all the power of 
 Christ, ivligioui and political. A second class disavow these large 
 claims — ihf^y say he is supreme only in ecclesiastical power : but thai 
 lie is absolute lord of the church. A third class differ again on the ei- 
 tent of that ecclesiastical supremacy. Some say the pope is above and 
 lieyond the councils and clergy ; and that he can annul them at plea- 
 aire. A fourth party say he is subject to a general council, and is on- 
 ly a leneral snperiiilendent, a mere president, or executive officer— 
 Ihat iio deoiiiii oCeoiincils are the euprprae law, and that the pope 
 merely executes them. Here are four distinct sects, on the generic 
 idea of the anpreme head. Again there are four parties on the es&en 
 ial doctrine of infallibility. .Some aay it resiues in the pope alone. 
 Bellmiine saya, (and he is the organ of a principal party,) '* that the 
 
 Cope oififiol pmmbiv err.** Gelasius says, **Th« church represented 
 y a general connctl is above the pope.** A third party say, that infal 
 Hbility resides in both the pope and a general council united. A fourth 
 ■ay, thstall Ibis does not conatitute infallibility, but that when the 
 whole eharah shall have acqnieaeed in a decree, and signified it by a 
 concurrent leapoBse, then, and not till then, aredofitiasand decreet io- 
 iillibly correot. Tlie fint of these partiet believes in the eharch tir- 
 kmii the second in the church repcMfitoliee f the third in the church 
 ^ifiKt»ei-^he fonrlh in ihechurchrefioiMteer— as some of their eanon> 
 iait have taughL 
 
 YMieidaf « in dltenstinf Infallihilliy, I taid it thoold be in the head, 
 if any wleie. My friend the bishop, aajt, it should be in the body : 
 and, to carry out the figure, if infallibility be in the body, the head 
 nmst be under the coutrol of the body : for the fallible mu^t yield to 
 the infallible. Now, the body is the animal part of every individual, 
 the teat of the passions and affections ; and therefore ought to be under 
 the dominion of the intellectual and moral head : yet this theory makes 
 this body, the sen->ual and animal body govern. No wonder, then. 
 
 ttial the Roman Catholic chnrch is always eorrapl. Bat from nature 
 and reasoB and revelation, I woold incline to that party that places 
 the government in the head. There are the powers of government, 
 and there ought to be the sceptre. It is abhorrent to reason — nay it is 
 father monstrous, to have the head under the dominion of the body. 
 
 Bat I hasten to show, that be the government where it may, in the 
 pope, the council, or the whole body, it is always fallible. I shall 
 begin with the head ; and here we have pope against pope. Adrian 
 VL did, uneouivocally, dittmn the pnpeh ittfaiiibi/tty. Now, from this 
 tingle fact, 1 prove the fallibility of the pope; for Adrian was either 
 right, or he was wrong. If right, the pope is fallible; for he avows 
 that he is. If wrong, the pope is fallible ; for he was a pope and yet 
 did err. This is a dilemma never to be annihilated nor disposed of. 
 Pope Stephen VI. rescinded the decreet of pope Formosus. Pope 
 John annulled those of pope Stephen, and restored those of pope Ste- 
 phen. Sergius III. so hated Formosus and all that he did, as pope, 
 that he obliged all the priests he ordained to be re-ordained. 
 
 Sometimes popes have at one time condemned what themselves 
 passed at another time ; for instance, Martin V. confirmed the decree 
 of the council of Constance, which set a general council above the 
 
 f>ope, and yet he afterwards published a decree, forhid.ling all appeals 
 rom the pope to a general council. He was certainly fallible, or, 
 rather, he certainly erred in one case or in the other. What then is true 
 of one pope officially, is true of all popes officially, and in proving a 
 few regular and canonical popes to be fallible, we prove them all to be 
 
 fallible. 
 
 Is the second opinion belter— is a general council infallible T I will 
 atate a foct or two; the council of (fonstance says the church in old 
 times allowed the laity to partake of both kinds— the bread and the 
 wine, in celebrating the eucharist. The council of Trent saya, the laity 
 and unofficiating priests may commune in one kind only. Here, then, 
 we have council against council. In the time of pope Gelasius it was 
 pronounced to be sacrilege to deny the cup to the laity : but now it is 
 nncanonical to allow it. The fourth council of Lateran, A. D. I2I5, 
 tays, with the concurrence and approbation of pope Innocent III., that 
 the bread and wine in the act of consecration suffer a physical change. 
 Then we begin to read of transubstantiation. Coun. Lat iv. canon 1. 
 •• Did the church always maintain this doctrine 1" Nay, verily, for a 
 host of fathers ; nay the whole church for the first four centuries say 
 ••the change is only mora/,"— a sanctification, or separation to a spe- 
 cial use. Here we might read a host of fathers, if we thought their 
 testimony necessary. ITie third council of Lateran, or the eleventh 
 oecumenical council, has decreed that 
 
 " JVon mtifi direndn svni jnramenta $ed potws petjftna qua contra mitlA- 
 (em eccUs'MSlicain d sanctorum palrum veninnt institatm." Cuo. Lat. iii. r.uui 
 16 Ijahbif. Council Sacrosanct vol. ». p. 1517. ^ ^ 
 
 Literally. Ihejf are not to be called oaths, InU permneM, which are iakm 
 aenimt the interests tf the church and the holy fathers. 
 
 Now does not this contradict Numb. xxx. 2, Lev. xix. \% Deot. xxiii. 
 23, Zech. viii. 17, Psal. xv. 4, and Matthew v. ••Thou shall perform 
 uoto the Lord thine oaths." • , -i 
 
 Atrain, the second council of Lateran, the tetdh cecumenical council, 
 forbade the marriage of clergy. /V 800 years the clergy were allowed 
 to marry! For the first 600 years one-half the canons of councils 
 
ROMAIC CATHOLIC BBUGION. 
 
 181 
 
 I ■' 
 
 1811 naiATS Off trb 
 
 IMM rafiMiif tli« ekrfy at to the affaiii of matri^ooy and oelibaey 
 Th© atidoBt church had not yet learned to forbid niarrtage to the clergy 
 for with Paul the clergy yel beliefed, that '^mamage wis honorablt 
 iOi all." 
 
 I liiife thus iliown that the church of Rome Is not uniform ; and need 
 iPefkther proof that she is mutable and faUible;^without that real unity 
 mi uniformity of which she boasts I Have we not found pope against 
 impe, council against council, the church of one age against the church 
 of another age, and, by the acknowledgment of a pope, as much strift 
 ml party m amongst Protestants. 
 
 instead of reading that long essay yesterday, (I do not know what 
 it was about, nor who wrote it; I paid uo regard lo it, it beiii^ obvi* 
 ously read to fill up the time)— I say, that instead of such readings, I 
 cipected a reply to my remarks on infallibility, or on some of the great 
 natters yet unnoticed ; but without any more distinct avowal of his 
 Mion of infalMbiltty, 1 am left to plod my way as before. My op- 
 ponent admitt kit lailhis not the bible alone, but that immense library 
 of iMt ill ftdlriifl tffifl iMrMkm /oA'of, already mentioned. But as he is 
 so silent on this point, I have an author in my hand whom he has al* 
 nady commended in this city as good Roman Catholic authority ; and, 
 therefore, I quote him with his approbation. He has these 135 folios in 
 Ms eye; and on the question, who shall interpret for public use — theRt. 
 '~ . J. F. if. Trevem, D. D. bishop of Stiasburg, late of Aire, thuf 
 
 ** if flscb of Dt was obliged to distinguish, among man^ articles, those which 
 come from tradition, and those which do not, he would hud himstif, in a general 
 way, condcnioed to a labor above his strength. In fad, that part of the preach- 
 inr of the apostlts which they did not commit to writiiir, was at first confided 
 ■olely to the memory of the faithful, fixed in particular cBurrhes by the oral in- 
 itmcttons of the irst bbhops, and afterwards collected nartially and as occasion 
 Ml oat, in Ch« writinss of the lalhan, and in the acts or the synods and councib. 
 Whenco it followi, inat to prove thai such an article is truly of apostolic tradi- 
 tion, we mat consult the belief of the particular churches, examine carefully th« 
 tell of the councils and the voluminous writing of the fathers of the Greek 
 tad Latin church^. Who does not see that this labor requires a sjmre of time 
 and extent of erudition, that renders it in general impracticable? There are, 
 indeed, to be found, men of extraordinary capacity and apDlkation, whose taste 
 ■ad inclination lead them to this kind of research; with the aid of the rules of 
 criticism, all founded upon good sense, they balance and weigh authorities, they 
 diitinfuish between what the fathers taught, as tiidividnai teachers, and what 
 they iepoae as testifiers to the belief and practice oi their time, and they attach 
 will! discrimination the different degrees of credibility that are duc:, whether to 
 their doctrine or their deposition. The world is well aware that such labor 
 is calculated but for a small number: and again, after all how successful soever 
 it may be, it scarcely ever leads to inconte«tible couclusfons. We therefore ar« 
 in want of mmm other means that may enable us altogether with certainty to 
 anrive at the apostolic and divine traditional The question is, what it this 
 ■mmmf •• • • # » a a « 
 
 Our author proceeds : 
 
 ** The same judre, the same interpreter that nnfoldt to ns the sense of the 
 divine books, nianiiest to us also, that of tradition. Now. this judge, this inter- 
 preter,^ I must tell yon here again, is the teaching body of the church, the bish- 
 opa nnilad in the sane opinion, at least in m great majority. It is to tlieni that 
 in the person of the apostles, were made the magnificent promises: ** Cit> tracli, 
 1 am with you ; he that heareth you, heareth ma. The Spirit of truth shall teach 
 you alt truth," &c. They alone then, have the right to teach whHt is revealed, 
 to declare what is the written or unwritten word: they alone al«o have atwayi 
 bren iu possession of the exercise of it. No other ecclesiastics have cverurw- 
 tuided to it, w hatever have bfl«ii their rank, their dignity, and learning. Thef 
 
 tfiay he contnlted and beard ; it is even proper this should be done, and it always 
 hn been done; lor tbay form th« council of the biihopa, and their eroditioo ac- 
 
 a aired by long study, tlirows light upon the discussions. But as they have not 
 le plentitude of the priesthood, they are not meiubers of the eminent body that 
 has succeeded the college of the apostles, and with it received the promises.** 
 Vol. I. pp. 168, 169. 
 
 So then, to quote his words, as found on p. lOR, "Theopinwia 
 adopted by the majority of the bishops are for all an infallible rule of 
 foith !*• That is, "I believe in the holy Catholic church." 
 
 But the priesthood are sworn "to interpret the scriptures according 
 to the unanimous consent of the fathers." And if they do not, the 
 people that believe them are innocent ! ! But how can they unless 
 they eiamine all these fathers! And what living man has read theae 
 135 folios, with or without much eare? In what a predicament is the 
 eonseienee and faith of this people ! Here is a task, which ! say, 
 never was, or can be, performed by man. The bishop can only filial 
 his oath by teaching what the Catholic church teaches. We have our 
 Old and New Testament without the apocrypha. They have the bible, 
 the apocrypha, and 135 folios. Let us now compare the Roman and 
 Protestant rules and interpretations ! Both rules, for the sake of argu- 
 ment, be it observed, need interpretation. But it so happens, that 
 a Protestant bishop, and a Roman Catholic bishop, are equally fallible, 
 my opponent being judge. As the stream, theh, cannot rise above the 
 fountain, botli interpretations are fallible. Are we not equal ! 
 
 Where do you find an infallible expositor of the bible 1 says the 
 Roman Catholic. I answer. Where do you find an infallible exposi- 
 tor of these volumes! You have a more difficult task, and no better 
 help, than we. The Protestants say that God can speak as intelligibhr 
 as the pope, and that he is as benevolently disposed as any priesthood. 
 He does not require an infallible expositor; he is his own exp4.sitor. 
 His Spirit is the spirit of knowledge and eloquence, and can si.'^k 
 intelligibly to every listener. As well might we say, that he wlo 
 made Uie eye cannot see, as that he who gave man mind and speech ean- 
 not address cleariy and intelligibly that mind of which he is the author . 
 I ask the Romanist, however, on his own principles, where is his in* 
 fallible expositor of these 135 volumes ! I request a categorical ansT'sr. 
 
 Bishop P. A general council, or the pope, with the acquie6i:ai.6a 
 of the church at large. 
 
 Ma. C. How do we approach — ^where shall we find this coonci! 1 
 It has not met for two hundred and seventy-five years. How can they, 
 therefore, settle a point between the bishop and me! Every age has 
 its enors and divisions. Every individual has his doubts. Ought 
 there not to be a general council eternally in session ! If, then, there 
 IS none — no infallible expositor extant ; wherein is the Romanist, with 
 all his proud assumption, superior to the Protestant! It was three 
 hundred and twenty-five years from Christ before the first general 
 council ; and it is two hundred and seventy-five years since the last 
 general council of Trent ; and the church has been $ix hundred t/ean, 
 at two periods, without an infallible expositor! To show the equality 
 of the two parties, suppose a Jew were converted to Christianity. 
 Suppose he had heard of just two sects of Christians ; all the rest 
 being annihilated, but the Roman Catholic and the Protestant. Ho 
 has read the New Testameut. He wishes to join the church. He 
 goes to the Roman Catholic bishop, and says : " I see two churches, 
 
 Q 
 

 im 
 
 mrnkkTE OK THK 
 
 ■OMAN CTATIIOLIC RJSUGION. 
 
 183 
 
 II 
 
 a- 
 
 i ' 
 
 •iff: I don*! 1mm whieli to Jolii. I md thM thcro it but one trn* 
 lAiwIi.'' Wb«t do«t llw WtlMf wifOiHl ! •• «if , j^ owfjit to jam 
 our clionsli.*' Tlw Jew biIch, " Vinir reiraom, sirl for th« Protestant 
 also sayt, I ought to join his church." The bishoo shows him J^teen 
 HMrit ^tJke trueehurtk. He says, " Eead the Bible, and see if these 
 mila are not eharMsteristie of ut ; and thoa judge for yourself." Ha 
 iida Ibtaa laarks involfo the principal part of the New Testament* 
 lie reada, bowever, and joins the church. Has he not df^cided thia 
 auestion by examining the holy scriptures 1 Has he not interpreted 
 iir hioiselt'l Is not the bishop so far a true Protestant ! or, baa ho 
 only becooie Proiaalaal for the purpoae of introducing this proselyte! 
 Theio ia uo gettiuf out of this diiioulty. I trust my good frieed will 
 not paaa it with a laugh, and a bold aaaertion, as usual. Has he not 
 in thia lOMMineed his own principlaB« and turned Protestant, for Iha 
 take of gaining the Jew 1 
 
 But, when the Jew has entered the church, and the bishop has told 
 bim he muat now believe as the church believes, for he cannot under- 
 ataud tba Bible : •' What !" responds the Jew ; **8ir, have I not deci- 
 ded the greataat 4|a«atioo to me in the universe I I believed in Jesus, 
 and 1 have found lAe 'ime tkurek by exercising my own judgment on 
 the teriptures ; and can I not now judge of minor questions I" May 
 I not again aay, that the two systems are perfectly equal I The eter^ 
 nal circle of vicious logic— you must believe the scriptures on the 
 authority of the church, then the church on the authority of the 
 aerif tares : oTt you muat aal at did the aforesaid Jew, on the ad vie* 
 of tlio biabop. There in aol a middle eourse. My learned antagonist 
 cannot show you a middle wa^. But I have not yet done with this great 
 tbama. 1 wiab to display in other attitudea, tbete two ** rulea of 
 imI." 
 
 And, first, I thai! aketcb the Protestant rule. Its attributea are 
 aeven. 1. Ji h impired, 3. // tt authoriiaiive. 3. It u inUMgibk* 
 4. Jf ft aioni/. 5. B u perpdual, %. M it mikoHc 7. M is pafeeL 
 We wail now prove tbit. 
 
 L It is inspired: for, ^^Jhfywtm of Gi>df** taya Paler, "^pdb m 
 ll<y men momd % iAe ifo/y ^'rt/." 
 
 5. Aniboiilatif e. ** The word that /apeak to yon, shall judge yon 
 in the last day," says the Lord from heaven. 
 
 3. Intelligible. To the Epbeaiaii eonverta be aaith, *' When yon 
 read, you may underatand my knowledpfo in the mystery of Christ.** 
 
 4. Moral. ** The word of the Lord is pura, lejoicing the heart." 
 & Perpetual. «* The word of the Lord endureth for ever; and thia 
 
 ia 'the word whieh baa been aaaiMMed to you aa glad tidings." 
 
 6. Oatbolic. ^ He that is of God, beareth God^t word."' " Preach 
 the word." ** Preach the gospel to every creatare." 
 
 7* Perfect. ^ From a child thou hast known the holy acripturea, 
 mMek mm Me la wmkt Ikee wim to wakmiumJ** '^ All scripture given by 
 inspiration of God, is profitable for doctrine, for correction, for instruct 
 lion in righteousness, thonm^khfumiaked to every good wtfrV^ 
 
 All Christendom assents to this. My opponent admits the bible to 
 be inspired. His rule makes his church a sect; for only a part be- 
 lieve in his traditions. All ebristiana admit our rule of the bible. 
 
 It it |>ei/ed. Such is tbe Protestant rule. Now for the Romanist 
 rule ! The bible being a part of the Roman Catholic rule, is such 
 
 only aa expbiiied by the apocrypha, tbe traditions of the fatbera, tba 
 decfeea and caaoaa of cooaeila, or in the handa of bishops s ao com* 
 pletely humanized, aa to lose all its peculinr attributes, and is made 
 to partake of all the characters of the mediums, through which it ia 
 given to that people ; and, therefore, of the i» hole Roman Catholic 
 rule, the attributes are just the opposite of those seven of the P«k 
 teatant*8. 
 
 I. It is uninspired : consequently, being human, it can have do au- 
 thority over the conscience ; and this makes it 
 
 3. Unauthoritative. God alone is Lord of the conscifnce, and no 
 man can make a law to govern it. Hence a christian never can be 
 subordinate to any institution in rdigion, that wants the aanetioa of 
 divine authority. 
 
 3. Unintelligible. No man can erer find time to examine all the 
 creed of Roman Catholics. It is constantly accumulating ; and if any 
 one bad time to read it all, he never could understand iu 
 
 4. Immoral. This is that attribute h hich 1 witih spttrially to con- 
 sider. The other properties are all cons*»qurnces of those already no- 
 ticed. But this demands a candid and faithful examiuation. It givps 
 me no pleasure to dwell upon this theme, to expatiate on the immoral 
 character of the papistic rule of faith. Tis here, indeed, we find the 
 loot of the manifold corruptions of that institution ; and as I came hero 
 not to flatter, but to oppose error and defend truth, it is my duty con- 
 tcientiottsly and benevolently to expose the immoral tendencies of ifaia 
 tystem. 
 
 We have heard the gentleman say, be was glad of an opportunity to 
 discuss Catholicism, to make Protestants understand better its peculiar 
 doctrines. I wish, myself, to hear his expositions, to see if he can 
 make it more acceptable. Therefore, I shall endeavor to tell my story, 
 candidly and faithfully, and give him the opportunity he desires. This 
 is my first effort against Romanism. It was not of my selection or 
 aeeking, that I now appear before you : but as I am providentially, aa 
 I regard it, on this arena, I shall reveal to you some of the secreu of 
 that institution, which seeks to be rooted in this Protestant soil. I 
 aball attempt tliis in tbe best spirit: for I wish to see my opponent 
 honorably wipe from his escutcheon any stain of the kind, that I may 
 allege. On these points, 1 shall be happy to be assured that hia sys- 
 tem is better than we Protestants can now regard it. 
 
 I aay, then, the Roman Catholic mle of faith it immoral, Tbis, my 
 friciida, ia a serious and weighty charge, and deserves to be clearly and 
 fully sustained. Before displaying my proof, I will only premise, 
 that auricular confession, penance, the maas, absolution, and other 
 parta of the system will pass before us in this alle^tion, sustaining 
 which, will anticipate some of our labors on the other propositions. 
 
 I shall fin^t read from the Catechism of the council of Trent on the 
 power of the priesthood to forgive sin, according to their rule of faith* 
 Auricular confession, is by thia infallible council declared ^ necessary 
 
 for the remission of sins.** 
 
 ** The voice o» the priest," «yi the cooncil of Trent, who is Ic^imately con- 
 •tituted a minsster for the reiiiisaioD ofsios, is to be heard as that of Christ him- 
 ■elf, who said to tbe huue man, •• Son^ U of good cheer^ thy ein* ar«/>rgi9m 
 Hue:* Cat. Council of Trent, p. 180. 
 
 Penance by the same council is thus defined : 
 
 FuBM or FfiAAWCE. — ** Penance ii the channel through which the blood ol 
 
OITBATB UN TRB 
 
 MOMAN CATHOLIC RSUGION. 
 
 185 
 
 II 
 
 » 
 
 ' i 
 
 iteint coatnietwi ftAttr baptMoi.*' 
 kw. gmnted bf iIm pmm, m tliit{ 
 
 'inlo tlw tool, and' wai l ut away tlw : 
 Iii .ik '** TiM fbnB of tike abMltttioo or pwiliMi. 
 •• I Ai:iOi.fB 'THBB.'* Id. p. 111. 
 
 Tk« piiiwt aijrs posiUTolj, **Iabmhe ikeeJ**' UDlilie the antliority 
 nfiiiDi wlo tneiwtlr declared the leper clean, he claims leally and 
 tplf to abaolre. The couocil declares : 
 
 ** Uiili»e the authority g^iven to the priettt of the old law, to declare the leper 
 cleansed from his leorotjt the power with which the priests of the new law are 
 invested, is not simplj to declare that sins are forgiven, but ms fAe minis lert qf 
 God rmlly to mhtohefrom mmJ* Id. p. 182. 
 
 TIm fiiestSi theii, m ike mtmairrf tf God, really abmlve from mn 
 And MM iMkot still, the prinst is said not oolj to represent Christ 
 IM miaaiiliafffe the fimcttoiis of Jesus Christ: 
 
 H ,g^ ^1^ g^ -^ ^1^^ ttdniinittratioD of this sacrament, also denumd the •«?{• 
 ons atteulion of the iaithful. Humbled in spirit the sincere penitent casts him* 
 wlfdown at the feet of the priest, to testifr, by this his humble demeanor, that 
 he acfciKMrledfes the necessiity of eradicatmg pride, the root of all those enor- 
 mities which he now deplores. Jb the minister nfOod^ who sits in the tribunal 
 Sffemmme m hi* legiti.mate judge, he venerates the jKnccr mmd permm ^mtr Lord 
 «M« Ckriei; lor in the administration of this, as in that of the other sacraments, 
 ike^prieel represents the character, and discharges the functions ofJesm Christ,'* 
 Coun. Trent, p. 182^ 
 
 all sin: 
 
 erroneoDS, or howe* 
 does not remit" Id. p. 183. 
 
 to claim the most servile obodi^ 
 
 pisst 
 
 **If tiierefofv, we read in the pages of inspiration, of some who earnestly im- 
 l^orad the mercy of God, but implored it in vain, it is because they did not repent 
 iineerelv, and from their hearts. When we also meet in the sacred scriptures, 
 and ill the writings of the fathers, passages which seem to say that some sins ara 
 irremissible, we are to nnderstand such passages to mean, that it is very difficult 
 to obtain the pardon of then. A disease may oe said to be incurable, when the 
 patient loatbce the medkine that would accomplish his cure; and, in some sense, 
 ■Hale sins may be said to be irremissible, when the sinner rejects the grace of 
 {2od, the proper medicine of salvation." Id. ib. '* The penitent mtist submU 
 
 Again Roman Catholics teach that penance remits ; 
 ••lliere is no sin, however grievous, no crime, however < 
 ver frequently repealed, which penance doc 
 
 TIms is the proper groand on which 
 
 mm m wB' fmsts : 
 
 Mmmyio the judgment ^the priest who is the vicegerent of God." ib. p. 183. 
 "*' ' " ifess once a yeai 
 
 ling to ire canon of the council of Lateran, which begtm: Owmes, 
 
 Therefore, all must confess once a year. 
 "According to tl-.e canon of the council of I 
 Wtrimque sexut, it couimands all the ^ttifnl to confess their sins at least once ■ 
 
 |«r*" .Id. o, 193. 
 
 fiut this immoral law presumes farther yet. It changes the laws ol 
 God, and dtvideR sins into venial and mortal, and fixes the price. As 
 •very thing depends upon the authority of these allegata I have hitherto 
 fttoted ftom the catechism of the council of Trent,* I now introduce 
 une of the most popular of the saints of the modem church. This 
 taint Ligori was sainted bv saint Pius VII. that best of modem popes, 
 who restored the order of the Jesuits, and the ** Holv Inquisition.*' 
 Saint Ligori writes the moral theology of the churoh of Rome in some 
 eight or nine volumes : and so orthodox, that bis works are owned al- 
 iiflet hv every nriesL I quote from a synopsis of that system of which 
 we shall hereafler sfieak more particularly. We shall hereafter beat 
 the saint in his definitions of sins. 
 
 •*Thii is a mortal sin," sa^s Lirori, " which, i»ii account of its enormity, de- 
 •troji the grace and friendship ofGod, and deserves eternal punishment. It is 
 called mortal, because it deatroys the principle of spiritual life, which is habitual 
 grace, and kilU the soul. 
 
 • Sm Oateeliifiii, connetl of Trent, as rovissi bv John Hughes of nHaielphia, nriosi af 
 it. loin's chareh, pp. lia. t»3. *^ 
 
 Venial ^in is that which, on account of its levity, does not destroy the graoa 
 
 id friendship of God although itdimiaishes the lervor of charity, and deserves 
 a temporal punishment It is called venial, because the pnncipL- of the spiritoal 
 life, grace, beinr still sound, it affects the soul with languor, that is easily cured^ 
 tlM pardon of which is easily obtained." Ltgor. lib. v. n. 51. [Synopms, p. SO. 
 
 The Roman Catholic rule of faith erects a tribunal of confession un- 
 known in scripture, and commands all to come to it at least once a 
 Tear. It moreover institutes a new office called confessor, unknown 
 in the New Testament, and gives to him the office of a father, a phy- 
 sician, a teacher, and a judge. 
 
 " The ottices that a good confessor is bound to exercise," '* are four: namely, 
 those of Father, Physician, Teacher, and Judge" Ligor. Theol. T. viii. p. 7. 
 
 Tlie confessor forgives all sins on confession, even the sin against 
 the Holy Spirit: 
 
 "Thtre is no sin, however grievous, no crime however enormous, or however 
 frequently repeated, whkb penance does not remit." Cat. Conn. Trent, p. 183. 
 
 Fbnancb here means the " Tribunal of confession :" for this tri- 
 bunal is sometimes called simply ^^ confession,^'' **The sacrament of 
 confession :" at other times it is called the " tribunal of penance." 
 Sometimes simply ** Penance," and he who confesses is called " the 
 penitent." But satisfactions and penances are to be apportioned ac- 
 cording to the discretion of the priesL 
 
 nevertheless the confessor, for just reasons, can diminish the penances, provided 
 the penitent is affected with violent compunction, or if it be during the time of 
 a jubilee, or a plenary indulgence, and especially, if he labor under any infirmi 
 ly of body or mind. And lastly, (to be brief,) always whenever a prudent fear 
 IS entertained, lest the penitent would not perform penance due to his sins. 
 Such is the common doctrine taught by the doctors, with St. Thomas." Ligor. 
 Prax. Con. N. ii. 
 
 But Still worse: this immoral law or rale of faith repeals and annuls 
 certain positive divine laws. I have here two catechisms, published 
 Dy the authority of the church. They have both expunged wholly the 
 second commandment ; so that it should not stand in the way of pay- 
 ing reverence to images. [Time expired.] 
 
 Ha^past 10 o'clock. A, M. 
 Bishop Purcell rises— 
 
 If my friend, Mr. Campbell, has failed to establish against the 
 Catholic church, a single one of those propositions, which have been 
 to conspicuously before the public for the last two or three months, 
 and if I have established two or three of ihem against his own vague 
 theory, it is not for want of splendid abilities on his part, or the pos- 
 session of them on mine. The reason of his failure, is the inherent 
 weakness of the cause he advocates, as the trae secret of my success, 
 is to be found in the impenetrable, diamond strength and beauty of the 
 Institution, which, in an evil hour for his past glory as a controvereial- 
 ist, he volunteered to attack. He has this day (and again I thank him) 
 brought up, for discussion, the most important subject that can occupy 
 or engross the attention of this enlightened audience, viz. the rale of 
 faith. If fairly published, as I have every reason to believe this con* 
 troversy will be, it will send forth sound and useful information, 
 through the whole length and breadth of the land, upon a topic of the 
 most vital interest \ and I will, most joyfully, meet Mr. C. on that 
 
 Qd 
 
 24 
 
IflD' WBBATM ON VBS 
 
 f—ii i w if fbr I Imil with exvltation snch an opportnnitj of dispelliiifl 
 |in|liili!e and misunderstanding with regard to our real principlM* / 
 wiu give emiMgmieal answer* to ail ike questiom he hat propounded ; 
 mud, therefore, do I take up the aubj^ct he haa been pleaaed to touch. 
 1. He saya, the methoda of electing the pope are Tarious« Bnt lei 
 that paaa : the method ia nothing. It ia with his authority we are eon* 
 otiiied. He has watted much ume in building up a house of sand, to 
 ■Imiw how eaaily he eouki demoUtk It, by showing that the pope ia 
 not inJillible; whereas, I haTe repeatedly told him, that the Catholic 
 •iniieh hat nerer taught that the pope*8 infallibility was an article of 
 Mtlii Metpoke of some more or leas important but unessential points of 
 ii ili ii W ' of opinion between Dominicans and Jesuits. But he should 
 hate ehown, to establish the proposition before this house, that these or* 
 dcrs disagree with regard to articles of faith. Their minor differences are 
 nothing, so long as they implicitly believe every article of faith revealed 
 
 af aiiiifhty God and proposed for iheir belief by the church, which they 
 I hear, and which they regard as the " pillar and ground of the 
 truth." This is the solid and immovable foundation of their union. 
 The case of the cup given to, or withheld from, the laity, as I have 
 •lieady told him, is one merely of discipline. It may now be gtvea, 
 m eol, at the pop may see cause. In the time of Gelasius, it waa 
 pKMwmioed tacrilege to deny the cup to the laity ; and, if all my 
 Mareit had lead church history, I need not tell them, it Was because 
 «f the leaven of Manicheism still working in pretended communi- 
 cants, who forbade the use of wine as coming from the evil principle. No 
 Ikiher of the church, however, said, that the consecration of the eucharis- 
 tic species, is a mere * separation,' or the change only a • moral change.' 
 I itfy him to the proof. Mr. C. says : " So far Protestants and Cath- 
 olics are eoual ;" for, that they have also a grand generic principla 
 vi« : that the Bible is their rule of faith, and the Bible alone. Now, 
 Itake up the organ of a numerous body of christians, the Christian 
 Filladium, and I meet him here with a strong argument in my favor, 
 npon this principle. Speaking of Mr. Campbell, (f mean by this no per- 
 Bomslily, that can be thought invidious : 1 intend none) the editor ob- 
 •iffes : •* He freonently speaks of * ike Bible alone ,' but this is not a 
 tem used generally by the brethren in New England, and Is taught 
 by few elegit Mr. C. We never knew our brethren to boast of walk- 
 ing by the Bible ahne. This wi nsoARO as an irkor, i.rr who wili. 
 fwcLAiii IT. We say, give us the Bible, but not alone. Let ijs have 
 * Goo, A Christ, a Spirit, ahd a ministrt accompanving it. There 
 was a law given to the Jews, and also a testimony, which they were 
 bonnd to observe. The teaiimonv nf the inspired prophdi did not con' 
 irmHei the law, but taught and enforced the same truths. The ancients 
 were t© walk by the law and the testimony^ which was called a word, 
 (Is. viii. 20.) What this *• redoubtable captain" of rrform says, of 
 sailing sometimes under this flag and sometimes under that, is per- 
 fectly applicable ti^-" but I will not read further : this is sufficient 
 for ay argnment. The Bible alone Is not the rule of faith to all Pro- 
 fcalaitla. Quakers, Mormons, &c., think not so, as I have already 
 proved. And, now, Mr. Campbell can do infinitely more with the in- 
 lelJects of his hearers, than the pope has ever done with those of Cath- 
 olics, if he can persuade them that the differences between Protestants, 
 who all take the Bible for their rule of faith, are ifm* mfw/im/. !• the 
 
 S01EA.H OATHOLK! KWJ6I0N. 1^ 
 
 divinity of.Christ an important or an unimportant article 1 One claM 
 of Bible-reading Protestants admit the doctrine; another reject it wUli 
 horror: pretty unity this! The Episcopalians believe in the necessity 
 «f submission to the bishoos; and eloquently have I heard the author- 
 ity of the church advocated by them. They do not say that the church 
 IS infallible, and in this they are inconsistent. But will they allow that 
 the difference between them and Presbyterians is unimportant ? Is the 
 doctrine of a hell, with endless torments there for the wicked, unim- 
 poitantl One class of Bible-readers hold this also, and another class 
 leject it! Alas ! for the declaration of my friend, that he can prove 
 whatever he states to be a fact. I strongly suspect a man who makm 
 such asseverations. 
 
 He is loud in his panegyrics on the unity of Protestants in essential 
 ■cts of worship: they pray together, &c. If this were even so, of 
 what avail is it, when they differ in essential doctrines. But, is not my 
 friend aware, that this is by no means a fact 1 And what reliance can 
 we place on his statements of what occurred centuries ago, when here, 
 at home, and refutation nigh at hand, he makes such curious assertions ! 
 
 Did not a case occur, last summer, within sixty miles of Cincinnati, 
 at Dayton, when the Episcopalian minister, the Rev. Mr. Allen, for- 
 bade the Rev. Mr. Peahody, a Unitarian clergj^man, of irreproachable 
 morals and great amiableness of disposition, to preach in his church ! 
 Did not the bishop reprimand the vestry, and Episcopalian minister, 
 for having previously allowed him to preach there! I think the 
 Episcopalian bishop acted, in this respect, as he should have done. I 
 blame none of the parties concerned, but I state an incontrovertible 
 fact. Again, at Pottsville, Pennsylvania, another case occurred. A 
 Unitarian minister died there, and the Episcopal clergyman refused to 
 say prayers at his funeral, because of his religious belief. What, 
 then, becomes of my friend's vague and general assertion, abont unity 
 among Protestants in essential acts of worship 1 Will he, then, ex- 
 communicate the Unitarian I and, if he once begin, how many more 
 sects must be put out of the pale \ 
 
 Let him shew me that a Jesuit or a Dominican, a Franciscan, or a 
 Benedictine, or an Augustinian ever refused to let a member of either 
 of these orders preach in his church, or to say prayere over a corpse 
 because of the difference of orderel Such a thing has never been heard 
 of; so that we have unity, and Protestants have none, neither in doc- 
 trine, nor in worship; neither in essentials nor in non-essentials, them- 
 selves being judges. ^ * « , ,. 
 
 If my hearers wish for a practical and convincing proof of Catholic 
 uniformity of faith, thev have only to enquire of the emigrants from 
 the various countries of Europe, who have fled from the oppression of 
 their rulers st home, to find free and happy homes amongst us here, 
 and I promise them that however awkward their appearance, however 
 broken their language, or uncouth their apparel, they will all answsr 
 the same on doctrinal points. America, Asia, Europe, Africa, New 
 Holland, our faith Is every where the same, like our God and our 
 church. Who can make void the prayer of Christ for unity ! Who 
 can disturb the church's union t As well might he pretend to make 
 the harmony of heaven to sleep. Is this union exemplified among 
 Protestants f The very contrary Is true. And whyt Because the 
 apple of discord is flung among them. The seedsof disorganisation aad 
 

 DEBARS oif mv 
 
 i 
 
 iwii w^ tiiliikly sown in Protefltantism from the Mrtk Seet» nraltipl v 
 wiliNNit •iMl--4iMir lame it Legion. My friend wnt quite witty, about 
 III* lift fm im m B foliot which, iccording to him, a Catholic moat 
 fetd to imierstand the doetrinea of his chnrch. But doea he not p«r- 
 etite that a Proteetant ia infinitely worae oflfl For he mast read fan* 
 fiia|ea In which the fathers of the church have not written — Hehrew, 
 Synae, Arabic; aa well as those in which the fathera did write, Greek, 
 l^tln, lee. before he can form a prudent judgment that he has aeqnired 
 the ekmentartf knowledie necessary to understand his rule tf faith. 
 Me Biiiat read folios of commentitora and learned dissertations oa 
 •ontroTened texts. He mnat decide for hiraaelf what books of acrip- 
 tin are genuine and what apocrypha], or spurious. For this pnrpoev 
 h9 iBuat tipiofe the aichives of the ancient churches, all the dusty 
 tiBM and ponderous folios of the ecclesiastical writers, to ascertain 
 what books were lefarded in their times aa canonical, and what as un- 
 eanonieal. And when he has, if ever, accomplished this herculean 
 task, he will be no better off than when he began, for he can never re- 
 ly on the testimony of tho^ fathers, whom he considera just as liable 
 to have been mistaken as himself! Thus he can never be sure that ho 
 Msesses dijective truth, or the revealed will of God : he can never 
 be sure that he possesses subjective truth, that is, that he has a perfect 
 IniPwiMlp of what that will is. Thus he can never be sore that his 
 flit nf faith is Inspired, authoritative, perfect. I call on my karttea 
 frimi lo jmwe ike mtOtmj if tkit argumeni, if he can. And if he can- 
 mol,Ih«¥ii clearly ettiblished the contrary of his proposition, viz: 
 •latl*POlestanis are not uniform in their faith, neither can they be. Now 
 inaik the difference on the Catholic side of the argument. We go for 
 the JMIIf Mil IraA'ii'iM— the whole word of God, written and nnwrit^ 
 ten. Wt tiko the Bible and the church ; Uie Bible and the testimony. 
 This nniero for us assurance doubly sure. We beliere that Christ 
 •stayithed a church on earth which he made the guardian of the divine 
 it|N!aite. From that church, that divinely appointed guardian we receive 
 the heavenly gift. She vouches for its accuracy, and on her testimony 
 we reeelTe the Bible, as an inspired, authoritatife, perpetual. Catholic, 
 perfect, and, tiplained by her, intelligible volume. But as we know 
 on the anthonty of St. John xviii. 31, 25, that the world itself could not, 
 as he thought, contain all that Christ spoke, and he always spoka 
 to instnet or edifv— as we know that Peter •• with many other wortk^ 
 Ml recorded in the Acts of the A:|N»lles, convinced the Jews that 
 Jesia was the Messiah— as wo know moreover that St. Paul conf 
 nanded the Theaaalonians, 2d. Ep., 9d. ch., 14. ▼. to hold the im- 
 AlMfit whkh they had learned, whether % the word, or his episaes 
 iii OTiiied Timothy to hold the form of sound words which be had 
 Mid firom him, in faith ; we therefore place the word of God, so eoi^ 
 wyed to ns, by the side of Scripture, and in this, as 1 have Jost shews, 
 ^e Scripture itself is our guide. Our traditions do not, like those sf 
 the Pharisees whom Christ reproached, make the Scripture void. Wf 
 helitft Mthing contrary to the Bibl&— nothing that the Bible does not 
 clearly apprOfve. The same God that rcTealcd the Bible, established 
 the church. They do not contradict, they mutually sustain each other. 
 I did not say that the pope is inspired, that the council is inspired, or 
 that the church Is inspired; bnt 1 do say that the church, whether as> 
 — ""^ in a fBoofil council, or diffused throughoat the world, is as 
 
 BOMAH CATBOUC MKLIOION. 189 
 
 certainly assisted hy the Holy Ghost to teach all truth, as the ev«D» 
 gelists and other writers of the Holy Scriptures were inspired by the 
 •aaw divine Spirit to wbitc the speeiai truthi which they were commio' 
 momi to reeeo/ to particular churches, and on particular occasions. A 
 Catholic is under no necessity of knowing every thing that has been 
 ever said or done by the doctors and fathers of the church, before he 
 can understand what are the articles of bis faith. He knows that, in 
 regard to doctrine they unanimously agree in receiving the Apostles' 
 creed. Hence he is sore that, ** 1 believe in God, the Father Almighty, 
 Creator of Heaven and Earth*' is an article of faith which none of these 
 Others contradict, and he has the same absolute certainty with regard 
 to all the remaining articles, viz : I believe in Jesus Christ, in the 
 Holy Ghost, the holy Catholic church, the communion of saints, the 
 forgiveness of sins. So far for the doctrine ; besides which articles 
 he IS in the habitual state of mind to believe implicitly whatever God 
 has revealed and proposed by his church. Then for the natural and 
 moral law he has an equally comprehensive epitome, vii : the Ten 
 commandments of God ; with respect to which he knows that there 
 has never been the slightest difference of opinion. 
 
 Neither the pope, nor a general council, nor the whole church has 
 now, or OTcr had, the power to change, or suppress an article of the 
 creed, or a precept of the decalogue. Is there any thing vague in 
 this! any thing indistinct! anything unscriptural or anliscriptural ! 
 
 My friend does not hear, or correctly state what I say. I did not 
 say that the body ruled the head. It would be a contradiction in terms ; 
 because the body supposes a head and a heart, which eyery body 
 ought to have, 'fhere must be no schism in the body. He has made 
 some yery eloquent observations on the impossibility of determining 
 where the infallibility resides, whether in the head or in the body or 
 both &c. in the pope, or in a general council, and argues that we may 
 thereibre as well have none at all. Now, let me illustrate this point. 
 Has not my friend a mind and one too highly endowed by nature 1 
 Well, does he know where it resides! Is it in his head; or in his 
 heart, or in his stomach I (a laugh) Does he know where to put his 
 hand upon it! There are yarious theories upon this subject among 
 scientific men. But who denies that he has a mind ! I repeat, who 
 denies the existence of mind ! Does it affect this belief to say that 
 we cannot tell whether it is here or there — in the body or around it ! So 
 it is with the heavenly mind that guides the church. Even if we did 
 not know its exact place of residence, we could easily judge of its 
 influence and guidance by its effects. But we do know where it evin- 
 ces its presence, as I have more than once explained to the gentleman. 
 
 What has Adrian's opinion to do with the question! It was but his 
 personal, private opinion, and no article of faith. Whether this opi- 
 nion was right, or wrong, all I said stands good. The witty conceit 
 of my friend was a sophistry suggested by the pa^n oracles, who 
 eoiild respond in such ambiguous tenns, that it mignt be interpreted 
 in fayor of the oracle's foreknowledge according to the event ; for 
 instance a king going out to battle would be told, " You will destroy a 
 great city ;" but whether it was his own, or his enemies', depended on 
 tlie issue. The idea is borrowed from Pagan craft. 
 
 [I am now admonished to dilate a little longer on the decision of 
 the council of Constance with regard to the * Cfup.' 1 have frequently. 
 
I< 
 
 !• iny iilefecMiise with parsoiia nol Catlioiie, heard this difficnity pT<^ 
 
 ri ; md I am fiid of th« ofyportonilf f mme fi»r allt of explainiof 
 Why does tlw Roman Catholio church withhold tho eiip froa 
 the laity f In the early ages* the holy eaehariat was comnmiiicated to 
 the fiutnful under either species | oHen under both. When the eucha« 
 fist was carried, as it was the pttdice of primitive chrislians to carry 
 it with them in all their sojournings, by sea and land, as wine was ex- 
 poaed to sour in tropical climes, tliey consequently carried, on theii 
 traTels, only the species of Bread. Did they believe that die virtue 
 of tht mwhaiial was thus destroyed I No. 'Fhey knew with St. Paul 
 that Jesus Christ, rising from the dead, dieth no mora. Death shall 
 10 longer have dominion over him. They knew therefore that his 
 iish was living flesh, not dead and bloodless ; and that, consequent* 
 ly, in the eucharist, under either species the flesh and blood are in- 
 itpaiably united. 
 
 What was the roaton of the abolition of the practice T When the 
 deaeiMi diatributed the consecrated elements to the faithful, there 
 were aiany infirm, decrepit, and palsied communicants, from whoee 
 trMUhling hands, or lips, it was feared, as it had frequently occurred, 
 the cup might fall, and thus might the holy elements be trodden under 
 foot and profaned. A contrary usage was therefore instituted, and it 
 has alnce prevailed. The dislike, indeed ditwust, which many persons 
 fM for wine, the un%villingness to drink from a chalice which had 
 Mated from mouth to mouth, he, Im;. are causes which, in all pro- 
 Dahllity, prevent a change in the present disciplinary regulation, bill 
 the church could to morrow reestablish the abolished practice of giv- 
 ing the cup to the laior, if she please. She did so, since the rro> 
 lestant reformation, in favor of the Bohemians. 
 
 The subject of oalhs and perjuries was quoted. Any man in hia 
 ■ilier aenaes must discern that my friend has mistaken the meaninff 
 of the pope. Examine the circumstances. He supposes the truth 
 th.t the chureh neiAer can nor does require any thine contrary to 
 itrnUm and judgment, and truth, which, in all her standards, and in all 
 mm catechisms, she teaches as the essential conditions, for every law- 
 fnl oath. Again, she every where teaches^ with St. Paul, that an oathi 
 coratrary to conscience, is a sin. 
 
 The pope knew that the church could not— that God himself, who 
 founded her as the pillar and gronnd of the truth, could not be pleas- 
 ed with sin, or served by a lie. Let me illustrate this matter and 
 set it at r«8t for ever. An infidel, swears that he will write against 
 the utility of the bible, deny its apthenticity, undermine its evidences, 
 east it into the flames. Is his owi an act of religion I Is it not rather 
 a peijury I Again— a man swi^aQji to take away the life of another 
 man, justly or unjustly, he boots not. Is not his oath a perjury, 
 lather than an oath, since it is maninttly against the uiiliiy of socie- 
 lY and, eottisouently, against the order of God I It ia remarkable trjM 
 tlia pope sp3dikii too of an oath against the ieaeking tf ike faiken^ 
 "eonlfiainstituta patrum," than whose sermons against all grievous 
 Crimea, and in an especial manner, against peijury, nothing can ha 
 conceived more denunciatory, more truly terrific. Is it fair— 4s it, lo- 
 gical, to draw from the premises a voncfusion so vituperative t 
 
 To force a shadow of unifonnitv, the thirty-nine articles were drawn 
 up by the church of England, aod the clergy of that church, by a cruel 
 tyranny over conscience, compelled to swear to them. Many eminent 
 
 BOMAH OATBOUG SXLI6I0X. 
 
 lU 
 
 divines of thai church have taught that the articles are not to Ip 
 Bworn to with unqualified assent, but that the mental reservation, « aa 
 I understand them," is allowed; while the sovereign lord, or lordess, 
 of church and state, and many no less eminent divines, have insistea 
 that the articles must be sworn to with the most entire and unquahfi- 
 ed submission. Is this, in my friend's estimation, the reverence due 
 to the solemnity of an oath! or is it not taking the holy name in 
 vain! Catholic priests in this country take no oath. I took none 
 The first oath I took was one of allegiance to the United States, ah 
 iurinff all foreign potentates, &c., as the oath is couched, rhis oal^ 
 1 took in the hands of Judges John and Thomas Buchanan, in FreA» 
 erick, Maryland. I also took an oath, several years afterwards, when 
 consecrated a bishop, to testify my belief in and faithful adherence to 
 ihe doctrines of my church. This was a further confirmauon of tho 
 oath which I had previously taken. This is no immorality. 
 
 We are again referred to a change in the ^doctrine'* of the church. 
 •»The second council of the Lateran," so says Mr. C. ''forbade mt 
 marriage of the clergy^ whereas nothing was more common m the Jirai 
 eight centuries than for priests to marry J*^ Now, in the first place, 
 celibacy is no part of Catholic doctrine, at all. It is not an article 
 of faith. The pope could, to-morrow, change that law, and allow 
 the Roman Catholic clergy, as the Greek priests do, to marry. It is 
 one of the bright features of our ministry, that the time and means. 
 
 I' 
 
 18 a ffooa, wise, ana nooie iumhuhuu. x.ii.*^««^ »••« — — r-j ' " ~ , 
 command of God. But we hold that it is more perfect, or as St. Paul 
 says, " IT IS GOOD " for the " Priests of the Lamb " to abstain. God, 
 for whose sake they make the sacrifice, will sustain them through temp- 
 tation. Keep thyself chaste, says St. Paul to Timothy, 1st Ep. ch. 
 ▼. 21. Again, St. John says: "And I heard a voice from heaven, aa 
 the voice of harpers harping on their harps, and they sung as it were 
 a new canticle, before the throne, and before the four living creatures 
 and the ancients ; and no man could say the canticle, but those hun- 
 dred and forty-four thousand, who were purchased from the earth. 
 These are they who were not defiled with women: for they are vir- 
 gins. These follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were 
 purchased from among men, the first-fruits to God and to t,he Lamb : 
 and in their moulh there was found no lie; for they are without spot 
 before the throne of God." What does all this mean ! Is it not evi- 
 dently the highest eulogy that could be pronounced on the state to 
 which their holy functions, as priests of the spotless Victim of 
 our altars, daily summon the clergy of our church ! I glory m this 
 feature of our discipline. Death before dishonor to a virginal pneat. 
 
 hood • It.* 
 
 In the second place it is a wide mistake, to say that nothing n'aa 
 more common, for the first six hundred years, than for pnests to mar. 
 If. The general council of Nice enforced, by a special enactment, 
 the celibacy of the clergy. This was the first general council of the 
 Catholic church; and the practice, it enforced, was no innovation. 
 Tlie councils of Neo Caesarea and Ancyra had, several yeare previ- 
 ously, made laws to tliis effect for priests and deacons. How waa 
 the circumstance introduced into the council of Nice ! Several bish- 
 ops, priests and deacons, had been married before their ordination. It 
 
 • . • ' 
 
 I 
 
Wti proposed to compel those who hmd not ▼olonlarily returned to 
 Kfigleness of life, to separate from their wires. Paphnurius, an un- 
 mnied bishop, in conseqaence oftheabaseof the Manichcans, wlio 
 coisidered marriage as coming from the evil principle, dissuaded the 
 cmmeil ftmn this oonr^, and so the bishops agreed, for all past mar- 
 liages. So wncrallj, however, was the celibacy of the Greek clergy 
 Hen established, that even Protestant historians — Mosheim, Ist toL 
 p. GSf— -complain of the melancholy, morose and unsocial institution, 
 in the second century. " The sensual man," says St. Paul, *• per- 
 ceiveth not the thinjrs that are of the Spirit of God, for it is foolhhntaa 
 Id Agm.** Ist Cor. ii. 14. But of the many curious things which my 
 ftimd has said, most unwittingly, in my &Tor, in the course of thii 
 debate, the most curious of all is that he should have, himself, in- 
 formed us, that for the first six hundred years, one half the canoni! 
 were occupied w ith the regulation of the clergy as to this affair of 
 eslibicy !! And why, if the clergy were allowed to marry! Is not 
 this, iidependently of the acts of these councils, which hare reached 
 US, irresistible proof of the care taken to obtain an unmarried, a pux« 
 clergy ! This is not immorality. 
 
 Confession Is not an immoral doctrine. It is a holy institution. 
 This I shall prove in due course of time. I agree with the Tenerable 
 liithop T«¥cni, the leaned author of the "Amicable Discussion," and 
 «f the '•Answer to Faber's Bifficulties of Romanism." Let my friend 
 hut study these pages with sincerity, and he, too, will become a Catho- 
 lic. How differeni the doctrine of the Catholic bishop of Strasburgh, 
 and of the Protestant bishop Onderdonk, of Philadelphia. The for- 
 mer shews cleariy how the most humble Catholic can have a divine 
 assurance for the truth of his religion; the latter, as I have myself 
 heard him declare, in St. James' church, Philadelphia, in the year 1832, 
 (amd his pastoral charse has been since published, and it will prove 
 what I here say,) teaches that not even the most learned Protestant 
 can ever be positively sure that either himself or his church is right! 
 And yet, St. Paul says, without faith it is impossible to please God. By 
 faith, he of course means true faith— and yet the Protestant bishop says 
 we never can be sure that we have that faith ! What becomes now of 
 the Protestant iiifallibllity, for which my friend so strenuously argued 
 to-day 1 The bishop's conclusion, on Protestant grounds, is more rea- 
 HMMiA/e than Mr. C.'s. As long as two pious and able men, of different 
 denominations, after all their efforts at truth, come to different and op- 
 |M»ite cMclusions uoon essential matiere, how can either say *»i am 
 rifht,** and " my neighbor is wrong?" What, I am asked, is the course 
 I would pursue with one who is not yet a christian, but anxious to be 
 instructed in the evidences of Christianity ! Why, the course 1 would 
 
 Cursuc is this : I would addreas Mi remon alone, as long as he has no 
 elter guide— convince him that the bible is, at least, authentic his- 
 toiy— and that he can rely upon the truth of the facte recorded in it, 
 ■■ he would on human testimony. I would introduce him to Jssua 
 Christ, whose character is there portrayed, whose miracles are there 
 Itemrded. I would tell him why he came on earth ; how he founded a 
 church to explain whatever was difficult in the bible, after having col- 
 lected all its books together, what no man could do for himself; how 
 Mestabllthed that church as the pillar and ground of -the truth, and 
 •sidof its fmtam, "He that heareth you, heareth mo;" and when I 
 
 BOMAIV CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 193 
 
 had convinced him of the authority of the church, I would not require 
 af him to abjure reason, but I would consign him to a higher and safer 
 guide, that church, herself the immaculate bride of Christ. 
 
 Now my friend's allusion to the Jew, brings a^story to my mind, 
 and I cannot answer his queries better than by relating it. A Protes- 
 tant and a Catholic clergyman walking together, met a Jewish Rabbi, 
 "Well, Solomon," says the Protestant minister, "here we three are 
 met, and all of different religions, which of us is right?" »*ril tell 
 thee," says the Israelite, " If the Messiah has not come, I am right; 
 if he has eome, the Catholic is right; but whether he has come or noL 
 ytw are wrong." (A laugh.)— [Time expires.] 
 
 Ha^patt 11 o'clock, A, M 
 Mr Campbell risei— 
 
 1 dhall respond to such matters as have a bearing on the question, ai 
 soon as I have finished my exposition of the immoral tendency of tlie 
 K'omish rule of faith. 
 
 That common cursing or damning, which offends our ears in all 
 the lanes and streete and highways, is authorized in the following 
 words : 
 
 **To carse insensible creatures, such as the wind, the rain, the years, the dayi 
 fire, &c., is no blasphemy, unless the one who curses, expressly connects then* 
 in relation to God, by saying, for instance, cursed be the fire of God, the brettd 
 of God,y &c. Ufror. Prax. Coof. N. 30. . 
 
 Again : the Roman Catholic rule of faith sanctions a violation of the 
 third commandment. 
 
 ; ;; ^**To curse the living is a mortal s:o, when it is 
 
 formal; that it, (as Caietan explains it,) when he who curses intends and wishes 
 a grievous evil to befall the one be curses: but it is no mortal sin to curse the 
 living, when the curse pronounced is merely material; that is, when it is pro- 
 noun<:ed without any evil intention. And why is it not a mortal sin? — because 
 be who curses a living; man does not always intend to curse the soul, or to de- 
 spise its substance, in which, in an especial manner, the imag^e of God shines 
 forth, but he curses the man without considering, or reflecting, about bis soul, 
 and therefore, in cursing him he does not commit a grievous sin." Id. ib. 29. 
 
 License is given to violate, in some way or other, every precept of 
 the Decalogue. The Sabbath as a divine institution is thus set aside: 
 
 "As to the obligation of hearing 
 
 the Holy TmNG," (which is the popish epithet for attending mass,) " let the 
 penitent be questioned in regard to whether he has omitted that HoLY THING?" 
 (to attend mass.) *• As to senile works, let him be asked huw long he has 
 worked? and what kind of work he did? for, according to the doctors generally, 
 those who work two hours are excused from grievous sin; nay, other doctors 
 allow more, especially if the labor be light, or if there be some more notable 
 reason. Let him also be asked, why he labored; whether it was the custom ot 
 the place, or whether it was from necessity? Because poverty can excuse from 
 iin in working on the Sabbath ; as the poor are generally excused, who, if they 
 do not labor on the Sabbath, cannot support themselves or tlieir ftuuilies; as they 
 also are excused who sew upon the Sabbath, because they cannot do it on other 
 dtt>s." Id. ib. N. 32, 33. [Synopsis, pp. 52. 53. 
 
 ** Merchandising, aud the selling of goods at auction on the Sundays, is, on ac- 
 count of its being the general custom, altogether lawful." " Buying and selling 
 p)ods on the Lord's day and on festival days, are certainly forbidden by the canon- 
 ical law — but where the contrary custom prevails, it is excusable." Id. ib. N. 293. 
 [Synopsis, p. 192. 
 
 — ■ ■ ' ' ■ ** He who performs any servile 
 
 work on the Lord^s day, or on a festival day, let him do penance three days on 
 bread and water. If any one break the fasts prescribed oy the church, let hira 
 do penance on bread ana water twenty days." — [Synopsis, p. 115. 
 
 R 13 
 
 I 
 
 ^ 
 
IM 
 
 OMBATM m THB 
 
 •* Th§pt^ has thi rifcht and Hm^fmmr to decree, thai the sameHfieation o/tM 
 LoRO*s DAf , shuU Ofi(y emlinue mjho hotirg, and that serviU workt may U 
 iam on tmat Dlf.** Iil. ib. [Sjnopsii, p. 188. 
 
 Custom, indeed, is fast becoi]iiii|, as St. Li^rori teaches, an excuse 
 for any thing, 'llie traditions of fathers, the xanons of councils, the 
 deeiwt of popes — ^all wear away by the attrition of custom. Hence, in 
 a Eoman Cainolic population, pure and unmixed, there is a degree of 
 frosiiiess of immorality, that Romanists themselves could not endure 
 in Protestant countries. Even the morals of New Orleans could not 
 he endured in Cincinnati. There, it is custom to go to mass in tlie 
 morning, to ra ister at noon, and to go to the theatre in the evening on 
 the Lord's day. This is indeed, the custom, or something very like 
 it, in all Roman Catholic countries. 
 
 On stealing, in general the casuist directs as follows : 
 
 — _ '• 111 respect to the tif vtiitb cuiiuiiuiiiiuieiit,*' says the Mint, 
 
 •'let the confrasor mk the penitent if he hug stolen any thing? and from whom. 
 wkethcr ilwiiifroni oneperaon, or froiinlifteretit personal whether he was alone, 
 or with others, and whether it was once or oftener ? Because, if at each time 
 he stole a considerable amount, at each time he sinned mortally. But on the 
 eoiitraiy,if at each time he stole a small amount, then be did not sin grievously, 
 unlett tne articles stolen came to a considerable aniouni ; provided, however, that 
 in the beginning, he had not the intention of »traling to a large amount; but 
 when the amount Elreatly stolen has become considerable, although he did not 
 •in rrievouslv, yet be is bound under a grievons sin, to restitution; at least, as to 
 Ihelast portions that he stole by which the amount became considerable. It is 
 to be observed. Iiowever, that a larger sum is required to constitute a heavj- 
 amount in small thefta, and more is required if the things are stolen from difler- 
 tnt persons, than if they were stolen trom the same person; hence, it is said, that 
 II •mall thefts, which are made atditt'erent times, double the sum is required to 
 COMtitate what is to be considered a large amount. And if a considerable time 
 intert cue between the thefts, for instance, two months then the theft probably 
 does not amount ti a grievous sin." I J. ib. H. 42. 
 
 On stealing to pay masses : 
 
 —— -—-^-— —-———-— ---^—-----— " If the person is unknown," continues the 
 •aint, '* from whom another has stolen, the penitent is obliged to restitution. 
 •ither by having masses said, or by bestowing alms on the poor, or by uiakiug 
 peaeats for pious places,*' by which the saint means churches, nunneries, &c.; 
 **and if th« penon himself is poor, he can retain the amount stolen for the use 
 of his family: But if the person on whom the theft has been couimitted, is 
 known, to him the restitution is to be made; wherefore, it is wonderful, indeed, 
 that there are to be fdund so many confessors so ignorant, that, although they 
 Inow who the creditor is, enjoin upon the penitent, that, of the stolen goods, 
 which they ou§ht to restore, thev bestow alms, or have masses said. It is to be 
 observed, that if any one takes the property of another, or retains it, under the 
 
 E resumption, that if'^he were to ask it of the owner, he would willingly give it to 
 iiil«he ought not to be obliged to make restitution.*' Id. ib. N. 44. 
 Thus we see theft can be made available to the behoof of priesli in 
 saying masses— what they ought to say, and by the old canons, ar« 
 Iwiid to say eraiia* 
 On l^ng. There is a way of making lying no lying : 
 
 ** Relatively to the ninth commandment, of popery the 
 
 Mgiith, the saint proceeds aa follows: — ** In regard to the reparation of the char- 
 acter of a person, if the fault of which he has been accused, is false, he who 
 de&mei him is bound to retract. But if the fault is true, the defamation that is 
 
 E ought to be looked upon in the most favorable light that it can be wilhattt 
 : let the penitent say, for example, [by way of excuse,] " I %va8 tieceived, 
 sd.** Others also adniit that he can emtivocate, by saying. / lied, since every 
 •in is a lie, as the scripture says. Again, by an <>9utvoca/ton, he may say * I only 
 made this up in my head,' since all words which proceed from the iiii:d mny bt 
 ■aid to rome from the head ; since the head is taken for the mind." Id ib. N 46. 
 [SynO'psk, p. 56. 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC BSU6ION. 
 
 195 
 
 TTie difference between insulting or dishonoring one's pareLts and 
 a spihtnal father, bishop or pastor: 
 
 *• He who curses his parents, let him do penance, on bread and water, forty 
 days. He who insults his parents, three years. If any one rebel against his 
 bi»hop, pastor, aud father, let him do penaiice in a monastery, during his whole 
 life." — [Synopis. p. 116. 
 
 Rules given to confessors: 
 
 ** The saint continues: "The confessor 
 ought to be extremely cautious how he hears the confession of women, and ha 
 should particularly bear in mind what is said in the holy congregation of bishops, 
 21, Jan. 1610. •* Confessors should not, without necessity, hear the con/essiont 
 of women after dusk, or before ivnlight.'* In regard to the prudence of a con- 
 fessor, he ought, in general, rather to be rigid with young women in the confes- 
 sional than bland; neither ought he to allow them to come to him before confes- 
 sion to converse with him; much less should he allow them to kiss his hands. It 
 is also imprudent for the confessor to let his eyes wander after his female peni- 
 tents, and to gaie upon them as they are retiring from confession. The confes- 
 sor should never receive presents from his female penitents; and he should be 
 particularlv careful not to visit them at their houses, except in case of severe ilU 
 ness; nor snould he visit them then, unless he be sent for. In this case he should 
 be very cautious in what manner he hears their confessions; therefore the door 
 should be left open, and he should sit in a place where he can be seen by others, 
 and he should never fix his eyes upon the face of his penitent; especially if they 
 be spiritual persons, in regard to whom, the danger of attraction is greater. The 
 venerable father Sertorius Capotus sayB,that the devil, in order to unite spiritu- 
 al persons together, always makes use of the pretext of virtue, that, being mu- 
 tually alfected bv these virtues, the passion may pass from their virtues over to 
 their persons. Hence, says St. Augustin, according to St. Thonms, confessors, 
 in hearing the confessions of spiritual women, ought to'be brief and rigid ; neither 
 are they the less to be guarded against on account of their being holy; for the 
 more holy they are, the more they attract." And he adds, "that such persons 
 are not aware that the devil does not, at first, lance his poisoned arrows, but 
 those only which touch but lightly and thereby increase the affection. Hence it 
 happens, that such persons do not conduct themselves as they did at first, like 
 angels, but as if they were clothed with flesh. But, on the contrary, they mutu- 
 ally eye one another, and their minds are captivated with the soft and tender ex 
 pressions which pass between them, aud which still seem to them to proceed from 
 the first fervors of their devotion: hence they soon begin to long for each other's 
 company; and thta, be concludes, * the spiritual devotion is converted into car- 
 nal. And, indeed, O, how many priests, who before were innocent, have, on ac- 
 count of these attractions, which began in the spirit, lost both God and their 
 •oul!* " Id. ib. N. 119. 
 
 The saint proceeds: "Moreover, the confessor ought not to be so fond of 
 hearing^ the confessions of women, as to be induced thereby to refuse to bear the 
 confessions of men. O, how wretched it is to see so many confessors, who spend 
 the greater part of the day in hearinr the confessions of certain religious wom- 
 en, who are called Bizocas," (a kinu of secular nuns,) " and when they after- 
 wards see men or married women coming to confession to them, overwhelmed 
 in the cares and troubles of life, and who can hardly spare time to leave their 
 homes, or business, how wretched it is to see these confessors dismiss them, say- 
 ing, */ have something else to attend to: go to some other confessor" hence it 
 happens, that, not finding any other confessor to whom to confess, they live du> 
 ring months and years without the sacraments, and without God!" Id. ib. N. 
 120. [Synopsis, p. 78. 
 
 The Romanist rule of faith both in word and deed places the Virgin 
 Mary above Christ, in the religious homage of the chu:ch. 
 
 " Nuns," says the saint, " ought to 
 hare a s|)ecial devotion towards St. Joseph, towards tfieir guardian angel, and 
 their tutelary saint, and principally towards St. Michael, the universal patron of 
 all the faithful, but above all towards the roost holy Virgin Mary, who is called by 
 the church our life and our hope ; for it is morally impossible for a soul to advance 
 much in perfection, without a particular and a certain tender devotion towards 
 the most holy mother of God.*' Id. ib. N. 171. 
 
 i 
 
IM 
 
 IMSW.AT'B OM TUB 
 
 «i 
 
 It, 
 
 t>"4 
 ,1 
 
 Our Ufe and our kope /** Ttiese words are io Protestant faitb and 
 Dibk propriety due to the Lord alone.— We cannot tiave two ittw»; and 
 tiro lioiiea; and if Mary is our life and hope, the Lord Jesu;* is not 
 I before alluded to this person under the Roman name of a being call 
 ed ** the mother of God ;'* which my opponent, as his manner is, served 
 op rhetorically, as if to produce a sympathy in favor of the superstitious 
 Yonoimtioo of his party. He had not, however, a Roman Catholic 
 audience. I meant no disrespect to any person. 1 know that the more 
 imielll|pDt Romanists discard the phrase as too gross and unauthorized. 
 TiiOM ta 00 being in the universe, say they, who ought to be called 
 lie mMer of Bodi 1 had in my eye at the moment some wretched de* 
 signs in some Roman churches, a scandal to any christian people : a 
 ■ort of family group, in which there is the picture of a venerable old 
 man, said to represent the Father of the universe-next an old woman, 
 the image of the Virgin Mary, and between them the picture of the 
 **ii% SUdf Jesus." It has disgusted the more intelligent Romanists. 
 lliit 6liiily of divinities is much mor^i in the style of the Pantheon, or 
 the poetry of Hesiod, than in the spirit, or letter, or taste of Christianity. 
 While on this subject we shall hear the moral theology of the church 
 on the use of images; and, first, of the use of the virgin Mary ^s image 
 
 ** Let him. who is in the hsibit of btaspheiiiiii<^, be advi^trd to make the sigu ol 
 th« crom [f] ten or fifteen times a day, upon the g^round with his tongue: and 
 thrice every morning:, to say to the most blessed Virgin: * O, my Lordess! give 
 OM patience.* " Id. ib. N. 16. Synop^iB, pp. 44, 45. 
 
 ** Patly to visit the most holy sacraiuent, and the imare of the most holy Mary, 
 to her of them the grace of pergeverance." Id. ib. NT 14. 
 
 '*0 my Lordess, give me patience!" Is not this idolatry 1 To beg 
 of the image of the virgin the grace of perseverance ! ! ! No wonder 
 that these mlks find it expedient to expunge the second commandment, 
 which savs, "Thou shah not worship an image" — no, "Thou shalt 
 not bow down to it." fiut we shall hear the directions given concern- 
 ing the divine mother : 
 
 " The saint now proceeds to give instruction to the pa- 
 nth priest bow to lead his flock in the way of ** salvation." ** Let hint be watch- 
 ful,** savi he, ** to render his flock »tu'tioiis in their devotion towanis the Virgin 
 Mary, by declaring to thetn how merciful this DIVIN£ MOTHER is in succor- 
 ing Ihoiie who are dewtut to her." Id. c. x. N. 216. ** Therefore," continues 
 the Mint. **let him intimate to them, that they daily recite, in conmion with tht ir 
 lamilies, fiv« decades of the Rosarv; that they last upon Saturday, and celebrate 
 Movanat vpon the festivals of our fjordess (nostrae Domina?.) Lastly, and above 
 •II, let the parish priest intimate to his flock, that they become accustomed ofti n 
 Io commend themselves to GotJ, begging of him holy perseverance through the 
 a«rits of Jesus Christ and tf Mary." Id. ib. 
 
 ** A certain image of tne 
 Eadc«mer,** so says the saint, **once upon a certain occasion, spoke to the ven- 
 erable brother Bernard of Corlion, who hegged of the tmmg€ to let hiui know 
 whetber it wished him to learn to read? and the cruci/ix anmotred^ * What wil 
 it avail thee to learn to read? What are books to tiiee? 1 am tby book,— this is 
 cnoueb for thee.** Id. ib. N. t20. 
 
 •• Now, that this is the very kind of reading that papists, or at least, those who 
 wbh to be saints, are addicted to, let us turn tu the great Bernard, and hear 
 what he says on the subject of such books. This saint, speaking of the Romish 
 churches, exclaims, *♦ There is so great, and such an astonishinj^ variety of dif- 
 ierent figures (imagea) presented on all sides, to the view, that the people prefer 
 rfsadjng upon t^he marble stones, than reading in books, and k> spend the whole 
 day m wondering a^ these things, rather than in meditating upon the Law of 
 p^d.** Bernard, Apol. p. 992. The same saint says, ** The bishops excite the 
 lliifciftoii of flt emmd W^l'fdtd people by eotpotai ommmmts, because Ihev cannot 
 fk U hffiin$mt ^d. tti- The saint does not mean that tbeir devotion is ex- 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 197 
 
 :itcd by such shows, for just before, he said, that these carnal minded peopi* 
 'preferred spending the whole day in wondering at these thing?, rather thaa 
 to be meditating on the law of Gocf." He could have meant nothing else there- 
 fore, than that these splendid images were placed in the churches under the 
 PRETEMCE of exciting dovotion, while the real object was, that the ** foolish 
 people," (as he calls them,) " might BESTOW A GIFT." Id. ib. •* O Crux ave, 
 spcs unica!" ** Hail, O Cross, our only hope!" as exclaims the Romish church 
 in her " Brevlary." 
 
 ■ ' *' Besides the little images of 
 
 Christ crucified, and of the Blessed Virgin," continues the saint, "which tha 
 
 Iiriest ought to be careful to place near the sick person, if it can be done, let 
 lini aUo place before his eyes large images of the Mother of God, and the Re- 
 deemer, tnat the sick man, turn which way he will, may see them and commend 
 himself to them." Id. ib. N. 235. 
 
 So much for this lesson on the morality of the Romanist rule of 
 faith. On these matters we have not time to comment. For those 
 who think they need a comment, my worthy friend knows how to 
 manage the cause admirably ! His talents suit this exigency. He is 
 fluent in all the dogmas of Catholicism. To these he has devoted 
 many years and is a good judge of a certain class of human nature. 
 He knows the power of a laugh — ^an anecdote — a sigh — a complimeni 
 — a picture — ^and, above all, he knows how much it weighs, with one 
 class, to say, with a triumphant air, " There's logic for you !" ** what 
 an argument is that !" " I have proved it now !" " this is sound logic !" 
 "my friend Mr. C. feels it — it is the badness of his cause— my cause 
 is so good, so ancient, so venerable, so holy, so catholic !" &c. &c. I 
 sny, in this sort of rhetoric, my learned opponent is an adept. It has 
 only one fault, it is too luscious sometimes, and he lays it .on rather 
 thick, to stick long upon the audience. He is performing his part 
 nobly ! For myself, I regard all this as a grave, serious, scriptural and 
 rational discussion ; I expect the good feelings of my audience, of 
 which I am already conscious, only by addressing myself to their un- 
 derstanding, and in the cool argumentative dignity of reason, fact, and 
 argument. But really, no man, in my knowledge, could sustain the 
 Romanist cause better than my learned and ingenious respondent ; and 
 if he fails, Roman Catholicism in the West need not look for an able' 
 defendant. 
 
 MjT friend has admitted the seven methods of electing popes, but 
 says it is no matter how they are chosen. Americans ! How would you 
 relish such doctrine in respect to your governors, judges, and presi- 
 dents 1 If some city or county in this state should elect a governor 
 for the whole state, would it make no difierence to you ! Should your 
 chief magistrate be elected by a mob, by a party, or by force, or brib* 
 ery, would you say it matters not — the virtue is in the office, no matter 
 how the incumbent has come into it? ! 
 
 The *^ Palladium*' and ** Baptist Banner" prove as much against 
 Protestantism, and for Catholicism, as they deal in ribaldry and per- 
 sonal abuse. If these are arguments on which the bishop relies, they 
 may be gosd authority for him ; but, for myself, I need no such logic, 
 and my cause disdains such auxiliaries. He has great use for Unita- 
 rians also, and sometimes for Universalists, and even Quakers ; but 
 in his last argument he has mistaken the point. These all appeal, in 
 their controversies, to the bible alone, just as the Jansenists and Jesu- 
 its, thp Dominicans, Bernardites, Benedictines, Franciscans, &c. &c. 
 whili; they hate disliked and opposed one another, all acknowledge the 
 po^ as supreme head of the church, the judge of controversies. 
 
 I 
 
 ■pi"'! 
 

 CltW wi l l M 
 
 D'SBAXJS un TIES 
 
 I 111 glad that lie has at last admitted that the Jansenists in all eseen 
 tials are Catholics, and that they are repudiated only for a difference 
 of opinion. But where now are his objections against Du Pin ! He 
 objeeled to htm that he was a Jansenist, as if a difference in opinion 
 dtttroys the eredibilitv of a witness — a principle that forever roots up 
 all history; for no one upon this principle is authentic, unless he be a 
 Rdniui Catholic ; nor then, unless a Jesuit, and this is equivalent to 
 saying, that no one is authentic unless he hear witness for him. — [Time 
 •xpiml.] 
 
 Twelve o'clock, M, 
 Bishop 'Puecell risei — 
 
 I shall begin where my friend left off. I am charged with appeal- 
 iif til tiie feelinf, and not to the reason of my hearers : ^ my rhetoric 
 la tmi luscious ; 1 lay it on too thick ; it won't stick," &c. &c. Well ! 
 if my rfietoffic is too luscious, that of my friend is too insipid ; if 
 mine Is too thick, his is too thin. The fallacy it would coyer, grins 
 through the flimsy gossamer : the weakest eyes can see it beneath 
 the veil. But I trust, I need not offer any vindication of my argu- 
 ments to this assembly. They are able, and, I thank God, willing, 
 too, to judge for themselves. They see that all, or the main force of 
 my friend consists of two renegade pneats. Smith and Du Pin. 
 These are the two pillars of his logic. The published volume will 
 ■hew how superior and how honest are mine. In the oral debate, I ad« 
 diws the judgment, without neglecting the heart : and if I did pre- 
 Wll my argument chiefly to the former, it would be because of an 
 lAeervatiou of the celebrated John Randolph, in the Virginia conven- 
 tion for altering the constitution of the state. Speaking of my learn- 
 ed opponent, who was a delegate to that convention, Randolph said, 
 •• He had politics in his heart and religion in his head." 1 cannot 
 ▼ouch for the authenticity of the anecdote, I have just heard it. I hope 
 It was not founded in lact^— [Mr. C. explained— Mr. Randolph had 
 never said so to him.] I proceed to more important matters. I did 
 mot pretend to say that an informal election had any force. But that 
 inj form on which the entire church agreed, according to the majority 
 
 Srinciple governiiif our own elections, was valid. It was Christ who 
 failed the constitution of our church. I do not much like to see any 
 eoiii|arison instituted between it and the works of human legislators. 
 But if closely examined, it will he found to contain the excellencies, 
 while it excludes the defects of the most popular forms of civil go- 
 vernment. We have a perfect feature of the Republican Model, in 
 this, that with us, merit is the grand criterion of fitness for office. No 
 favoritism is allowed. No matter how humble the parentage or ob- 
 aouie the kindred of the individual, virtue, talent and common sense 
 me enve, sooner, or later, to elevate him to any situation he may be 
 mtfiaed to accepL The church often selects her chief officers, as 
 God did David, " from the flocks of sheep," Ps. 7. viu. 70. from the 
 humblest walks of life. It is to this system, of giving merit a fair 
 Jeld, that we are indebted for the brightest ornaments in civil so- 
 ciety, a Curran, chosen for his intelligent blue eye, his wit and 
 sidiuess, from among his playmates, when "M«y thai won, laughed^ 
 mmi ik^ thai lost cheated ;''" as is very often the case. 
 
 To finish the conversion of tlie Jew, where I discontinued my ar^ 
 gument, at half past eleven, oo different principles. He knew tliere 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC KELI6I0N. 
 
 199 
 
 was a synacrogue which the people were bound to consuU, by the ex- 
 press command of God, and that it was no servility, it was blasphem> 
 against God and often visited with the heaviest penalties, even m this 
 life, to oppose its authority, or to contradict its teaching. He is 
 therefore prepared to hear of authority in religion— in fact, the syna- 
 gogue was a type of the church, its introduction— as the church is 
 the fulfilment and the consummation of the teaching and testimony 
 of the LAW. The Jew having had reason to question the truth of his 
 leligion, for which, he remembers he had often read, a better was to 
 be substituted, and aware that the time marked so distinctly by the 
 prophets for the coming of the Messiah, has long ago past, he looks 
 for any religious society, that can illustrate the splendid prophecies of 
 Isaiah, respecting the catholicity, or universal diffusion and the dura- 
 tion of the church, from the time of the crucified one. He has only 
 to open his eyes to see that the Catholic church extends the dominion . 
 of Christ, the limits of his spiritual kingdom from sea, to sea. Then 
 he looks at the other denominations. He finds none of the qualities of 
 such a kingdom, in them. They are not Catholic, they are not old, 
 they are not uniform. They are the contrary of all this. This is enough 
 for him. He uses his reason, thus far, alone, because he is not yet 
 baptized. Like the wise men, he follows the light of that star, until 
 he reaches Jerusalem — when its light fails him, there, as the star did 
 them, he asks, as they did, of authority, where the truth may be found, 
 and reason and revelation concur to shew it to him in the church. 
 He consigns himself to its guidance, he becomes a Catholic— and 
 reason tells him, every day, he has done right. He lives and he dies 
 without a doubt of the soundness of his decision, for this blessed 
 security is the distinctive character of the Cathoiic. All other creeds 
 based on the essential maxim of their fallibility, leave the human 
 mind, in life and death, a prey to the most torturing anxiety. But I 
 have not done with this very instructive incident in the discussion. 
 If the Jew witnesses an occasional scandal in the church, he calls to 
 mind how Adam fell in Eden, and Aaron fell, at the foot of the smok- 
 ing Sinai, and Heli and his Sons, the priests, fell in Silo, and that 
 Christ said not, reject a religion, whose ministers have, personally, 
 transgressed, but on the contrary, that he said : " Upon the chair of 
 MosiS have sitten the Scribes and the Pharisees, Ml things therefore, 
 whatsoever they shall say to youy observe ye and do ye .• but according to 
 heir works, do ye not^ for they say and do not. Thus truth is not 
 ibandoned ; if the bad liver meets his merited doom. 
 
 I now come to all that farrago of the Renegade Smithh translation 
 af Liguori. My friend says the Catholic rule is immoral. He ap- 
 proached this topic with so much reluctance, and with so many strug- 
 gles, that, conscious of his having nothing true to produce agains 
 Catholic morality, I was going to say to him, "speak out." But I didn't, 
 and now he has said all. Well, what does it amount to] Why to 
 this, that the Catholic church is blackened, but beautiful (Nigra sum, 
 sed formosa^ as the spouse says in the canticle). She is, though 
 misrepresented, fair, though slandered, pure. If a Catholic were 
 always what his church teaches, and the sacraments she is appointed 
 by Christ to minister, give him grace, to be, he would be an orna- 
 ment to human nature, as well as to his faith. But " the Catholic 
 rule is immoral and dispenses with the law of God." No ; it enfor- 
 ces dreadful penalties here and eternal tonnents hereafter, for a viola- 
 
200 
 
 tMEMATm ON rai 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC BBLIGION. 
 
 201 
 
 I 
 
 tioii of the law. If her ministers make any mitigation of her strict 
 code of morals in consequence of the arduous duties, weak health, 
 or oliMf circumstances of her children, she teaches them, that if thii 
 alloMd motives of such mitigation do not, indeed, exist, it is not 
 *'^i faithful dispensation, but a cruel dissipation" of the heavenly or- 
 dinances; that the priest has no power but what he derives from God, 
 ami that God will iniallibly inflict all the rigors of his vengeance for 
 its ahiBO, as well on the priest, as on the people. If all the priests 
 and hishopa in the world were to pronounce the words of absolution 
 over a sinner, in whose heart God did not see true sorrow for his fault, 
 with a sincere resolution to sin no more, the absolution would be null 
 and void, and the horrid crime of sacrilege superadded to the previous 
 guilt of the transgressor. The hope of the hypocrite shall perish, 
 •ays the scripture. We have a maxim, which must make the pope 
 and bishops and priests, as well as the laity tremble, when we 
 approach the dread tribunal of penance. It is this : ** a good confes- 
 Sioi is the key of Heaven, a bad one is the key of Hell.*' How ad- 
 minhle are the lessons read today from Liguon — and they were faith- 
 fully rendered for a sinister motive — and how well does the Catholic 
 church describe the perils and the obligations of their sacred office to 
 her ministers ! Hence it is that we assume our religious robes and hear 
 confessions in the open church, where are also our confessionals, 
 under the eyes of all. If Liguori were the immoral man that Smith 
 would make Mm, would he have given such lessons to the clergy 
 and pointed out so impressively the dangerous consequences of a single 
 indiseretioii, or the slightest familiarity on the occasions to which he 
 was adverting I " I made a covenant with my eyes, says Job, xxxi. 1- 
 that I wonld not so much as think of a virgin ; for what part should 
 God from above have in me, and what inheritance the Almighty from 
 on high I" Liguori says ; •♦ He that does any servile work on the 
 Lord's day, let him do penance, three days, on bread and water." To 
 what does my friend object in this, on the score of immorality 1 Is 
 It the enforcing of the observance of the sabbath I Surely that is not 
 iinmoral. Is it to the severity of the penalty ? But did not God ordain 
 ™®J*>™ of death asainst the n}an who gathered a few sticks on the 
 mMth I Liguori allows work on the sabbath, on certain occasions.— 
 So do we.— Doctors work on the sa>bath, without sin. So do printers, 
 IhoMfh I think not always, especiahV when they publish piout lies 
 "•^'Sfi*^® Catholics. ** Which of you, says Chnst, whose ox, or his 
 ■•■• Mis mto a pit, will not quickly dra.ir him out, on the sabbath. 
 If a house is on fir© on the sabbath, will not the Presbyterian boll 
 img and the citizens haul out the hose ana engines? Will we not 
 •jywjj"^ New Orleans' profanity on the sab- 
 
 nS i?^^' ^®y *™ "°**** Catholics, many of t.Vem are infidels and 
 riowijiita, who there break the sabbath— and the «" sin, though bad 
 fioigli, 18 not so bad as theirs, who, as it has been don© elsewhere. 
 Meet in gan|8 for for^ries and other such frauds, o.^ the sabbath, 
 uuatom IS fast becoming an excuse for every thinff."— . Vo where doet 
 Mgmn m ikig, I call for the original. Let Mr. C. i ^reduce his 
 ^Tiyft!^- 1/ he cannot, what wTu this community th^nlc of him I 
 
 ItdI?n!rcTfi{^^/^'^P^r**^^^^^^ Maryibove .Christ." 
 It «oes no such a thmg. It says •• enrsed be every Goddess w, "^rship. 
 
 1:. iw »k '^^f°«'! "Aoiwr to wkmn Aimor." We know and pw 
 rasa that the mother has no power but what she derives from the H>n 
 
 To Him, we say : " have mercy on us ;" to her " pray for us. Mr, 
 C. says, " No being in the universe should be called mother of God, 
 Was not Christ God I And does not the gospel call Mary, his mo- 
 ther ! Did not one hundred and fifty eight bishops so call her, m the 
 ▼ear 431, in the council of Ephesusl Who is the intelligent UUtw- 
 lie, as my opponent states, who is ashamed of what the gospel and 
 the church sanction 1 I ask who is he? Let us have his name. 
 The streets of Ephesus rung with loud applause when the decision of 
 the council was announced, vindicating the name and dignity ot the 
 mother of God, and the words M«/>»* 0i3T«»oc were echoed from mouth to 
 mouth, mingled with the most joyful and exulting cries of the populace, 
 to the consternation of Nestorianism. »Son! behold thy mother! were a- 
 mong the last words spoken by the expiring Savior on the cross. W ill my 
 opponent call them ill timed at that hour, when all was consummated . 
 
 "The Catholic rule makes a distinction between mortal and venial 
 •ins." And why should it noti Does not the bible, which propor- 
 tions the penalty to the offence, does not the civil law, which punish- 
 es not every offence alike, does not common sense point out the dis- 
 tinction? Is it as great a sin for a child to tell a little, wAt/e lie to 
 excuse itself, as for a son to whet the razor and cut his father s throat I 
 I am sensible that a lie is never innoc^t. Nor do I excuse it under 
 any circumstances— but it is of various shades of guilt, according to 
 the circumstances when it is uttered. I know of national legislatures 
 which give a bribe of forty pounds per annum to an apostate priest, to 
 tempt him by filthy lucre to act against his conscience— and which 
 not so many years ago, encouraffed a son to turn Protestant, by em- 
 powering him to take his father^s estate and turn both his aged pa- 
 rents and with them his brothers and sisters, if they persisted m be- 
 imr Catholics, out of doors, and it would be easy for me to prove that 
 this law was passed by many Protestant ministers, and that it was not 
 oner scrupulous in point of morality in papistical distinction between 
 mortal and venial sins ; but let us have more of Smith s translation ot 
 Liguori, he says * let stolen money be paid for masses ? No ; he says 
 first, let the rightful owner be hunted out by the penitent thief, and 
 to him let the restitution be made. If he can be no longer found, let 
 the money be given for masses, for his spiritual benefit, or distributed, 
 for his sake, in alms to the poor, and what better use could be made 
 of it — what better counsel given ? . j * 
 
 Another proof of Catholic immorality is that we are bound to go 
 once a year to confession ! Where the immorality of this is, I cannot 
 conceive. Is it not good to be obliged to examine, at least, once a 
 vear, if not more frequently, the state of our consciences and to con- 
 fess ourselves sinners ? Is not this an admirable institution for the 
 acquiringr of the best kind of knowledge, the knowledge of oneself I 
 Is It not worthy of God ? Is it not God himself that instituted it 1 
 Did he not leave to his church, the power of binding and loosing trom 
 sin, when he said to his apostles, after having mysternusly breathed 
 upon them and given them the Holy Ghost, " Whose sins you shall 
 foreive, they are forgiven, and whose sins you shall retain, they are 
 retained : Whatever you shall bind on earth, it shall be bound m 
 Heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth, it shall be loosed in 
 Heaven." John xx. 23, 23. And my friend quoted St. 1 homas 
 Aquin, and St. Augustin, as well as Liguori, for the holy rules the 
 priest must observe, in hearing confessions. That establishes the im 
 ^ 26 
 
JmvMmm' 
 
 DEBATE 0?f THK 
 
 I 
 
 nt fact, that in the last century, and in the fourteenth, and as fai 
 mk as the £fth age, the practice of confession existed, as it does at 
 the present day. In every age from the time of Christ it has been 
 piictised, and eipedence has proved it the most effectual restraint 
 that relimon has ever imposed upon vice, on passion, and on human 
 ffiilty. Who can tell what crimes it has arrested 1 What virtue it has 
 ppjserved and purified 1 What restitutions, of reputation and of for- 
 tune it has caused to be made I How many sinners it has stopt in the 
 ilewn-hlll path to destruction 1 Voltaire and Chillingworth and a hun- 
 dred others, not Catholics, have pronounced the most splendid eulo- 
 gies on confession. These disinterested witnesses will furnish you 
 smple proof on this point. But my friend before he closed, uttered 
 one word, while he read from the catechism of the council of Trent 
 ••Jten^ aprice, ^c." for the forgiveness of sin. Now in the name of 
 tfiith, m the name of this community, I ask Mm for the proof, for 1 
 pronounce it absolutely false. 
 
 Mr. C. explained that he did not say it was done by the council of 
 
 imit. 
 
 He says that we have exalted the confessional to an equality with 
 the throne of gnuse. Well miffht ii be the footstool of that throne, 
 If Its pure principles were earned out. On the throne, or in the con- 
 fessional, 11 is the same God that pardons the penitent sinner.— [Time 
 expired.] *■ 
 
 Mr. Campbell rises 
 
 7%ree o* clock, P, M. 
 
 The gentleman challenged me this morning upon an important 
 point, vii. that Protestants cannot make an act of faith— that is, be 
 perfectly certain in their belief of the holy scriptures, or of Jesus Christ. 
 I accept the challenge. It now only remains for him to appoint the 
 ^me when, and the place where, and I will meet him on that point 
 But that is not the question for to-day. Let him not think to take me 
 off, by raisinff incidental and foreign questions. They may remove 
 the emmi of the audience for a while; but his time would have been 
 better spent in aniwering my allegations on the great question. 1 
 limve heard not one answer, as yet, to the question, " What gives gen- 
 eral councils their infallibility ?" and various other points of great 
 moment to his cause : to which he had better attend, than to propose 
 lew debates. I will remind him of another question which he had 
 better solve. ' ffow am a tkoumndfallibkB make one itifailible ? ' Do 
 "«yf *>y Meeting together, become infallible I or, by an ecclesiastic 
 combination, give out infallibility? This would have been more in- 
 structive than much of what the gentleman has given us. He obser 
 ved at one time that the Jansenists were a Roman Catholic sect. But 
 again, he says, that they are not Roman Catholics at all ! To pre- 
 serve the union of the chnrch, their plan is a very easy one. When 
 peraons dissent, cut them off. While Jansenists agree with the 
 mtjofity of the church, call them good Catholics : when they dissent 
 ■» they do in some very cardinal matters, call them heretics in the 
 bosoni of the church : but not cf it. But the gentleman's explana- 
 ^T r S® council of Trent will never satisfy Protestants. The coun- 
 cil of 1 rent at one session, had forty-eight bishops, forty-five of 
 whom were very ordinary men. They decided that the Apocrypha 
 and tlie Vulg;ite were authentic ; that the LaUn Vulgate is the true and 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC KELIGION. 
 
 203 
 
 MilY authentic copy, more authentic than the Greek original. These 
 mftereHTften b^^^ before amongst Romanists ; kit were 
 
 HnTadjudicated by the council of Trent The modern doctrine of 
 Catholics is, that a simple majority is infallible. "That the opt »^ 
 Jim^adoDted by the majority of the bishops are for an mfalhhle rule 
 Jf«?M " So Ustheiorth^ bishop of Strasburg; but the proof is 
 fn^her matten ^ow the pr Jsent dcJctrine is that twenty-fi^^^^^^^^^^ 
 ops, being the majority of forty-eight, are infallible. J.^^.^»"*^" °* ^ 
 maiorilvof a council, then, is the essence of infallibility. Father 
 p3 who writes the history of the council of Trent, a ^ood Catholic, 
 trS?v'sa?sT" beardless youths were sent to that council by the pope 
 t^oLiTmajorities for his measures-That the pope sent packed ju- 
 rieswhoTn every question were expected to support his measures. 
 So irovoked was the good Catholic with the aberrations of Trent, that 
 he LTemnW Tsseits that the bishops of Trent were « a pack of mcar- 
 n^t^tronl-'n^^ I quote 1 Jvery words. He v^ com^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 that the pope had hired and sent off young ^^^^Xf^th^e?^^^^^ 
 the empire to vote as he pleased to dictate. So much for the mtaiii 
 hilitv of oecumenical councils. . . 
 
 My Wend has pronounced |1°*'?? e"'"™'"™/ "P°" *« P?'^^^ 
 rinirt of the Roman priesthood, and has extolled the purity ol ceUfr- 
 fcvL essential to perfect holiness. That these pnests have not been 
 STmSate parities, half the decrees of ^ese vX-^f^^^^. 
 Half their legislation is about the specks and Flemishes ot this \ir 
 rin ori^s hood, as if they assembled for the purpose of hiding their 
 Ke ThTbishop quoted Rev. xiv. 4. and was not ashamed before 
 thraudience to apply it to marriage. 1 blushed for our audience, 
 and could not but be shocked with the freedom of attack »Poa the or- 
 dinance of God. Marriage is the oldest and most venerable institu- 
 rinn^n the Srv of man. God himself instituted and celebrated it, 
 on the flowerh7nks oTEden in the state of primeval innocence and 
 Wi» It waTthen and there said : " n i. n«*J<.»rf/- "- '» ^ -^- 
 I beUevewith Paul that marriage is honorable '" ««• *™ ^T^w 
 ritv "earth knows no purer, no holier state than *^» "V''"/? ';";r; , 
 aZi'c™[w I tell— or dare i tell before this assembly, but half that I 
 ^^veTeStS o"thaT^?Jn state of which ^y ^f "J-peTceli^ 
 
 p™, U miy be convenient, I prefer a single «t««e '^"t *»S^' 
 LJiLnr female who for the sake of greater punty prefers celiDacy, 
 l^\l tlTet' the^el; first principle! of both rdigion^nd morjai^ ; 
 and is as for out of the tract of truth and reason, as he that would cut 
 off his own hands to prevent him from plunder. ^^^^ man 
 
 Tt i« essential, in my opinion, that the bishop be a "jarned man. 
 TnJ Jd ^h^ Holy Spirit by Paul has decreed, that he should be the 
 
 tion, he should have all a chrisUan's feelings and experience. 
 
 e 
 
 
 
•hmli kiow ©xperimentally the domeatic aneetions anii relationt. 
 Me MhmW study human nature in the bosom of his family. There la 
 a class of feelings, which no gentleman, of single life, can compre- 
 Jiend ; or in which he can sympathise : and these are essential to that 
 intimacy with all classes, sexes and duties, which his relations to the 
 church often impose on him. If he does not know how to rule a sin- 
 gle family, and to enter into all its customs and feelincrs with practi- 
 cal skill, how can he take care of the church of G^ I So arguet 
 Paul : and so must I reason and judge. 
 
 Next to his remarks against marriage, as necessarily less pure than 
 celibacy; I was sorry to hear the gentleman defending "white lies," 
 and « little sins." When I think of the nature of sin, and the holy 
 and imniiitable laws of God, against whom it is committed, I see no 
 difference between one sin and another. There may be great and lit- 
 tle sins as to their temjioral relations and Consequences : but when HE " 
 arainst whom every sin is committed, and that divine and holy law, 
 which IS violated in the least offence, is considered ; we must say with 
 the apostle James, " He that offendeth in one point is guilty of all." 
 It may be the veriest peccadillo on earth : but in Heaven's account, 
 one sin would ruin a world, as it has done, for he that keeps the whole 
 law and yet offends In the least point, is guilty of all. He that said, 
 not a jot or titll© of his law shall fall to the ground— He that maffni- 
 lied his law and made it honorable, will suffer no person to add to-- 
 to mlMtoael from, to change or to violate a single point with impunity. 
 I wish the gentleman would come up to the point and defend hii 
 Catholic rule, that I might fully deliver myself on this subject; but 1 
 have as vet given a very few instances of the impurities and immoral- 
 iiiea of hit rule of faith. But from the specimen given, I would ask, 
 does it not teach the worship of creatures and the images of creatures— 
 does it not countenance idolatry 1 Does it not command the invo- 
 ealion of the spirita of dead men and women ! Are not multi- 
 tudes of saints invoked, of whose abode in heaven there Is no witness 
 on earth I Does it not pay religious homage to beings, who by nature 
 are not God ! Does it not blaspheme the name of God, and his apos- 
 tles and prophets, who are in heaven ! And, may I not add— does it 
 not annul the laws of God, and by a system of unparalleled casuistry 
 set aiide every moral obligation I 
 
 Th* maeman represented confession as a christian duty. So it is : 
 bnt not aifffsilareonfession; not confession to a priest. Leo I. opened the 
 flood-gates of impurity by ordering and substituting private confession 
 to a pnest; for public confession before the whole congregation. Tho 
 j^mtrenelimentapinst the rapid declensions of public morals In the 
 iili tiiitwy, was broken down by their dispensing with public for 
 **I!5L^ "ST***"* ^^ aensible historians, or, rather, commentatore 
 on iiiiloffa iiola, a^iee that there was no greater check to flaffitious 
 iiiiiwee than bringing the defaulter before the whole congregaUon ; and 
 this being commuted into auricular confession, inundated the church 
 with unparalleled impurities and immoralities. " Confess your faults 
 one to another," is not, whisper your faults into theeare of your priest* 
 Why do not the priests, on this their proof, confess their faults to the 
 people 1— c«ii/eM to one another! But this authorizes no man, no woman 
 to degrade themselves by falling upon their knees before an old or youna 
 liachelor, and telling to him all their impure and sinful thoughts, words 
 
 ItOSKAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 305 
 
 .» h. ronfeBsed The secrete of all hearte are his; and he has gra- 
 I'sl^asrurfdusAl;:, he will hear 0,e -k-tl^Tdlr U 
 Ud confessions of all who approach him 'hro-gh <*« r« ^«^"^g<^'J 
 Uieremore condescension or mercy in a Roman P"**' *»» " ^?^' 
 NoT my friends, there is no ear more ready to hear 'han his , and he 
 
 onl*? »n forgi»;. To snppose the contrary, »•«'»''«« *^°"y>/„tX 
 San institution, and argues consammate ignorance o*^ <5<«*- " '^ "^°''{ 
 S,mpTble ,rith thel^nius of the religion, ""djep-'g-"' '^,^»^\»^« 
 law and gospel. And with what propriety, modesty, piety, n«>e8 »"» 
 fcm,lM old and Toune, should mutter their sins and secrets inw the 
 
 ■"'The "wntl"^ objects to some of my reasonings. He sm »hat *• 
 
 1 he p"»'«"T ° l^Tiff „f sins I Does he wish me to tell the whole 
 
 t",^l Is Soffheprindplec early asserted in the penances already 
 
 reaZi Why Bx a Panose of <Ar« days for violating the^^abba'h, jnd 
 
 s^bfe r^z ^r • het"^:rn^ txz t 
 
 r,^ do'^nanw all his life! He who kills a common man does 
 pe"nan^ tCfea" ; but he who kills . priest must do penance 
 
 '*The ^ntman says there is no possibility of ««•-'-' P/f°" '^«' 
 . prU unless contfition be "»--• 1^11%" ^ ' ""co^lrUion m 
 S In order to receive the 'J^™"'^ "' "I^'^rhe have kSrition."-Id. ib. N. 
 JS-^ThTilnt'p o3ht^i„''L'U';£n"^f' .he 4U. chapter of the ,4lh .. 
 rion of the coun°il of Tren.:-I.l. ib [Sy^v>». p^lOS. , ^ 
 
 docirme of Luihtr, or Co^otn. or •l"*'^'*""*'"' "". „ articles of the church, oi 
 S'-^^-ro tr t:tZo:l^it1:^'^'^icLt^C%L whe«>n the, 
 f;t?^;rd Xch*hey™l?ubHribe with a greater har-aony... . perfect r»le 
 of Uieir faith and aclioos, that is the BlBLK. , p„^rt.iiU, whatsoever 
 
 "Tbe Bible. I say the Bible ""'X ',«.''''. 'lfS°"b°e ^ indab.uble c«.«- 
 
 LreJSrioV^'uirt.!.''^.^^^^^^^^^^^ -'i^- -' "-" •■«' "=-■•- 
 
 s 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 * L I 
 
DEBATE ON Till 
 
 ■naticd pramiiniitioii. I. for my part, after • long mad (at I wenly beli«v« ana 
 hope) iiiipartid March of the true wmy to «/ef7tiir fuvprnuM, do profeu plajolf 
 that I c|piii©t find anr rest for the sole of iiiy foot but upon this rock only. 
 
 I sm plainly, and with imne own eyes, that there are popei arainst popei, 
 WMUcilt against councili. some lathers agaiost others, the mine fathers ag^alnst 
 meniMlrea, a consent of &tbers of one age agaiost a consent of fathers of another 
 •fe, the church of one age against the church of another age: Traditive ioter- 
 pretotions of scripture are pretended, but there are few or none to be found: 
 m tradition but only of icripture can derive Itself from the fountain, but mar 
 be plainlj proved lo^be brought in. in such an agje after Christ, or that auch •« 
 •ge rt fHi not in. In a word, there is no sulficient cerlainiy but of scriptur« 
 jnlj, for any considerinr man to build upon. This, therefore, and this onU I 
 Mmmmm to belicfe: This I wiil profess, according to this I will live, and Tor 
 ttif If tlitre be occasion I will not only willingly, but even gladly, lose my life, 
 though I should be sorry thai chHstians should take it from me. 
 
 ••ftopoje me any thing out of this book, and require whether I believe or no. 
 iind^fisein It never •© incomprehensible to human reason. I will subscribe it with 
 hand and heart, as kiwwkg no demonstration can be ttronger than this, " God hath 
 WMitli^lore It IS true. ' In other things. I will take no man's liberty of iudr- 
 tiigltNli him; neither shall any man take mine from me. I will think no man 
 the worse man, nor the worse chrittian, I will love no man the less for direrine 
 in opinion from me. And what measure I mete to others. I expect from them 
 ■gwn. I am fully asinred thai God does not, and therefore men oiurht not to 
 imire any more of anv man than this, to believe the scripture to be Godi 
 
 VTmt^ ^'^T *"*** "^"'^ °^ **' "*^ "* "^® according to if- 
 
 .^ fliijriMii/ 3 o'clock, P. M 
 
 Bmmm Furckm. rises— 
 
 I UBjniftuiiif my opponent, to-day, though Tarious assertions, and 
 iwm endfsfora to establish a^inst the Catholic church, the charge of 
 mniorality. I said, that the trrace of penance was, in our estimation 
 to miwerfii^ that there is no sin which it may not efface by the merc^ 
 of God. This, Mr. C. says, is a proof of our immorality I If it be 
 immoial to lift a heart-broken penitent from the depths of despair, and 
 tell him there is hope m God, my friend is right. Catholics believe 
 that there is no sin which God cannot forgive to sorrowing man. One 
 drop of the infinitely precious blood which was shed for us on Calvarv 
 la more than sufficient to cancel the iniquities of a thousand worlds • 
 
 llilT ^'"' .wr ^'Jf' ^^i!** ^^^ ^^^'^ ^^^y »h^" ^ made as 
 white as snow." (Is. i. 18.) •* Come to me, all you that labor and 
 
 » Ufdeied," says Christ, "and I will refresh you." (Matt. xi. 28.) 
 
 .«S!.l *r o ®i l^l ^f ^S'P^"''® ^^""^^ «*" «" iirremissible sin, a sin 
 tgwitt the Holy Ghost" That sin, my friends, is indeed a deadly 
 one. 1 hat sin is, obstmately ie«istin|r the known truth, and final im- 
 pnitence, the almost inevitable consequence of sufferinr ourselves to 
 be MidM by religious prejudice, this tin is more common than 
 »»|.C»8 • too many) are willing to believe. They are in that waT 
 ijr which the scripture savs : " It utmeih to a man right ,• but the ends 
 Aereof ^ lo «fe«,/A.»' (l$rov. xvi. 38.) To such Chrisl solemnly dc- 
 *«• that " /% shall call upon him, and he will not heart and they 
 9Aali rfte m thetr «n." Such persons as these, find it easier to accuse 
 our church of a few riots in liome, or elsewhere, which all the power 
 of religion could not have prevented, (and the only wonder is that thev 
 lilrfk ***"*"" r'?'® frequently,) than to study her divine evidences, bj- 
 llJl- ^ my«tenou8 truths she proposes, and practise the holy lessons 
 •he enjoins. But I niust hasten to answer the multitude of hclercre- 
 ■ecus questions which my friend has proposed. 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC BKLIGION. 
 
 207 
 
 « What givesieneral councils their infallihility V' The power and 
 omnSc? of 6od : the Holy Ghost ab ding J!;^';^ ^'j^^^^^^^^^^ 
 days, until the consummation of the world.-" Can * thousand talU 
 Sres make one infalliblel" Yes ; and, according to y?J^ ^^^^^^ 
 in<r everv one of twelve fallibles made an infallible; for you allowed 
 'thS Z7wre aposUes were, individually, and of course cf^^^h. 
 
 ^fallible. And, if you need more homely ^""f^f ^^^^^ wlS^s' 
 that because one thread cannot keep a seventy-four to her moorings, 
 that a rble consisting of a thousand strong threads cannot do so 1 
 wl^^B^c^^^^^^^^^^ many can, humanly speaking: how much more 
 so when there is a divine promise : " f^^i^^^rT^Jll fj ^XJ 
 the gales of hell shall not prevail agmm you.'' (Mark xvi. If.) I never 
 Mid the ^nsenists were Roman Catholics. I objected to Du Pin from 
 Se very commencement of this controversy, on the ground of his be. 
 bg a Jansenist. The Jansenists have been condemned ^J the Popes. 
 
 nfnce, they lose no opportunity of '«s"ii^«| .^7v,t^%»?i^"e^ 
 their faults and suppressing their virtues. My friend, then, fo"owed 
 a notoriously treacherous |uide. when he trusted himse f ^„d his 
 cargo of nations about the popes, to such a l*^^™^;'^^" f^^^" ^^^^^^^^ 
 bid as the Jansenists are, they are too learned in ^^^^f ^^istory and 
 in the scriptures, to become members of any Protestant sect. Their 
 Llnificent work, The Perpetuity of the Catholic Faith, is, probably, 
 Te^lst learned productions^ in the annals of religious contro- 
 
 versr I shouW L happy to lend it to any gentleman of this assem- 
 7.%^\t^^%on.\T\.im how venerable are the doctrines whic^^^ 
 wL of kuowkdge induces some persons to assail. J^f^^^^^P^ 
 all the bishops in the worid, are no article of ^^ ^h. Arucle^^^^^^^^ faigt 
 are defined, and they are no longer opinions. Siquis dixerit . it 
 anv sav -"in this manner commence the canons of doctrine to define 
 ^ticLs^f faith; and they end by the words, "Anathema sit;" m ini.. 
 ?a on of S P^^^^ who slid : "Were I, or an angel from heaven to 
 StoV any other gospel than what has been preached, let h.m 
 L TiSt^eL" ^his for'muL always marks ^he definU.on^^^^^^^^ 
 lie faith amonff the acts of general councils. But it will mase even 
 Ihe sma'tt^ e?s in theology, the scioUsts, I could have almost ^.d the 
 whool-bovs of Earope, faugh, to see the gentleman gravely quote Via 
 Paolo oKer PaSu'thelycophant of the sena^ of Vemce .he«- 
 communicated monk, or, to say all in two *°''l^r *>'« " g^''^^^ 
 kenlie." ae he 18 justly called by the Protestant bishop, Bur^t, as 
 his a" horU, for the prieedings of the bishops in the council of TrenU 
 »He hid," says Bossuet. "the spirit of Luther under the frock of a 
 monk." Hendry IV. of France det^ted h^.hyP^^y. »"f.^<'»°""';^ 
 
 him to the senate of Venice: and ?»"»"««' «»°'''=';i^'™°Lnrf 
 hundred and sixty errors in h 8 pretended history of the council of 
 Trent I have gS Paolo Sarpis' Lok in English, and w'l> P""« «» 
 ■ him some,a?leait, of these errors, if he is quoted again, with his worthy 
 ^m^r^ Smith and Du Pin! Now th. truth is, that there were upwarf, 
 of two hundred and fifty b shops, or prelates, of different nations, 
 Sear'y two hundred of the n^st learned theologians, and the ambassa- 
 do« of man. Catholic princel, at this council. It was held •« Tre"'- » 
 rrcityTand the utmostliberty was allowed «> *^1'''=Tirco?.ncn n^ 
 ferentqoestion8,p.eviously to the definitions »' ^^''l^JJ^'^Z^nZt 
 to decide anew, what had been alway,, every where, and oy all believes. 
 
 t 
 
wtKi 
 
 DBBATB ON THB 
 
 ^t 
 
 in the Catholic church ; and the canon of scripture which it defined, was 
 po other than what had hean nettled in all the previooa councils for 
 upwards of a thousand years ; and this the whole Catholic world per- 
 fajij mnderstood. What, now, becomes of the eentleinan*s 48 by 251 
 Why dues he exaggerate in Jigure* when he talks against Catholics, 
 mdMgwe inmimahare when he speaks for them ! Those beardless 
 youths he speaks of, had, I presume from Italian faces generally, as 
 much of that excrescence as other animals distinguished by a late 
 ■eiator. My friend was quite tender to-day, Indeed excessively elo- 
 fnent, on the subject of marriage. Had he confined himself to its just 
 Mttte, as the primeval institution of God, on the flowery banks of 
 Bdin, without outraging the express declarations of Christ, and the 
 Intpiiation of his Holy Spirit, in the new law, I would have repeated 
 Witt I have already said, in acknowledgment of the purity and sanc- 
 tl^^of the nuptial union. But, I must borrow his own words; lo say, 
 with still more truth, that " I blushed for our audience, and was 
 shocked by the freedom of his attack upon the ordinance of God." 
 The gentleman may talk unUI the end of the year, and I would meet 
 iim at every pause with the words of Christ, Matt. xix. 18; or, if 
 lli«M are noi plab enough to the "sensual man who thinketh this 
 ^Ttue foolishness," with those of St. Paul, (1 Cor. vii.) « / would 
 lAol aU mm were even m mpey." ♦* I m^ to the unmarried and the 
 mmm^ U u good for them fTl% «o continue^ men at /." ( ver. 8.) ♦' ffe 
 mai m With a mfe, ig mHdtomfor the things of the world, how ^ 
 mmf please htswifcf and he is divided. He that is without a wife, is 
 mSmtamfir the things thai belong to the Lord, how he may please God. 
 (verses 3i, 33.) *' Jrt thou loosed from a wtfe^ seek noi a wife , . , if 
 f^^'^Z 7^1^: **« *«^A no/ sinned.' nenerthekss, such shall have triliL 
 mmm fihe^esL Bui I mare you J' (ver. 28.) Can holy writ mora 
 nnequivocally reprobate all the ffentleman's romancing about wedliH:k, 
 to thii proscription of that pure devotedness to the holy offices of the 
 luniftry, of which Jesus Christ, St. John, and St. Paul,liave left us 
 the bnglitest examples in their own persons I Mr. C. said : " Dared I 
 to tell, hdbra this assembly, but half that 1 have learned of that vinrin 
 priesthood :" and I, my friends, dared I tell, before this assembly, but 
 half that I have learned, from old Protestant residenters of this citv, 
 «f that married priesthood, in Elyria, on Lake Erie, and in towns in 
 Oie int«nor of this stale, without casting the net over heads nearer 
 Momc, I would fill your souls with tenfold horror! 1 would advise 
 mj fnend to tread lightly on these ashes. Holy as marriage is, and 
 inly as I confess it to be, St. Paul advises married people to foreeo. 
 at cer^in times, the privileges of that state, to give themsel^ to prayer. 
 Kf\< 2 • **®"*® ** commanded in the prophet Joel, xi. 16. 
 ™ liiph-priest was forbidden, in Leviticus, to neglect the foreffoinir 
 tnJniMSlions, when he ministered unto the Lord ; as, also, to take a 
 Widow to wife, but only a virgin. Now, a widow, according to my 
 fnend s notion, would have abetter title than a virgin to have a hiffh- 
 priest for her husband, inasmuch as she had shown her reverence for 
 the iistmion of marriage, by a previtps union. And, now, let me 
 asic again, why did my ojpponent labor so hard to give his Protestant 
 r!ft!!L!7 *;""*'*""; ^^"^ **»«'f ancestors, when it is well known, 
 l!1 «TT ^^T*/**"?^™"^ marriage! This, the Catholic church 
 Hit md donn. But, when a vow is made to God, she says, with St. 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC BELI6I0N. 
 
 209 
 
 Paul, (1 Tim. ▼. 12.) '* ii is damnable, in either man or woman, to 
 break it." Has my opponent read all these texts T Does he not re- 
 member to have read in history, the honor in which the light of reason 
 taught all the nations if the earth to hold virginity, and the privileges 
 to which it was every where entitled ! Has he read of scandalous 
 damages recovered in courts, in England, by Reverends, who were 
 mocked to scorn the following Sunday, when they went into the pul- 
 pit to preach 1 Has he read of other reverends, who have had to pay 
 damages for the slanderous reports, put in circulation by their fair 
 companions in weal and woe 1 Is this the tribulation according to the 
 flesh, of which St. Paul speaks ! " The decrees of councils attest that 
 priests have not been such immaculate purities." Well; and what 
 do these records of the civil courts of England, and the domestic an- 
 nals of broken hearts and blighted honor, attest 1 As well naight the 
 gentleman charge marriage *ith the shocking excesses, which it did 
 not prevent in David and Solomon, as the law of celibacy with the 
 specks and blemishes of the Catholic priesthood. 
 
 In every religion there will be bad men, and by them every virtue 
 will be outraged, but must we on this account blame virtue and ex- 
 punge it; must we, like Moses descending from Sinai, break the 
 tables of the law, because of a stiff-necked and a revolted people ; or, 
 on the contrary, hold up that law before them in terror, remind them 
 of their duty, and reclaim them, by exhibitions of divine justice and 
 mercy, to virtue 1 " It is essential for a bishop to be a married man." 
 And the gentleman's vote would be withheld from me, because I am 
 a bachelor. Why, sir, St. Paul does not mean that a bishop should be 
 a man of one wife, but that ^e should have had but one — otherwise, as 
 he was himself unmarried, he would have acted against his own rules. 
 Now I claim to be as clear-sighted, and as well read in the bible, as 
 my friend, and I maintain it is essential a bishop should not be a mar- 
 ried man; for he will not then be afraid to bring home frona the bed of 
 death the small-pox, the cholera, or the plague, to his wife and chil- 
 dren ; he will not be prevented by the enffrossing care of a family 
 from visiting the " widow and the orphan ;" he will have more money 
 to spare for the wants of the poor. " To preside over a christian con- 
 gregation," says Mr. Campbell, " a bishop should know experimen- 
 tally the domestic affections and relations; he should study human 
 nature in the bosom of his family; there is a class of feelings which 
 no gentleman of single life can comprehend, or in which he can sym- 
 pathise, and these are essential to that intimacy (what intimacy ?) with 
 all classes, sexes and duties, which his relations to the church often im- 
 pose upon him." What does all this mean 1 I am sincerely shocked 
 at this freedom. But if it mean any thing that I should answer, it 
 would mean, that a bishop should be a bachelor to sympathise with a 
 numerous class of christians, viz. old maids ; he should have a scold- 
 ing wife to be able to sympathise with a scolded husband ,- a sickly 
 wife, an ugly wife, a drinking wife, an arbitrary wife, an ignorant, 
 stupid wife, to know experimentally what husbands suffer in all these 
 domestic relations ; he should, and he should not, have children. Can 
 there be any thing more superlatively ridiculous ! As well might you 
 exact of the physician, that he should have had all the diseases yon 
 may call upon him to cure. A bishop can study his own heart, and 
 as Cicero says, "Timeo himinem unius libri;" if he will not learn 
 8 3 14 - 
 
 If 
 
M^ DSBATB Oil TWm 
 
 ininiliallin Here, h» will not learn it any where. I haye much moi» 
 til mw m Hiit snbjeet, which aueen Elizabeth, Oxford college, (Ens- 
 laid,) ngnktions to the *• fellows," and Dr. Miller, of Princeton, 
 fnniithed me ; bnt whether I resnme this unpleasant task or not, del 
 pends on my learned opponent. I have a large family to provide for, 
 and I try at least to take caie of it. Fifty little orphans, in want of 
 an asylnin, look to me for br^d ! and as Christ and St. Paul have 
 tawf ht me to live, while I have ears to hear, and a heart to commiser- 
 ■ifi the hard lotofthe fatherless and motherless, and claims to present 
 ill th«lt name to a geiwfous public, so, must I reason and judge, I should 
 continue to live. These little beneficiaries ^ther around me when I 
 visit them, and they call me by the endearine name of father! and 
 their appealing looks, their grateful smiles, Uieir wants and artless- 
 MS8 and joy excite in me emotions which a virtuous parent well 
 ■light share, and an unfeeling one, who neglects or abuses his chil- 
 (ben, well might envy ! I invite my friend to visit these little inter- 
 flfiig orphans, and see how an old bachelor gets along among them. 
 
 Did I leally defend white lies! I think not. "One sin, in the 
 •ifht of heaven is as ereat as another." This I deny. This doctrine 
 laps the foundation of sound morals ; it leaves us no energy for virtu 
 om effort; it writes the mysterious "Mane, Tecel, Phares," on the 
 wall, fof the iist and least offence ; it has no warrant in scripture. God 
 nien speaks of nations filling up the measure of their guilt, and what 
 eould tiiia mean, if one sin were as bad in divine estimation, and filled 
 If aa inaeh space as a thousand ! It is true. He punishes all sins, 
 i«t not alike ; therefore all are not equally heinous in his sight Mr. C. 
 Mys, ** I wish the gentleman would enable me to deliver myself," &c. 
 Yoii may deliver yourself on anjr point you please, I have no objection. 
 
 His next attempt at proof of immorality, was the allegation that wo 
 have destroyed the second commandment, rejecting the law against 
 making graven images, that we may worship creatures, and images 
 of cieatnres, and introduce idolatry! the invocation of the spirits of 
 Jead men and women, &c. &c. My friends, this charge orleavina 
 out the second commandment is very stale, and, no doubt, my Prote^ 
 tant hearers will be astonished to see and hear for themselves that it 
 IS utterly unfounded. Here is the Catholic catechism of this diocese : 
 it thus veads. 2. " Which is the first commandment!" Ans. " /awi 
 A^Lord^ % Gid^ who brtmgki ihee mi (f the land ^ Egypt, and out 
 «fll« imtm if bondage, Tmu ghaU not have strange gods before me, 
 I*Mi ikoM ml make to thy$elf a graven thine, nor me Hkeness of any 
 Mugf thai is in the heavem above or the earSk beneath, or in the waters 
 mmder the earth i thou thaU not adore ikem mr terve them,^* TheDouay 
 MtteoMsm is e<|ually full, (hold* it open,) so are d7 our bibles. I 
 will dtaplay this little catechism here, or I am willing to pitch it 
 aniiiiif niy andience for inspection. They will see that it contains 
 the commandment in full, and that there is nothing in it, in violation 
 of the law of God, on this, or on any other subject. It is an admirable 
 ahtliiniMit of faith and morals. If there have been any catechisms 
 iraMished without the commandments in full, it is because they were 
 pnhltshed for the use of children, whose memories were not to be en- 
 eumbeted bv too long answers, when the sense and substance of the 
 
 Srecejjt could be snfficiently expressed in fewer words. As to the 
 ivi»H» of the commandments, my friend knows that the bible was 
 
 ROHAN CATHOLIC REUGION. 
 
 211 
 
 tot originally divided into chapters and verses as it is at present, 
 fiut with this question we are not now concerned. 
 
 It is not a crime to make an image, if we do not adore and worshin 
 it instead of the Creator, who is blessed for ever ; otherwise God would 
 have transgressed his own prohibition, for he commanded Moses to 
 make a graven image, namely, the image of a brazen serpent, and to 
 set it up before a people exceedingly prone to idolatry, that they may 
 look on it and be cured of the bites of the fiery serpents that stung them 
 for their murmurings in the wilderness. The divine lawgiver also 
 directed (Exodus xxv.) two images of Cherubim to be made, with 
 tlieir wings overshadowing the mercy seat of the ark of the cov- 
 enant, towards which the people turned in prayer, and before which 
 Joshua and the ancients of Israel fell flat upon their faces until the 
 evenine, at Hai, when they were defeated, for the sin of Achan, by the 
 men of that city; and Joshua said, "Alas, Lord God," &c. vii. 7. 
 What was the temple of Solomon, built by the special directions of 
 that God who had forbidden the making of graven images to adore 
 and serve them, but a temple of images ? Never has any house, per- 
 haps, since or before, not excepting the celebrated picture galleries of 
 the Louvre, abounded more in pictures and likenesses of things in 
 heaven and things on earth, than did that venerable pile, and yet God 
 was not offended, but promised that his ears should be attentive to the 
 prayer of him that prayed in that place, as we read in the book of Kings. 
 The objection is unphilosophical, as well as unscriptural. What, I 
 ask, are the letters G. O. D. but pictures, representing a certain ideal 
 So written language, when first used, was a series of pictures, as every 
 scholar knows; and the bible abounds, like the temple, with these pic- 
 torial signs. Again, where is the immorality of looking on the em- 
 blem of our dying Savior 1 Is it not the gospel narrative of his sorrows 
 and his love, condensed 1 The council of Trent, Sess. xxv. teaches, 
 what every Catholic knows, " that while we venerate the memorials 
 of Christ and his saints, we are not to believe that any divinity or 
 power resides in them." I would, therefore, express in a few words, 
 the motive of our respect for the crucifix, and our sense of its lifeless- 
 ness and want of power, in the following apostrophe : " Thou canst 
 not see, thou canst not hear, thou canst not help me, but thou remind- 
 est me of my God." . 
 
 Were the objection of my worthy opponent rigorously urged, it 
 would be impiety for the orphan girl to wear around her neck the like- 
 ness of a fond, but alas ! prematurely deceased mother : or a soldier 
 boy the miniature of the father of his country. The different trades and 
 professions should be arraigned for the idolatrous practice of suspend- 
 ing before their doors the signs of their various occupations. The 
 United States' mint would be a factory of idols, and every money- 
 holder, in bank notes, or the hard metal, an idolater ! Finally, if the 
 Catholics substitute the words " honor and veneration " for " wor- 
 ship," when speaking of the relative respect paid to the emblems of 
 Christ and his saints, yet even the use of this word could be defend- 
 ed from the Bible, Chron. last ch. where the people, as it reads in ihe 
 Protestant bible, worshiped the Lord and the King, but surely not with 
 the same kind of worship. The exterior act appeared the same, but 
 in the heart, there was distinction of homage. If it be wrong and an 
 outrage to the mediation of Christ to seek inferior intercessors with 
 God, why did Paul ask the prayers of the christians to whom he ad- 
 
 i. 
 
 Ill ■: 
 
 J. 
 
 I- 
 
I'll 
 
 212 
 
 DSBATX OK THS 
 
 BOMAN CATHOMC EBLIfilOX. 
 
 213 
 
 dinttod li!f «|ii8tle« I Wliv did God command the importunate friendt 
 viloh to aai the jiitt mm/s prayers for them ! Why did he appoint 
 » piiett to offer gfifb and aacrifiees for sin ? And why did the apos- 
 llet teach us to say, ** I beliere in the communion of saints/* // wm 
 iinmgef smid king Jamat^ to the Scotch bithopi, to allow those honorable 
 phem^ in the ehurehe^ to itfitcorfM, Uom<, and devih, (griffins) which 
 were refmed toprophei§ iwwl apo»tle» ! " Let them not lead people by the 
 iiiiic,** ifif s Dr. Herbert Thomdike, Prtitendary of Westminster, " to be* 
 Bim lliy eon prove their tuppoaition that the pope is anii-christ, and the 
 'pe^itk 'i^MaierSf when they can notJ* Just Weights and Measures, 
 • 11. '* It is a shame to charge men with what the^ are not guilty 
 ©f, in order to make the breach wider, already too wide." Dr. Mon- 
 tague, Prot. bishop of Norwich, Iny. of Saints, p. 60. 
 
 Another proof of immorality is the distinction oetween material and 
 formal sins ! This is a just distinction. The civil law recognizes it. 
 An injury done with malice aforethous^hi, or formally , is very different, 
 88 to the guilt of the agent, from accidental and unintentional injury. 
 A child, a maniac, a man in his sleep, or otherwise unconscious of 
 what he does, and not the culpable cause of that want of conscious- 
 mia, may iniict an injury, with impunity, for which liberty, and life 
 should, under different circumstances, be very justly forfeited. My 
 friend has brought up casuistry. The tendency of such punishments 
 is salutary : and if a seyerer penalty is inflicted for the murder of v 
 piieit, Iec., it is to preserve the mviolabilitv of religion, which watchei 
 wrm the lights of parents, to the fear and love of their children, and 
 of the law, to the obedience and respect of those for whose preserva- 
 tion and wellbeinff it was enacted. My learned friend traduced the 
 cler^ of the Catholic church and described the dangers of the con- 
 fessional. As well might he denounce the medical profession. He 
 read numerous extracts from publications of Smith, Slocum & Co'a 
 joint^stock concern, for the defamation of innocence. He may sit 
 i«Wi, In the lowest places, with these worthy associates, if he will. I 
 •hall not molest them in their calculations of the ^^ pieces tf silver," 
 ♦«I will leave them alone in their glory." 
 
 The gentleman allows that auricular confession was the law of the 
 church in the fifth cemtarj. This is generous, and he is contradicted 
 in the concession, by aorae Protestants, who, for want of better knowl- 
 edge, give the instituticiii m later date. It remounts, however, farther 
 up the chain of loly uaagea, viz. to the time of Christ, who gave 
 such power to men aa that expressed in the text, St. John, xx. 22, 23. 
 lliia power was not to be exercised without a knowledge of the dis- 
 positions of the sinner, and this knowledge could only be obtained 
 from his own confession. Leo I. did not, therefore, '*open the 
 floodgates of tnipiety by substituting private for public confession." 
 The practice is of divine institution, and how horrid is it not, to speak 
 thus of what all ages and nations of Christianity, the Greek and the 
 IiaSiii churches and the sects of the east, have ever held as the work 
 «f Christ, taught by himself and every where preached by his apos- 
 tles ! Tertullian and Origen, who lived in the age next to the apos- 
 tles, hold the following language : *•*• If you withdraw from confession^ 
 Mnk of haUfre^ which confession extinguishes.'' '^Look carefully itbout 
 ihee in choosing the person to whom you confess-^^onfess to him your mosi 
 merei sins." *• M is meessary^" says St, Basil, in the 4th century, ** to con- 
 fesa our sim to ^oae io whom the dtspemation tf the divine mysteries m 
 
 eommitted," ^* Let no one" says St. Augustine, ** fay to himself f ' Ida 
 penance to God, in private,' Is it then in vain inat Christ has said, what^ 
 sttever you loose on earth, shall be loused in heaven ? Is it in vain that 
 the keys have been given to the church P^ These texts abundantly 
 prove that auricular confession was practised before the time of Leo L 
 in the fifth century, and consequently that Christ and his apostles 
 must share the odium in which my opponent presumes to involve the 
 Catholic church. He says the practice of the public confession of sin, 
 before the whole congregation, was the last entrenchment against the 
 rapid declension of morals in the fifth century. And yet with glaring 
 inconsistency, after contending for the practice so vehemently, in 
 almost the same breath, he tells us : " There is no ear but God's, to 
 which our errors or our faults ought to be confessed, for that the 
 secrete of all hearts are his." Can there be contradiction more palpa- 
 ble 1 And does not the Catholic practice save the sinner's honor, gently 
 withdraw him from the downward path to ruin, admonish him of his 
 ingratitude and restore him to religion and to society a better man, 
 in all probability to sin no more ? " Is there more condescension or 
 mercy in a Roman priest," asks my opponent, " than in God V Why, 
 the blasphemous question might have been put to Christ by the leper, 
 when the Savior ordered him ^^ to go show himself to the priest." Malth. 
 viii. 4. " Is there more condescension, or mercy, in a Jewish priest than 
 in GodV 
 
 My friend quotes St. James, " confess your sins to one another :" 
 but he takes care to omit the ar^ecedents and the consequents of the text. 
 " Is any man sick among you. Let him bring in the priests of the 
 church, and let them pray over him,, anointing him with oil in the name 
 of the Lord, and the prayer of faith shall save tlie sick man, and if he be 
 tn sins, they shall be forgiven him." James v. 14. Is not obedience 
 to the directions of the Holy Ghost, the calling in of the priests and 
 availing himself of their ministry, the indispensable condition prescri- 
 bed by God himself, in the scripture, for the cure of the corporal mal- 
 adies, but, much more, of the sins of the sick man ? Could my 
 friend have been more effectually refuted than he evidently is by 
 a text of his own selection % [Time expired.] 
 
 Ihur o'clock, P* M. 
 Mr. Campbell rises — 
 
 From the beginning I have said, and I repeated it yesterday, that 
 1 would not state any fact which I could not sustain. I do not care 
 how often I am put to the test. I have here three catechisms, in 
 which the second commandment is omitted, and to keep up the number 
 ten, they have made two out of the 10th. Here are two catechisms, 
 published by the authority of the Roman Catholic church. The title 
 of one, from the highest authority since the council of Trent, is aa 
 
 follows ; — 
 
 " The most Rev. Dr. James Butler's catechism: revised, enlarged, approved, 
 and recommended by four Roman Catholic Archbishops of Ireland, as a general 
 catechism for the kmg^dom. Suffer little children to come to me, and •jrb'id 
 them not, for of such is the kingdom of God. Mark x. 14. This is etema life, 
 that they mi^ht know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou 
 hast sent John, xviii. 3. Twelfth edition: carefully corrected and improved, 
 with amendments. Dublin: Printed by Richard Covne, 4. Capel st. Bookseller 
 and Printer to the R. C. College of St. Patrick and Maynooth, and publisher to 
 the Catholic Bishops of Ireland. 1826.*' [See page 36. 
 
BSBATS OH' fBM 
 
 ** 8^ IMI 'COMintliaillClltl' 01 ijnmi* 
 
 A. 1. I MM tile Lord tbj God ; thou •bait have no ttrsnge gods before bm. 
 
 t. Tboii shalt not take ibe name of the L.ord thy God in vain. 
 
 9. Thorn abalt not covet thj neighbor'* wife. 
 10. Thou shah not covet thj neighbor's goods, Eiod. xx J* 
 
 Are these thi ten eommm^menia of Godf as all Roman Catholio 
 children are taught !! 
 
 The single fact that the four archbishops of Ireland, and the Rom* 
 an Catholic college of Maynooth should have impiously dared to 
 ilrike mm commandment from the ten, which God wrote on two tables 
 with his own finger, and should have chan^d and divided the tenth 
 Into two, speaks volumes in proof of my allegata against the Romanist 
 rule of faitn. But we shall hear another witness — ^Title: 
 
 •*Tlie Ctoneral Catechism revised, corrected and enlarged by the Right Rev- 
 •ffttiidJillMt Boyle D. D. Bp. &c. and prescribed by him to be taught through- 
 oat tile diocese of Kiidaire and Lerghhn. [Motto the same as in the other, ster- 
 •otvped Mid printed at Dublin by the same printer, A. D. 1827.] See. p. 25. 
 
 Q. Say the ten commandments of God. 
 
 A. I am the Lord thy God; thou shalt not have any strange gods before me. 
 *11lon ihalt not make to thyself neither an idol or any firure to adore it. 
 
 1. ThoQ shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord 
 will not hold him guiltless that shall take the name of the Lord bis God in vain. 
 
 9. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife. 
 
 It. Thon abalt not covet tliv neighbor's goods.'* 
 
 nil iMiits the reprobaion pronounced on the preceding. 
 
 Again: here is an American catechism. — ^Yes, in ihis land ot 
 liililes has been published a catechism, in which the same liberty if 
 talcen. Its title is : 
 
 " An abridgement of the Christian doctrine, with proofs of scripture 
 01 points controverted, by way of question and answer : composed in 
 IWf byMev. Henry Tuberville, D. D. of the English college of 
 Douay : Now approved and recommended for his diocese, by the right 
 Mev. Benedict bishop of Boston. This is the wav, walk ye in it** 
 Isa. xxz. 21. New York ; published by John Doyle; No. 12. Liber- 
 ty ttiiffti ttareotyped by A. Chandler. 1833.*' See p. 54. 
 
 **C|. What is the second conmiandnient ? 
 
 A* Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.** 
 
 Is fill ike ueond eomfnandmeni? Ilit not That child is tauo^ht 
 iilsehood, which is taught thus to learn the decalogue. If the Roman 
 hiiltojps and archbishops in Ireland and America, in this our day can 
 thns impose on all the youth in the Roman commimion, and thus per- 
 vert ami annul one of God's commandments, to make way for the 
 worshiping of images, what shall we say of the morality of her rule 
 of faith in this and other matters f 
 
 II is a poor apology for this expurgation of the decalogue, that it is 
 not so done in the Douay bible : for when these catechisms were in- 
 troduced, and even yet in most Catholic countries, not one layman in a 
 thousand ever read that bible : the catechism intended for universal 
 consumption contained all his knowledge of God's law. What my- 
 riaii% then, through this fraud, must have lived and died in the be- 
 lief that the second commandment was no part of God's law ! It 
 is olesfly proved, that the pastors of the church have struck out one 
 of God's ten words; which not only in the Old Testament, but in all 
 revelation, are the most emphatically regarded as the synopsis of ali 
 lelif ion and morality. They have also made a ninth commandment 
 9nt of the tenth, and theif ninthy in that independent position, be- 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC BELIOIOlf. 
 
 215 
 
 eomes identical with the seventh commandment, and makes God ns0 
 a tautology in the only instrument in the universe that he wrote with 
 his own hand ! But why this annulling of the second commandment 1 
 Because it is a positive prohibition of the practice of bowing down 
 to images, and doing them homage ; a custom dearer to the Romish 
 church than both the second and the seventh commandment ! It is, 
 hewever, gross idolatry. So far at least as the i^orant and unedu- 
 cated part of the community is concerned ; no spiritual, no highly 
 cultivated mind needs such aids of worship— nay, they would, to 
 such persons, be hindrances rather than aids of devotion. But the 
 uneducated and sensual mass, which are in that community, — the vast 
 majority, literally adore tlie image, and delight in the picture more 
 than in the Creator. And, therefore, the abrogation of the second 
 commandment, by the priests, is the positive introduction of idolatry. 
 The Hebrew bible says and all versions of it in eflfect say, " Thou 
 shalt not make unto thyself any graven image, nor the likeness of 
 any thing in heaven above, nor in the earth beneath. Thou shalt not 
 bow down to them nor serve them." The gentleman made as hand- 
 some and eloquent a defence of the practice of violating this solemn 
 precept as could be well imagined. He referred us to the tabernacle 
 and temple, of ancient time foil of types — patterns of things in hea- 
 ven, Ac: but unfortunately for his logic, none were permitted to wor- 
 ship these patterns of ideas. They were but to portray the things to 
 be revealed in the gospel age — ^a picture-book, to sketch the outlines 
 of that redemption, which the Messiah wrought, and of the worship 
 of the kingdom of heaven. They never presumed to worship them, 
 they looked through these outward symbols, or signs of ideas, to the 
 spiritual substance as we look through unfigurative language to the 
 
 sense. ' , • t i. • 
 
 The " brazen serpent,"*^ introduced by my opponent, had the authon 
 ty of God, for its being made, and was a splendid type of him that 
 destroyed the serpent, that old serpent the devil, who had bitten the 
 human race. When men bitten, looked at it, they were healed : hut 
 when they began to worship it, it was destroyed. I say, it had the 
 authority of God. But where is the same authority for carrying 
 about the bones of a dead saint, or the hair of the Viram Mary, or 
 the feet of Balaam's assi Where is the first word, m favor of wor- 
 shiping or making an image of the cross, or of the Savior, or of any 
 saint I or of venerating a grave, a relic, or a picture t 
 
 My opponent ingeniously asked, if the name of God were not a 
 picture 1 Profound reasoning ! The name of God a picture of the 
 same class with the image of the cross and of the Virgin ! But a 
 mother says to her infant, " my life !" and she may say to Lady Mary 
 in the same style, " my life !" Ingenious ! I would ask this Roman 
 Catholic lady when she looks upon her child, and exclaims " my life, 
 if she feels the same religious affections, the same pious emotions, 
 as when she looks up to the Vir^n Mary and exclaims, *' my life?* 
 Is not the gentleman rather playing the sophist, or sporting in jest, 
 than gravely reasoning the subject 1 Certainly, he would not so teach 
 his congregation in the absence of Protestants ! This is as felicitous 
 and as rhetorical as his allusions to the device and images on medals, 
 or on gold and silver coin. There is, indeed, idolatry heie ! B« 
 there is no hypocrisy in the temple of mammon. Moreover, these 
 worshipers adoi« not the image of money ; but the money itself. 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 I. 
 
 I 
 
810 
 
 DSBATX Olf THB 
 
 Next cane the disrabim. What ao aefoelttioo of ideas ! What 
 Mnfirion in the mind that asaoclates the eherabini in Solomon's tem- 
 |ile» with the image on a dollar ! Is the gentleman serious I Did the 
 ]Mii|ile fee the cherubim, in the holiest of all I Aaron, the priest, only 
 stood before those cherubim, as the type of our high priest, who offers 
 his sacrifice in heaven : and Aaron stood there only once in a year. 
 If he understood either the type or the anti-type, he could not adduce 
 it either for the wofship of an image or the offering of any sacrifice on 
 earth : for, like Aaron m the holiest of all, Christ offers his sacrifice 
 ira heaven* Aaron presented the blood upon the propitiatory : but Christ 
 tntered ome for aU, As the bishop's high priest is not in heaven but 
 at Rome ; all the sacrifice which he can ofifer on earth is not worth a 
 farthing: for in the Christian and Jewish sense, no sacrifice on earth 
 nan at ail any thing. Such were the types, and such, certainly, are the 
 tiH-tifea. Offerings for sin, now, are only made in heaven. Ttie 
 Wiy aiitiaion to Aaron, strikes a blow at the priesthood of the Roman 
 Catholic ehurch, as if God had not accepted in heaven, the sacrifice of 
 his Son, and called for their assistance! ! 
 
 But it is hinted that I should more fully prove the immorality of the 
 Bomaii Catholic rule of laith. I have no lack of documents on this 
 ttlject. The saint Ligori, by the help of saint Pius VII. has richly 
 firaished us with indabitable authority. "The attorney general of the 
 d«vil lives at Rome," says my opponent, **and prevents the beatifical 
 tion of all saints." Hciw great, then, must have been the virtues of 
 St. Ligori, who, in spite of the devil, was canonized hy pope Pius 
 ¥11 1 ! See how equivocation is taught in this rule of faith and mcF 
 nlitv :•»■ 
 
 * T9 ■wear,** mji St. Lif ori, ** with •guivocation, where there is a good rm 
 fOfi, and eqaivocBtioa itself is lawful, is not wronj^. And If a {lenon tweart 
 without a rood reason, it i* not to be considered a penury; since, in one sense 
 0f the word, and according to mental restriction, he swears what is true." Li- 
 gor. Lib. iii. N. 151. [Synopsis, 159. 
 
 Dissimulation is variously taught. 
 — * * It is lawful/' continuei Ligori, ** for a Catholic, when he 
 
 if poning through a countiy belonfi^ng to heretics, and is in danger of losing his 
 life or property, to pretend that he is not a Catholic, and to eat meat on fast 
 daji.** Id. Lid. ii. N. 15. [Synopsis, p. 216. 
 
 This new old rule of faith has made some new sins, which neither 
 patriaichs nor Jews did ever commit ; and here is one of that class 
 which no American can ever commit : 
 
 ** Is it a mortal sin," asks the saint, to steal a«ifia/l piece of a sacred relic? Ana. 
 ** There it no donbt, hot that, in the district of Rome, it it m mortal sin. But ont 
 of thtt diitrkt, if any one steal a small piece of a relic. It it probable that it it 
 no mortal sin, provided the relic be not thereby disgraced, nor. its value less- 
 •iMd; unless it be some notable or rare relic, mch for instance, as the Hnly 
 Croit, or the hair ofthe blessed Virgin Mary," Iec. Id. ib. N. 532. [Syoopsit 
 
 p. 107. 
 
 There is a secret on the subject of infallibility^ which the saint Li- 
 gori has begun to divulge. Custom, it would seem, since general 
 coiincils are gone out of lashion, is from this time forth to be the 
 standard of orthodoxy and infallibility ; at least, in morals. Listen 
 to the moral theology of the Romish church on this point : 
 
 ••Custom." says the saint. " ift defined tht- unwritten law. In order that custom 
 should obtain the force and obligation of law, three thingt are required. 1st. 
 That it be Introduced not by any particular person, but by a community, or at 
 least, by the majority of • community, which is capable of making laws, al- 
 though, in lact, laid comDiinity cannot make the lawt. Sodly. It it required 
 
 lOMAN CATnOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 217 
 
 „J Vhonld be reMOoable." Custom hat a threefeld state. lathe 
 tnamg all those pertont who introduce a custom contrary to iuw, sin. In 
 proccM of tiiite. those who follow a custom that has already been introdoced 
 bf tlieir ancestors, do not consmit a sin in following the custom, but they can be 
 pufliahed for it by the prince. In fine, those who follow a custom after it has 
 become a rule, neither sin, nor can they be punished for it." Id. ib. N. 107. 
 
 "TlUt TIMB Rfi^UI&KD ACCORDING TO THE CANOKS OF THE ROMISR 
 
 CHURCH, ft)tt A CUSTOM TO BECOME A LAW. Ill order that custom should 
 obtain the force and obligation of law, it it required, 
 
 " 3dly," continues the saint, " that it should continue a long tirae with re- 
 peated acts. In regard to the time that is suflicieot to render a custom lawful, 
 one opinion is, that it is to be left to the judgment of the prudent, according to 
 the repetition ofthe acts, and the quality of the matter. .The second opinionis, 
 Ihttt tea years are required, and are tolbcient; for thit it the length of time re- 
 quired for the introducing and l^galiiing of a custom br the canonical law, an- 
 ■eat it be in tome place wberf the contrary it sanctioned/* Id. ib. lib. i. N. 107. 
 
 7 Syuopsii, p. 183. . « ■, - 
 
 •• Merchandizing, and the telling of goods at auction on the Sundayt, it, on 
 •cc3unt of its being the general custom, altogether lawful. Buying and wiling 
 goods on the Lord's day and on festival days are certainly forbidden by the can- 
 onical law, but where the contrary custoiu prevails, it is excusable." Id. ib. N. 286, 
 
 " He who makes use of the knavery and cunning," says the saint, •* which it 
 usually practised in gambling, and which has the Anction of custom, is not 
 bound to restore what he wins, since both parties know that such tricks arc eus- 
 t>mafy, and consequently they consent to them." Id. ib. N. 882. 
 
 Gambling consecrated for priests and people by the law of custom : 
 
 *' We will now show, however, the canonM to toe contrary, notwithstanding, 
 that all sorts of gambling are allowed. This we prove from Ligori s own con- 
 cessions. He teaches as follows;—" The canons," says he ♦•• which forbid garnet 
 of hazard do not appear to be received except inasmuch as the gambling 
 Is carried on with the danger of scandal. Be It known," continues he, " that the 
 above mentioned canonical law is so much nullified by the contrary custom, that 
 not only laymen, but even the clergy do not sin, if they play cards principally 
 for the sake of recreation, andjor a moderate sum of money.** Id. ib. Ii. 88* 
 [Synopsis, p. 235. 
 
 A new way of sanctifying the sabbath : 
 
 •* Bull nCHTS and plays aluowkd. "On the entrance of a prince or no- 
 bleman into a city, it u lawful on a Sunday to prepare the drapery, arraage the 
 theatre, Ac., and 'to act a comedy, also to exhibit the bull-lights; the reason is, 
 because such marks of joy are morally necessary for the public weal." Id. ib. 
 Jl. 304. [Synopsis, p. 193. ' , , , , . . 
 
 The Roman Catholic rule of manners makes it even lawful to stn : 
 
 •• It it lawful,'* says Ligori, •* to induce a person to commit a smaller sio, in or- 
 der to avoid one that is greater." Id. N. 77. [Synopsis, p. 255. 
 
 •* Let the confessor," says the saint, •• enjoin upon those scrupulous, who are 
 afraid of sin in every action, that they act treely, despise their scruples, and do 
 contrary to what they dictate, where tin b not evident [Synopsis, p. 173. 
 
 This law licenses drunkenness : 
 
 •• It is no sin to get drunk, by the advice of a physician, if oiie*t health ctnnol 
 elherwise be restored." Id. N. 76. [Synopsis, p. 254. 
 
 Hence drunkards may be acceptable communicants ! 
 
 •• It is lawful," says Ligori, " to administer the sacraments to draakmrda» if 
 tiicy are in the probable danger of death, and had previoutly the intention of 
 ivceiving them.'* Ligor. vi. N. 81. [Syoopsit, p. 260. 
 
 If norance is the mother of devotion, even yet : 
 
 The sin.ner must be left in ionorajice.— The doctrine is at foUowt: (I 
 take it from the saint verbatim.) ** If the penitent ftays he,) is in iisea^M 
 ignorance, in regard to those things concerning which, it is possible to be invin- 
 3bly ignorant, although this ignorance be of the • law of God,* and the confessor 
 prudently thinks that to admoninh the penitent would uot correct him. then, and 
 ta that rase, the confessor must abstain from admonishing the peniieat,and niutC 
 loave him in his ignorance." Id. ib. * . • 
 
 Heretics are still to be punished, not only hy virtue of the general 
 
 T 28 
 
i 
 
 2 IB wniATB o?f Tirs 
 
 •«p.iieil of Lalfiiii,, A. H. 13 1&, whicli tajs, ** L«t iSIm Menlar pownn 
 lit'. 'CiMi]itlM, if naoetMry, to mdmwmimit, io tMr itaott power, all 
 Mm^amimm^md by the ehnreh :'* but aceordin^ to tba moral tiMology* 
 as reported by the fmint 
 
 H£ilEncs "TO BE PC MSiiCD.—** A bishop is bound/* tiiyi Benedict XIV. « erra 
 injiliciifwhttfffcthe tribunaJ of the holy inquisitum is in force, nedDloii^ly and car«- 
 iWf to piii^ the dvicete that is coiiiiiiitted to bis cart-, fruiii bi:rettcs; an:i, if h« 
 indany of them, he ought to punnh them accortiiiig to the ranons; he nhould 
 however, be canti^as, nut to hinder the in^tisitora ^ the faith from doinr their 
 dut?/' Lijpor. Kp. Doc. Mor. p. 378. [Svnopis, p. 294. 
 
 From the influence of all these laws, why should it ba tfaoaght 
 BUyiifi that the clergy are exceedingly corrupt I Listen to the saint : 
 
 How wmmj relapMuc tiiuert are involved in eternal ruin by fulk>wiar lh« 
 dii«ctioni of bad coaFeatort! •*The saint hai told us, that, AMONf; TH£ 
 FHIESTS, WHO LIVE IN THE WORLD. IT IS RARE, AND VERY 
 RARE, TO FIND ANY THAT ARE GOOD." [Sviiopsit, p. 18U. 
 
 Yet a«sooniinf to these assumptions, under the sanction of Christ, 
 all are bound to bear them on peril of damnation : for, ** he that liearw 
 etb you, beareth me ; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me : and he 
 that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me." So, to despise these 
 priests, is to despise Ood ! 
 
 Once more, from Li^ri, and I shall have fiven almost a specimen 
 of the immorality and impiety of the Roman Catholic rule of faith, on 
 fiMtal points of religion and morality. There is no one subject on 
 wiiih we could be more copious than this one : but from respect to our 
 fiifenee we shall give but the remotest hint. 
 
 ••A biibop, however poor he may be, cannot appropriate to himself pecuniart 
 ilMf without the license of the apostolical see. Bat he ought to apply them to 
 pioai uses, which the emncU of jVchI has kid apou non-resident clergymen, or 
 upon thoae ckf^ymm who kitp tmem" Ligor. Ep. Doc. Mor. p. 444 [Synop- 
 «a,D. 294- or- r t j f" 
 
 Wow, if a priest should keep a meee^ it is a very expiable and tri- 
 fling oflTence; but should he marry a wife, he must be excommunica- 
 ted foiaver! Thua the Roman Catholic rule of faith treats the Bible, 
 and annuls, at pleasure, every law and institution of heaven ! Have I 
 not, them, my reanected auditors, fuUv proved the falUhility and im- 
 moral tendency of the doctrine and rule of faith, of the bisliop's church 
 *-to aay nothing of that ayatom upon the clergy themaelvea, who ex- 
 fMad and inculcate it! 
 
 One word, before I sit down, on the unanimous consent of the Greek 
 and Latin fathers. I have said before, and I repeat it, if they agree 
 m any two points, thev are, in giving testimony to the scriptures, and 
 liat it is the duty of all to read them. So far they are all Proteatantt 
 pd lot Roman Catholic^— [Time ezpired.]^ 
 
 SOMAN CIATHOUC BBUOIOlf 
 
 210 
 
 Muff pmi 4 o^ekdkf F^ M 
 
 QlBllOP PURCEIX rises — 
 
 The extract from Chillingworth will be viewed by men of Intelli- 
 ■Mice, as one of the strongest arguments advanced in this debale on 
 tllfl Catholic side of the question. And it may be as well to observe, 
 tlict my friend baa probably first seen it in the Catholic work, the 
 Alititeble Diacussion, from which he baa quoted. Chillingworth was 
 diifingniahed aa a coutroveralalbt. He bad a public disputation, like 
 tli piaaent, witb wnne Jeauits, by whom he was not only defeated 
 bat convertMi to the Catholic faith. But yielding, like Gibbon, to tha 
 aolicitatiou of friends, the importunities, the livings presenttid to him, 
 
 or to wbacb lie win pieaented, by Land, aiehbiahop of London, lie re» 
 eanlad, and finally, aa it is on good groanda aaaartod, he died a Jew. 
 Tha only apology he could offer for his versatility was, that he found 
 every one of these religions in the bible — it was tiie onljr resting place 
 for me m*k* cf kufeeU^thAi is to aay, he trampled upon it, to Bubserve 
 the purposes of base, worldly interest \ But I have now, thank God, 
 aometlung more tangible to offer in the way of protf, that nothing 
 can be conceived more inexcusably unfair, than the arguments em- 
 ployed against the Catholic religion* I now pledge myself to shew 
 to overy man of honor in this city, that the last allegation read by 
 the gentleman, purporting to be from the works of Liguori, is not to 
 be found in the works ot that writer. It is all a base fabrication, I 
 will not say of Mr. C. ; but of MomAody. I will meet this charge 
 with a complete and an overwhelming refutation. We have now 
 come to an important crisis in this debate. My worthy opponent re- 
 duced to the desperation of defeat, like a drowning man, is induced 
 to grasp at anything and to resort to abuse. But this will not sustain 
 him. He cannot now quote from Du Pin, or send his readers back to 
 the dark ages, and draw a grossly exaggerated picture of the personal 
 frailties of a few popes and then ask if there can be a drop of apostolic 
 grace in the whole world. I have three editions of the complete 
 works of Liguori, in mv library, or in this city, to refer to ; and in 
 none of tliem can this irife doctrine be found. Mark, then, the pro- 
 position, my friends. It is this. That priests are allowed to keep 
 mistresses, upon pavment of a fine, but that, if they marry, they are 
 sxoommunicated ! 1 new call upon Charles Hammond, Esq. Judge 
 Hall, General Harrison, Judge Este, Judge Wright, or anv other five 
 equally learned and honorable citizens of Cincinnati<-»for 1 only men- 
 tioned the first that came to my mind — to decide this issue of fact. 
 1 pronounce the whole char^ a base, unfounded assertion, and I again 
 thank Heaven, that I am m a city, where justice will be done to 
 the truth, and where falsehood will be triumphantly defeated. 
 
 The volume from which the gentleman has been all day reading, ii 
 one of those books of abomination and falsehood ; (>ut forth, in the 
 city of New York, by Smitli, Slocumand Co. and it is a fair specimen 
 of their fashion of circulating truth. Does it not furnish strong pre- 
 sumption to the reflecting mind, that there must be something divine 
 in the religion which such men and women combine to abuse 1 It 
 was the monster Nero, notorious for parricide and lust, who first drew 
 the sword against the christian religion. Forget not then, I pray you, 
 my friends, the proposition that is before us. I am determined not to 
 alumher or sleep on this matter, but to probe it thoroughly and ez- 
 poee its rottenness to the world. Mr. Campbell^s allegation against 
 the Catholic church, is that Liguori, a standard moralbt in that 
 church, teaches, that prie»i* may keep eoneuhinest by paying a ^ae, bui 
 thai if ikey marr^f they must be excommunieaied, VV hereas 1 distinctly 
 deny that Liguon has ever taught any thing so abominable, and that 
 all who say so, are guilty of a most flagrant violation of the command- 
 ment of our God, wiiich aavs "Tnou shalt mot beaji false witksmi 
 
 AOAINST THY KTBIGHBOa." Exod. XX. 16. 
 
 The charge of suppressing the 2nd commandment, while proof to tlie 
 contrary, from the Catholic catechisms every where in use in the U. S« 
 and from every Catholic bible in the world, was staring him ia the face, 
 may be placed along side of the foregoing I Add to these, the hardi- 
 
I, 
 
 t 
 
 I 
 
 I' 
 
 I 
 
 I' 
 
 DSflATS 'Olf THB 
 
 llocNi witfi wliieli tli« pliiiwflt wofds of the Redeemer, tlie enphatici 
 ieelarmtiofi of St« Piiii, md t)ie hia^fiest eulogy of Urn Aptlaajfm 
 Hi lira tuperior itiielity of the unmarried state, frnwe been violentlj 
 tortured oj my opponent, and a fair estimate may be made of tho re* 
 spect he entertains for the bible. Even his jests are but little help to 
 Ills afgninent, for error was never senoinely wittv. And when he af« 
 fecm to lanf h at St. Paul for his (laYing been a bachelor, I shall coii« 
 teHt imyieirwith replying, yes ! St. Paul was a bachelor : but would 
 he not have looked well, with sevei little squealing children trottinff 
 aller him, mniing the ekureka of Asia ! llie remark of St Paul, 
 ** have I not a ri^t to lead about a sister !*' has reference to the prac- 
 tice then eaily introduced, of entrusting in some cases, the instruction 
 of imialM, tn petaons of their own lex, and to the greater facilities af 
 fefdM ia this lesiiect, to the apostles and preachers of Christianity, to 
 convey the knowledge of true religion to promiscuous society, wheth- 
 er Jewish or Pigae. I consider marria^ a holv, nay, a divine insti- 
 tution. I respect the sanctity of the union, and pay a willing tribute 
 of praise to the eminent virtue of persons engaged in that state ; hut 
 1 Biiist reason and judge with Christ and St. Paul, that if, **• he who 
 maniet does well, he who does not does better.'* A priest assumes 
 tie ohlfgation of celibacy, at mature age, and voluntarily. God's 
 grace is sufficient for him, as it was for St. Paul, and his virtuous 
 atmggles against the evil spirit, that dared to tempt even the Savior, 
 in the desert, and Paul, who had been rapt up even to the third hea- 
 ven, can make mrtueperfed in infirmity, without the priest's being as 
 foolish as the thief, who cut off his hands, to keep himself from steal- 
 ing. I hope however that my opponent, or his auxiliary. Smith, will 
 mot be templed to cut off kh hands, for stealing from Liguori, what 
 is better to any man than trashy gold, kia good name. One word 
 ■ore. If marriage were aa pleasing in the sight of God, as celibacy, 
 *hy did God and St. Paul direct abstinence from marriage privileges 
 as a preDaration for seasons of greater devotion 1 According to my 
 fHend, should they not have commanded the contrary ! 
 
 I pass^ in the next nlace, to relies. The chair in which the signers 
 ef the declaration of Independence sat, the pen with which they wrote 
 iie ipeffimis document, a bit of the wood of the tree overshadowing 
 lie grave of the illustrious Washington, are all treated with respect, 
 aiid sought for with avidity : shall religious memorials alone be trea- 
 ted contemptuously I What says the scripture, Acts. xix. 11. Jlnd 
 &od wrougki by ike hand ff Paul more than eammon miraeie», m thai 
 esefi ihm were brought frrnn Ati body to the »icA, handkerehids^ and aprom^ 
 mad lAe iliseiises departed from ^m^ and the wicked spirtts went out tf 
 Him. ** Tie woman, troubled twelve years, with an issue of blood, 
 •iM wfliin heiaelf, «Mf I shall touch only his garment, I shall be 
 iiealed," and $he was heakdt and JetuM turning and seeing her taidt Be 
 efgmd heart daughter, %/Mili lurA wmde thee whole.'' Evm untk.uifaiik 
 or consciousness, there is a miraculous cure recorded in IV Kings xiii. 
 f 1. •* Md Eii$eua died and they buried him. Jnd the Movert from 
 JftoA enwae into lAe land, tAe mam year. Jlnd tome thai were burying a 
 Man, mm lie JZovert and eati tki body into ike i^mlehre tf Eliiem. JSnd 
 Mxleti he had touched the boneg ff Ehmus, the man eame to life, and ttood 
 tipofi Mb feel,'* I have no doubt that these texts have never been read, 
 m: at least reiected on, by learned Protestants, like my friend, who 
 riiiifNiIe Catholics in the pious simplicity of their souls, for venerating 
 
 SOMAN OATUOmC XBIilOION. 
 
 sm 
 
 dead menU bone». If the corpse of a prophet who had never seen !•> 
 sus Christ, could impart such a miraculous virtue, as to resuscitate 
 the dead, why is it considered absurd to invoke the prayers of th% 
 living and beatified spirit that knew and loved, and watched over the 
 Savior on earth, and that now reigns gloriously with him in heaven 1 
 If Eliseus was good, was not Mary good I If the prophet of the Sa- 
 vior had so much power, had the mother of the Savior none 1 Havt* 
 ing now disposed of celibacy and relics, I resume the subject of ceK 
 fession. 
 
 I shall now proceed to vindicate the scriptural origin, the moral 
 tendency and the immense benefits conferred on society by the theory 
 and practice of the sacrament of penance, as held in the Catholic 
 church, from the weighty charges preferred against it by my oppo- 
 nent. On this subject the council of Trent, ch. vi. teaches: " the penance 
 of a christian arler his fall (from the grace of baptism) is very different 
 from that of baptism, and consists, not only in refraining from sins, 
 anh a detestation of them, namely, a contrite and humble heart, but 
 also in a sacramental confession of them, at least in desire and at a 
 propel time, and the priestly absolution; and, likewise, in satisfac- 
 tion, hy fasting, alms, prayers, and other pious exercises of a spiritual 
 life ; not, indeed, for the eternal punishment, which, together with the 
 crime, is remitted in tlie sacrament, or by the desire of the sacrament, 
 but for the temporal punishment, which the scripture teaches is not 
 always wholly remitted as in baptism." Such is, and ever has been, 
 the doctrine of the Catholic church, which thus ascribes the whole 
 glory of man's justification to God, through Jesus Christ, our only 
 Savior. She teaches that God alone can forgive sin, and that without 
 sincere sorrow, which induces us to detest sin more than all other 
 evils together, the words of absolution would be a mockery ; and this 
 sorrow may be called contrition, or attrition, the name matters little ; 
 it must be true, interior, preter^natural, universal, sovereign ; that is to 
 say, it must come from the heart, and from a motive suggested by 
 faith ; it must extend to all sins without exception, and be accompa- 
 nied by a sincere resolution to suffer every evil, even death itself, raider 
 than offend God any more. This is the only idea of penance, as a 
 sacrament, inculcated by the Catholic church, and from this, it a^ 
 pears, how horrid is the guilt of our calumniators, who, when they^ 
 find us otherwise invulnerable, assail us with the poisonous shaf^ of 
 slander and misrepresentation, pretending, while they know full well 
 how sincerely we reprobate the doctrine they impute to us, that the 
 pope grants licence to commit sin, and that priests for^ve it for money ! 
 
 The power of the priests to absolve the contrite sinner, is based on 
 the texts, John xx. Matthew xvi. where Christ gives the keys of heat 
 ven to Peter, and Ch. xviii. 13, when he declares to ail the apostles^ after 
 breathing on them, and giving them the Holy Ghost, ** Verily I say unto 
 you, what meter ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven, and 
 whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven." By these 
 words we consider the priest vested with a judicial power by Jesus 
 Christ, to bind or to loose from sin ; and as this power cannot be ex- 
 ercised without a knowledge of the sinner's dispositions, especially aa 
 to his sorrow for past sins, and his sincere resolution to refrain from 
 them in future, which knowledge none but the sinner himself can 
 give, we conclude on the necessity of sacramental confession to the 
 the priest, who holds the plane of Christ in the spiritual tribunal. 
 T8 
 
HEIIATB ON Till 
 
 m 
 
 i« 10 immonlitf in this belief; on the eonlrair, the mont in 
 nknlahle beneits hftt e accrued from it to reli^on and to society. Il 
 iny friend say that it is impioas to ascribe to man a power which be- 
 longs to God alone, I answer, that if God choose to give snch power 
 to Marat it would be impious in man to deny such power to God, and 
 B ffrlOTOUs sin of disobedience, to refuse to use it. If he persist in 
 ttyiiig, that man cannot be empowered by God to forgive sin in the 
 iiOtament of penance, I will aslc him, why then is man empowered 
 to foicifo iin in the sacrament of baptism! I ask, why does he 
 Micrel with Catholics for employing the words — ^**1 absolve thee 
 Inmi thj sins/' when Episcopalians do the samel Here is the church 
 of Eoglftiid book of common prayer ; and in it, I read as follows : 
 ** When the minister visits any sick person, the latter should be moved 
 lo make a tpedai tmfanon at Mb ttm, tf he ftth hit enmdenee trouhled 
 tiM ofiv weigMijf matter t mer which emtfemmh, the pnegi ^alt absofve 
 llil% ffhe humbly and heartily desire it, afier this murtt ** Our LordJetu* 
 €krui, who kaih kfl power to his churchy to absolve all sinners who truly 
 rt§mii and 'Miem in Mm, tf his great mercy, ftn-give thee thine offences, 
 mndby Ms amthmiiyeommitiitd to me, I absolte ti:ee rioM aix Tnr sms, 
 ifi the name tf the fhiher, and tf the Son, and (f the Molv Ghost,** Jmen. 
 Soon aHer king James I. presented to the world, in his own person, 
 the anomaly of head and member of the English church, and lord spi- 
 ritual and temporal of the realm, he asked his prelates at Hampton 
 «oiirt, what tnthority this church claimed in the article of ahsohdion 
 fimm mnf (Mark--the new Peter did not know his powers !) Arch- 
 Htio|l Whitgift began to bambooxle him with an account of the gene- 
 ral confession and absolution in the communion service; with which 
 the klof being dissatisfied, Bancroft bishop of London, fell on his knees 
 •nd said, *' It becomes us to deal nlainly with your majesty ; there is, 
 also, in the book, a more particular and personal absolution in the 
 visitinf of file sick. Not only the confessions of Augsburgh, Bohemia, 
 and Saxony, retain and allow it, but also Mr. Caltiit doth approve 
 both such a general and snob mprivaie eorfesston and ahsoluiitm,'*'* ** I 
 •aneodingly well approve it, replied his maMy^ it being an apostolical 
 ■nijfodly ofdinance.** Bancroft was right in quoting the Augsburgh 
 Mil&sion, lor the Lutherans, the real Simon Pure of the reformation, 
 in the oonliMsion of faith, and apology for that confession, expressly 
 teach, ** thai absolution is no kss a smramerd than baptism and the Lor^s 
 mppert thai particular absoluiion is io be retained in eotifession, that to 
 «i^iel ii is the error cf the Nucatian heretics { and that by the power of the 
 J%t, i^ ore temittA^ mi only in the sight of the ehurm, but in the sight 
 ef God,** Luther himaelf, in hit cateeMsm, required, ihai ike pemteni in 
 eorfession should expressly deefem thai ko heHeoes ** the forgioemat of the 
 pried io be the forgiveness of God,** 
 
 On this topic, before taking up the Toluminont eridence before me 
 iir the doctrine of the Episcopallani, on this side the great water, I 
 lirast produce evidence, not to be contradicted by the champion of all 
 Protestantism. It is that of the redoubted Chulingworth. Treating 
 3f the text, John xx. 23, 3, he asks : *• CSoiii any man be so unreason- 
 able as to imagine, that when our Savior, in so sokmn a manner, having 
 fit^ breamed upon his dim'p!eSf,therdiy conveying and insinuating the 
 noly Ghosi into their hearts, renewed unto them, or rather confirmeS thai 
 g*onmm e&mmimon^ whereby he dekgaled io them an uuihonly if bind 
 
 lOXAH CATHOLIC BELtOION. 
 
 iMV'MlfUP 
 
 Jng and loosing sins iipoti mr^ eon any one think, I say, so unwortMlf 
 tf our Savior, as to esteem ihae words of his for no better than eomph" 
 meni? Therrfore, in obedience to his gracious will, and as I am vmr* 
 ranted and enjoined by my holy mother, the church (f England^ {you see 
 Protestants use the style *holy mother church'* as well as Catholics) Ibt 
 teeth you that by your practice and use, you will not suffer that commis- 
 sion wMch Christ hafh given to his ministers, to be a vain form of words, 
 \oithout any sense under them. When you find yourselves charged and 
 
 rressed, have recourse to your spiritual physician, and freely disclose 
 nature and malignity tf your disease. And come not to him only 
 mi0i such a mind as you would go to a learned man, as one that can 
 ^ieak comfortable things to yott ,• but as to one thai hath authority, dele- 
 gated to him from God himsef, to absolve and ac^it ytiu tf your sins. 
 If ymt shall do this, assure your souh, that the understanding if men, is 
 wU able to cotteeive the transport, and excess tf joy and comfort, which 
 shall accrue to thai man*s heart, who is persuaded he hath been made par' 
 taker if this blcssiufr** 
 
 An accredited writer in the New York Churchman, of the 7th Jan. 
 one of the ablest periodicals in the United States, quotes the most 
 convincing texts from Origen, Cyprian, Basil and Gregory, under the 
 bead o( antiquity, 
 
 Origen (flor. A. D. 220) in Horn. 10 in Numb. 
 
 **Laicu!» ai pe<X4t, irte stiuiu oon potest a life rre pecratum, ted indigft »• 
 etrdote, ut putnit reniiMiontin pcccatoruin accipcre." The same father, in hit 
 •eventh bonilly on Luke, " Si eniui hoc feceniims et revelavcruuus jpeccaU 
 nottr*. non sofum Deo; sed et his, qui possunt niederi rulneribua aostris atqu« 
 peccatis; delebuntur peccata nostra ab co, aai ait, eA:e delebo, nt nabem, iniqui- 
 tatt^a lu«« et sicwt caliginem necrata tna." Tljat. ver. ex. Taj lor.) 
 
 St, Cyprian (flor. A. D. 240) in lib. de lapsis. 
 
 ••Coiibteaiitur wnijuli, qurrso *os. Iratres, delictum suuni; dum adhuc, qui deli- 
 amt. in s.-eculo eat, dum adinitti ejus confeagio potest, duiu satisfactio, et reuiid- 
 •10 facta pr swrirdotesanuH Dominnm ^rata est." 
 
 St. Basil (flor. A. D. 360) in Regul. explic. et Reg. Brev.; 338. 
 
 Iwoyv/tp'tm* T» *tmwtm tw umgimt TOtj ir*rrt9ifH*9K twfttKtiiri** Tfl» acrSf*ov»T»r. 
 
 St Gregory M. (flor. A. D. 500) in hom. 26 m Octav. Pascho. 
 
 "Causae pensanda; sunt, et cum lipandi atque solvendi potestas exercenda, vi- 
 dendum est, quae culpa ante, qua sit poenitentia sequuta, post en I pan; ut quof 
 onmipotens Deus percorapuoctionis^ratiam vivificat, iilospastoris sententmabsoN 
 vat: tunc enira vera est absolutio nnesidentis cum etcnii aH)itrium sequilurjudicis.'* 
 
 ••When St. James exhorts all christians * to confess their sins to one another/ 
 rerlainly it is more agreeable to all spiritual ends, that this be done rather to 
 th« eoTate of souls, than to the ordinary brethren. The church of England is 
 BO way engaged against it, but admires it and practises it. The Calviniatcburch- 
 rt did not practise it much, because they kne^r not well how lo divest it from 
 its evil appendages, which are put to it by the customs of the world, and to 
 which il is too much exposed by the interests, weakr.ciwes, and partiahlies of 
 inen. But they commending it, shew they would use it willingly, if thej could 
 Older it unto etlification. •* Interim quin 'sistant «e pastori oves, quoties sacrara 
 cop'nain i»rticipaie volimt, adeo non reclamo, ut raaxime velim hoc ubique obser- 
 rari." Calvin. Institut liber, iii. c. 4 Sec 12, 13. And for the Lutheran 
 churches, that it is their practice, we niav see in Chemintios, 2. part. Gan. 
 Cooc. Trid. Cap. 5. de Poenit. who is noted to this purpose by Bellarmine; only 
 they alt consent (how vcrj' consistently) that it is not necessary, nor of divine 
 institution." Jeremy Taylor of auricular confession. 
 
 " Fbr they who are spotted with sins, unless they be cured with the prtestiy 
 mHthority, cannot be in *A« bosom <^ the churcK" stdd Fobianus Martyr {cited 
 bu Taylor.) 
 
 I 
 
324 
 
 WiMW A I'M! OIV ' 1' H M 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 225 
 
 III 
 
 XilrSr" **"* ^ T"^ hiiltolf »!« away liia sin. triit kw anJ oft print. tliM hk 
 
 1 'Vor 'if w* 'io IliK mnA mrm% amtmlvm mA m\y to GiM. but to IIm«» who m» lw«l 
 MMiiMli aini MM* mm mm mm U khmod uut hv him. who uy> : '• Behojil. I wiU iak«i 
 •«■» mm MlmiiiiM •• ■ iAmmI:, .uhI' ymw ma» a« darkmis." 
 
 m I betMcJi ynn. hrelhren, let each owi tsoorcM his air.*, while \m who has Pioood it wt 
 5.,.'*;„?Py "*|2^ '?''*' '"■y ** •dmittud, whUe the MikHetkNi and f mniwiiMi mada by 
 
 .»!? %Jf!T""* •■«*••"«««!»«> mmm^^ m ptmhm oThia ao«l. bat t» i««m1 tba hiiMni 
 IblMia oThM bean to thnae emtrwtad wltb tba care of thw iftitrm. 
 
 (S) The eaa)«i are to bo wniffhed, and when the fmwvr of hmninf aiid hindinr k lo h« 
 •proiiad, wt Miiial ana what eaaaa praeeAHl, and what fwoaoco haa followed iha Ihalt. that 
 the MilaMa of the paalor imif ahMlva thoM whom the Omoipotent God. bj iha grace of 
 comfwiietion, enliwna: iir then iha abaotatloa of the nioiator if%orrect. whea he ftJowa 
 the dt«ree^ of the 'Oteraal Jadge. 
 
 frw Saffliah divinen. im thm of laat *|Meeh afflaturdar. Janaary 81.] 
 
 THURSDAY. JAitUARir 19th, Half-past 9 Jl. M. 
 Hit 3<i Proposition heing^ read — 
 
 •• SIm k tiM Babjioo of John, the Man of Sin of Pkal, and the Eniptre of tb« 
 
 louofcal Hom orDmiiers Sea Monster/' 
 
 Mb. Campbell roae and aaid : 
 
 Icoild haTe wished, my fellow citizens, that this proposition had 
 w»ii Bcaier the close of this discussion. But as my nine propositionB 
 w«re first arranged as themes for lectures, rather than as propositiont 
 lor Miatii; I could not materially alter cither the verbia^ or order, ai^ 
 ter I had heen invited to discuss them with my present opponent. 
 Willmit farther cercniony, I proceed to sustain the proposition. 
 
 I am lot iiiiciisilile of the difficulties and objections we have to en- 
 cotinlert when we presume to prove any thinff from the fi^rative and 
 symbolic language of prophecy. The difficulties are not, however, so 
 ^t as at first view may appear. Symbols are eierapi from some of 
 im objecUons lymg against literal descriptions— 7%«y tmd no tramialion. 
 Sun, moon, and stars speak the same sublime language to every eye, 
 and suggest the same devout and lofty emotions to every heart. A 
 JiOB, a leopard, a bear,-^an earthqiiake, a tempest, a swelling sea, aro 
 typs of the same ideas, and call forth the same thrilling sentatlons in 
 spectator. Hence die wisdom in selecting appropriate symbols 
 m the penoiis and scenes which fill up the great drama of human cxis- 
 tenoe, and diversify the prophetic chart, which the revealing Spirit 
 iioldt ap to the eye of the diligent and faithful student of the word and 
 'pfovldeiiee of God. 
 
 But, as on a |lobe of 13 inches diameter, the earth with all ita oceans 
 and contiBents, its mountains and valleys, its lakea mi islands, cities 
 and districts, can be displayed in the proper positions and relative sizes 
 of all Its partiv and in an instant presented to the eye; so in a symbol, 
 can be grouped together all the grand characteristics of a people or an 
 •vent, and so accurately and comprobensively, that by a single glancB 
 
 iJiS®^f ■?**"* *^" *** learned than llrom the perusal of a volume. 
 
 TMb is, indeed, an advantage which figurative representation has 
 over thiit which Is purely literal and descriptive. By a glance of the 
 •f* « a f 'o**®, or a map, one can have a better idea of a country, or 
 of lieeartbf than from the reading of volumes; so by considering a 
 •f mbolio representation, we may acquire a more vivid and comnn 
 hentiTO view of a subject than by the perusal of many pages. 
 
 There is but one eye in the universe that pierces al. nature through; 
 to which the past, the present, and the future arc equally plain. God 
 alone knows the future. He has revealed it. In the seventh chapter 
 of Daniel, now lying before me, we have one great meridian line, which 
 runs from the Euphrates to the ends of the earth, and from Uie reign 
 of Nebuchadnezzar, the proudest of Assyrian kings, to the ultimate 
 triumph of the Gospel throughout the whole earth. 
 
 We shall rapidly sketch the contents ofthis chapter, which embrace! 
 more of human destiny than can be gleaned from all human records. 
 Daniel is in vision translated to the Mediterranean — ^the great sea— 
 ■ymbol of people in commotion ; as the earth is of the people at res|p 
 There can he no more appropriate or striking picture of human society 
 than the sea. Sometimes it is tranqu'l and smooth as oil, like a splen- 
 did mirror reflecting the azure vault of heaven: anon it is ruffled by 
 a gentle breeze that ripples softly on its bosom : again, it swells and 
 foams and rages in huge mountain waves that strike with a sublime 
 awe the eye of every beholder. So the people who, to day are all in 
 peace and amity in the smooth current of their daily avocations, by some 
 evil wind or passion are swollen into some mob, or tumult, or tre- 
 mendous conflict, which for a moment rends the social compact, 
 destroys all confidence, and jeopardizes the best interests of all. Thus 
 in the symbol now before us ; — the winds, the passions of men, are in 
 some great tumult. They strive upon the ^eat sea. Four terrific and 
 appalling savage monsters in quick succession rise. 
 
 They were all sea monsters, for God's symbol of a tyrannical gov- 
 ernment has always been a savage wild beast. The first was like a 
 lion with eagle's wings — ^the fortunes of this eagle-winged lion com- 
 ing out of a tempestuous sea, fitly symbolized Assyria in its rise, glo- 
 ry, and decline, after the dynasties of more than fourteen hundred years. 
 
 The savage beast, like to a bear, raising itself on one side, standing 
 with three ribs in its mouth, viz. Babylon, Lydia and Egypt, represents, 
 because of its rapacity and cruelty y the empire of the Medcs and Per- 
 sians. This rose from the sea which overwhelmed the Assyrian pow- 
 er : and it continued for two hundred years. 
 
 A leopard-like monster, with four heads and four wings upon its 
 back, indicates the rapid conquests of Alexander. His short-lived 
 empire of ten years, reared upon the ruins of the Medo-Persian, and 
 spotted with various nations, finally partitioned among his own four 
 principal generals, is most appositely represented by the symbol of tho 
 sixth verse. 
 
 But a fourth beast« dreadful and tenible, and strong exceedingly, 
 having great iron teeth : which devoured and brake in pieces, and 
 stamped the residue with the feet of it, diverse from all the beasts 
 that were before it, having ten horns, portrays the Koman empire in 
 tliote fortunes connected with the principal figure In the group. In- 
 terpreters are as much agreed about the import of these symbols as are 
 lexicographers in defining the ordinary words of human speech. For, 
 although they may differ about the time when, or the place where, one 
 of these symbols may rise, or fall, there is scarcely any controversy on 
 the symbols themselves, or subjects to which they refer. 
 
 But the principal figure in these four monsters remains yet 
 to "be described. " I considered," says the prophet, " and, behold, 
 there came up among them (rather, " behind them" and unohserv- 
 «.) ...oiher UTT.. HUBN. before^ which, thr«e of U.e firs. horn. 
 
I't 
 
 DSBAIV IX!t Tin 
 
 iPito {iIucIumI up by tim roots.** Mmmf as defined oy the Spirit, roenn 
 kiiffs or kinjiniioiiis. Hie Roman empire was first partitioned between 
 ••iTiings or states, after the irruption of the northern barharians.— 
 l%pin, the kinff of France, gave to a pope of Rome one horn, vts. the 
 tisfchate of Ravenna. Charlemagne gave to Peter's successor the 
 klmfiomof the Lombarda-^the second horn ; and Lewis the Pioua con- 
 imed to the Pope the Siaie if Bome^ a third horn of the original ten. 
 Thus, before the Httk kom became very conspicuoos, three horns made 
 liNim for it, and it occupied their plaises. 
 
 But the ikmntk Aorn is particularly described in the words followiitg, 
 to wit : ** In this hom were a/a like the eyes of a man, and it had a 
 MwH speaking great things.*' Here we have a hom, a government, 
 full of eyes^— sagacious, politici eiimin| : and eloquent, persuasive, 
 boastful, rhetorical, for such are the chief attributes of the hmrn full of 
 tyiis, having a m&uik^ ius. The identificatbn of this horn is the grand 
 
 S|ioint before us. We shall, therefore, hastily seek out its distinguish- 
 ttrihtites. 
 ' reading the chapter with, now and then, the interposition of a 
 , we shall see that the peculiarities of the HUk kom are clearly 
 tad definitely marked. 
 
 ** I beheld,** says Daniel, **I contemplated the horns till the thrones 
 were cast down (rather set np : as in the Vulgate, pouti mtni,} and the 
 Ammwv or days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the 
 hair of his head like the pure wool, his throne was like the fiery flame, 
 and his wh^ls as burnin| fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth 
 from before him, thousand thousands ministered to him, and ten thou* 
 ■and times len thousand stood before him, the judgment was set and 
 •h0 hooks were opened. I beheld then, because of the voice of the 
 fmnt words which the hom snake, I beheld till the beast was slain 
 •ud Mb Am% destroyed^ and gifen to the burning flame.*' Mark, the 
 Mllire and complete destraetion of the beast of the little ktfrti is as- 
 signed to his arrogance and blasphemy, — because of the words which 
 he spake against God and his saints. The other beasts simply lost 
 their dominion, but their lives were spared. ** As concern! nor the oth- 
 er beaalSt they had their dominion taken away, but their lives were 
 proioiiMi." So ends the general statement concerning the whole, and 
 the broEMi, and the restored, empire of the fourth beast. 
 
 But to proceed to the second part of the vision. *' I saw," &c. 
 ** One like a Son or MAn^har^tumk) came with the clouds of hea- 
 IfD, and came to the Ancient ifdayst and they brought him near befora 
 Um, and there was givea him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, 
 1km all people, nations, and languages should serve him ; his dominion 
 is an everlastinf dominion, which afaall not pass away, and his king- 
 dom that which shall not be destroyed. I asked the meaning of all this, 
 ■0 he told me and made me understand the interpretation of Uie things." 
 
 We have now an interpretation authorized and confirmed. »*The8e great 
 beasts which are four, are four kings which shall arise out of the earth. 
 But the saints of the Most Hioh shall take (receive) the kingdom, 
 and possess the kingdom for ever — even for ever and ever." "Then 
 1 would know the troth (meaning) of the fourth beast (empire,) 
 and of the ten homa ; and of that hom that had eyes, and a mouth that 
 ■pake very great thtnjFs, whose look was more stout than his fellows." 
 The inletpieling aogei then explatna this portion of the vision. '' The 
 
 ROMAH cathomc rbligiox. 
 
 227 
 
 fbnrth beast shall he the fourth kingdom." (King and kin|:dom are 
 BomeUmes used interchangeably.) There never were but four great 
 universal empires on earth, and there neper will he another, ^cept that 
 of the Messiah.— His universal empire will be the fifth. The fourth 
 beast " shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down and break 
 it in pieces."— So did the Roman empire. And the ten horns are len 
 kings (or kingdoms) which shall arise out of this empire or kingdom ; 
 and another (thk little horn) shall arise after them. And he shall 
 be DIVERSE (not merely political) from the first (ten) and he shall sub- 
 due three kings ; not only shall three of the kings give place to 
 him«--hut he shall destroy the antagonist power of the three empires 
 that preceded his. "He shall speak great words against the 
 Moot High, and shall wear mi the saints of the Most High, and 
 think to change times and /awt.— (These three never met in any beings 
 eave the popes of Rome.) And they shall be given into his hand un- 
 til a time, and times, and the dividing of a time." 
 
 A time is one annual revolution ; a times, two ; and half a time, 
 halfayear; in all,/or/y-/u»o months ; or one thousand two hundred 
 and three score days,— the product of forty-two thirties ; or forly-two 
 Jewish months. Of all this, and of one day being given for a year, 
 there is no controversy among Catholics or Protestants. The continu- 
 ance of the empire of the little horn is therefore predestined to twelve 
 
 hundred and sixty years. . , . j 
 
 But the judgment shall sit. The long prayed for and expected judg- 
 ment shall be given in favor tfthe saints. Then shall be taken away 
 his dominion to eonmme and to destroy it unto the end or consumma- 
 tion. " Then*' with anticipated triumph be it spoken—" the kingdom 
 and dominion and the greatness of the kingdom, under the whole 
 heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most Htf;h, — 
 (They were not all worn out by the Little Hom) whose kingdom is an 
 everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve andobev him. 
 Hitherto is the end of the matter. 
 Now of all these items the sum is — - , „ ,. 
 
 1. It is a beast, or empire, or power, that ^w out of the Roman beast 
 S. It rose after the empire was divided into ten kingdoms. 
 
 3. It was a new and different power, saffacious and politic— with 
 human eyes — an eloquent, persuasive, and dennnciatoi^^ power. 
 
 4. It supplanted and displaced Mrcc of the original states of the 
 Roman empire or of the ten kingdoms into which it was at first divided. 
 
 5. It assumed more than any other empire. It uttered great things 
 •nd its look was more stout (daring) than its fellows. 
 
 6. It made war not against sinners, like other empires— it made war 
 
 '^X'^iS^ for. long .im«. gainst them. It «».««rf/fc«»6." 
 
 8. It presumed to change Umn and laws. How many fasts, aad 
 Irast8,and saints, and new laws, and institutions has this power set op ! 
 
 9. It had power to hold in subjection all saints, and to lord it over 
 them for a Ion or time. 
 
 10. It was to be consumed, gradually wasted as the Protestant Ke- 
 formation has been wasting its power and substance for three ceulunes 
 ..4ind is yet finally, suddenly and completely to be destroyed. Can 
 my learned opponent find all these characteristics and circumstances in 
 mu? other power or empire in the history of all time ! 1 trust he will 
 
I 
 
 BBHATB 0?l TIIB 
 
 fit « me an opimrtunity to mf9l§m on them fxiiiita and to defend tlie« 
 
 Bore fully. 
 
 Meiintifiie, to excite attention, I poeititrely affirm that these items 
 leter met in any King^, Kingdom, State or Empire, save that of Papal 
 Moine. There, and there only, can they all be found as large as life; 
 and as exact as answers the image in the mirror to the face. 
 
 Bill 1 hasten to identify this prediction with the Babylon of John. 
 
 And in doing this I can at present hat sketch the rudest outline. Let 
 
 "i open the 13ih chapter, 
 
 John stands in vision on the shore of the great sea, the Meditarrane- 
 
 I. He saw a savage beast rising out of the sea. It had $eom hmd» 
 
 and leu AeriM, and on its heads the names of blasphemy It resembled 
 
 the limit tie bear, and the leopard. It was composed of all that is 
 ••▼afe. The dragon, the serpent of my opponent. Pagan Rome gaT0 
 him hw power and his throne, and great authority.— How much does 
 this memblc the vision of Daniel ! This seven headed Empire with 
 ten home — It Is on this beast the woman sat — subsequently pictured 
 out as Babylon the Great. This is the Latin Empire which Kustatnei 
 thei Latin church. This is the beast out of which the Little Horn grew. 
 Ilic wounded head or the imperial^ which was the sixth head, was 
 healed by the great Charles, and his new empire controlled by the ec- 
 eletiastic beasu spoke blaspheoiiea and daring things against God, hit 
 name, and all that dwell In heaven. This new religious and poUacal 
 Empire "made war against the saints and overcame them."." And itcon- 
 *»nww (orfort^two months" "a time, and times and a dividing of time.' 
 His dominion extended over all the western Roman Empire. But 
 
 next comes the IMtk ifom— the ecclesiastical beast In John^s vision 
 
 this beast resembles a lamb, but it speaks like a dragon.' Christian 
 Rome spoke like Pagan Rome ! It obliged aU ike mrfk to worship the 
 dragon— It was Calholie ! ! It made an image of the Pagan beast. Il 
 gjve life to this image, and compelled all to die or worship the image 
 of the Pagan heast. It was then a bloody persecuting beast. It wai 
 Mohtrous as Pagan Rome. But instead of worshining dead heroes 
 it worships dead saints-^nstead of Goddesses it has Lordeases; angels 
 instead of demi-gods.— 
 
 Indeed Papal Rome has borrowed much from Pagan Rome— Old 
 Mpne had her pmt^fex wmmmmM^ her purgatory, priests and priestesses* 
 her victims and " A«ito." She had her lustral water as modern Rome 
 has her holy water. She had her vestal virgins as her descendant hat 
 ber nuns. She had her Pantheon as modern Rome has her Vatican, 
 and in the niches where stood the gods of the dragon now stand the 
 ■aints of the Roman Draconic lamb. 
 
 Mj present argument requires me to identify this beast with thf 
 mmm church or with the Little Horn.— And therefore in addiaon Ic 
 the resembling attributes already traced I proceed to the most definite 
 ®r its marks. " Here is wisdom. Let him who has understaodint 
 conpute the number of the beast : for it is the number of a man, and 
 bit number is six hundred and sixty six."— 
 
 The ecclesiastic beast, or kingdom is thus definitely the letters of a 
 Mine which together make 666. The name of a man is the name of 
 tills kingdom. Now we begin with a Roman saint.— even with the 
 peat IreniBus. We shall find in the name of the king and founder of 
 Ibe Laun empire the name of this propheuc personage— It is said by 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC VSLI6ION. 
 
 829 
 
 die Mini that imong the Greeks the king's name was written Laieinm 
 ^(he letters of which being numerals in that language exactly make tht 
 iam:lbr a ao 
 
 T 
 t 
 
 V 
 
 t 
 
 s 
 
 10 
 
 m 
 m 
 
 goo 
 
 '666 
 
 He made the name of the founder stand for the name of the empire. 
 But Bellarmine, a learned Jesuit, objects to this— that in the language 
 and at the time the Revelation was written the oi^ho^phy of this name 
 was A«T/rcf, and not A-nww. And this being so there is a plausible, nay a 
 relevant objection aginst the interpretation of Irenaeus. We pause not 
 to examine this matter ; because we find a much more consistent and 
 convincing exposition In the tme and proner name of the Institution 
 which in Greek was always written in full. 
 
 HAmrt^n&siiKitx. The Latin Kingdom. H^-S, A=3n. »=-l, t-=300, »— IS^ v-kSO, 
 il»R. &^2, »-=!. «-=900. •=-10, )c=30, 1=5. .=-10, »=1 : The aum. 666. 
 
 The conclusion from these premises is, that as there is no other kmg- 
 dom on earth whose name is exactly 666^and as the beast, the symbol 
 of this kingdom, has been proved to be the Latin emjnre^ and He La* 
 iine Basifeia, being proved to contain 666, this definitely and clearly 
 marks out the Roman Institution as that to which the 13th chapter of 
 the apocalypse and the 7th chapter of Daniel refer. 
 
 The only question of apparent difficulty that can be here-asked, is : 
 —Whether Rome Pagan or Rome Papal is intended : for th'it Rome 
 is intended cannot be questioned. That it is Rome Papal is evident 
 from the fact that what is called the second Beast, chap. 13, verse 12, is, 
 chap. 18 and 20, called the false prophet— and this is the beast whose 
 name is given as numerically equivalent to 666. 
 
 This moreover explains that love of Latin which to this day distin- 
 guishes this party. They not only have long gloried in the name Bo' 
 man or Latin Catholic or Church of Rome, but they still say mass in 
 Latin, and perform their religious services in that dead language ; for 
 although Paul " had rather speak five sentences in the vernacular, than 
 ten thousand sentences in an unknown tongue" — that he might edify 
 his hearers,— and although in the age of the " primitive Fathers" the 
 whole church prayed and taught in the language of every country 
 where they worshiped ; still for the sake of Latin, to this day and even 
 in this country, Romanists perform their most devout services in that 
 dead and foreign tongue as though God himself preferred that language 
 to every other. Thus they are providentially bearing to all nations and 
 languages the grand mark, and the number of the name which identifies 
 them as the beast and Babylon of John. 
 
 To return to the imagery of the Prophet John : — ^In tlie 17tli chapter 
 this ecclesiastic establishment is compared to a great harlot, with whom 
 the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and as having intox- 
 icated all the inhabitants of the earth with the wine of her whoredom. 
 The woman is further identified by being described as silting upon a 
 §earld bead, full of blasphemous names, having Eeven heads and tm 
 karmt and she is adorned with purple and scarlet, with gold, and dia- 
 monds, and pearis ; having a golden cup in her hand, full of the abomi- 
 „Uo„a„^dp<.l.u.ionofherwbored,»s. She had upoo her forehead he, 
 
9i^ 
 
 HBBATE OM' WUM 
 
 SOMAN CAiaOUC SEU6IOX. 
 
 '•'Wr'JI , 
 
 ''w 
 
 i<iif 
 
 * 
 
 ;li 
 
 If 
 
 
 ■MBO Wllini |«>^' MTSRETt iSAItUIII TBI ' tvBtAT* TUB MUTHkI Of 
 
 PnniiHtt samm vat AMiiiiifATWKs or thb EAweruJ* And to mtkt 
 the matter more certain, the Spirit testifies, Terse 18 : **The woman 
 which yon saw is the great city (spiritually called Babylon, literally, 
 Papal Rome) that rules over the Mnffs of the earth.'* 
 
 Having thus connected these symbols, and seen the co-sdaptation to 
 the same subject we shall here introduce the Apostle Paul with his 
 plain and unfigrurative description of the Man of 8in, 2d chap. 2d The»* 
 ••lonians, and examine the congruity of his description with the sym- 
 liols of Daniel and John. He may be regarded as the literal interpre- 
 ter of them both. 
 
 ** Ijtl no mm deceit e yon by any meam : for that daj shall not come, 
 •Ifffiiit there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, 
 tiw Lu of perdition ; who oppo<4th and exalteth himself above allUial 
 u ealled God, or that is worshiped; so that he, as God, sitteth in the 
 tMiple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, 
 that, when 1 was yet with you, I told you these things ! And now ye 
 kiMiw what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For 
 tiM mystery of iniquity doth already work ; only he who now letteth 
 will let, until he he taken out of the way. And then shall that Wick« 
 ed be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his 
 mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even 
 him, whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all powers, and 
 signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteous* 
 MSS in ^em that perish ; because they received not the love of the 
 tMlh, thatlliey might be saved." Verses 3 — 10. 
 
 The Apostle foretells an iifrntmy fa falling away) in the Church ; 
 which apostarj would issue in the full revelation or manifestation of 
 IHB Maw or Sm, (or ofidoiatry^ for this is tke sin of Jews and Gen- 
 ilet.) The Jiifi o^ Sin is agam designated as the Son or PcnoiTioir. 
 He was Ibe subject of past prophecy as Judas was; for on that account 
 he too was called the Son of Perdition— foredoomed to ruin. The names 
 oiMinaf&n and Stm ofruin^ fitly represent this apostacy. The at- 
 tributes ar#d circumstances peculiar to this passage are tlie following. 
 
 1. He was to come forward stealthily by degrees and unol'served, 
 (like Daniers Little Horn, to grow up behind the others) "The secret, 
 or mystery of iniquity already inwardly works.** 
 
 S. He could not be revealed Ull «' lie who restrains or lets (the Pa- 
 gan power) be taken out of the way." Political power as well as ec- 
 clesiastic was necessary to his development. So the Little Horn 
 did not appear conspicuous till alter the ten horns grew out of the 
 Iburth beast. The Maa of Sin is, in historic truth, the youngest horn 
 that sprang from the Pa|rao beast. 
 
 S. He was to eialt himself above all that Is called a Goi^ or an 
 object of worship. My learned opponent will agree with me that God 
 hem may mean, as sometimes it does in the Bible, a magistrate or king. 
 And certainly not only in the arfSgant titles which he assumes, but 
 in tho diajMnsafions which he has granted, in respect to laws 
 divinn and human, no magistrate, kini, or potentate, ever ^laim- 
 od so much on earth as the Man of Sin, as tlie Popes of Rome 
 He is not only styled « Universal Father,'* " Holy Father," " His 
 Holiness,'* •• Sovereign Pontiff,** "Supreme Head of the Church 
 on Eanh,'* '• Pater Familias," " Successor of Peter," " Prince of tho 
 
 apostles,** "Infallible One.'* "Vi«ar of ChrisC* " Lieuteiwint of 
 Christ,*' •* Prince i>f the World ;** bat be is styled, still more blaspbo- 
 roonsly, ♦• Lord of Lords,** a god on earth, " Lord God the Pope.** 
 
 4. He places himself " in iTie temple of God." This ascertains ths 
 Man of Sin more specifically than any other attribute or circumstance in 
 the passage. He is no Pagan idolater ; he is no infidel Jew ; he is no 
 author of a new religion ; but he siis in the Church of Jesus Christy- 
 God's building— God's temple— holding the fundamental truths of re- 
 
 igion, as did this community when the Man of Sin invaded the 
 Church; for, yet, the great/oc^ of Chrisiianity are acknowledged by 
 the Church of Rome, though ^^made ifiw effect by her traditions. 
 
 5. Ho exhibits or "shows himself to be a god.** He claims to 
 reiim not only for Christ as his vicar, but the homage due to a repre- 
 sentative of God lie haughtily appropriates to himself. Such is tho 
 
 Erediction of the man of sin ; and who that is conversant with the 
 istory of the popes of Rome, from their coronation, standing on the 
 altar in St. Peter's church, receiving the title of God's vicegerent, 
 assuming the honors of tlie supreme head of the whole church ; pow- 
 er over tSe angels of heaven, over the inhabitants of Hades, and over 
 the laws and statutes of the bible, can think that Paul exagrgerdtes the 
 picture by saying that this son of perdition, and man of sin, was to 
 pass himself off, was to "«Ao«; himself as a God,'*'' „ « iv_ 
 
 6. He is called the lawless one ; verse 8, " the wicked one. So Da- 
 niel's little horn is represented as " changing (or seeking to change) the 
 times and the laws." Instances of such dispensations and indulgences 
 could be multiplied, ad libitum^ demonstrative that such have always 
 been the professions and assumptions of the " Princes cf tke Jpostles,** 
 
 7. But another incident in the history of the decline of the man of 
 ain deserves our attention, and singularly identifies him with the em- 
 pire of the little horn. " Whom the Lord shall consume (or slay) br 
 the spirit of his mouth, and destnn/ by the brightness of his coming. ' 
 And of the dominion of the little horn, says Daniel: "They shall 
 ionsume and destroy it to the end.*' Paul seems to have quoted the 
 ▼ery words of Daniel, and thus most unquestionably identified the 
 iiMfi ^ «fi and iiltle horn as designating the same apostacy from 
 Christ and his religion. .... j 
 
 8. In describing the coming of this man of sin, he is compared to 
 the deceptions, assumptions, and approaches of Satan, who has often 
 assumed a divine mission or the power of miracles. So the Roman 
 church has ever pretended to the power of working miracles, and has 
 gained and still retains much power by false signs and lying wonders. 
 
 Of this apostacy, and of the rise and progress of this man of sin, 
 as described by Paul, we may mark his growth and progress in full 
 agreement with the records of authentic history in the following order 
 and style :— He was an embryo in Paul's time. (The mystery of in- 
 iquity doth already Inwardly work). He was an infant in the time of 
 Victor 1., 195. He was a bold and daring lad in the time of Constan- 
 tino tho Great A sturdj atripling in the days of Leo I., when au- 
 ricular confession came in. He was nineteen years old in the days 
 of Justinian's code ; and a young man full twenty-one, when Boni- 
 face HL received from Phocas the title of Universal Patriarch or 
 Pope, A. D. 606. He was twenty-five when Pepin and Charlemagne 
 cave him political power and fflory, A. D. 760 : and at full prime, or 
 at thiity-five, when Gregory the Great took the crown from the e»n- 
 
ft 
 
 • 
 
 ii 
 
 i ilii 
 
 TPl 
 
 pi 
 
 339 DBHATB ON TIIK 
 
 fcioff Ilfmj mil gave it to Rodolpliua. He Imd leacKed his gnmd «ii« 
 naetocib In tlio dfty* of Wiekliff, mi Luther give h|iii..^. mortal thnisty 
 which iiitiodiicod iRtohis syslem thai chronic consmnption under which 
 he has ever since lingered. But it remains for John the apostle, and lait 
 prophet of the church, to declare his last agonv and final overthrow. 
 
 As we have no time more than to slcetdi the naked outline, wf 
 ahai haalBii to the consummation, as respects the Bah j Ion of John 
 ■o eineiiy Identified with the subject before us. In his apocalyptic 
 developments, 18th chajpter, he deelares her final doom. My propo- 
 sition carries in it the indication of a monster. Ske is the Mm of 
 8tn ! Bahfkm the Greai-^^ eit^f a hemtf a woman^ a i/o/e, a per»eew 
 ting power { aearid^ purple, drunken with the blood of the lotnit, with 
 IkeMaod of ike mmr^fr$ *f Jetun ! ! Mvstbry ! By mystory she rose, 
 she reigns ; — ^her mystery of pureatory, transubstantiation, relics, mi- 
 racles, signs, sacraments, and unfathomable doctrines, have given her 
 power : for, says Paul, (2d Thess. ii.) describing the advances of this 
 son of ruin, and lawless one, " His coming Is according to the ope* 
 ration of Satan, in all power and lying wondern." — Douay Testament. 
 
 Babylon, the ancient capital of Chaldea, great as it was, was but 
 the type* Her antityne is the spiritual city. This city sits upon the 
 seven mountains of tne *'*'Hoiu Moman Empire^*'' which the heirs of 
 Papin elected. For thus did they blasphemously designate the 
 new empire erected out of the seven grand electorates of Germany ; 
 the seven heads of that empire which sustained the assumptions of 
 the papal see. 
 
 But we have now to do with her overthrow. The means of her decay 
 are, first, the spirit of the Lord's mouth. The reading, preaching, and 
 f lienlating of Ine Bible. The second is the hatred of the ten horns ; "For 
 the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the 
 whoie^ and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh 
 |nd burn her with fire.*' iVesA is the symbol of riches. And riches 
 aha has had beyond comparison. It Is said, that in two churches in 
 flfsin, some fifty years since, there were more gold and silver, in 
 aainlB, apostles, and angels, than the richest sovereign in Europe was 
 worth. Her real and personal estate has never yet heen valued. But 
 the political powers shall get tired of the cupidity and insatiable ap- 
 petite of this monster, and shall plunder her resources and confiscate 
 her estaiOv as in France and England, and thus shall her ruin com 
 miPiS* Bmt at the moment when judgment shall be given in favor 
 nf tha saints of the Most Highr— when the hour of her destruction 
 has come suddenly and in an instant, as when an angel hurls a mill- 
 stone into the sea, shall Home with all her glory be swallowed down, 
 and engulphed in immediate and eternal ruin. We do expect In the 
 inal cataatrephe of Papal Rome a combination and concentration of 
 Almighty wrath. The vials of God's fiercest anger await her. The 
 Plamies of Egypt, Sodom, and Jerusalem are In store for the Son 
 of Perdition. In the battle of Armageddon, blood shall flow for 
 liHa furlongs, to the bite of the horses' bridles. It is remarkable, 
 that this 1600 furlongs make exactly the whole extent of the State of 
 Borne, whkh the popes have so long held. From the Tiber to the 
 Po Is jiat mn miles or 1600 furlongs. Still the laat act of this ap- 
 palling drama will be short. The aitllleiy of Heaven's vengeance 
 shall hnrot upon her In a mmiMili Ibr Omnipotence has a long con- 
 troversy affainst her for her evil deeds. ! have cnly time 'o add, On:! 
 
 ■OMAN CATHOLIC SSLIOION. 
 
 233 
 
 H fbings said by Daniel, Paul, and John perfectly harmomze in Aa 
 a«w«etiuess and eompleteness of her destruction. However gradiiaJ, 
 Ibr a time, the oonsninption and decay of her strength and glory, she 
 will die a violent death ; for all the witnesses attest that a mddaa and 
 overwhelming destruction awaite her. ^ , . , , ^ . . ._. . 
 
 But amid ttie tremendous darkness of this dread hour, ttie bnght 
 and morning star of Israel appeara: for as soon as the flying angel, 
 as it flite across the heavens, announces in words of everlasting joy, 
 that the hour of her judgment has come, the angel in his rear, aUeij- 
 dant on his flight, shouts triumphantly from east to west : ** It is fal- 
 len! It is fallen ! Babylon the great is fallen!" Then shall there be 
 •'voicesandthnnders, and lightnings, and the universal eaiihquake 
 which shall bring the cities of the Gendles to the dust." Then will 
 be the time when a voice from heaven exultingly shall say: "K^ 
 loice over her, ye holy apostles and prophete: for God has avenged 
 von on her! Then the immense multitude of samls,— the martyred 
 minions in heaven shall say : Hallelujah ! Salvation, and glwy, and 
 power to the Lord our God : for his judgmente are true and nghteous : 
 for he has judged the great harlot, who corrupted the earth with her 
 fornication, and he has avenged the blood of his servants shed bv her 
 hand ! And a second time they said, Hallelujah ! and the smoke oT 
 her torment ascended forever and ever!" , , , ^ , . 
 
 Then, indeed, shall the kingdoms of the whole earth become the 
 kincrdoms of the Lord, and of his anointed. Then the cause, so long 
 oppressed, shall universally triumph : for ages of prosperity and joy 
 are vet to crown the labors of Messiah; and untold millions, the 
 trophies of his mediation are yet to gladden heaven and earth by their 
 cheerful submission io his authority, who shall then be acknowledged 
 the TishtM King of kings and Lord (f Iord». . ,^ _^ . 
 
 Such a catastrophe is even feared at Rome itself. The popes hwe 
 uttered it abroad ; they have proclaimed to the world that they felt St.- 
 Peter's chair tremble under them;— that the throne of the prince of 
 the apostles now tottera to its fall. In dolorous strains they lament in 
 their encyclical lettere the prevalence of liberal (with them infidel) 
 principles. Even in Italy and in Spain the sovereign pontiff observes 
 Indications of the spirit of the age. Free discussion, the liberty of 
 the press, or even a whisper about free government, m the environs 
 of Rome, grievously afflicte him. It has been said by the most mtel- 
 liffent in the internal affaire of Roman Catholic ccuntnes, that it 
 would not be the most unexpected event if the present incumbent of 
 the Papal chair should be the last of the popes of Rome. 
 
 Public opinion is fast changing even in those countries, and there 
 IS an undercurrent which, like a subterraneous fire, is liquifying the 
 foundations of the hills and mountains on which this proud super- 
 structure rcare ite aspiring head. The pope is looking abroad, per- 
 haps to the "mountains of the moon," or to the great valley, as to a 
 wilderness. In which there may be an asylum reared for lam in such 
 a contingency as might drive him from the Eternal city, who knows 
 hut that the ecclesiastic politics of Roman Catholic Europe have 
 aided the tide of emigration prospectively, on the chances that are to 
 decide the fortunes of Uie hierarcliy in the Old World. 
 
 But the destinies of western Rome, the theatre of the prophecies 
 before us, exhaust the symbols of \hf^ ^redicuons. The fortunes 
 of our country and of the Papacy here, belcng to another chapter. 
 U 2 2111 
 
It 
 
 lIBiATB ON THB 
 
 SOMAN CATROUC BXLIOION. 
 
 235 
 
 'ill 
 I 
 
 'III 
 
 14 
 
 i 
 
 Wliether il aliall simtiltaaeoitftly fall im tlie New world, or shall seek 
 ,lHPt to reeruit ilt shattoied iii'liiiilit an ~ 
 
 ami 9Mk to found a great Aiihi- 
 Romaii Catholic hietarchy, is • quitliiM of grave import, 
 vhieh it Is am. my pmwimm to examine. 
 
 Such, however, are its origin, its historYt and its doom in the OM 
 world, as sketched hy the nii|fer of God. And the history of Eu« 
 •SpSiv inr twelve hundred and thirty years, proves, beyond a reasonable 
 'Mlil»ri>'iMl BanieL Paul, and John spake as tkey were moved by the 
 .HfllV' opifit. 
 I 'Oannot .sil down wi'thoat an apolooy iar the indeaest' of this gieat^ 
 It would require hours to ilTiip the map wUeh I have laid 
 you. I have endeaTored only to estah ish the ^nd landmarks, 
 and point out the bearings of piopheey upon this instttution. In hopes 
 ihit my learned opponent will give me an opportunity to fortify the 
 weak points^ and to illustrale the obscuie, I give place ; having, as | 
 jud|e, isdeemed the pledge which I tendered m my fourth proposition : 
 for m the history of all time, no person will ever find any one sub- 
 jert in which so many— nay, all the grand characteristics of this 
 piophelle tyranny, so clearly, liteially, and hamioniously meet as in 
 npii liiino. On this point 1 challenge special investigauon.— [Time 
 " r'jiliif 9 minutes*] 
 
 Maff pad 10 o*ok^t J, M 
 
 B'lmop PmtcBLL 
 
 Before I take review of my friend's last speech, T wish to complete 
 my previous one. I was speaking on the subject of auricular and pri- 
 vate confession, when I was last up, and endeavoring to prove that it 
 was a practice not contrary to scripture, nor immoral. I have. In proof 
 of this Dosition, quoted authorities from scripture, from the ancient re- 
 cords or the Catholic church, and from the divines and practice of the 
 . Enffllah ehoioh* I now add to them, a quotation from the discipline 
 of the Methodist church, edition of 183{^, New- York. And, to show 
 that every argument addressed to you hj my friend, falls with as great 
 force, nay jrreater, on Protestants, I will read the following extract, 
 (p. 84.) You will observe, my friends, that I do not arraign the Me- 
 thodists, as immoral, or quote their discipline from insidious motives ; 
 hut, to show that our practice is tmUtOed in a way, by which it is not 
 tm|iroved, but liable to great abuse ; and that every thing that is said 
 tgalnst us, may be said against others. 
 
 Section III*— "Qf tkt Band Societies. " Two. ikrm or four traebelieTcrt, who 
 hate collided in each other, form & band.— Only it is to be observed, that in one of 
 thrae baadi, all nrntt be men, or all women ; and all married or all nnmarried.*' p. 83. 
 * Jtelet af fl« Band SoeisHem.** •* Tb« daalgB of oar ueeting i^ to obey that 
 esnpiaai of God. Coolett your laulls oaa to another, and pmy one for aoothcj', 
 that V* may be healed." James, ▼. 1$. 
 
 •• S#iiie of the questions proposed to one- before he it admitted among as. may 
 "^J? ***'• ^/f^c*** P- 84. ''I.* Hare you the fofgireness of your iint? (a pret^ 
 
 ■fd qneatbn, my friends to answer, whea the ilfflfliare assnrea at, Eoclca. 
 
 u 1, - Man knoweth not whether he be worthy of lofe, or hatred;" In olh«r 
 
 whether he hath, or hath sot, forgiveness of bin sins.) S." Mas no sin, 
 
 anwaid or outward, dominion over you? (What scrutiny!) 6." Do you desire 
 to be told of vour Hulls? 7.<» Do you desire to be told of ail your faults, and 
 that plstn ana kmntf !.• Do yon desire that every one of us should tt-ll you 
 from tima to time, whatsoever is in our heart, conceminir yoof 9.» Coosidmr! 
 lo yo« deaiie we ahoay tell yon wknlaoevar we tfaaii, whatsoever wm fear, 
 whalioevcr we hear concerainf yoaT ]0.*> Do you dis'ie that in doiiiff this, ifs 
 "■'"■"' aacloi© as |iossible. thai we should cuiU the qukk. aiid search 
 
 fonr heart to the bottoral !!.• Is it your desire and design to be on th.» and 
 all other occasions, entirely open, so as to ?peak without disguise, and without 
 teservet ^T Any of the preceding qaestions may be a^ked « often Mocca* 
 lion reouires: the four following at every meetioff. 85. !.♦ What known sins 
 
 tion requires: the lour loiiowing ai e^ery mectioff. a. 
 
 Zm jm committed since our l£rt meetinrt ^-V Whatj^iailar ♦"-Ptetiooa 
 iSZ yon met withi S.^ How were you deliveredl 4.» Whathaveyou thougtit, 
 •aid. ir done, of which yon doubt whether it be sin. or notT ^.^^ 
 
 Tkey must reveal the whole soul and body, inward and witwanl 
 sins; and I defy roy friend to quote any thing, even from Smith s 
 Liffuori, to surpass that. In the Catholic practice, the confession is 
 to the priest alone ; who is bound by holy vows, before God and man, 
 not to abuse his trust ; and it Is unheard of, that a priest has ever vio- 
 Isted his oath, by divulging the secrets confided to his ear, as the 
 minister of the sacrament. But tell such secrets to one woman, and, 
 ■a the witty Frenchman said, when asked why he began a deed with 
 the words, *» Know one woman," &c. : " Why, if one woman knows 
 it, it is equivalent to »* all men," for they will all know it soon enouffli 
 from her.*' (a laugh.) I suspect, that my opponent also suspects by 
 this time, that he has got into a pretty badyix. 1 shall be amused to 
 see how he will ed out of the noose. 
 
 Now, my friends, I have advanced Protestant testimony, to show, 
 either that the champion of Protestantism has trodden most awfully 
 upon Protestants' toes, or to prove that the Catholic practice of con- 
 fession is not immoral. Did time permit, I might cite the most coa- 
 vincing testimony, from the fathers of the reformaUon, and from tbe 
 German princes, to show, that when the restraints of the confessional 
 were removed, the barriers of virtue seemed to be broken down. 1 do 
 not choose to use their testimony before this audience. It is suffi- 
 eiently well known, and it follows from it, that my opponent ought 
 not to speak ill of confession ; for it has every where proved itself to 
 be a useful practice, and one beneficial to society. It has been one of 
 the most remarkable aids to justice, in cases which legal process could 
 not reach. To show this, I will relate an anecdote. Some one, in 
 New- York, stole a quantity of silver spoons, and, having confessed 
 the crime to the priest, was told, that neither confession nor absol^on 
 could be of any avail, without restitution of the ill-gotten goods. Res- 
 titution was accordingly made. Here is a fine practical comment on 
 the subject. The pofice, having heard of the affair, insisted that the 
 uriest should disclose the name of the thief, and wished to compel him 
 to do so, to promote thereby, as they supposed they should do, the 
 cauw of justice. The priest, of course, refused to commit a flagrant 
 breach of trust, and modestly contended, that the cause of justice was 
 much more effectually promoted, by the course which a priest m such 
 ease pursued. Restitution had been made : was not this enough I 
 The police subpasnaed him to appear before the mayor of New-York, 
 the celebrated De Witt Clinton, who decided that the pnest could not 
 be compelled to give up the name. The lawyer employed by^e 
 priest, was Mr. Sampson, a Protestant, and an ornament to the bar. 
 He reported the trial. Before reading his speech, touching on this 
 verv topic of the morality or immorality of auricular confession, hear 
 the admirable, but too brief preface, he has prefixed to the volume. I 
 »m sure, every high-minded and honorable man heTe,^»»«J^«'„^^ 
 testant or Catholic, will subscribe cheeifully to his sentiments. "The 
 genersl saUsfectioo given to every religious denomination, by the d#- 
 
« 
 
 lllli 
 
 Sill 
 
 WEBATM cur TME * 
 
 eitioi of this interesanf auettion, is well ealcolatiNl to dissipate anfi- 
 fmltd pi«|iidifMM and nfigimis Jitloiiii«ai and tlM rafMiner fsela m 
 IMMB iiiiaraisttoii in inaking it public WImb that adjodicatioa 
 iliall \m omnpavBd with the baneful atatnten and judgnMiita in Europe, 
 iipOB similar 8nbjects« tbe snperior equltj and wisdom of American 
 Jwrispfndence, and civil orobity, will be felt; and it cannot fail to \m 
 well received lij the enughtened and Tirtuous of every commanity, 
 and will constitute a document of history, precious and instructive to 
 tii« present and future jenerations." Having produced before thm 
 mm% a book called, ** The Papist misrepresented, and truly repre* 
 ■ented,** and lead the misrepresentation first, he continoed : 
 
 "The papitt hrmfy reprefmted, belieres it datnnable in wij rel%ioa to nwkc 
 Ipdt of nwn. liowever he fimiljr holds, that when Chritt speaking to hit apot- 
 tM MM, John xm,f2, ** Reeeivt y< the Holy Ghost; whose aims ymi ihrnilj^ 
 fiM, ikmfmrejbrgivimi and wkosi tim ym sluUi retmm, M«y art rstmmd;'* 
 m gMe them, aad their niccetaora, the bishops and prtesta o( the Catholic 
 «Kh, authoritjr to absolve anjr truly penitent sinner from his tins. And God 
 iavinir thus rif en them Ike mimutry of retmeiUaiiam^ and made tht m Chrigfg 
 kgmtes, t Cor. v. 18, 19. 20, Chri$f§ mimMten mnd the dispenstrs ^ ih% 
 m^eriet of Christ, 1 Cor. ir. and fivei them power that whatsoever Iktv 
 mmad o» emrth ahaU be loosed in heamm, Mattt. x»iii, 18, he undoubtedly be- 
 lijVii, that whoioeTer comes to tbem, maktnr a sincere and humble confession 
 of bn sint, with a true repentance and a hrm purpose of aniendnient, and • 
 h«arly resolution of toning from his evil ways, may from them receive absoln- 
 tiwi, by the authority given them from heaven, and no doubt bnt God ratifies 
 above the sentence pronounced in that tribunal; loonng in heenen wh^wevet 
 m lAiis lomtd by them •n emHh. And that, whosoever comes without the due 
 jweparatbn, without a repentance from the bottom of hb heart, mod real intea. 
 tjom of forsaking his sins, receives no benefit by the absolution; but addt tia to 
 sin, by a high contempt of God's mercy, and abuM of his sacraments." 
 
 ^ :■"<> wonder then, this latter being the true character of confession, if the bit* 
 
 itiMi eMtoiaa of the Catholic faith have still respected It; aad that discerning 
 ■liMls nave acknowledged the many benefits society might practically reap from 
 iS-JiSSnE***^ fawn its religious character. It has, I dare say, been oftenei 
 aHa»ei 1^ aaicaani than by good sense. The gentleman who arf^ied against 
 nStjM Ntpertad himself too much to employ that weapon, and I believe he hai 
 iSlll ai that good sense conk) uigc against it, which we take in very good part. 
 Bat while thia ordinance has been openly exposed to scoff and ndicule, ila 
 ezcelleoce has been concealed by the very secrecy it enjoins. If it led to liceo- 
 S??*''**^*f danger, that licentiousness, or that danger, would have come to 
 l%ht, and there would be tongues enough to tell it. Whilst on the other hand 
 lis utility can never be proved by instances, becante it cannot be shown how 
 ■May have been saved by it: how many of the young of both seiea, have been 
 m tba DMMt critical junctnro of their lives, admonished from the commlaiion of 
 ma iilal eruie, that wooM have brought the parents* hoary hairs with sorrow 
 to *• g«»«. The«! are secrets that cannot be revealed. 
 
 Since however, the avennet that lead to vke are many aad alluring, is it not 
 Will mat some one should be open to the repenting sinner, where the fear of 
 nanisbment and of tbe world's scorn, nay not deter the yet wavering convertt 
 m tbe road to dratrnction, is easy and laiooth, tiJiuM* descensus evemt, may 
 It not consist wuh wisdom and policy, that tbeie be one silent, secret path, where 
 thfdoobting MHant nay be invited to turn aside, and escape the tbronr that 
 »■■■" ■ ■■ " ^•— ' alO'njt' ®~—-- — .*— * —u^ ^_ :_ *»._ I •-* _ L^i__ r^ •. 
 
 BOXAN CATHOMC REIIGION. 
 
 237 
 
 «Aii^ *£ ,-■ j"**"/. .Some retreat, where, as in the boion of a holy hermit, 
 
 Wimin tbe tliada of innocence and peace, tbe pilrrim of this checqncred lifm, 
 any dimw new inspifalions of virtue and repose. 
 
 If the thousand waya of error, are tricked with flowers, is it lo wrong, that 
 toncwhera there ihould be a sure and gentle friend, who has no interest to be^ 
 tray, nocara, bnt that of ministering to the incipient curet The syren songs and 
 
 ^ ilahments of pleasure, may lead the young and tender heart astray, and the 
 repulsive Irown of stern authority. Ibrbid return. One step then gained or lost, 
 * vKloryor death. IM mm then mk you that are parents, whM:h wonM yos 
 
 pfenr, tint the child of your hopes should purma the couiic of rain, and con- 
 
 tinue with the companions of debacch and crime, or tire to the confession^, 
 wberv if compunction could once bring him. one genlle word, one wtll timed 
 admonition, one friendly turn by tbe band, might save your child irom ruin, and 
 your heart from unavailing sorrow? And if the hardened sinner, the murderer, 
 thta robber, or conspirator, can once be brought to bow his stubborn spirit, and 
 kneel before his frail fellow man. bvite him to pronounce a penaucc »a»t«^^o 
 hia eriaies, aad seek salvation through a full repentance, there w more gained, 
 than by the bloodiest spectacle of terror, than though his mangled luubs were 
 broken on the wheel, his body gibbeted or given to the fowls of the air. U 
 these reflections have any weight at all; il" this picture be but true, in any part, 
 better forbear and leave things as they are. than too rashly sacrifice to lealoua 
 doubts, or shallow ridicule, an ordinance sanctioned by antiquity and founded 
 on eiperience of roan's nature. For if it were possible for even faith, that re 
 noves mountains, as they say. to alter this, and with it to abolish tbe whole 
 fabric, of which it is a vital part, what next would follow ? Hundreds .o« oullions 
 of christians would be set adrift from all relig^ious fastening! Would it be better 
 to have so many atheists, than so many christians I P""/ "o^'^.^^f.* chu^h is fit- 
 ted to receive into its bosom, this great majority of all the chnstmn world ? Is 
 it determined whether they shall become Jews or Philanthropists. Chinese or 
 Mahoniroedans, Lutherans, or Calvinists. Baptists or Brownist*. MatenalisU, 
 UniversalisU or Destructionists. Arians, Trinitarians. Presbyterians. Baxtenans, 
 Sabbatarians. Millennarians, Moravians, Aotinomians or Sandeinanians, Jumpers, 
 or Dunkers. Shakers or Quakers. Burgers. Kirkers. Independents. Covenauters. 
 Ptairitans. Hutchisonians. Johnsonians, or Muggletonians. I doubt not that in 
 every sect that I have named, there are good men, and if there be, ' tru»t tney 
 will find mercy, but chiefly so as they are charitable, each to h» neighbor. And 
 why should they be otherwise? The gospel enjoins it; the constitution ordains 
 It. Intolerance in this country could proceed from nothing but a d iseased aflec- 
 tion of the nta mater, or the spleen." Catholic Question m America, p. 87. 
 
 I will now dismiss the question of confession. There are many things 
 to which I should like to give answers, in set speeches ; hot, whoever 
 
 „ my tnena numedly 
 
 him, for his occasional hoarseness of voice. 
 
 When my worthy opponent stated, in his long-blazoned proposition, 
 « She is the man of sin," I imagined that he meant no more than the 
 ©xcitinff of an innocuous laugh at the expense of" Mothee Church, 
 by making a man of her in her old age. How great, then, has been 
 my surprise, to see him, all sail set, dash headlong upon this rock of 
 commentators, the "infames scopulos interpretum, 'around which are 
 scattered in profusion, the wrecks of so many learned lucubraUons, for 
 the last 1800 years ! Catholics and Protestants, churchmen and lay- 
 men, ancients and moderns, Papias and Newton, and last, not least, 
 Mr. Alexander Campbell, have all egregiously foundered upon this 
 
 hidden shoal of controversy. j *i. . r. i • 
 
 No wonder, the learned Protestant, Scaliger, observed tfiat Calvin 
 was wise, in not writing upon the Apocalypse. " Saputt Calmmu, quia 
 in Jpocalwmn nan acritmi /" Had we a congregation of scary old 
 women, instead of intelligent and sensible men, around us, 1 should 
 expect to be looked at by many a prying eye, confident of seeing ont^ 
 mt least of the ten horns, sprouting, or already strong, full-grown, and 
 threateningly prominent from my forehead. But as 1 address reaso- 
 ners, not visibnaries, nor rhapsodists, nor fanatics, I must reason, 
 leavinir to my fanciful friend, the regions of imaginaUon, into whicii 
 he has'flown, far above my reach.— I would not fetch him too hastily 
 down, hut by sending a few arguments, at respectful distances alter 
 one anoUier to pluck a feather now, and a feather then from his wings. 
 
,TE on TBM 
 
 w may fetch hlin smlel|, and alowly, and with diffiiity hack again to 
 
 th»i.:ay piihwM i0n of logic, an«l common senne. Am« afs the we»» 
 pmrn with whish I, in the irat place, proceed to grapple with the 
 gentleman. 
 
 lal. Is he an infallible f He pretenda not, veillT, to h« aneh. 
 Then what is all his fanciful theory worth 1 It is based on reason and 
 iialory, is it! Well but llug:o Grotius, and Hammond, and Dr. 
 Hemit Thorodike, not to mention fifW others, of different leUffiona 
 denominations, but all Protestants, and at least as good biblical and 
 classical scholars, as m learned antagonist, hare ridiculed the notion 
 Hi calliif the pope of Rome Antichrist ! If only one learned and 
 fieiw PMeatiiit weie pitted against my friend, I would be eren 
 with him, or more than even.— How much superior in this argument, 
 when I hare so many wise men on my side, while all the monoma- 
 ibes are on his ! *« i«el them not lead people by the nose,'** says Thorn- 
 iikiBi ** to beUem they emt prove their mwposition that the pope i» mnH" 
 cArtfl, mnd the Fmneta, Momiemf when they cannot '* Thus the most 
 learned and orthoaox Protestant divines cannot subscribe to— they are, 
 on the contrary, ashamed of^this interpretation of my learned opponent* 
 
 ind* Those Protestants, who agree with him in calling the pope, 
 antlchfist, disagroe as to the particular pope to be so called, ana still 
 more, as to the time when the downfall of Babylon was to have taken 
 place, or is to take place— as in the case of the Jewish testimony 
 against Jesus Christ, there is no agreement among the witnesses. 
 Bnanbom confidently asserts that the popish antichrist was born in 
 the year 86 ; that he grew to his full size m 376 ; that he was at his 
 greatest strength in 636; that he began to decline in 1086; that lie 
 wouM die in 1640 ; and that the world would end in 1711. (Bayle Art. 
 Braunbom^ bisho|> Newton, Napper, Fleming, Beza, Melancthon, Bnl* 
 lager, had all their peculiar and conflicting theories, and none of them, 
 we may safely assert, has found the Apocalyptic key. Turien, Alix and 
 X0lt| lie in nothing more wise, and equally unsuccessful. 
 
 Sd. The scripture is opposed to him. For St, John says, 1st En. 
 eh. 3. ▼. M, ** 'fhat the liar who denieth Jesus to be the Christ is 
 antichrist'* Now this, the pope has neyer done ; but, on the con- 
 trary, he contends earnestly for tiie faith in the divinity of Christ, one* 
 delivered to the saints. 
 
 4th. Chnrch history is opposed to him. For it shews, at everi 
 page, how the pope sent missionaries into every part of the world 
 even the most distant, to gather barbarous nations into the fold ot 
 Christ, to preach to them salvation through his blood. Now acconl- 
 bf to the rale of the Savior, *«a kingdom, divided against itself, 
 Muinot stand.** And it is unheard of among all the signs of the anti- 
 christ, that he was to be the strenuous, and for many eenturies, the 
 only apostle of the true Christ, the Savior. Even the worst pope, 
 was true to doctrine, and made the beams of the sun of righteousnese, 
 df puffe, christian laith, gild the villages of Tartary and cheer the 
 iwnng horde i in its deserts. 
 
 6th. My friend is opposed to himself; for he said to day, that the 
 
 ■mm of the little horn signified wisdom and knowledge. Now as the 
 
 Catholic church is the mother of ignorance, the vicUm of blind and 
 
 lidiculous superstitions, the cause of all the obscurity of the dark 
 
 ages, she cannot be the antichrist Again its mouth indicated elo- 
 
 BOHAN CATHOUC SELIGIOIT. 
 
 239 
 
 quence, was eloquent-^Then my opponent is, himself, the beast, for 
 his speech was truly eloquent Indeed the ingenuity with which he 
 dressed up even the old story of " she is fallen, the mighty Babylon, 
 the great harlot, which corrupted the earth — Allelujah, Allelujah !'* 
 is proof positive that he would, by his comntand of ianguage, deceive, if 
 pmihle^ even the elect into the belief, that he had succeeded, where 
 80 many had failed, in breaking the seal of the mysterious volume* 
 He has clearly put the lion in a net and not so much as a mouse 
 durst approach, to gnaw a hole, to let him out 
 
 6th. He is opposed to Catholics. For they have been wont to ap* 
 ply the words ot St John, just before he speaks of the antichrist to 
 the Protestant sects, which, ther conceive, are fast hastening into the 
 arms of the Unitarians, who deny the divinity of Christ. " They 
 went out from us ; but they were not of us ; for if they had been of 
 us, they would, no doubt have remained with us, but that they may 
 be manifest that they are not all of us." I have already said some- 
 thing of the " monster," not merely " beast*' but ** monster," which 
 my friend attempted, like Prometheus, to form and steal fire from 
 heaven to animate, that he might call it •* Apostolic Protestantism." 
 ITiis, in our estimation, may be found to possess, some, at least of 
 the characteristics of the Apocaljrptic beast But we should beg leave 
 to baptise it *♦ Polypos" or " Legion." We could very satisfac- 
 torily shew that it has made war on the saints, and devoured them 
 by thousands, not to say millions ; that a portion of the beast so detains, 
 even now, when liffht from heaven is breaking, millions of the saints, 
 of those who for the Confession of Jesus Christ and for eonscituce 
 mke are reduced to a galling servitude, a poverty, and a degradation, 
 far worse than the lot of the negro, of the southern rice-fields. 
 
 My friend began by observing that symbolical language gives great 
 scope for the imagination. It sets us adrift upon a sea of speculation. 
 Is he r^y to embark upon that sea 1 Are his sails trimmed ! Is his 
 compass ready 1 If the sad experience, to which I have alluded, has 
 not disinclined him to the voyage, I assure him that he will find it to 
 eventuate like that of the three wise men of Gotham, whom our illus- 
 trious compatriot Washington Irving, sent to sea in a bowl. We may 
 drift with every wind, and current through a thousand perils, on this 
 wide ocean of imaeination. But my friends, what has miaginaiion to 
 do with this question t She is a very p^ood slave, but a very bad mis- 
 tress. Give me full scope with your imagination and I can prove to 
 you any thing and every thing, until we all are like the novel and ro- 
 mance writers of the present day — "tn fancy ripe, in reason rotten,^ 
 Novels and romances are, confessedly, works of fiction. They are not 
 npected to contain reason, and therefore they escape censure* But 
 when men pretend to pass off their day-dreams for the oracles of Hea 
 ▼en, they should remember the law of Deuteronomy, xiv. 5, " /U< tht 
 Prophet and forger ff dreamt shall be slain,"*^ and it tney tear not even 
 the fate of the false seer, at least they should apprehend the lash ot 
 criticism and ridicule. I know in this ^ood city, a respectable dame, 
 who is not a Catholic, but who has written a ream of paper on the 
 Apocalyptic visions. I suggest to my friend that he may possibly ga 
 ther additional light on the subject by comparing notes with her. She 
 has made it the study of years, and on one occasion, as I am credibly 
 informed, under the influence of the text's inspiration, she came into 
 
9411 
 
 dhuitb oif ma 
 
 JtUJCAM CATHOLIC RKUOION. 
 
 241 
 
 Pill 
 1 
 
 I 
 
 ihpffeli, Willi tiio 11111, mooiif and stais pictontd upon her ffrois, tnil 
 lf|ilii|r beiwfttli li«r foot m the solemnly moTod through the aiolo. 
 Ton, tlrv may have aoriKissed thia lady in oloqaence, thoo^ of thai I 
 am not aoite tare, bnf, certainly, iho waa a mateh for you, in imagina- 
 tion. My friend obaenred that the aiin would go down, it would take 
 Ua a wholt daj, to ahew the audience the raHmmk of the conceit with 
 Which he haa nvored us — I coald not help aasenting to the gentle- 
 tnan^s remark, and atiying, in my mind, that it waa even ao— nay, that 
 it woald take 365 days, before he coold shew that there waa anything 
 In it that was reasonahle. 
 
 Southey obnerves that the ** Romish cbuich was, in the worst of 
 limes, KowtTKR depiled, the salt or tsi earth, the sole oohsirta* 
 Trrt patitciPLE, bt which Eitropi was sated prom the lowest and 
 BI08T brutal barbarism ;*^ and yet in the Tery face of this reluctant 
 trihute, hy a firsi-rate Protestant historian, Mr. Campbell labora 
 to denonetrale that thia ▼enrehureh waa Anti-Christ! He places 
 lier on the Mediterranean, although it is a weary ride before you reach 
 lier aplendld domes and OTerlaaling— maugre the liquify ingr— hills, on 
 whicfi she sits, in humble, if in aueenly majesty. The Tiber, like its 
 namesake in the district, instead of being called ft tea, may well be 
 ealled a " Gwm ereek^* now. 
 
 My friend^a Lexicography, leonismt and Synchronisma, mutt hare 
 m ipaated for argument atronp aa the rock of Gibraltar, in his own 
 opinion. It is unanswered and unanswerable. He saya that God al- 
 ways by a beaat, meana some monster or other. Then Jesus Christ 
 miMl be •tome monster or other,' for what is the cry of Hearen's Ju- 
 Mlw «t the end of all thingal ^^ Behold the ^Lion' tfihe tribe ^Judah 
 l«ll «m>fflf/«lf'' and apin— *« Worthy was the Lamb that was slain," 
 In, IMS. My friend would m&ke a strange havoc with the language 
 and imagery of heaven— a curious monster of a Lamb and a Lion, than 
 which notwithstanding all he has said, I will force him to confess that 
 there can be nothing, as there is nothing, more beantiful than this en- 
 tire passage. The Evangelists are represented in the vision of Ei«- 
 kM at Beasts and Birds of prey. Are they too Anti-Christs ! Eng- 
 liii has elMMOn the Rampant and Roaring Lion for her emblem. My 
 IHend baa piaited and diapfaiaed her. What portion of Anti-Christ, 
 of the wtrnn of tin, h§kef She has persecnted — and I might with far 
 more truth aay to her, what the martyred Robert Emmett said to Lord 
 Moibiiry, **fan the innocent blood your ladytkip km ahed could be col- 
 keted tfilo Mf mreai reservoir, ymr Lad^pMp mSgit twim in ii,^ My 
 friend apoke of Elitabeth'a long life. He did not aay of how many 
 Jpaara ahe abridged the life of the •• JWr Queen / fiboto." Politically, 
 tniellectnaUY, and morally, Rome, or if you will, the papacy was the 
 Savior of Eurooe, as all hiatoriana ajreo. How, llien, could ahe bo 
 ilie • Beast !• It ia prepofteroua. Why all this haa been prophesied 
 mm ftlailM, anil piopheaiod and IklaUled again. Forty, or fifty yean 
 •!!>»«• iif wwfiiilo fHond there (Rer. Mr. Badin, the firat prieat or- 
 dtaiued In the United States) etn inform you, almanaes were published 
 in Kentucky, stating the precise day and minute, when the Hallelujah 
 was to be intoned for the Downfall of Babylon ! The day haa passed, 
 and what of it! I have got a book here, which makee Napoleon Bo- 
 naparte the man of sin. Bom on an Island, in the Mediterranean, 
 C^fiilei, deriving his power fiom the French ReroloUon, wMch afieel! 
 
 ed to emsb Christianity, I'lnlaiiie; which substituted decadi for Sa> 
 oath ; prolaiied templea: adored a vile woman in the temple of God, 
 Imiiiolatod and expatriated thoosanda upon thousands of priests, and 
 hoped that the last of kings might be strangled with the viscera of the 
 last of priests: plucked Piua VII. from the chair of St. Peter, drag- 
 ged the saints, the venerable monks by their beards, from the horns of 
 the altar, &c. &c. The Apocalypse is a sealed book, which Crod haa 
 not vouchsafed to unfold to man. Better practise what we do know, 
 with certainty, of his adorable will, rather than blaspheme what we do 
 not understand. Meanwhile, if ever there was made a plausible appli- 
 cation of this mysterious prophecy, behold it in the rise, progrress, and 
 errest of Mahommedanism. The sea, or lake, the year 666, the war 
 on Christ and the saints ; the sword and Koran ; the watch-word Be- 
 lieve or die, the conspiracy of Christendom during the crusades tr. 
 check its power, the gloriously disastrous battle of Lepanto, the pre- 
 sent crippled, but still formidable state of Islamism, all pictured so 
 vividly aa almost to convince us that we have surely discovered the 
 object of the prediction. Let us read from Waddington. I shall make 
 a few brief pauses which yon will fill up by appropriate reflections. 
 How few have understood the appallin? dangers that this civil and 
 religious despotism of the Impostor of Mecca, threatened, during so 
 many ages, to Christianity and the world ! 
 
 •*Tiic leveoth century wai marked by the birth of a n«w and resolute adver- 
 lary, who began his career with the most stupendous triumphs, who has torn 
 from ut the possession of half the world, and who retains his conquests even to 
 this moment. Mahomet was bom about the year 570; we are ignorant of the pre- 
 cise period of the nativity of that man who wrought the most extraordinaiy re- 
 volution in the afiairs of this globe, which the agency of aov being merely hu- 
 maa has ever yet accomplished. His pretended mission did not commence till 
 he was about forty years old, and the date of his celebrated flight from Mecca, 
 tfM Hedjirah, or era of Mahometan nations, is 622, A. D. The remainder of hit 
 life was spent in establishing his religion and his authority in his native land, Ara- 
 bht; and the sword with which he finally completed that purpose, he bequeathed, 
 for the unirertal propagation of both, to his followers. His commission was 
 aealously executed ; and, in less than a centunr after his death, his faith waa an- 
 interrnptedly extended by a chain of nations from India to the Atlantic 
 
 The fate of Fenm was decided by the battle of Cadesia, in 636. Tn Svria. 
 Damaacnt had already fellea, and after the sanKuinary conflkt of Yermuk, waeni 
 the Saracens for the first time encountered and ov«:rtihrew a christian eoemv the 
 conquerors instantly proceeded to the reduction of Jerusalem; that grand reli- 
 gious triumph they obtained in 637. In the year followiiM; Aleppo and Aoti- 
 och fell into their hands, which completed the conquest of Syria. Thence they 
 proceeded northward at fiir at the tkorei of the Euxine and the neighborhood of 
 CuBttantinople. 
 
 The invasion of Egypt took place in 6SS,and within the apace of three year*, 
 Ike whole of that populous province wat in pottettioo of the infidels. Alexan- 
 dria wai the last city which fell; and in tomewkat more than a century after the 
 eipubion of philosophy from Europe by a christian legislator, the schools of 
 Alrica were closed in their turn by the annt of aa vnlettered Mahometan. 
 
 The MOGcat of the Saracens was not incontiderably promoted by the religiout 
 diiteatioas of ^ir ehrittian advenariet. A vast number of heretics who had 
 been oppressed and stigmatised by edicts and eouncib were scattered over the 
 surface of Asia; and these were contented to receive a foreign master, of whoia 
 
 Ehnciples they were still ijraorant, in the place of a tyrant whose injustice they 
 ad experienced. But in Egypt, especially, the whole mass of the native popula- 
 tion was unfortuoatelv involved in the Jacobite hereav; and few at that time 
 were foHnd, except the resident Greeks, who adhered to the doctrines of the 
 church. The followers of Eutyches formed an immediate alliance with the sol- 
 diers of Mahomet against a Catholic prince; and they considered that there was 
 aothinf unnatural in that act, since they hoped to secure for themselves, under a 
 V 16 
 
^1 
 
 ■ 
 
 OH 
 
 I, tl« toktalloa wkiok hid hmm ninwd hf m ortliodoi goverameat 
 W» tlMili MMfffc, liow«v«r, tlMAtkit hm, Hm prelwit oTliMiriltiertioii, 'W« 
 villi. nMBf 'iii« rapEcttioii <»f tii«ir aalicsi tbtt besidfts th« raoolketion of wroagt 
 •ad the desire to escape or reveife thtSt t^ej were iaflaoMd u furiously m 
 their poffMcntors by that narrow i«ctanu •piril, which islcoiiiflioiilj excited 
 ■iMt kc«nlj whme the differeacet are moat trilling; isd which, wfaik it axaggt 
 ntad tha liaaa 'fh«t' acfianited them from Ihair fellow chriitiaM. Miadad tfaam tr 
 tha linad aalf which divided all alike from the infidel. 
 
 riMtt IgY'iil, tha i M in p ap w niih«l aloa|; the aotthtn ihora of A%icatj mm 
 thoofh 'their profvaaa ii'thit direction was lotermplad 1^ tha d o ni et tic ditica 
 tiont of the prophet's &nilljr, eveii more than hr tha occational visor of tbi 
 duristians. tbej were in pomtisbii of Carthage oefoiv the end of the seventl 
 cantiitT. Thance ther inticaadad wastward, aad after encou nteriac •ona oppo 
 iition m>m the native Moors, little either Irom the Greek or Vandal mastert oi 
 thaciwnlrjr, thej completed their conquests in the year 709. 
 
 Hitherto the Mahometans had gained no footinr in Europe; and it maj seen 
 •Craaga that the most western of its provinces should have bHcen that which w» 
 fill npiMad to their occupation. Bat the vicinitj of Spain to their latest coo 
 il pi i H, aad tha fiM:tioas dissentions of its oobility^gava them an earij opportv 
 Iha subjugation ot that country. TaairsnccaM waa almost naa* 
 In 711 they overthrew the Gothic monarchy bf tha victory of 
 &iai|;«Ml 'tha two Ibilowtng yean ware a nlficiant to taoira their dO'minion over 
 thanailaat 'part of the peninsnk. 
 
 lib waters of this torrent were destined to proceed still a little further. Ten 
 jpaars afler tha battle of Xeres, the Saracens crossed the I^reneea and overran 
 with little opposition the southwestern provinces of Franca — * tha vineyards of 
 Gaacony and the city Bourdeaux were possessed by tha sovereign of Daroas- 
 aad Samarcaad; and the south of France, iVom the mouth of the Garonne to 
 
 Ihat nf the Rhone, assumed the manners and religion of Arabia.* Still dissaUsfied 
 with thoae amole limits, or impatient of anv limit, these children of the desert 
 agpia aMurched forward into the centre of tna kingdom. They were aacaaipad 
 between Tours and Poictiers, when Charles Martel, the mayor, or dnke of tha 
 Franks, encountered them. It is too much to assert that th« fate of* sristianity 
 dapiaded upon the result of the battle which followed; but if victc y had da- 
 mrad §m Iha Saracens, it woald probably have secured to them in rranca tha 
 nnia ailent, peffaape the saaM dnratioa, of authority which they possessed ia 
 Spain. Next taey would have carried the horrors of war and Islamism IntoGcr- 
 ■lanjr or Britain; but there, other fields most have baaa fought, against nations of 
 warriors as brave as the Franks, by an invader who was becoming lets power- 
 ill aad even less enthusiastic, as he advaacad fiuther from the head of his resour- 
 caaaad his faith." Waddington'a Church Hist, pugr 135. New York edit. l«35. 
 
 Thit is IIm tynnay mm which the pope has saved os, and for it 
 «i¥iliiatiiiii and nligion owe him a debt which they will oerer b« 
 able to repay. 
 
 My opponent ran a parallel between pagan and Catholic Rome. 
 Buss he not know that the pagan religion borrowed many of its es- 
 iiiitial rit«a, and not a few of Its forms, from the indistanet kaowl- 
 •dfn of a primaiy vevelatlon made to Adam and to the patriaraha, 
 and aHerwarda from the written law I And might I not mn a raon 
 pilbet parallel between the Catholic and the Jewish institutions, 
 while the latter was Dmiii I The Catholics haye a Pontifex Maxi 
 ■ms, or High Priest; so had the Jews. The Catholics hsTe a church 
 to guide the people ; the Jews had a synagogue for the same purpose. 
 The Cathnlies have a famous temple, to whose doctrine and worship 
 ■Hmusteonform; so had the Jews. The Catholic pontiff enjoTs some 
 
 by the lustral water, emblematical of the blood of Christ, of 
 
 me power and merey which ean cleanse the stains of the conscience, 
 ••Tliou Shalt sf -inkle me, Lord, with hyssop, and I shall be cleans* 
 
 4. 
 
 MIllAlf CATSOUC SBUOION. 
 
 •d, thou sliall wash IM| and 1 shall hnsMde whiisr than 
 Tid also said, "Thou ahalt sprinkle me, O Lord, with hyssop, and I 
 shall he cleansed ; thon shalt wash me, and 1 shall be nrade whiter 
 than snow.*' The Catholics have nuns; so had the Jews nuns, liks 
 
 Ihe name of the Catholic church. The title that the pope 
 
 ^ wervut $ervorum Jkif*^ servant of the servants of Clod. The 
 
 if Luther, Dioclesian, Julian, of the true God, himself, could be made 
 
 to tally with the numbers 666— see Robinson's Calmet, p. 71. I 
 
 eould take letters out of the name of Alkxandib Camfbku. to mean 
 
 the same thing. 
 
 Ma. Campbell. — ^If you can, I will give op the argument. (▲ 
 langh). 
 
 Bishop Purcell.— What language must it be ! Hebrew, SyiiM, 
 Greek, Latin or English! No matter. £ is in some langua gt 
 SOO — L is 50. — 
 
 Ma. Campbill.»-You have not yet learned the numeral alphabet. 
 
 Bishop Pitrcell. — I cannot make the sum bioht orr, but have a 
 little patience with me and I will pay you all. (A laugh.— The au- 
 dience having composed themselves at the request of the Moderators, 
 Bishop Purcill proceeded.) Thus, jrou see, my friends, the name of 
 my friend helps us in this matter, for it is the name of a man, and the 
 name of a beast, too, with a hunch on its back, when we can find tha 
 lacking numerals to deeijpher him. He has made a certain a d mis sisn, 
 tdter Imviuflr denied it all the week, that the aposUes founded tiie aee 
 of Rome. This shows that the truth will prevail, and that my friend 
 will laugh in his sleeve at you, if you believe all his fanciful and ro- 
 ■umcing conjectures about the man of mh* Again— another contra- 
 diction. If all that blood is to. he shed, in the exarchate of Raven 
 na, we are here, in Ohio, and safe enough from the danger under om 
 happy constitution.— We need have no fear of being crushed beneath 
 the fragments of that crasy and tottering chair, the pope is sitting in 
 •0 uneasily ; the very rumblings of the volcanic hills will die, and 
 their last echoes he inaudible on this side of the Atiantic, and as 
 the Apocalyptic magician has pointed his wand, to the dilapidated 
 jaws of the Beast, ue conclusion is plain, that, m he km kti mU ki$ 
 Ueik, he eanU bite! we need not be afraid of him. 
 
 We are told the pope suffers himself to be adored, and calls hinn 
 ■elf God. So far from this, we have seen how he humbles himself be* 
 fore the altar, how he nravt the humblest of the saints to pray for hint 
 lo God, and how he has nad a prayer inscribed in our church liturgy, 
 whraeby we ask of God to preserve him from all evil, especially from 
 Hm worst of all evils, sin. Does this look like exalting himself above 
 «f«iT thing that is ealled God t The present pope is said to be onn 
 of tiie best of men. The only faults alleged against him are tiiat he gives 
 •mplovment to a large number of poor tradesmen, rebuilding the 
 hnniea church of St. Paul — and that lie /aibt«m{f^ somewhat profuse- 
 ly. I wish every one here had as little to answer for. 
 
 Much has been said about the gold and silver of the Vatican. My 
 friend, I am sure, knows that money is a necessary evil. If we all had 
 a little more of it, we might purchase heaven with the mammon of ini- 
 qnity ; hat the pope is now poor. If I am rightiy informed, his uen* 
 

 021 
 
 MIT I 
 
 isi 
 
 .'**' ^^ fwimtldy, or mlbiliiiiately, lost this mark 
 if It b« one. But my worthy opponeit has oTerlooked 
 lie fact Jadea ahoiiiMled in gold ; St. Peter's, in Rome, 
 _ , . ,J?r*^ *" *'^®'' ^^^^ ^^ ^^P'® of Jerusalem, with plaiu 
 ^fir^i^ij . " "^""^ hesieged Jemsalem, the Jews swallowed their 
 fiiid to hide it from Iheir rapacious conquerors— and this was made a 
 •ew InoHleBt m the dreadful vengeance of heaven upon that deicidal 
 Ijcople, for the soldiers, in quest of gold, ripped open the bodies of 
 tte iU-iited victims whom famine, or the arrow, had precipitated from 
 Miaaparts. After the sacking of Jerusalem, so great was thequan- 
 ■If tr gold ohlained in it, that gold fell, in sterling value, throughou 
 ttt lliMl «ii|iim. This would prove, that Jerusalem was the beast. 
 Mow vain are all the gentleman's eloquent remarks. Not one of these 
 iiarfes » Miliar to Rome, while many of them are not applicable to 
 Jtetal III. I will say nothing about the millstone; it went to the 
 Mm, aiid so did the fcnaeman's argument. 
 
 Myfrieiids, I iiav<a oneor two arguments to borrow from a vervdis- 
 tiiipiih^ Catholic writer. Dr. Lingard, author of the history of Enff- 
 
 i!!fL 1^ •^■" !2L!i^ my Send has any of the symptoma of 
 KiaBta hMPi an pttilkieallj deacfibed. 
 
 •i-"*?*!*? ^}^hp^ of mom than fifteen centurie*. the vision* of the .pot- 
 tfc^^ Joim had been enreloped in the thickest obicarjtv. At the em of tblro- 
 
 lMeTr««Z:i IkK ^ SJ"®<» •«/y oW womea, of eitber gender. biTCeei 
 2! ^!?!! ;*T *t T ?» "^^ ^^ mv^tery, end to ret eel to the world ths 
 Hue meuung of the book of Reveletiou*. From the deji of Luther to the ptee. 
 Ci..!!lTf P*^?'^^ • nomerouf end uninterrupted tucceMion of trantlalon, 
 lMt«rwt.espo«ttor% end annotntort, who may truly be mid to hare seen v\Z 
 !!!!!*• J w ^ **•'* .**'*^*! dreamt; and.leM by tome miihap the pious race 
 ■hony beco...e eEtioct, Bidiop Warburtoo ha. kJl a fund for the mipLrt orX 
 
 IIIiTz!?" *"• F«*>^y did not iee that he was thui endenvorinr to diiiiM 
 !RffiI!?* I f u*/™'?S •P**^'** .?f »nte»ectual dJiease, which, far the aakf 
 jliTsEi'' 'i!^ ^ *"*• ^ ****/»»• •pocnlyptk mania. It hi not. indeS. 
 bMa hitherto ciniand m any wstom of nowSp' ■ Wt it i. not on that accoont 
 IJijrenl. or lest raeml; and, I trust. I thairconfer a benefit on the pnblk bf 
 SEric^ Slidyr *"** *'*^ "^ ^ ***""**• ^ iyiiiptomt o/thi. thZ 
 
 -SUrJ Jf! rT?'™?"* ?*!*" ?'' **\*. '«fo"»«*«o"" broke from the com. 
 !?*!rL2- iT*T**^ church, they found it convenient to justify their schism. 
 y |iiea«lin|r tiiat the Pope was Antichriit, and Rome tiM anrlet tt of 
 
 SSjwmTl^Z^li''^^ conscious superiority of birth, they .night in the 
 
 g?Ay ^. fiwulmrrty with the myttenout volume, quickl/ produced th« 
 emmMn, iMiea n tne sabject of the pre^nt observations. lU progress was 
 3rvML'TJ^*fir*'y department in hie: but it. mo.t*diSnguish 
 
 mSSifJilJiSHZ^l rP*?[l ^* ■»»>« fir.t manileet. itaelf by n leelle^ 
 ■ropa^kiwojlyplik.! theantichrJ.!. and the man of sin; the heart with ten 
 
 ?S! tr r^* luT''**^^^^?."?'*"™"'^ *^«»« ^ fcvorit?. die only .nb 
 CSl^il^^rlu *"'J ??'?'**^ pereepUone amuse the UnarinntiJi : thn 
 
 iSTS^riFaf^'fA^A^ 1"*^'** l*»H ^'^^ "»*>•* powerfiil nund. sink into 
 *- imbcalfty of childhood. Of the troth of this descnption we have a melaa 
 
 ii 
 
 . . , •» kl. wil, an anaaal 
 
 ke fb|ie to lie ^wtfpkfift, Ac 4ke. 
 
 Is pfeaeked hi Lineiki^a Inn Oka.pel« to fwnvt 
 
 ri 
 
 m 
 
 mmUM €ATBOUC SXLIOION. 
 
 daily BKiof IB the gmaSir IMSC Newton. To him Nntera amMMd to have m- 
 loCMd her choiccet aecreta: a. n philoMpher he wa. and is ttili unnralled: bal 
 BO sooner did be direct hi. teIeMX>pe from the motions of the heavenly bodiet 
 to the vi«on. in the apocalypse, than his head grew dizzy, the downfall of pope> 
 IT danced before hi. eyes, and he hazarded predictions which on the scale of 
 pophetai have placed him far beneath the well known Franci. Moore, physician 
 nna almanic^inaker. 
 
 It .hould be obMrved, that this intellectual malady, like the other species of 
 nmnia, assumes a thousand difierent shapes, according to the predisposition, of 
 the Mibject which it attacks. I sliall produce a few inrtance.. In 1789. Mr. 
 Cook published a translation of the apocalypse, with key. to open it. meani^ 
 to hi. readers This reverend gentleman wa. Greek profemor in the oniversi- 
 tj at Cambridge; and, a. hi. reading naturally led him to the Greek poet., fan 
 wa. detennin^ that the author of the apocalypse should be a poet, and, more- 
 over, the rival of Sophocles. In his opinion, the apocalypee i. a tragedy form- 
 •d on the same plan as the (Edipus Tyrannus. ••The dram* opens with the 
 temple scene; the seels, the trumpet, and the viab unfold the plot; and though 
 the antichrist does not die, no more than CEklipus, yet he falb into such calami- 
 ty a. make, him an obiect of pity, and justifies the lamentation, pronounced on 
 hi. downfall." Nor i» this all. By t^ing one of hi. apocalvplic keys on the 
 Odyieey of Homer, he ha. diKovered that poem ako to have been in.ptred, and 
 inform, u. that the suitor, of Penelope represent the vassnls of poperv, who, «»• 
 der thn pretence of courting the bride, the christian church, devour stll the good 
 things in her honse, till Christ, the true Ulysses, the •'•< '••# or safe way, ar- 
 rives, and wreaks his vengeance on them. ^ - . « 
 
 la Mr. Granville Sharp, the &vortte apocalyptic Nostradamus of the Rector 
 •f Newnton Loogville, (Le MeM reply, p. 193, 202,) the mania has shewn itself 
 in a different manner. This gentleman is known to be singularly partial to nso- 
 nosyllables. He has written a volume on the Hebrew letter van, and anothar on 
 the Greek articles, •, ii, t«. From letter, and articles, he wa. induced, by his 
 previous success and the importuni^ of his friends to proceed to the explica- 
 tion of the visions in the book of Revelations. Here the apocalyptic mania soon 
 discovered itself: but the appearance of the disease was modified by hi. pro- 
 viott. habit, of monosyllabic invcstiention. He convinced hiuMelf that the aamn 
 •f the beaH wa. Latetnos, and that Lateino. must signify the Latin charch. Thn 
 
 Knf is curious. Lateinos, he contends, is derivea from the Hebrew monosyl- 
 e LAT, which mean, to cover or conceal. Now the Latin church, in the 
 celebration of the mam, conceal, wine of the prayers from the people, by order- 
 ing them to be pronounced with a low voice: therefore the Latin church m La- 
 teinos, the beast in the apocalypse. Moreover the head of the Latin church n sides 
 in the palace of the Lateran.'a name derived from the mme monosyllable. LAT: 
 and the Lateran palace is .itnaled in the country anciently called Latinm, an ap- 
 pellation alw denved from the mme monosyllable Lat: and Latinm i. a province 
 of that part of Europe called Italy, which also derive, ito name from the same 
 monosylbble LAT. Be not startled, gentle reader: apocalyptic maniacs cao 
 with eqval lacility read backwards or forwards; and Mr. Sharp informs ns, that, 
 if we read Italy backwards, we shall have Ylati, in the midst ot which is the He- 
 brew monosyllable LAT. Naviget Anticyram! 
 
 Wera I to describe all the varieties of the disease, these obserraiKma wo«hl 
 •wall to an unmeasurable bulk. I shall therefore content myself with noticing 
 the prophetic, which is perhaps the most prevalent, species. When the nund m 
 •eised with thiemnnia, the regions of fotority are instantly opened to it. sight: it 
 can point ont the date and nature of every event which i. to happen; it can in- 
 form «B in what year popery, Mohammed ism, and infidelity nre to perish; when 
 imd where antichrist is to be born, reign, and die: who b to restora the Holy 
 Land to toe Jews; and in what year the new Jerusalem is to descend from henvoi. 
 It is in vain that preceding prophets have frnonently outlived their own predic- 
 tioas: tiie lessons of experience are heard with contempt: and each new sear is 
 convinced of the truth of his own visions. Among those who have sutfered Jbte- 
 ly under this form of the disease, the most distinguished are Mr. Whitaker and 
 Mr. Faber. both sch<4ars of exteauve erudition, and both equally animated 
 against the Church of Rome. They both agree thatLuther is the angel wi h the 
 everla.tJng gospel; and, if by hi. go.pel they mean the K»lifidian doctrine <%lrea- 
 dy noticed, they have a chance to be right It may juatly be called everlasting 
 ▼ 2 
 
■«*♦ 
 
 INBATI OH THB 
 
 i»ritifin|)ff«l>iUyiiid prowljtttM loacMBMMAtlldw^cratliet^ Wr. 
 Whitaker ditcoverf tlist tlie two bom ©f th« biwC ire IIm two oraMMk ordora 
 of tlM Dominicwis asd FrancincaM. Wby tiicy tbovld cham tbo profereoco be- 
 Ibffo thoar lmtlirt% of fraatcr «itk|iiit]r. or mora general dilfailoK I koow not; 
 iMt it iicerteinlj aofortiuMte tltat tliolMMl Im not four homfl tb«iiTO«,iro 
 ■on of Benedict and Loyola, might have had the honor of beiof Matod oa nm 
 ffuniniiir two. The tame gentleman infomit m that the Ottoman eamiffe w0l 
 ■o«Ib fill, EooM be wretted from the pop, and tba le^ of the pojpMy be tr 
 ferred to " " -- - . 
 
 BOMAK CATHOUO BBJOIOlf . 
 
 247 
 
 em. Mr. Faber makea an equal display of erudition; bat thn 
 thM anfei, Mr. Wbitaker*s Zuingle, he hai ptoced in a noat uncomfortable aitmi* 
 itlNS bound him foft in the midit of the ocean, and transformed him into 
 ^. MMmr^mrek^Emgkmd! Nor does he alwavs arree with his riral in mom 
 important points. The two beasts he shews to be tile two contemporary Ito- 
 man empires, temporal and spiritual, under the emperora and the pooes: and 
 gives hb raaders the pleasing intelligence, that both tae Tnrk and the n>pe will 
 empire in the year 1868. Though be does not eipect to witness this happy event 
 ' be has the goodness to promise a sight of it to many of the preaent 
 
 ly for these two prophets, each dit poted the accuracy of the piw- 
 
 foitowed; and the raault has been 
 
 III 
 
 • conviction in the minds of moat of their readers, that each has completely pso- 
 ceedpd in deiuolishing the ajslaoi of hfs adversary, and compleieiy foiled in eatab- 
 
 l^.'r.^^TWi^ <o d^crib. .h. dift.... .r»P*o».rd.b di^; b^ 
 
 I bop 1 shnU be excused from indicating the method of cura. When the mania 
 ' obCaine 1 possession of the brain, 1 doubt whether three Anticjr roe would 
 
 ' 'ft Okpol it I would rather, like Dr. Trotter in his treatise on the 
 
 lenment, endeavor to correct that mndufmUmm which nato- 
 ■a% liads to' it I would advise the PhMealant theologian to sospend, for a while 
 ■I ienal, bis assent to some of those doctrines, which edaution has Uught him 
 to revera as snered. I would have him team to doubt whether it be certain, that 
 nic 
 
 m long sucenasion of bishops, throngh many centuries, can be that one individual 
 'i iicffl ie d by St Flaul as the man of sini or that the church, from which ahnoet 
 nil other ebureiiea have received the knowledge of the gospel is, **the giuot 
 mother of harloli,** aud the kingdom of Antichrist. I would recommend tolim. 
 If bo mail iodiilMr the apocalyptic hierocly phics, to attend to the solemn assev« 
 •ration of their aathor, which la frequently repeated both in the first and the last 
 chapters, thai bis predictioos were, even at the time in which he wrote, on the 
 point of beiog Inifilled. In the destruction of Jerusalem, and the first period of 
 
 to exercise his ingenuity, and may pop- 
 
 I am nwara that what I aak, will not londily 
 
 point 01 beiw inifilled. In the destruction 
 
 haps stumble on tic 'Oolycnio which can le 
 
 contained in this 
 
 bo nanled to 
 
 in Rome 
 
 The doctrine that popery is the beast, the pop antichrist, 
 the whora of BalMrfon, ii, I know, an important part of tho 
 
 portent part 
 
 the words of a 
 I con- 
 on the 
 
 ■Mr fotpoi peached by Lnther and his associatei: it forma, to nse thewoi 
 ianmed prelate,* •* a primary pillar of the reformed foith.** ^ But when 
 sider tho dangerous consequences of this doctrine, its deleterious effects 
 
 It of sooae among the most distinrnished writera of the Protestnnt cooi- 
 
 tho rUkttle whieb it serves to throw oo the inspired writings, and Iho 
 
 PMon If givoi 10' inO' sncen 'ana comemp oi we prosesaao nwaei, i lo* 
 
 i wolMooMiod hop that, for the nke of religion 'and hnmnnity, it will 
 
 with Mb HipMfft imn the enlightened characters, who now poside in 
 f§m astabliabed^'Ohnnb. If it once foraaed a pillar of the reforoMtioo^t ooaca i t o 
 It eooKi only do n lamporary support, woMm nmy now oo 'lonMvoa' wimooi qmi* 
 gor to the 4bric. To the pious fraud, from its utility, tba firat rafonnen ndgit 
 '' reconcile their conseienoes; at the present day it may be rejected by tbair 
 with some credit: it cannot be retained without disgrace. 
 
 * Watson's Thsalsf isal IVaets, veL v. p. 7. 
 
 !»*-« 
 
 Mll.CAMFBiXLriaao- . r r -i.. 
 
 The blBhop has not giren one but many and yanous proofe of ti^« 
 troth of an adage of some currency and authonty. Napoleon in hu 
 flight from Mc^cow, muting on recent disasters, oOen ottered this ex- 
 pression : " There is but one short step ftom the sublime to the ridicu. 
 fous/' I never before witnessed so illustrious a proof of the inTin- 
 ciblc force of the argument from prophecy. I looked at the gentle- 
 man writhing under the accumulating evidence, amounting almost to 
 demonstration, that I had asserted no defaniation in my fourth propo- 
 sition. Instead of meeUng the subject with scripture and argument, 
 like the scuttle fish, he darkens the waters that he ««yj!^Pf^™ 
 eye and the hand of his pursuer. His effort at mystification is a* 
 ridiculous as it is imbecile. He invokes the assistance of some old 
 lady to create a laugh ; hut the audience has got tired laughing at his 
 maLuvres. The subject is two grave, and tie \"dience too deeply 
 penetrated with the awful truth which they had just heard to be amus- 
 Sd by such levity. Failing so manifestly, m the attempt to disparage 
 mil use of the prophecies, he undertakes to explain. He is dnven 
 into Asia to the Koran, and to Mecca for the man of sm ! How have 
 the weapons of war perished ! Facts are not found in the history of 
 Mahomet or Mahometanism, to explain these prophecies : and conscious 
 of this, his own courage fails, and a second time he resorts to ndicule. 
 As Voltaire, Volney, and other wits, have fruitlessly attempted to 
 laugh Christianity out of countenance, he endeavors to place the whole 
 matter before you as idle and absurd. Could my rhetorical and ingen- 
 ious opponent afford more unequivocal manifestations of confusion and 
 dismay; than you have now witnessed 1 But, my ^"ends, we are not 
 to be laughed out of our argument, that stands before us like we rocfc 
 of Oibraftar. The waves that strike it, but foam out Aeir imbecility, 
 and are broken to pieces. He may, indeed, torture his ingenuity to 
 escape from an argument, which he dare not, which he cannot meet , 
 but he will torture it in vain. 
 
 The effort of my opponent has been as much to disparage prophecy 
 itself, as any mode of interpreting it. According to hun, prophecy 
 Is no gift : On our principles, it is at least as useful and interesUng 
 as history. It is one of the kindest boons of heaven, that we are per- 
 mitted sometimes to peep into the future, guided by the lamp of etef- 
 nity. The whole Bible, is for the most part, history and propb^* 
 It is almost all history, for prophecy is the history of the futiye. God 
 never held the human family in suspense respecUng their vital inter- 
 ests. Their origin, duty, and destiny, he has equally regarded in aU 
 his communicauons. Soon •• our firat parents had transgressedui 
 Eden, he permitted not one sun to go down, till he appeared to tiMi 
 and revealed a portion of his purposes. In a single period he o«j- 
 denses a miniature view of the future destinies of mankind : " I wUl 
 place enmity," aaid he to the serpent, ** between thy seed and^hcr 
 ieed : it shall broise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. l 
 thank our Heavenly Father, that he has thus from the beginning vouoH- 
 eafed to his children something of the future. Indeed, so abundant 
 are his revelations, his promises which are all prophecies, and hit 
 prophecies which all threaten or promise, that there is scarce a single 
 page of the whole Bible without a prophecy inscribed upon it. l^er^ 
 
918' 
 
 DEBATE 0'?l THE 
 
 EOHAE OATHOUO EELI6I0N. 
 
 249 
 
 1 
 
 *. 
 
 ttinlj ihy oppononl hat forgntSen this ! Hm he not^ according to hif 
 ability, hmm tnrnliiff into ridicule prophecy itself, the Bible itself 
 God*! food and perfect mfll But if prophecy be wholly imtiiteni- 
 gible ; Why, I ask, sheild it constitute so large a portion of God*i 
 flniy 'hmk to man I But I will not farther debate this question. The 
 feaieiiin himself would admit all tliis, on any other occasion. 
 
 I did not intend, indeed, and I am sorry I proposed , an argument of 
 tUb kind before such an assembly, limited as I am at present to an 
 heur or two, at most to complete it If my opponent would devote 
 with met day or two to this subject, I might even satisfy himself, 
 BUI onlj that prophecy is a gifl, m intelligent gift ; but that much of 
 it pertains to the ofiein, progress, and catastrophe of that very biermi^ 
 ehy, of wliich he is himself a member. 
 
 Them are two kinds of maps in schools ; one gives both the place 
 ■■d the name of it, the other fsometimes called a blank map,) giTes 
 §m place without the name. The former represents history ; the lat- 
 ter, prophecy* Prophecy is as correct a map of the future, as histo* 
 lyia ef the post ; but it is not always quite so obvious. I have tauriit 
 pofiaphy with these two sorts of maps. The pupil studied on that 
 inscribed with the names of the places, and we eiamined him on the 
 blank map. The study of fulfilled prophecy, with the history of the 
 past, prepares us for the blank map, the outline of the future. On 
 the Hank map, we can learn the ^fieat outline of things — ^their rela 
 five poeitiims, distances and magmtudes. We may sometimes err, in 
 iziiff the proper name on every place: but we cannot greatly err, in 
 fonniw a useful acauainitnee Wlih the whole ; especially, having a 
 eonect Knowledge or what is past, or of certain portions of the past, 
 vhich must ever be a key to the future. Thus we can acquire a clear 
 aid satisfactor^r outline of the vast expanse of future time, although 
 v« Eiay, sometimes, err in a date, or in the name of a particular place, 
 'petsun, or 'thing. 
 
 But as my opponent has so perfectly failed to meet my argument; 
 I shall have to give it to the public without much amplification or 
 pnwl I will, therefore, recapitulate, emphatically, a few of the 
 grand land. :inarks ; and 
 
 !• Ilie two tyrannies mentioned in Baniel and John, arose out of 
 the peal sea, the Mediterranean ; or, front among the nations border- 
 ing theieon, in a state of tumult Does not Rome stand on these wa- 
 ters ; and is not Italy almost surrounded by them ! The Tiber itself, 
 ineonaldenhle as it is, is nenHlieless, a part of this very sea. This 
 heaileiaw net firem the deserts of Arabia; nor from the Paeifio, nor 
 Ike^ . Aiantie i hot Ipmi. :the Mediterranean. 
 
 i» The eiigin or e—MweMceinepI of these two despotisms, or of the 
 fiiMlle beasts of Daniel and John, eiactly synohroniie. They wero 
 aontMEpoiaiiee: indeed, they aro identical. They both riae at the 
 :iame time and plaoe. 
 
 3. They are eO'«xistent, and eontinae the name time, 1860 /eais. 
 
 i. The typea, in both pictures, or the giand incidents and eharae- 
 ''imfatiea. 'aro 'the aaine. 
 
 6. Their latter end is the same. Then is, indeed, no argument on 
 iUa ■abject : it is as plain as history. My opponent will never debate 
 it Paul occupies the plaoe of a eonmentator or interpreutor, and 
 «itkoiil a figaro explains the i^ystery of iniquity. He avers the im- 
 peesibiity of the appearanee of this monster, this papal hierarohy, so 
 
 
 |«w as pamn Rome, which then hindeied a pope, shjwld continue to 
 SSle" 'aS commeitaloro aademtand, « he that lete," as rofemng to 
 !t^n Rome. We have already seen, that we «?«« not JPf * PPJ^ 
 CXe the time of Phocas the usurper, and B^^i^f^J^^- ^^^ 
 ecclesiastic communion of nations, under a ghostly monarchy, ever 
 itood on earth before that day. r .v:- ««— «.«»k 
 
 iSnl .peaks of ihe temple of God, a. '^I'^l^f'T,^^'^^. 
 .ntagonistpower. It was not ia a pare church he »PPe«?J. «^' Jf ; 
 tainly it was not amons the pagan Arabs, that this man of}^^'"^^"' 
 soch U the import of siL in tfiis passaee) showed his Ma8I*?""«» <^^ 
 
 I Mid not, that there was no chuicl of God at Rome, Wore the piH 
 p«,? f Item never had been a true church of God, at R<"»« ! *« P-P^ 
 Sr L man of ««, never could have been bom th«e. /"^^''^ 
 wrred, emphatically, the man of sin is not a pagan, a Turl^ a pro- 
 fessed infidel ; bot, an apostate Christian. 
 
 Doe. not the pope of ftome, and none but the pope of Rome, «!» "P 
 dllhf grand liJiaSHsnI. of this painUngI He ^\^"^^^f^''^ 
 M that is called a god-a magistrate, a pagan ?!'^"y\»'~'«J,°1 
 himself: for no felse God, nor the only living "»^.*™f.^°^; P^'f^ 
 to fonrive sins before they were committed ! His name is covered 
 with ^Mphemy. There never stood on earth such ^J^o'ffiJ^}; 
 ing like a lamb, and speaking like a dragon. 1 need no^ however, 
 leneat what has not been contradicted. . .. ' . <• 
 
 "^^My a^ment is unanswered. I regret Oiat it must go to *e PuWic^ 
 without being more fully tested. As to Latetnos, the g«ntl«nan m^ 
 laugh at it; but can he show state or empire, whose name 't^e that of 
 MeXaiine Banleia, will spell 666 ! If he cannot, this alone ought to 
 
 ^^^'mv oppoSS^t did"me groat honor, in giving me such a ^o"^^® »» 
 Sir Isaac Newton, to bear half the brunt of his indignation. Greater 
 literary and ecclesiastic names, than that of this great P^l^^^^V^^'l^^^ 
 briffhtei stars in universal knowledge, adorn those prophetic heavens, 
 aniconcentrate their light upon this map, which I have ^^J'^'^l 
 and imperfecUy. What, if f should let the gentleman ««• » J*^,^™ 
 first magnitude, or hear an archdeacon, m his own church, say a wort 
 on Babylon, and on the woman that Mts <>n many waters . 
 
 - WhS cmn there safely H^e. where not only wicked things are »»^\' ^ «J 
 
 ZL wicked Wl -n^dly thing.; «d to ^'^^.^^^^•'^^ySi^r!^ 
 ble: where they do not only not rtcetve$wnddoctnm, but bitterly^ pemcnij 
 
 •11 tbo«» who do resist the madnewi of their wiUs .' / «„k.1^« h«t fron 
 
 » What is it, think you. to be.dnink with the cap of Bf 7^9"; ^tt^ 
 
 loor conTersation with hef to be «> infected with the contagion of^^^^*J^^ 
 Hng the erring herd,yoi. willingly embrace ^-^JJ ^^^^^fH^^i^^ 
 riffht^tif, mad things for aonml; and to desire mlher to be "~j2lL2ln.-l 
 uSe. th«i to be wise^lone with danger and dension 1 He that » d^fcjMt injM^ 
 
 r» C? the-, ought not to li.e th««, ^''^^M^^Jt^'.^^^^I^f^J^J^ 
 wevailed m to infect all men with Iti coatiffoii." Mch^hm 4€ Clmmg%§, 
 
 ^U'^9h^ of Sifnomaeal Prelates, Utmea^^\ ,j_.^ 
 
 « The ch^h i» now become a shop of me«Wi«>. or rather of ~«>«y "J 
 iMMit** in which all the sacraments are exposed to tale. • f»"** 
 
 SESfoii Ton see Inch mL admitted to tUpriesthood and other holy ordj«, 
 JCtTi/iZ aX™Jd. and «Mm:e able to ^id though -aywardly sjjd wjA- 
 HTnndewtandinK one syllable after another, who know no more Latin, hai. 
 fk^T dTAnTc. who, wien they read. pray, or sing, know not, whether they 
 btei <LT?S.5«-i^ him-^. ™diSp1i»ed. anqaiet. glattom. drunkanU 
 
 •2 
 
• a'. -I -- — !''■*•■*• *»«* Hfi Milwiij, uad in OM itoid, Idk ukI {gnoiMt" 
 IB Ma look of Ae eomipl timie tftk^ ohmli, «m. i» 
 
 •^TJrtjjIijifM deilcd witli tlM tiali ol all viem; Md HMgiit be itij aiUid tlM 
 ■mmmjfMthrmmni§i that, lbs i^iiif of tli« prophtt wm now ▼•liiiad, tliat 
 jmm m lm§tjfthim !• flifrMlcfl, eveiy one wufiven to coTetoatncM: that 
 MMii tlte finplMt to lib pricrt, tf eiy one M^ • • • • 
 
 Wlio praiisliM or declu«t tlMfonwl? Who «th«r by woid or dmd ihewt Om 
 tmj to lilb 'denwir* 
 
 Afftin : 
 
 ■* what dioald I ipealc, (with he) of tha leanbi^ of the prlMli, wh«i it b rmbla 
 that waiMwy of them can raadt They know aot woidt, and ninch lew thian: 
 in of them thai fwjralh. it n hnrtntiaii to hioMelC If any man !■ idle and Sb- 
 inm labor. If he lofat fmm, be geta now a-dayi into the clewy. and then 
 pnaa^ he joint Mntelf to the rest of the prieMi that are volnptnont, and 1if« 
 ne«»dli| to JEptennM, rather than acoordin^ to the lawi of Chrirt, Cap. 26. 
 
 * Such (inith ha) ia the abundance of wicked men in all pioleMiom, that them 
 ii Marcely one amonff a thontand, who aincerely doth what hit profeaiion doch 
 iminitai if thnie be any liaccret chaste, aober, fragal penon, in any collecc or 
 convanl. who doth not walk in the broad way, he it made a ridicnlont &ble to tha 
 rtHpttid It continually called intolent, mad, and hypocritical fellow; to that 
 many who would hare been good, bad tbty lived with rood and honett men. 
 are drawn by wicked company into their ricet, lett they thould tuffer the foM. 
 mentioned reproachct amonc their companioni." Cap. 26. 
 
 H« tken eonoliilet with an apostrophe to the Roman chnreh, at 
 loilowt : 
 
 ••What thinkest thon of thine own prophecy, the ReTclatioot of St. Johnt 
 Deat thon not think they do at leatt, in part, belong to theet Thou hast not 
 anrely to ^iy Ipttall thame at to deny thai; look, tl^lbre, into it, and reail 
 
 mff^mmm^mmidJlammmimJ' Deekrai. Delect. Viroram EccL ^^ 
 111 leaiiie If kolant ife demaogia, an archdeacon of the ehnreh of 
 Uiiiiie, in the fifkerath centnry. 
 
 Nm onlw have the sins of Sodom and Egypt been multiplied in thia 
 Babylon the mat, but aha had superadded to these the blood-fnilii- 
 ■asa and anally of Jerttsalea. Peraeenlion is of the very essence 
 aai apiris of the supiemacy, not merely as the martyred millions of 
 Aialeataata, of e?eiT age, declare ; bat accordingr to the doctnne of the 
 CMMht aid the oaths of her bishops. Every Roman Catholic bishop 
 ii awom to paiaaeote heretica and schismatics : even this very gentle- 
 llBll Aataiaoni JsMraeetA/e and oppo§e kerdict and 9chiMmaik» to Ihe utmoti 
 af ili jMaer. Thia ia no mare allegation. I will hereafter produce 
 m oath^ wad if it can be oiherwiaa explained, I shall give him an op* 
 
 Elaailf to do it. Till then, I prooeed to allege, further, that laamad 
 man Cathoiica have tiemblinf ly interpreted these propheelea, at 
 Mcmfing to Roma papal. I have another witness here, in oonfirmaf- 
 mm. iiiBirapaaeh, and with his taatiiiiony I ahail cloae theaa remarkab 
 
 ■ran 'iii'iMJVUU. 
 
 ** Whenoe ia it that thia hnppaMdf fa tf<l, ftaemiM all flcth b«l eMvoptodite 
 wayt, wa weva all citiaent and inhabilnnta not of the holy citr Innit. that 
 Sg' f^„*^y <'^*?^^*<>f****'P«'P'''tIiaiah it ftilfilled, %o7ia thaSitUni 
 fl% heme ahnrlot,'' Let no nan thinkthia prophecy hat been InliUed almady 
 
 in the detraction of Babylon, or Jervialem. 'NoTStare thinga were present to 
 
 doih^iii m Retelatioot tell us, the daughter of Zioa u not Jemtalem, but Rome; 
 
 and nit detofliiilion of her makes it plain: For the woman which thou tawest 
 (Mill M} m mtmtmi diy which hath domioioa over theAiort of the earth. 
 thai la api^lnnl diimimon. She tiu, mith he. apoa leven hills, which mrm^trh 
 J^^ 'y'^ ^.'Py ***" ■«»««<* »• rtyled swticolia. Sha ia foUTtaitb 
 
 the naatea m Umpbamy^ehe it the mother of vncleannets, fomicatjon^ 
 
 ha, 'Of 
 
 BOKAH CAIWOMC MBUOIOK. 
 «d rfMHn4«ntlo«.,whfch.feinthee«th; A^ 
 
 these matters as often as ne cnoosca w L™«.ciftn« In this mat- 
 
 Jndira, " Let mry "•»» ''"• •"* "" ' ^ 
 
 •"■S^^-'k ^TJ.T^^\coloty for speaking on a subject, which 1 
 
 ?Kr orS'^^'/woald be the »^^^^^^ 
 Snain ItaW or Portugal, under similar ciicomstances. my mmaa 
 hKeo';5:;riuni^ of .Simple denial of thoBe i«»a at ^e m«ae^ 
 if they were not paiU of hi» gyatem; and be may hare tlie luu oie- 
 
 "o7!l.^V^" tT'ci.nfe.sion, one word «i to the quotations from 
 E^SsSu""^ ""d Methodists. Would *e genUeman wwh y«. to 
 SdOTUnd, that aurUular ""/«"'"^» •".onimance of those rehgioM 
 "mmuniU;.. «. taught and practised in h.s '^-J'*'' f thereis lie 
 where is the relevancy of these quottuons 1 If he <^?*»',**?,'^i" ^! 
 ""*"',.„, urnnfoiia.vourfai»A< to one another, wllljusuiy 
 
 troth and o»»^»'' "^f^iXItf^to W«. to each other, and to pr-jf 
 
 !?y '*° Z^ S^ITm hTXl th« MethodUts and EpiscopaU. 
 /«. «« «»rfA«r , but wiU he Mrm, ma „„,„,! confessions ! ! 
 
 ^hv^r»T»k 'seekttike J^-^^pali-? and MeOrodisU bjjr. 
 «!rtrf^sbiSe(rf these unscripwial and ««ful practices t They 
 ESvow th^TStey would say uTthe bishop, confess your &»1^«» 
 i!^drw3 will co/fes. to you; but on no other »onditto«. W. m«J 
 ;:;y"?i;;u; we caunot 4i-^ou. You m^r P»y ^^^^^^^ 
 
 iustiee mr opponent renders to Episcopalians and Methodism, m mm 
 
 lSlK'«2^- with himself onje -j|-t^^^^^^^^^ ^, 
 
 « The taint continues ihut: St. PhU'P Ji«J"" JSd .ubruit t&emseWes to a 
 
 they who desire ta progrest in ^^."V^jt^ rhSit Method iwn?] He who 
 
 'Z.^^ir::':^e rti tl'r ^dSl &^r any of hi action, 
 thus acts will oe •ecwrc iru>" & ., -uffer him to err. Wotniag 
 
"^ 
 
 liMl} "lit 
 btfal, 1m wIm 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 _J hfmmy ova imlgiiMat [It Ibig 
 
 ia^»;iJ«ffJ?:1"'*?"^ 'T' ^'*?^ "' coMiM«i«i«it hi doubtfuiriM wh* 
 
 Ml la oli«dieiice to his confeMor it axcuted froin tin. altlMMwii in tnith. wbnl 
 
 iLtuoriJl "ilf r* ^»Methadim.?3 Quoting from sTEonyiTb* K 
 IIM Allowing: If tfteni be i doubt wbetber wbat one it tboat to do it anW 
 the comcmodment of God. wc must obcj the commtndttent of our prSue!'^ 
 
 i-TiSLCl °'' *=«"'««^/') " because, aItho«t;h wfant we do be a«i^.t oJd 
 iieir«rtiiclcit, OR account of th« virtn* nf nK«JT.«^^ u^: T^ _" : *^ 
 
 ^i,., ,^ , . -7 •*=f°"?J «[ t*»e Tirtue of obeiHence. we being lu^ect to our 
 
 fMialm fio not tin/* [Itthii Epitcopalianitm?]— Id. ib. '' 
 
 lent'. il,?.S«?li!irST!:*""*? ^* ■'•"l' "•treiiuou.lv iotbt npoa the pea!- 
 tent t ob^mg hiai, aad if he refuses to obey, et him be sharDirrebukeShL 
 
 ld.ik If. 16. P'ime expired.] «• «•■«» as possioie. — 
 
 Bm^wiw Pimcsix ritet-. 
 
 It WM not heaven's holy oracles, hut maii'a preramptnoiis fbedoni 
 Wiethe wofd of God. that I ridiculed. It iKw mj ^friend whTS. 
 irSntlk ^j'^**'l^..T*^.™P*' "^^ *^*»<"«* to infidels ocoMiioi 
 Sl^rr nS «;!r?'^ ^ ^^^l^ -pon H his own preposterous inter- 
 pwtations, and makini^ it say what its diTine Author nerer intended it 
 
 r **ZiJ ^"J*™ ff^t »n tl»« wty words of that sacred book, that 
 
 mmmmi^ ^ mr^^lme u of any prhoit iniefpreiatwn t"" thai tkem 
 
 MaliZrr /!f7^i*" A/.W,"and ikan^/uU U ike pi^ 
 
 tSS ii- '• /'"^"^ on Ihemselyes swift destruction/imrf many shall 
 
 ^L^f'^lT'^^' ^h'O"? h whom thu wmy of truth shall £e evil 
 
 2?!!*!I; 1 "**''^ ^'^P'^T *'"® ««"P^»'««» «>«' learned friend gavt 
 
 iTiTv ru^^^ chmnology, pniving, at least, one 
 
 Sio my sausfwstion, if not to hu own, that we may err in a date, 
 l'di!ri;.H ^"f ' ^* T^'**? 'l?, ^*^**^'y ''•^ *•*>»« « his sym 
 
 l-a«.h 1 rr^ 't"* J '^^ ''"^ ' T"' "^ •PP'y to »>*'« ^ fig«« of 
 Baaian, ne n^ oroken the eggs of asps, and ma? eat them : he bath 
 
 lir- W Inf rl^rlSr^ ^^^^ himijel/with the Slmy te,- 
 
 Zm^i^^ ncweiiess, iiimnstaney, and change of religion; but in 
 2 "!?r* " neither mutability nor •« shadow of Ticissitude •' 
 My friend has taken us a liahing again ; the sea monster baa dl*. 
 
 9§m mm m» troablmg of the stream. Tbera ia nt% mm^^ f^^ 
 
 St! iLT^i TfT y".*" «» «»• "MUief," will >i#flv 
 i»^i^Tji'?**^ o»ght to be much obliged to'wS^? 
 
 "«•■ oy denying and admitting, raectine and adontinv nrm t,rJj 
 SiE^t^TlSr^iJ^y-^ He*^'hlois hft'SndloTd i^O^'ZS^ 
 
 rSrl' !5*I*''*^^?!"' P^^ ^»»« dlrecUons on thi. decalogT 
 •ml shewed that 6od, himself, could nol authoriae a wM^^^^ 
 mm laws, .uch less a confosaw. Hence hhZr^^^^Z 
 
 SOHAN CATMOUC BMLieiOW. 
 
 .-A^ « G*!.'* wm pwisdly imrflifiMe. I wit* my fnmd woiiii 
 f!35r3^r««^^« hr^aWhT w^^ find ia it maiims and example. 
 •^nTJ^^h^Tf ^m telio^^ nothing that could BcandaUze htm. 
 
 rZt'it ™ aathor-^Md commanded by scripture, pracused by 
 
 ?„e«r T^^^o" Pi»- »» "^^^^^ ^y "^ .he men. faithfully 
 do thCT comply with the salutary ordinance. 
 
 Wdo no? ai-wde youne people from ""^^i '" °°teu 
 ^t tho<e who are called to fliat state, do not marry faster What w 
 S^^*tert rfJlSirt tirade of abusive eitracta against the Catholic 
 STurehf Mmt I h've to read dissertations to m, opponent on all the 
 
 me the necessity of such frequent exposure »f ^is — - 1 won t^^ «^ 
 Here are the complete works of Liguori, in ^'gjl* J°J,""5f ^^Ir".^ 
 index consisUnc of one Tolume. I have performed a work of sopere- 
 l^tion I hale eramined these volumes, from cover to cover, and 
 ^^'^^ f .1 !.„ ZTmnrh as a shadow be found for the infamous 
 IS.."™ °I «L™te"T Wenffromihe sin of wilful misrepresenta- 
 &wil »v he 1^ iLn d^eived, misled by-^ti-**!;' Vtf hf.^' 
 %Z caTde^We the elec^ ./ po^k, that is to '>^f^fJ^^^ ^^^; 
 
 St- r -C ^^^S^^ "STf^eft H?.K^;S 
 Sidi^ which is here now, will be here *« fTLlkL slaSierl^ 
 
 *"Cro?tCtte?vT„''.S^u^n of ^Mh^c doctrines and. practices^ 
 thin Srir ri^pirand fcithful announcemenL It is the '^'Y^?' 
 SSnlf ouTt^neU that did us injury for Um^.and M'fJ* "^ hatf » 
 " - ■ u„, „„„ the liffbt from heaven is breaking. "Thou bast ap- 
 SS^ d«S»», aniit is night, .■» it diall all the beasts of the ««r.h 
 f^;I;Sin riJeti-ald 'they shall Ue down in theudena." 
 
 mflU^^pponent »iy. the Tiber runs into the MedUerreW 
 That is" fact, aid so do thi watere of a thouMind "'••er streams. Ho 
 «« *«■ I^ not prove that there wa. a head of the church in Borne 
 Sore Con.tan.ine-'i rime. This I mav simply den, ; <»»« h"« ' "^ 
 qnoled the testimony of general councils, of the fathers, of numbe lesa 
 
 w 
 

 J 
 
 
 mmmmm^ to prov« tlial, 
 , tnd add one foniark tlMl 
 
 MV inoootettibki faoll I w§m to EiMebiii% ,.^ 
 
 Eotebios was Inmtii in 170. His liiitory eitoiids to the jear 334, tho 
 
 Opoeli when ConatantiiMi 'waa aole master of the Roman empire, fia- 
 ■•iiiiis marrited tlie belief of the whole churob daring the prfwsediog 
 itmhrnind years, for no longer period had elapsed siiioe the death of 
 8iLioliii..WMl Polyearpt Ifnauui, Irencus, Cains, a Roman pritat* 
 and Ii«gaai|ipiia, the eeclesiasUcal historisD, U¥ed in that interval, 
 mm Kaaabiiis* My friend has now allowed that, for a long time, tho 
 ckanli of Rome was pure. This is true; but when will he fulfil his 
 fMutso at the opening of the debate and inform us, at last, from what 
 •inreh she is an apostacy 1 We are coming near the end of the dis- 
 •aatM and this is too important a point to heforgoUen, 
 
 ••TlisalWiih formerly used the vernacular language.'* So she did. 
 And theie wit a weij good reason for it. The Latin then waa the ver^ 
 ■mhr of the greatest part of the civilised world, in consequence of 
 tio Roman cooguests. It was generally known, where other Ian- 
 
 0|W floaiiiiMi to be the vernacular. Su Paul wrote to the Romans 
 ^wek, • kngiage which all the Romans did not nnderstand. My 
 ■mm Mr. Campbell has stated the venr best reasons, in the preface to 
 ■M^MW Tbetament, for the adoption of a uniform laffguage as the ve- 
 
 S^ !L2t***i?"' T**® *^™®** Southey agrees, if not with him, at 
 
 Mall wilh toe Catholic churoh on the subject of its peculiar fitoess lo 
 la Ilia laiigmia of the Christian Liturgy. ^^ 
 
 - iatio,** nyt Southey, Vol. L p. 59, " wm iiMde the lansiragB of relifioa; there 
 aacroMn the mam remmm for thit in Jisk, ftiid Speio, and Fimnce. u lor ftflrng 
 !SJ??if*!?^£f** of the tm; and in Cng^land also, there waa reason, whirb, 
 inon Olfcrent, was not less valid. A comnioo language was neceisarv for 
 l&e cleigy, who conmlcred thrnMcivet at belonrinr. less to the countrr. 
 !lL*^'*'^****y happened, mdividuallj to have been Wn. or stationed, than to 
 Msir oroer. or to cbnatendoni, for in theae aeea chriftendoni svat legaidadai 
 •onMtninr more than a mere name. No modern ' 
 •a, orredi 
 
 r No modern laoj^uai^ was aa yet lia« 
 
 f -.: • "Si^S."^**' regarded aa • written tongue; of neceasltv, therefore, 
 Iflij, in whuai thn wmtern cletfy rend the acnptnrea, and in which the fothera 
 2 «•••■••» church bad composed their works, and the councils had issued 
 
 ZZLfTS?' ^T^*7 T^*'* "!!!?•'* ■• **»• "^^ •^ profcmionni ka* 
 mm of the miawlers of religion. They preached and catechised, and confer. 
 
 MlalteMiuon speech of the country, and that the church service was not ver^ 
 
 naif ininllif iMe to thecongragation was, apoa their priociplea, no ini^onvmiieocn. 
 
 Bntii; 10 this fmpcct. there was no real dindvaotage in the uae of a forein 
 
 loagve; IB other respects many and most important advantages arose from ft 
 
 The clergy became of neceisitj a learned body; and to their humble and m- 
 
 lJ?li?!!LrTl^iT'****t/'^/7 f ^ '^^ agea. and the preservatU 
 jff^TJT^fe «<■ •■fiqiiity, whfch. for thn iaitnMStloo7f all after ageV, have been 
 preserved : The itndenia at CnalnrtMiy in Bede's time, were as well skilled, both 
 
 Sim i!!li£rfr^ ■■ '".I??"-?!*?* ■i^^'li •«* *5?K» »»i««»«elf (worthy to be 
 25JJf twereble, if ever that epithet was worthily appli«l) had acquired all that 
 
 mfff pMttbly telaaread im books, and, waa master of what was then, the 
 
 I orele olhaaMB fcoowfodga.** ' 
 
 ^ laa. iaaaaailT tba Iilaf„ ,., 
 
 the saeriimtiii 
 
 pteit biiiaalf, does, to what they answer, • Amen.' When a foreigner 
 IMB aaroT thaaoiintries where Greek is not the vernacular comes in- 
 iaofflrehunsljea, and I need aearaely aieept even the Catholics, of the 
 emfc rite, he is pefiMtl| at home, among his brethren in ftith and 
 jwiwhlp. Their eeiaiMNiiea and prayers am the same aa in hie mtiva 
 ■Mi— llorinans, French, Kngiish, Irish, Poles, Swiss, I'sliana, Bw 
 
 Tha paopl^ hava the Bobatanea^ Insiiamiily the lilaial translatioa, ia 
 ??!l?yy,l>aafca, of what ihe Ptieai nwfs, daring the saeriiee, in 
 ^HS^r !5*?"*^ ^ Catholic Europe. Tbay know aa well aa the 
 
 ■OMAll DATHOUC mXUGION. 
 
 hSr oar priests, aa they di^ Hm aposdaa, apaaidag ^J^f^^^ 
 STwTll Say cill oar own, "the^^^f 1^^ 
 monsof our chnreh are not preached in Latin, but m as plam English 
 as ire ean find in common nse. ..,^„^, v l.-. 
 
 1 have answered all I could note of the gent eman's w«»™-/J«^ 
 only two of my own to add at present. It is m "^'•"f J^ .^/J^: 
 lion of my Itirned opponent that monstere are always ««W«";tt«^ 
 ofbad men or tyrente. Now what will my friend say of Eaekiel 1st 
 1 -And I s7w-^nd behold a whirlwind cwne out of the north : 
 and a great cloud, and a fire infolding it, «jd »inghtness was about it 
 and out of the midst thereof, that is, out of the midst of the fire, as it 
 were Sie resemblance of Amber', and in the midst thereof the likentjis 
 of four living creatures : and this was their appearance : there was the 
 likeness of I man in them. Every one had four feces, and every one 
 four wings. Their feet were strelght feet, and «5f ?*;•*»(. ^**'^ 
 was like the sole of a calfs foot ; and they soarkled like the appw*- 
 ance of glowing brass. And they had the hanis of a man, under rt^r 
 idngs, on thei? four sides: and they had faces, and wings on 1*«r 
 rdJr And I heard the noise of their w inp, like the "oiso of ma^y 
 waters, as it were the voice of the most high God;— This was tne 
 :kirorth" Ukene»s of the glorv of the Lord,'^ What -U my^fnend 
 ■ow say of his monster theory ! These animals are taken to have 
 been figures of the four Evangelists,— or of all the Apostles. 
 
 My iw^ond remark ia, that whoever has read Hume's or I^"»|«^ 
 historr of England, knows that the Ana-bantists when driven by arm- 
 Sd SSiiere on? of the Parliament House, fcund io the famous Ohver 
 Cr«mwelU a perfect facsimile of the Anti-Chn8t.-[Time expiied.] 
 
 nree o'elodk, P. M 
 Mr. Campbell rises— , 
 
 There waa one remark made by my opponent, in his last speeek, 
 tnd only one that had some appropriate ^^^^J^^^J Hi^^t 
 symbols. Upon this remark, 1 will make one affirmation. What»^r 
 else he has been pleased to say, may pass for what it is worth, tax finee. 
 
 The genU^aS asserts, that beasts of prey are not alwavs sym- 
 bolical of tyrants. Had I asserted that proposition, it would have 
 been in point to have made such a remark : but unfortunately for hun, 
 SSat was not my proposition. It was, that when God depicts a tyran- 
 Zr\^ «,.^««»n Ir^X^a mnneter. or Bomo savaiTO Wild bcsst to symbohie 
 
 ny, he selecU some monster, or some savage wild beast to symbolic 
 »J» . . , ,j^j with— "beasts of prey in symbolic language 
 
 . •«« r\- J* 11 :* r.^^. «nv nr/%nnftifinn. that a llOU 
 
 S: But is that identical 
 
 only represent tyrante 1" Or follows it from my proposition, that a lion 
 or wi eagle must always and uniformly represent a tyrant 1—1 went fox- 
 ther and said, that some savage wild beast-some monster was God s 
 Inage of a secular or ecclesiastic despotism. This was "fJ «*pl^^f ^2;- 
 
 It ia true that a " lion," aa well as a " lamb" is applied to the Sa- 
 viOT. He is the " Lion of the tribe of Judah :" but baniel's Uon had 
 winfia. and came from the sea. It was a monster. _ 
 
 lie Roman spirit, in other words, the savage spint of pagan and 
 papal Rome, has been imparted even to Protestant states. In so much 
 Ui England has for her symbol, or nauonal device, a tawnv li^, 
 and her sons have chosen their own eagle, a ravenous bird o^ ?«!{ 
 for their device, that they may pounce upon their mother s lion m^ 
 show themselves as full of war and stratagem and spoils, as the baf 
 
IXnATB ON Till 
 
 li* InMw nf i^j kinf , mdm tbe device of » mUk while dove, on m 
 mie iff, as nion eoiisooaiit to the gmdm ef the Reign of heavea. 
 Z!L *^'^r*'i '• "T^^l'y barbarous. Nationa at war, m at beat but 
 pMifr ciTiliied, and, therefore, they generally chooae beasts of piey 
 for their insignia. Whan we become more raUonal, more cinliied. 
 and more christian, we will find some other way of settUnir our na- 
 wpal disputes, than with the sword, and with the confusednoise of 
 ih^amor, and faiments baptiied in blood. 
 
 Thegentkmyii asked, the other day, (and I know not whether 
 mL^!uInJ f'^^T^'^ impertinent matters introduced, I paid 
 any attenUoo to it)— if God coufd make twelve men infallible, could 
 JT "*1 ™*T *?, °**°y "?**'® infallible as he pleased ; and continue 
 tb« through all succeeding time!! Certainl/he could. I answer! 
 hit there is no philosophy m this question. I might retoJt, could not 
 
 nuir Miellitea as he pleased I And the s.^e answer would equally 
 
 the system of nature, nor the system of religiVm i^l them. 'Hw 
 uiapijed twelve made a full revelation of christian truth. They taught 
 £lTiZl!!T"' ^® "r* "^""Smore. If a full and explfcil 
 aZtT^ 1^"^T?^ ?*? ^^'^""y pi«8erved; ten thousand 
 ""^ «Tr °<'^Pe"'^V**'?.**'"®***° system, by adding a new idea. 
 ii-S kTr ^""^ "L* f^^"^^ ^® <>^«' ^J' I thinl I have ac 
 •5ri- V" °®il?y ^^^ ^'^™ ***™« "e*^ source, or repeats, I know 
 ■ntliinsii, "If the testimony of tradition be not infallible how can 
 fjWlywfte Bible to be inspired t" This, together with his reoeated ' 
 
 rSfeST f^r^hfa*"^**"** ^ro ^ '" ?* ^^ *»" "^^ «^« testimony 
 ilSSr tL-^ 8^«^>««"/f Peter, &c.; I reserved for my sixth prl 
 piiition, which, because of the advanced state of the discussion, as 
 iHMeat tune, is likely to be crowded into a corner, I theiefora heir 
 IMrmiasioii to introduce it at this Ume. mewioio oeg 
 
 fm^mkl IhU'TJfJ'JT'^^JS^ ^'a P?*«?r°«« *« »>•*•« r »«n os the Bible, and 
 
 be22l?nTrH^?i*'r^^^^ Jbe bishop hag himself averred, "I 
 
 Mmm In tlie Holy Catholic church :" but this phrase needs a general 
 ooiieil to explain it. Does it mean, I believrtt* Catholic cfurch^ 
 Son ^anW Z^"" ^^•f^olk chumh 1 Do they confide in it for sal va! 
 
 amtiiguous. The " fides carbonana" is thus expressed : **Ibelievo 
 What theohuioh believes; and iha eharoh believes what I believe* 
 tad we kiih believe the same thing.'' Or, as rep^tS the oX; 
 «iy, the Konmn Catholk believea the bible on the authority of the 
 «iiich, and the church on the authority of the bible ! But the Chris- 
 STir ?*?r*l . T^ expected to be always ready to give a reason 
 
 Z^^^li^'' l*^™' a^*^ ^ r'**"' and every communica. 
 tt» frwiliiii IS rational ; and as man is a reasonable being, he must 
 hare good nwons to offer for his believing the christiaS reliSon. 
 
 Z^lZfmy^Z ^i^i^*' ^. "^^^ ^^ faith,"wh^'?:S; 
 
 ZJTh^l m^ ^^®' ^^ •"" ^^ *^« ^**°»*« Catholic was the 
 S! t'^Sf "t ^* f!?!®,'**I?° "^"^^^^ i««ti<y any one for being a 
 low. a Turk, or an infidel. He that is of the ordi of All or OiL' 
 
 ■OMAW cAmiiLici mmwioN. 
 
 Wf 
 
 hat Ikeii, la gooi t reason to give for his faith in the Koran, aa lay 
 Romanist haa to givo lor his &th in the bible, if his answer to the 
 qveatioa, ^wk^ dommheHamr 'w, Beemm imf Mker^ wlktrntmrnt^ 
 or Ukt tkurtk Ml me ii wm m. I woold, indeed, be gratiiod to leoM 
 from my opponent, Dr. Pobckll, why he would not have had as good 
 •oasoB for believing in the Koran, as he has for being a Roman Ca- 
 iholie, OB the ground of mere tradition, had he happened to have beeii 
 bom in Torkey ! There must be an examination of the teatHDony, 
 and perception of its troth, on its own intrinsic excellence; or, a eoB- 
 vietion of its troth upon the evidence which it afforda ; else tlioio is w 
 leaaoa in faith— it is mere credulity, or superetition. 
 
 The firat, and characteristic difference, between the Protestant and 
 tke Roman Catholic, is this : the former believes the scriptures firat, 
 and the church afterwards ; whereas, the latter believes the chnrsk 
 first, and the scriptures afterwards. " But," says the bishop, •«whm 
 does the Protestant get the bible to believe, but through the chuehr* 
 And that firat bnnga oa to the proposition. 
 
 If any person hand me a book, and I read it, and believe it, does ny 
 faith in it necessarily rest upon him who hands it to me f And, yet, 
 this is the gigantic strength of all that my opponent can say on this 
 subject. It would be much more plausible, that the Proteatants aio 
 indebted exclusively to the Roman Catholic chureh for the book, if 
 Protestants believed all the Roman Catholic traditions, as well as the 
 bible : but, while we reject the apocrypha, and the traditions of popery, 
 and receive the bible only, thia fact will answer a thousand volumea of 
 sophistry, in proof that our faith in the bible, reata not upon the author- 
 ity of the chureh of Rome. The fact, that we reject her apoeiyphal 
 bible and testament, with all other traditions of Roman Catholics, an- 
 elent and modera, resting solely upon her authority, and that we re- 
 tain the bible, {one venion cf which ahe hat,) is incontestable proof, 
 that we receive the bible on other authority than her traditions. Dis- 
 pose of this fact who may, I afikm that my opnonent never can ! Thia 
 illustrious and indisputable fact, places in bold relief the inelevaney 
 of his effort to show, that our faith in the bible, and his belief in Pe- 
 ter's Roman diocese, or in his being bishop ok Rome, rest upon the 
 same authority. That I must believe a letter on the authority of him 
 who carries it, or a book on the authority of him who pota it in my 
 hand, ia another of the assumptions of the chureh of encroachments, 
 resting upon Peter's having been biahop of Rome. 
 
 God created both the sun and the human eye, and he baa adapted 
 them to eaeh other. He created the human nndentandiaf and tho 
 bible, and adapted them to each other. The honest student of nature 
 needs no tradition to prove that man made not the aun ; neither doea 
 the humble and candid student of the bible, need any witneas firom tho 
 bishops or church of Rome, that they did nol make the bible. She is, in- 
 deed, a witneaa for the bible, and the trae chureh, aomewhere elae ex- 
 iating than in her own communion : for, had it not been for her rivals, 
 who, like Argus, have ever watched the aacred text, how it would 
 l^ve been interpolated and corrapted, her editions of the nrimitiye fh- 
 theis, and other books of which she waa the sole or chief depository, 
 abundantly declare. But, having fixed the date, not merely of the firat 
 pope, but of the grand schism which originateil the Roman Catholie 
 ehureh. I haaten, with all despatch, to show that we have copiea of tho 
 w9 17 
 
Him gnnd leliisai, wmm todeet ttraa the irm 
 wops: Mv, tlMt were writtmi htfom Om iffamAm of a snpraiiM liMid 
 Mgwi to bo ilMMMod { tml whieli oopioo, in tiio form of tfaiioeiiiition, 
 ■■•• »•••' *■•« oollod by Um Aofirs of a monk. I load bm m few 
 iooiHMMi, m I ba^e but litde time for this subjeet; but I read them 
 iMi a aoufoo of biblical ■■iiiiitj, which, on thoae iiointt, has not 
 boon, and, I praaiimo, will not be, dls|Hrtod 5 •* Horne'a IntrodacUon : 
 •^f tiM imammmaipu kmmu to be •kteot, which oontaia the Gnek Scrip- 
 
 IK! ^illlll!^ .kH^!!?r"*' PT^'** *«. ^ ,S«ptwfiiit wtbii. end tfie 
 ifew TettMoeot) there ere two which pre-emmentlj demaiid the etteotion of 
 the Bibliod atndeat for their tntioQitir and lotrmtic vdne, wh. The Aiezaodriu 
 muicriiit,whieh>|iffeMrrediii the Britbh nraseum, end the Vatican muiiiKript 
 depoiiled in the libniy of the Vatkui Falace at Rome. ^ 
 
 ^u**,!?**?^^^''"^'^'''*"^^ if noted by 
 
 the laMw A in Wetitein> aad Gneebach't critical editiouof the New Terti 
 ■■eat, contistt of four folio vottuneta the three first contain thewhole of the Old 
 Teetameot, together with the Apocnrpbal books, end the fourth comprises the 
 Hew Teatament, the itst epiiHe of Clement to the Corinthtans, and t^e Adoc 
 jyCTP"*™*, escribed to SoIommid. In the New TeMament thera b wutinrtlM 
 ■'•!flP'""i •• *' •• Matth. Mtr. «. • p*t^9»H imrm^i likewise from John vi. S6. to 
 •i*. i^and finora the t Cor. if. 13, to »ii. T. [Thit manoscript is now preterrad 
 
 ESj?r2llS*^f"*£:f ""J^'^n"* ? ™.***P<»»'«* '» "«?• It wassentes .Pesent to 
 !Mi TrT *•"«»« Cjnllits Locens, a naUve of Crete, and patriarch of Con- 
 ■lantinople. by Sir Thoroat Rowe, ambassador from Enrland to the Grand Sein* 
 ior,i« i be year im. Cyrilins brought it with him from Alexandria, wb^, 
 ' poiWft It was written. In a schedule annexed to it, he rives this account; 
 Mat it was written, as tradition infotnad them, by Thecia, a noble Ecyptiaii 
 ladj, ahoot thirteen hnndred yeait ago, a little after the council of Nic?. Ho 
 adds that the name of Thecla at the end of the book was erased: but that this 
 *¥<^.cy "^ oAer books of the Christiana, after ehristianily was extin- 
 guM IB Eiprpt byihe Mo hammrd a ns ; and that raeant tradition ra^rds the iact 
 of the Iteration and eraMteof Thecla'sname. The proprietor of this manuscript, 
 befora it came into the hands of Cyrillna Locaris. bad written an Arabic suV 
 acription, expessing that^this book was said to have been written with the pea 
 of Theek the martyr." rintrodnction to the critical stndv and knowlcdae of 
 •ha Holy Seriptnrea, by fhomas Hartwelt Horne. Vol. IL ppTSfi, SlT *^ 
 
 Bot, this It not the only n w ii papiatical mannaoript of the aoripta re. 
 ";Miw 'Oitaat. 
 
 II. -Tra Cmm VAncANUS, No. 1209. which Wetstein and Grieabach 
 hnva boib naipd with the letter B, contests the palm of antiquity with the Alex- 
 aadrmn nrannmpt. No facsimile of it has ever been pabUshed. The Roman 
 adition of the Septnagint. prtated in 1590, professes to exhibit the text of this 
 ■MUnteript; and fo the preiMre to that edition it is stated to have been written 
 before the year M7. 1, a. townrda tha aiaaa of the 4th eentniy: Montfoncon 
 and Bl^ini refer jt to tha Sth <Nr ith^caatwy, and Da PSa to the 7th cen. 
 Iny. IMisantHaghas OMleavoredtoahev that it was written in the aarlv 
 part of tha foarth centniy ; bet, from tha omission of the Easebiaa •i^mKmm nod 
 •»v».«n BHdiop Mai^ fioaclndes with great probabUity. that it was written be- 
 iwa tha close of the ffth cantniv. The Vatican maanseript is written on parch* 
 ■jnt or fnikm le eaaial or Capital iettera. In three cobmra on each paga^^l of 
 m^araaltha mm aaa, axcapt at the begbniaf of a book, and without aay 
 dlvwoas of chapters, Tanea. or words, but mth acccnte and spirits. Tha shape 
 of the letters, and color of the mk. prove that it was written thronghont by one 
 aadthe same carefiil copyist** Id. ib. p. 74. ^ 
 
 Tliefe aie alao Yeraiona older than the papaey, older than the fid- 
 gale, which is itself eridently older tiian the ohnicb of Rome. 
 
 ••Syria being visited at a very early period by tha piaachaia of tha christian 
 Ml* several transhitioaB of tha saciad volame waia made into the laaftnace of 
 ■mm matry. The most calebtaled of these is the PtteJUlo or IMwS^inrtw 
 JasfJ**,) as It IS nsmllir called, oa account of its very close adherence to Oia 
 Hebrew text, from which it was immediately made. The most extravacant as- 
 lerttom hava bean advanced conoamiag its antiqnity, soma rtforring it to tha 
 
 BOMAH f ATBOUC RWJGION. 
 
 lime of Solomon and.Hirani, whUe others ascribe it to A»a^ the mjest of Sama- 
 ritans, and a third class, to the apostle Thaddeui. This last tradition is receiv. 
 ed by the Syrian churches; but a more recent date is ascribed to it by modern 
 bibliad philolorars. Bishop Walton. Carpeovi Lewden. Bishop Lowth. and 
 Dr. Kennicott. Ix its date to the first oeotary ; Bauer, and some other German 
 critics, to the second or third century: Jaho fixes it at the Utest, to the second 
 century: De Rossi pronounces it to be very ancient but does not specify any 
 nrecue date. The most probable opinion is that of Michaelis, who ascribes it to 
 Iheclose of the first or to the eariier part of the second century, at which time 
 the Syrian churches flourished most, and the christians at Edessa bad a temple 
 for divine worship erected after the model of that at Jerusalem: and it is not to 
 ha topposed that they would be without a version of the old Testoment. tba 
 taadimc of which had been introduced by the apostles." Id. ib. pp. 187, l»»- 
 
 •• An important accession to biblical literature was made a few years since, by 
 the late learned and excellent Dr. Buchanan, to whose assiduous labors tbe 
 British chnrch in India is most deeply indebted: and who, in his progress 
 unong the Syrian churches and Jews of India, discovered and obtained numa 
 roas ancient manascripU of the scriptures, which are now deposited in the onb- 
 lic library at Cambridge. One of these, which was discovered In a remote Syn- 
 an charch near the mountains, is particularly valuable: it contains the old and 
 new Testements, engrossed with beautiful accuracy in the Estrangao (or old 
 Syriac.) character, on strong vellum, in large folio, and having three colunine in 
 n pare. The words of every book are numbered: and the volume illuminated, 
 btttnot after the European manner, the initial letters having no ornament. 
 Thomrh somewhat injured by time or neglect, the mk being fn certain places 
 oblitSated, still the letters can, in general, be distinctly traced from the im- 
 press of the pen, or from the partial corrosion of the ink. The Syrian church w- 
 siens a high elate to this manuscript, which in the opinion of Mr. Yeates. who 
 hu publiihed a collation of the Pentoteach, was written about thesevcmth 
 centi^. In lookmg over this manuscript. Dr. Buchanan found the y^rj first 
 emendation of the Hebrew text proposed by Dr. Kennicott, which doabtless is 
 the true reading. Id. 16. p. 189. . ..,,-..•. 
 
 Now, if we of the west of Europe, did receive the bible first ftom 
 our Roman Catholic ancestors, I ask, wonld that make ns denendent 
 on their traditions alone for that book ; any more than A. B., who 
 lived on one of the seven months of the Nile, from which he supplies 
 himself with water, was, on that account, absolutely dependent on the 
 branch nearest his dwelling. Tell him that he is absolutely and alone 
 dependent on it for water ; and he will say, " No ; but it is more «m- 
 
 • venieni to supply myself firom this stream : there are six other branch- 
 es, from which I could supply myself, were it necessary for my life or 
 comfort." So say we. We have Jews, Greeks, Armenians, and Pro- 
 testants, from the first schism, A. D. 350, down to the present day; 
 to say nothing of the ancient sceptics, Celsus, Porphyry, Julian, and 
 others ; and 3ie ancient heretics, from whose writing, together with 
 
 ' those of the infidel pagans, we could almost compile a New Testa- 
 
 • ment, containing every fliing read, not only since, hut before the conn- 
 ' cil of Laodicea. Du Pin himself acknowledges, that before that coun- 
 cil, even in the third century, the scriptures were read as they are now. 
 
 ' But, as for our independence of all Roman Catholic tradition, on this 
 
 • subject, many other proofh may be offered. The notorious and glorious 
 fact, however, that Protestants have rejected the Roman Catholic rule 
 of faith, apociypha, traditions, and all, and even her own vulgate, as 
 
 ' auttentic, will for ever frown out of countenance, the |roundless im- 
 putations of my too credulous opponent. [Time expired. J 
 
 '•^ , Ha^past 3 d'dock, F. JC 
 
 Bishop PUECKLL rises— 
 
 My friends, have you ever seen the Anti-Christ 1 Look at him now 
 (holding up a hook.) This morning, 1 endeavored to shew that Ma- 
 
vhatb oil vm. 
 
 hmm»i wag iU iMMt liMst, to iUutntt the myMwioiis fffopheeTt 
 •Dd I stated tiut many maaa (Imirteeii) ooold be Ibiiwi to corfes|iofiil 
 witk the Domliers €66. I now aistiiietly abew the page aad book, 
 wiien tbe computatioe ia made and the laat of theae aamea ia that of 
 God himaelf. Cefdomii, a Greek writer, Hetliea that the name of 
 Mahoiiiaedv as it waa written in hia time, wiU exactly apdl the beaat. 
 Oa thia aobjeet, the reader who ia not eonlent witk tie article, Anti- 
 Uhnat, in Bobtnaon'a Calmet, may refer to Walmealey'a General Hia- 
 IMV of tiie Chriatian ehonsh, p. S60. 
 
 I do not fife my own tiieoir of tiie matter. There hate been too 
 ■lamr tbeonata akmdy^ to need more. I belie¥e tiie beast was neitiier 
 Mttir, nor Mahoinmed, nor tiie pope. Thia ia not an article of faith 
 with me, nor witia any Catiiolic. I reapeet tiie prophecy, hot I await 
 to deeiile the iineatiooa until • RoTelationa' he what tiie term importa. 
 I iavt haii a history of the popea, in Freneh, pabliahed, aa the titie 
 paM aaya «•! tiie expense of tiie holy Father." Of eoorae it is to be 
 ondaiatood to be a hoax, and it deaenres to be ao eooaideied. It telle 
 
 f "SSP.*^ 'i? *'*®"* ¥™ '* ■"*^ ^•" he waa to be deatroyed for oTet 
 
 Ml 17«ib We may then write lua epitaph. 
 
 I ito MH know on what ffoanda my friend asaerted yeaterday, thai 
 lie Sni. ooramandment wia not a part of tiie Catiiolic mle of morala 
 Ikat e alnrady exhibited Yariooa eateehiaaa, in use in tiie United 
 malea, in all of which, every word of tiie eommandmenta ia found. 1 
 ■nppoae my friend ovtiiooked tiie fact. I waa dad to hear the flentie. 
 ■^ mak 80 highly of M ichaelia. It ahowed his literary knowledge | 
 
 lit of hia voika eovld be obtained in Paria, in 1694, 1 proenied it 
 
 °? « bappaM by a aingular coincideoce, unknown to him, to be. I 
 
 Wile him to exaaiiae ialt tiie eommandmenta, and he will find tiiem 
 
 llY aiMl ^th^|l|; nmd«nA in every Catiiolic Bible and Teatameni 
 
 very diA 
 
 M^*" Jl^'* K«ae»^W7aa1Lf"^t to know, tiiat ia tim oM 
 JMiiiew Bible, there ia no diviaion of vaiaea, moeh leaa of ehapteraf 
 TTiat a Roman Cadidie cardinal had a good deal to do in making tiie 
 diviaioifr-^nd tiiat tiiey were not Proleatanta, botRabbis, who suffixed 
 t ia points which senre instead of vowala to Hebrew words, which 
 Mve ime bat ooiaenattta alone; aecoidii^y, aa theae vowela ai» 
 
 UHT* Z^"7!^!?^ f^y "K^'^y whatever tiie jm'filcr pleaaeal 
 oa mini or the oldeal known meaning mvat be tiie only criterion. 
 But lAoold hke to know how one of our ffood, plain, homebied and 
 ■■•■■iriona eWaaM eaa acea i ia h tiiia taak for himaelf. Even lean* 
 •i men made themaalvea ridlMlMa by thtk maaoietic fixtniea and 
 tiaiialatlons, and Lutiier, who waa a good QtOolk aeholai^anghing 
 at y>« muidity of their veraiona ef paaaagea in tiie Bible— obaerved 
 that "In tiie beginaiiig tiia euckoo ale tiie apanow and tiie featiieia,** 
 
 rSSi" ^T Ti «T* • tt««l«ti<«,«^«h* fiii» line ^ OmmdM, aa aoma 
 of iheiia. I wtil return to thia aubject. 
 
 It appeara tiiat Birda and Beaata of prey may repreaent peace, at 
 
 well aa cruelly. England tiien auffima ao diaparagement from her 
 
 mmuM CATHOLIC sxuoion. 
 
 961 
 
 Wffl ■! iiend tell tiie andienoe when tiie sMsordte noifili, witiioul 
 -"ik *• «nderatanding of tiie Bible, if not 
 were firal introduced 1 and by whom I 
 
 I, nor the United Btatea, from her Eagle. The gentiemaa auff- 
 99^ • <i»** iMT tiie latter. I hmve boI tiia alightaai o^ei^ and M 
 
 the criticism I have heard be correct, the bird lately stamped on th« new 
 American coin resembles a chicken, more than a bird of prey, it looka 
 as if it were more to be preyed npon than preying, and more ainned 
 against than sinning. 
 
 Before I come to the very important point of the Bible, 1 meat not 
 forget to quote the testimony of the eloquent Southey, to shew what 
 anti-Christs the popes were, and how they displayed their anti-ehrist* 
 ian spirit, in the conversion of Old England. 
 
 •• Tn«t Ciregory, who was afterward* raited to tfie poptNloBt "nd if dieti*- 
 e«iih«) from »ucceedii« popes of the same narae (one alone excepted,) by 
 the fwik of saint, and trooi bim, by the appellation of the Great, was one dav 
 led into the market-place at Rome, with a great concourse of persons, to look 
 at a large importation of foreign roerchandite, which had just arrired. Among 
 other articles, there were some boys exposed for sale like cattle. There waa 
 nothing remarkable in this, for it was the custom every where in that age, and 
 had been so from time immemorial: but he was struck by the appearance of tbe 
 boysf tbeir fine clear skins, the beauty of their flaxen or golden hnir, and their 
 inaenuoos countenances; so that he asked from what countnr they came; and 
 when be was told from the island of Briuin, when the inhabitants ia general 
 wera of that complexion and comeliness, he inquired if the people were chna- 
 tians, and sighed for compassion at hearing that they were in a state of P^:ub 
 
 darknett. From that day the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons became a 
 
 Ikvorite object with Gregory Accordingly he despatched thither 
 
 forty missionaries from a monatfery, which he had founded at Rome. . . . . . . 
 
 When, therefore, Augustine (who was their chief) and his companions landed 
 in the Isle of Thanet, they came not at obscure men, unprotected and nnaccrad- 
 ited; but with recommendations from the kings of France, «nd as <nf*^^^>S^ 
 froM a potentate, whose spiritual authority was acknowledged and <weyed 
 throughout that part of the world, to which the uoilhern mtions were accw- 
 tomed to look aa the seat of empire and superior civiliiation. They madetbeir 
 arrival known to Ethelbert, and requested an audience. They approached ra 
 procession, bearing a silver crucifix, and a portrait of our Savior, upon a baa- 
 iier adorned witii gold, and chaunling the litany. Tbe king welcom«l ^tm ccur- 
 leoatly. and oidered them to be seated: aftec which, Augottme stood up, and, 
 through an interpreter, whom he had brought from France, delivered the pur- 
 port of his mission, in a brief, but well ordered and impressive discourM. Ha 
 was come to the king, and to that kingdom, he said, for their eternal good, a 
 messenger of good tidings; offering to their acceptance peipetual bappincta, 
 hero and hereafter, if tiiey would accept his wordi. The Creator and Redeemer 
 had opened the kiagdom of heaven to the human race: for God so loved tha 
 worid that he had sent into it his only son, as that son himself testified, to be- 
 come a man among the children of men, and suffer death upon the ««>»»»« 
 atonement for their sfnt. That incarnate divinity bad beea made manifest by 
 inamnerable miracles. Christ had stilled Uie winds and waves, and walked nooa 
 th« watera: he bad healed diseases, and restored Uie dead to hfe: finallv.hahad 
 risen from the dead himself, that we might rise again through him, and had m- 
 candad into heaven, that he might receive us there in his gloiy; tod he would 
 come again to judge both the quick and the dead. - TPhink not,** he procacdad, 
 ••O iBMt excellent king, that we are rapetttitioas, because we haft coma fron 
 RoMe into thy dominions, for the take of the salvation of thaa aad of thy peo- 
 m%i w have done this, being constrained by great love: for that which we da- 
 tk% above ail tiia pomps anJdelighta of this world, is to have «ir feHow-CTaa- 
 tares partaken with ourselves in Uie kmgdoai of heaven, Ac.** [Southey s Book 
 of the Church, chap. iii. p. 53. etc. ,^^ 
 
 My friend propoaed a qipeation, which he thought diiSenlt. Wliy 
 do I believe the bible! He said my anawer would be, because tiie 
 church believes it ; and this, he says, is like Peter giving a character 
 to Paul, and Paul to Peter. I reciprocate the queation of the gentie- 
 man, and he says he believes in the church, because he believes in the 
 bible. Thus the bible and church testify to eaeh other in his theory, 
 and the difficulty ia infinitely gieater for a Proteatant, tiian for a Ca- 
 
gnt mpmm 
 
 IIm ittMt liMft, to illittnle tlra myflMioM propheej; 
 ■od I tttted that many naniet (foartmo) eooM be fomid to conospoiMl 
 witk tiM munliera €66. I now dktinetly shew the page aad bocrik, 
 when the eonputatioii it maiie and the last of theea namea ia that of 
 God himaelf. Cefdenia, a Greek writer, teatillea that the name of 
 MahonuBed, aa it waa written in hia time, will eiaelly apell the beaat. 
 On thia aobject, the reader who ia not content with the article, Anti- 
 Ohfitt, ia MiliMB'a Calmet, may relef to Walnealey'a General Hit- 
 toij of the Chrlatian choreh, p. S50. 
 
 I do not |iTe my own theorr of the matter. There ha?e been too 
 many theonata ahrtady, to need more. I beliere the beast was neither 
 Lather, nor Mahommed, nor the pone. Thia ia not an article of faith 
 wiih me, nor with any Catholic. I leapeet the prophecy, but I await 
 to decide the qnestiona nntal • ReTclatiooa* be what the term importa. 
 I have heia a hiatoiy of the popes, in French, published, as the title 
 fm aift •• at the espenae of the holy Father.*' Of course it is to b« 
 nnieiitood to he a hoax, and it deaerrea to he so considered. It tells 
 a heap of Ilea about him ; amonf othera he waa to be destroyed for cTei 
 in ITlSb We may thm write his epitaph. 
 
 I do not know on what fronnds my friend asserted yesterday, thai 
 the Snd. cemBandment was not a part of the Catholie rale of morala 
 I have already exhibited variona catechisms, in use in the United 
 Stalea, in aU of wiiich, every word of the oommandmenta ia found. I 
 auppoee m§ ftiend overlooked the lact. I waa glad to hear the gentle, 
 man apaik m highly of Michaelia. It showed hia literary knowledge i 
 and peihapa he may be intereated in knowing that when but one edi- 
 tioii of hia woika could be obtnined in Paris, in 1834, 1 procured it. 
 Hero it happena by a siii|alar coincidence, unknown to him, to be. I 
 invite him to exasune in it the commandments, and he will find them 
 lullv and iu thiblly rendered in every Catholic Bible and Testament 
 Will mv firlend tell the audience when the moxordie notnli, without 
 lihieh the nndaiatanding of the Bible, if not impoaaible, is very difll 
 
 eHl|'"iiiii first intmtaned I and by whom t 
 
 Ho all Bible readeia know, aa they ought to know, that in the old 
 Mehiev Bible, there ia no diviaion or veraes, much leaa of chapteral 
 Hal a loman Catholin cardinal had a good deal to do in making the 
 diffiaion— 4ind that they were not Protestants, but Rabbis, who suffixed 
 the pninia which iifve inatsad of vowela to Hebrew words, which 
 hapt'" .Mne but conaonanta al<one; accordingly, aa theae vowels are 
 plaetd, the Hebrew root may aignify whatever the jMinfer pleaaea f 
 Tha context of the oldeal known meaning mnat he die only criterion. 
 Bit I ahould ike to know how mm of our good, plain, homebred and 
 indaatrioos eltiaena can aoeoapliah thia taai for himaelf. Even letfi- 
 ad mm made th a »aal vaa iidienloaa hy their maioretic fixturea and 
 
 inualations, and Luther, who waa a good CMMk scholar— laughing 
 at Ihe ahaurdity of their vorsionB of naaaagea in the Bible— obaerved 
 
 thai Mil the beginning the cuckoo ato the aparrow and the featbeia,'* 
 vonid be joataa good a tranalataon of the fimtllneof Geneaia,aaaonw 
 •fiheirs. I wUI ratara to thia aubject. 
 
 it appeara that Birda and Beaata of prey may repreaent peace, at 
 well aa cruel^. England then auffera no dianaragement from her 
 Lion, nor the United Btatea, from her Eagle. The gsntiemaa snf> 
 geeto « dove fee the lattor. 1 have not lit aligfateat ejection, and if 
 
 wntAH CATnoLic scLioioir. 
 
 961 
 
 the criticism I have heard be correct, the bird lately stamped on th« n^ 
 American coin resembles a chicken, more than a bird of prey. It looka 
 as if it were more to be preyed upon than preying, and more sinned 
 against than sinning. 
 
 Before I come to the very Important point of the Bible, I nrast not 
 Ib^t to quote the testimony of the eloquent Southey, to shew what 
 anti-Chrisis the popes were, and how they displayed their antt-^ris*- 
 ian spirit, in the convereion of Old England. _i • j- • 
 
 •• That Gregory, who wm •fterwwtif niied to th« popedom, and m OMtia* 
 aaished from succeedinr popes of the wme naaie (one alone exceptei*.) by 
 the TMk of saint, and horn htm, by the appellation of the Great, was one dav 
 kd ialo the market-place at Rome, with a great concourw of persons, to look 
 wX a large importatbn of foreign merchandise, which had just arrived. Among 
 other articles, there were some boys exposed for sale like cattle. There was 
 nothing remarkable in this, for it was the custom every where m that «g«. » 
 Ind been so from time immemorial: bot he was struck by the appearance of tba 
 boys, their fine clear skins, the beauty of their flaxen or golden bair, and their 
 MMreauoos countenances; so that he asked from what countnr they came; and 
 when he was told from the island of Britoin, where the inhabitants IB general 
 were of that complexion and comeliness, be inquired if the people were chris- 
 tians, and sighed for compassion at hearing that they were in a state of Pagan 
 
 darkness From that day the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons be<^me a 
 
 lavorite object with Gregory Accordingly he despatched thither 
 
 forty missionaries from a monatfery, which he had founded at Rome. . • • • •; 
 
 When, therefore, Augustine (who was their chief) and his companions ianded 
 in the Isle of Thanet, they came not as obscure men, unprotected and unaccred- 
 ited; but with recommendations from the kings of France, and as messengers 
 from a potentate, whose spiritual authority was acknowledged and obeyed 
 throughout that part of the world, to which the northern nations were accus- 
 tomed to look as the seat of empire and superior civiliiation. They made tbeir 
 arrival known to Ethelbert, and requested an audience. They approached in 
 orocession. bearing a silver crucifix, and a portrait of pur Savior, upon a ban- 
 £er adorned with gold, and cbannting the litany. The king welcomed ^emconr. 
 teonsly. and ordered them to be seated: aftec which. Augustine stood up, and. 
 through an interpreter, whom he had brought from France, delivered the pur- 
 port of his mission, in a brief, but well ordered and impressive a»«co«"Vi** 
 was come to the king, and to that kingdom, he said, for their eternal good, n 
 messenger of good tidings; oflfering to their acceptance perpetual hapi>»"«^ 
 here and hereaTter, if they would accept his words. The Creator and R^fef*" « 
 had opened the kingdom of heaven to the human race: for God ■? loved tba 
 world that he had sent into it his only son, as that son himself testified, to be- 
 come a man among the children of men, and suffer death upon the cross, m 
 atonement for their sfns. That incarnate dirinity had been made manifeest nj 
 innumerable miracles. Christ had stilled the winds and ™«f? •«^.'^«JJ~ "CS 
 th« waters: he had healed diseases, and restored the dead to life: finallv, he had 
 risen from the dead himself, that we might rise again throueh him, and had s»- 
 cendMl into heaven, that be might receive us there >n hi» glorj; V^ "*J!5"lf 
 come again to judge both the quick and the dead. - Think not," he procaeded, 
 •• O nost excellent king, that we are superttitiont, because we have coina Iroa 
 Ro«a into thy dominions, for the sake of the salvatioa of thee and of thy pcn- 
 ^; wa have done this, being constrained by great love: for that which we dn- 
 are. ihova all the pomps and delighU of this world, is to have our feHow-^raa. 
 torn partakeia withouirselves in the kingdom of heaven. &c.'* [Southey »s Book 
 of the Church, chap. iii. p. 23. etc. «n^ 
 
 My friend proposed a «ine8tion, which he thought difllenlt. wny 
 do I believe the bible! He said my anawer wonid he, becanse the 
 choreh believes it ; and this, he says, is like Peter priving a character 
 to Paul, and Paul to Peter. I reciprocate the question of the gentle- 
 man, and he says he belieyes in the chnreh, becauae hebelieTes in the 
 bible. Thus the bible and church testify to each other in his theory, 
 and the difficulty ia infinitely greater for a Protestant, than for a Ca- 
 
I 
 
 WMBJkTE cnr ma. 
 
 'lAilit.' ''bfaet,'l«r«l)iiiMlii<;li0iiiiMltoii k not latccptilile of anf 
 iiftoulty, whaumwm. One word will show that we ara right. Which 
 mm, FMoal Tho bible or the churchl Manifeailj, the church waa the 
 older. The afioatlie did not wait lo have thousanda of bibles copied, 
 aad to Mghtfiaaila iiiih themt and aail as aupeicarg oea of the boa- 
 wenly merdiaiidiiey to the diatant aationa of the earth. ** Jhttt,** i^|fa 
 8t. Paul, *^mmm from heming,^^ There were milliooa of converta to 
 Chriatiaiiity, whole nations were converted to the Savior, by premk' 
 Imy, belbte the diiereiii books composi off the present bible, were do- 
 lemined to be eemiine Sori|iliift and collecled into one volume. This 
 was not done b<9bre the beginninf of the fourth century. The church 
 : waa therefoie prior to the bible : and if the bible had never been writ- 
 •teOf th« foapei could have been preached and believed, as it was in 
 i the eailf agea, without its aid. How did the apoatlea make converta 
 without the bible! They addreaaed themselves to the reason of the 
 unconverted nattoos. They convinced tiiem, if neoeaaarr, of the ex- 
 iatenee of Godf bf the spectacle of the divine wisdom and power, dis- 
 played in the eieaion and preaervation of the worid. Th^ appealed 
 to the natural law, whooe pieeepta were written by the finger of God, 
 on tahieta of lleah, the hearta of men, before they were engraven on 
 atone, amidst the thunder and lightnings of Sinai. Thua did they 
 ini the great primary truths of natural religion, with regard to 
 both doctrine and morals, inculcated by the contemplation of the 
 vialhle wonders of creation and the teatimony of the human heart. 
 They next proceeded to convince their hearers of the unity of God, 
 and the ainfiilness and grossnesa of idolatry, of their having departed 
 iram the moral law, of the darkness in which sin had involved the 
 hunuin race, of our incompetency for our own cure, of the divine com- 
 -misentioB of our misery, of the descent of Jesus Christ, hia doctrine, 
 ^hisHilradei, his charity, hia eatabliahment of hia ehnreh, his aaen- 
 menta and the various meana of grace, his promises to be with his 
 apoatlea, He and hia Holy Spirit, for ever, his death, &c. The holinesa 
 iW the apoatlea* lives, the cruel death with which they sealed the truth 
 thejhad proclaimed, conciliated the belief and completed the conversioH 
 of iieir hearera. ** IwiOmg^,^ aays Paschal, '• hdieoe the tmlneaMt, 
 woko M Ikdr ikroak h mi h aiieai ike iruik ^ v^ tkey deelare,^^ The 
 bible could not abed ita blood to attest its divine origin. The ignorant, 
 who aie a lafge proportion of the human race, could not read it; the 
 learned, and &e pious, and the aincere, aa every one knows, found it 
 a taak Ikr above their atiength, to disttn|||iii8h genuine from apnriooa 
 tpiptnre. Before the invention of printing, men could not procure 
 ; liliBa: ainoe the inventioii of printing, they md them to intr^uce m 
 iood of new aeeta ; ao that there are now aa many religions, almost, 
 ' aa there are dHlbrent versiona or diifamil readera oi the acripturea. If, 
 on the contrary, there ia anything clearly taught in the scriptures, it la 
 the authority of the church, whidi, without aid from the bible, not all 
 •eniposed when the first apoatlea preached, had fully eetablished hte 
 authority, and, independently of her miracles, proved, by the prete^ 
 natural success of her preaching, that God waa indeed with her, as he 
 had promised, teaching all natiSna, and perpetually suggesUng to her 
 all tmlh. Hence, we believe in the church first; and on the faith of 
 the evidiHiea which I have enuminted, we believe in the bible, which 
 the ehorch presenta to us, vouching for its purity and authenticitj. 
 
 BOMAll eAVmOtm BVUOIOH. 
 
 The bible obtained, sanctions the authority of the ehorch, and confiraM 
 our faith. Here, all is consistent, and oor submission to the chnreii is 
 loaaonable. The Pioteatant divines. Hooker and Chillingwortb, allow 
 that the bible cannot bear teatimony to itself: even Lather waa fiweed 
 to acknowledge it, •* We are obliged,*' aaya he, •* to yield nnmy 
 thinga to the papists ; that with them ia the word of God, that we re> 
 ceived from them ; otherwise, we should have known nothing at all 
 about it." (Comment on John, c. 16.) Hence the remarkable saying 
 of St. Augustine : " I should not believe the ^pel itaelf, if the 
 Catholic church did not oblige me to do so." Will my friend inform 
 me, why he rejects an authentic work, of great excellence, written by 
 St. Barnabas; who is termed, in scripture, an apostle, and declared to 
 be full of the holy Ghost, (Acts xiv. 34, xi. 24 ;) and receivea, as 
 canonical, parte of the New Testament, which were not written by 
 apostles at all, viz. the gvispels of St. Mark and St. Luke I The original 
 text of Moses, and the ancient prophete, was destroyed with the tem- 
 ple and city of Jerusalem, by the Assyrians under Nebucbadnessar; and 
 the authentic copies which replaced them, perished in the persecntton 
 of Antiochus. How were these books restored ! Paul wrote his 
 Epistle to the Romans, and entrusted it to the deaconess Phcebe. His 
 £pistle to the Ephesians, he confided to the disciple Tychieus. How 
 can we be sure of these epistles, as they now stand in the Testament! 
 Was it not the corruption of the bible by Queen Elixabeth's bishops, 
 that caused James I. to have a new translation to be made % But, 1 
 should be endless, if I enumerated all the insurmountable difficulties, 
 which a Protestant encounters at the very first step of his journey in 
 •uest of a religion. He mmi turn Catholic at the very outad, and take 
 •Se hible, at he gets tV, on authoriiy, or remain an unbeliever all his life* 
 And he mmt believe thai mUkoriiy to be infallible, or he can never be sure 
 thai the bibk it gives him m divine. Catholics have faith by baptism, as 
 Protestante have ; but the latter lose it when they adopt, on arriving 
 at mature age, the Protestant principle, that every man must find out 
 his religion for himself, firom the bible. Many Protestants are not ad- 
 monished of the danger of their situation, and do not themselves reflect 
 on these difficulties. As long as they are sincere, and do the best they 
 can to obey God and conscience, the Catholic church excuses them, in 
 the words of St. Augustine : " Let those treat you harshly, who know not 
 how hard it is to get rid of old prejudices. Let those treat you harshly, 
 who have not learned how very hard it is to purify the interior eye, and 
 render it capable of contemplating the sun of the soul, truth. But, as 
 to us : we are far from this disposition towarda persons who are aepar- 
 ated from us, not by errors of their own invenUon, but by their being 
 entangled in those of others. We are so &r from this diapoeitioo, that 
 we pray to God, that in rafoting the false opinions of those whom you 
 follow, not from malice, but from imprudence, be would bestow upon 
 ua that spirit of peace, which feels no other sentiment than charity, no 
 other interest than that of Jeaua Christ, no other wish bat for year 
 salvation.*' Had we been bom Mahommedans, we would, perhaps, 
 live Mahommedans. Thank God, we are not. But, this does not re- 
 
 auire us to throw away our faith, it would be too long to notice all 
 le gentleman says. I attend to the most important. 
 Now, I will venture to assert, that there is not a Protestant in this 
 house, who can say, that he has found out all the tenete which he be- 
 
on 
 
 MotWi hf vradiof Hm Wk •lone. Ho Ml efw tliMa, beeiiM Mt 
 
 or a luMdiitf oHmt iniaeneoo may have been broaglit to bear wpm hia 
 ■lad and his affeetioiia, favorable to tlioae peenliar tenela. It is not at 
 ■i iw eaae witli Proleotaat ohiMrea, aay laofa tbaa witb Catkolk ehil- 
 tfien, that leamm h Ibe/nl to lead tbem to tbefrMief. Let eaeh one 
 eaiMiidlj examine bis own beart, and aak bteaelf if be waa not aa 
 nMMb tdmmhi in those doetrinea wbieb be now pr ofina e a f as the Catii* 
 
 ^pwBW^B ^waPiuP' KilMi VWMBMUJi'npe 
 
 How ean he be sore, if he indeed poeaeas aa antbentie copy of the 
 acfiptorea, that be midmlmii theni I •« The word of God,*^sav« the 
 
 Pnleataal biahop, Walton, ** does not eonstit in mere letters, whether 
 wiilten or iirinted, bot in the aeme of it; which no one can better b- 
 lerpet than the true ebmoh, to whieh Christ eoniniitted this aania 
 fm^BJ* (Polyglot Prolef. eh. ▼.) 
 
 My opponent saya. thaie was a oopj of the seriptnrea Ibond, wbieb 
 the iipen of a monk had never aoUed, And how does he go about to 
 •itabliak tbia nropoaitioa I He quoted Home. I will take up thia 
 vaiy work, and prova, while I admit that Home waa a learned writer, 
 that be fell into aome very unlearned blunders. But bow does Home 
 aay that my friend is right ? He says, that this very manuscript waa 
 ' i in one of the twenty-two monasteries of Mount Athos ! ! Lo ! 
 waa a monk at the bottom of it after all ! [Time eipiied.] 
 
 aia«' (jjtMvaBiiL 
 
 Mm o^tkdkf F. M 
 
 1 JF^i^?^ 'kcre is any thing but order in our discussion— I mean 
 lofieu mder, as respects the duties of a respondent. Now, eertain- 
 VijW« ^M abundantly appear in the report of this debate. 
 
 Tm genlleoian has not onoe^ as yet, replied to my apeecbea in reffu« 
 iar aeiiuence ; but, afkr the interval of a night, a day, and sometunea 
 two days, he responds to some point or argument : and then bis r^ 
 plv consists either in accusing me of misunderstanding, or misstating 
 what he has aaid ; or perhaps in denying my authorities, or by intro- 
 dneiuf some extract, or tradition, or opinion, from some great Pro- 
 jMtant, or some good Catholic, or some excogitaaon of his own. 
 His last speech was a happy illustraaon of Ovid'a 
 
 ** coiif««tW}iie •bdeiu— 
 If on bene janctanmi ditcordia Mmiiia rerain.*' 
 
 Mm « « m • [MetiBior. lib« I. 
 
 AM, oertainl^, bia mirtiifiilneaa and gnvity were in unison witl- 
 Iha dignity of bis reply ; and equally fallible aa respects effect of any 
 amrt upon his audience. This rhetoric soon weara out. It is but an 
 M%aiio«nd, a shadow; the criala calls fbraomething more solid. But 
 if it etinot be found, I must aubmit to interraption, and torn aaide to 
 moAm tha gleaninga of hk last and best reiecttons upon the prophecies. 
 
 The gentleman baa given ua from bia library some ridiculone puns 
 spell the name of IMlmMt. He doea not, and under his haid desti- 
 ny he cannot, alwaya discriminate the preeiae point in debate. It is 
 not about tihe name of an individual, such aa Ludovicua, or Maho- 
 met; butof a ^ple— a community—* kingdom. Hia second mia- 
 Ma 18» that if it were a personal name, the number of tlie name of 
 Maboiiiet as given in his example only makes 508. His name pro- 
 perly wntten is equal to only 463. He ought also to have decipfaeiv 
 
 ftOMAM CATHOMC MSLlGlOft, 
 
 265 
 
 edt.or his author, whether bis name should be taken as it is written 
 in Arabic or in Greek. But whether he take it in Arabic or in Greek, 
 it will not in Grecian numerals, and certainly not in Arabic, equal 
 666. So fails his effort at both reason and ridicule to dispose of this 
 moraing^i argument from prophecy. I again repeat, that on thia point, 
 aa on every other, my arorument appears unassailable. 
 
 Yesterday my opponent wjjs asked, where infallibility resided ; to- 
 day he answers by asking, where shall we find the mind ? In the 
 head, stomach, hands, feet, or where \ This is not a parallel case. 
 The question is, as usual, mistaken, or misapplied. It is, wheie is 
 the moulk of infallibility ! when I desire an infallible response, where 
 shall I hear it t Where is the Umgw of infallibility 1 If the church 
 possess infallibility and never decides a question by any organ — ne- 
 ver can utter an answer, it is worth no more than a diamond in the 
 depths of the Atlantic. 
 
 l*he alpha and omega of the proofs offered by the bishop for the ex 
 istence of infallibility, which has been so often repeated, and which 
 I promised sometime to notice, is this : " /aot vjilh you^ Now, lo- 
 gic asks, what means " I am with you !*' as proving infallibility, un- 
 less ** I am with you," is a phrase already incontrovertibly established 
 to mean infallibility. But what says bible fact T There are, at least, four 
 meanings of the phrase. I am with you, personally, providentially, gra- 
 ciously, or with miraculous power. It could not be the first : for he 
 was leaving them personally. It ceuld not be the second ; because 
 that was common to all good men. Thus God was with Joseph, with 
 Jacob, with all the patriarchs, and with all good men. It could not 
 be that God was to be with them graciously ; for that too, is common 
 to all christians. As the apostles said to all good christians, " The Lord 
 be with you all,*' it could not be a special promise to the apostles. 
 What remains then 1 Mark, the evangelist, explains : " These signs 
 shall follow. In my name shall they cast out devils: they shall 
 speak with new tongues, serpents shall they take away ; and if they 
 drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them. They shall impose 
 hands on the sick and they shall be whole." So the Rhemish Testa- 
 ment reads Mark's account of the promise, " I am with you." Again ; 
 after the ascension of the Messiah, the evangelist relates, v. 20. " But 
 they " (the apostles) »* going forth preached every where : our Lord 
 working with all^ and confirming the word with signs that followed." 
 
 This, then, is the proof of infallibilinr, as interpreted by Mark in 
 the canon Catholic 'mtament Now, does not this confine the pro- 
 mise to the apostles 1 Can the popes work miracles 1 Can the bish- 
 ops t— Such a miracle, forsooth, as the existence of the Roman Ca- 
 tholic church in the western empire, after the rise of Mahometanism 
 in the east ! A splendid miracle, truly ! That proves as much for 
 Mahometanism and Paganism, as for the popes of Rome : for all 
 these systems rose upon the ruin, and also withstood the shocks of 
 other systems! 
 
 When Peter said to the cripple, " Silver and gold I have none; but 
 fticA tu I have I give thee— In the name of Jesus take up your bed and 
 walk," he felt that he possessed something in the promise ^*- 1 am 
 • widi you." Can any of his successors speak in this stvle : silver 
 and gold I have none : but such as I have (the power of Christ) I 
 give thee I 
 
 The gentleman's dissertation on the vicious circle, leaves him 
 X 34 - 
 
hbbats on tbi 
 
 wlian it found him ; belieying the church firftt and the bible after- 
 Vifds; and making the one prove the other: but he will never dis 
 fom of it He is like the eccentric witness, whose veracity could 
 only be |)roved by the principal : and yet the principal depends foi 
 bis veracity upon the witness. The bishop for a little while turned 
 Protestant, and then be affirmed that he believed in Christ on the ev- 
 idence of his own miracles ; and that evidence he found in the bible, 
 ind thai bible he interpreted for himself. Thus he became a Protest* 
 ant, ivlita he attempted to solve that Gordion knot. But as soon as 
 he had, by the Protestant rule, obtained faith in Christ, he instantly 
 relapsed into the embrace of holy mother, and denounced the bridge 
 over which he escaped from the island. * 
 
 But the gentleman asked a question which has puzzled wise men to 
 snswer. A chil^ however of four years old could have asked Newton 
 a question that he could not have answered in a thousand years. 
 ^How cat you prove the bible f* says the bishop. Does it prove 
 itself! I w Jl imiute him, this once, and ask, does nature prove ii* 
 self I Does God prove his own ezistence without his works or by 
 Us works? Must there be another universe created to prove this T-— 
 Tbis is a question no one will put, unless on the hypothesis that no 
 am can prove a universe to exist but by other tesumony than itself. 
 So the bible proves itself to be the word of God, as nature proves it* 
 wlf to be the work of God. Thus has the supreme intelligence stamp* 
 ed the impress of himself both on nature and revelation. David says, 
 ** Lord, thou h^st magnified thy word above all thy name.** I have 
 other reasons, if necessary, to prove how the bible was put together. 
 Many a christian has been made so by the single testimony of one 
 evanfelist ; or by a single epistle of Paul. We have four gospels; 
 but one would have been enough ; and as much as many tndividiials 
 had. The whole christian doctrine might he learned from Paul alone, 
 ffon perliaps the half of his epistles. Paul and Peter wrote, and said 
 mttk iioio by divine inspiration than is preserved or recoided. So 
 did theaneient prophets. We need not to prove, in order to our faith, 
 who collected the writings into one volume, any more, than who col- 
 lected all the words of Christ, that are reported. 
 
 Cardinal Belfarmine says: ** There is sure to be some doctor at 
 the bead of a schism.'* Heiesiarchs are generally men of letters. 
 Where then the pertinency of those remarks about the unlearned wres- 
 ting the scriptures? The original means unimuMkl^ uniraetable persons 
 rather than unlearned. Philosophers, as they love to be called, are 
 generally the most unteachable, and the greatest wresters and perver* 
 ters of the scriptures. Peter had those too wise to learn, in his eye, 
 when be spoke of wresting the scripture ; and not the simple, honest 
 and unassuming laity. Let a man sit down as Mary sat, at the feet of 
 Christ, and bumble himself as a pupil ought ; he will then hear the 
 vilee of God, and understand it too. He will then discern how it is, 
 that all God*8 children are taught by God, and that there is none that 
 taisheth like him. 
 
 Mather wittily than loffieally, the gentleman gives the monks some 
 evedit, for handling the Alexandrine manuscript. Be it known howev 
 «r, that monkery began in St. Anthony's time; and that this said copy 
 is older than the founder of monasteries. Because Tacitus, Livy, Hor 
 
 , and Virgil passed through their hands, are we dependent on tUt^a, 
 
 BOMAN CATUOUC RXLIGION. 
 
 887 
 
 Ibr ill our knowledge of Greek and RoiaaD letters? The monks handled 
 copies that they never wrote. But that gave those copies neither 
 more nor less credit. I did not mean that one ought not to thumb the 
 scriptures in reading them, when I spoke of them being soiled by the 
 hands of amonk. I have then, so faras objection has been made, as 1 con- 
 conceive, sustained the sixth proposition. Will the president moderator 
 please have the 6th proposition read? [The 5th prop, was here read.) 
 Prop. V. Her notiontof purgatory, indulgences, auricular coDfeMion. remit* 
 •ion of sins, transubstantiation, superero^lion, Ate. essential elements of oer sys- 
 tem, are immoral in their tendency, and injurious to the well-being of society, 
 religious and political. 
 
 Now, my friends, I want to strike a blow at the main root of the 
 whole papal superstition : for that root is found in the proposition just 
 now read. I have but little time to do it, and shall, therefore, march 
 right up to the point at once. 
 
 The capital, distinguishing doctrine of Protestantism, next to the 
 bible alone as the rule and measure of christian faith and manners, 
 and the right and duty of all to read and examine it is, that the death of 
 Jesus Christ was not simply that of a martyr : hut that " be died fur 
 our mm, according to the scriptures." Thai the death or sacrifice of 
 Ckritt i» the great tin offerings and the only sin offerings iB a cardinal 
 doctrine of Protestantism ; and that there is now no priest, uor vic- 
 tim, nor sacrifice, nor altar, nor sin offering on earth follows, as a 
 matter of course. Jesus was " the Lamb of God" — " Himself the sin 
 offering and the priest." He expiated our sins in his own body on the . 
 cross.'* " His blood cleanses from all sin." Papal priests, penances, 
 confessions, masses, remissions, purgatories, intercessions of saints, 
 angelb, and almost all their ceremonies, arise from the notion, the 
 radical mistake that the sacrifice of Christ, as a sin offering, an atone- 
 ment, a reconciliaiiov was some way deficient. Although we can 
 trace supererogdUuu, purgatory, penances, lustrations, the intercessions 
 of nngels and dead men, &c. to the philosophers and dreamers of the 
 east— their divine Platos, Pythagorases and Aristotles : still the im- 
 mediate origin and cause of all these errors may be traced to ignorance 
 of the bible doctrine of the priesthood of Christ, the antitype of that of 
 Aaron and Melchisidec. It was Dryden, a Roman Catholic poet, if I 
 mistake not, who said that the dos pou sto, which Archimedes sought 
 in vain by which to raise the globe, was found by the popes of Rome 
 in the doctrine of purgatory. That was the philosopher's stone — the 
 lever which lifU the world — which has brought more gold to Rome, 
 than the discovery of America itself. 
 
 My friends, the doctrine of purgatory with all its correlates is bared 
 on two errors. 
 
 tst. T%at man can do more than Ms duty t 
 
 dd. Thai sotnething may be added to the saerijtee of Christ to give ii 
 wwre value or efficacy. 
 
 Now, I aflirm, that no created being, not a Gabriel, or Uriel, or Raph* 
 ael, or the highest of the angelic hosts, can do an act of superero- 
 gation. No man can, by any thought, word, or action, make God his 
 debtor. ^ Who,*' says Paul, ** has first given to the Lord, and it shall 
 be recompensed to him again? For, of him, and through him, and to 
 him, are all things." Jesus told his disciples, that when they had 
 done all that was commanded them, they had inly done *heir duty, 
 and were to him unprofitable servants. T.ie greatest naiht that 
 
DXAATI 021 TIIE 
 
 liftl it not more holy than he ought to ho, w hit own account 
 Thistinfle thonriit evtpontm thataea of merit which has pcrfonncd 
 ■oeh woDdera in Roman story. 
 
 Mo human bcinf has an^ thinr to gfive to God ; and therefore none 
 flu merit from him any thing. If a matins salvation depended on his 
 •hoiiing a single tear, where could he find it ! The heart that feels 
 and the tear that ilows^clear as chrystal down the cheek of the most 
 devoted saint^ are of God's creation. And, therefore, it is out of the 
 fieation, to conceive how any work of , merit, as respects God, is po9» 
 ■lUe for angel or for man. 
 
 Were a saint to turn pilgrim and peregrinate on liis naked kneea 
 the four quarters of the globe, were he to give his body to the flames, 
 when God asks it, or duty lequires it; he has deserved nothing from 
 God, on the ground of merit He has only employed the powers that 
 God gnve him, and used his faculties in a way consonant to the de- 
 ■•f* ^ ^i« that gave them. And sooner will a man add new glo- 
 mes to the sun or create new luminaries in the heavens, than add one 
 attribute of merit or of power to the sacrifice of Christ. " He fin- 
 ished transgression : made an end of sin offerings, brought in an ever- 
 Itetinf justification;'* and left nothing to be done to make his sacri- 
 iee more meritorious or efficient. 
 
 Works of supererogation, auricular confession, masses for sins, 
 transubstantiation, prgatory, with all the appurtenances thereto he- 
 lonffing, are the veriest ghosts of paganism— the phantoms of infatu- 
 iled lenson, attempts against the dimity of God and the supremacy, 
 ■■ well as the true and proper divinity and dignity of his Son. 
 
 This superstition, this man of sin, stands with his two feet upon 
 lie ^o'greatait lies in human history. He places his right foot on 
 IM first and his left foot on the second. Need I say that the former 
 lilrms ikai the ioerijtee ef God*§ oum Son m i fS0t(^Sd|ti/ m a $in tger* 
 img t and that the latter teaches that man eon do more than Am duty to 
 M. Here then, I say to mv opponent, I will measure swords with 
 him. Let him meet me on these too points, then it will be an easy 
 ****^ ^ *^*!E**®® °^ **^® imaginary purgatories, transubstantiation, pen- 
 ances, works of supererogation, &c. &c. and to shew that so lar from 
 bringing glory to God or righteousness to men, they are positively, 
 nalnimlly, and necessarily opposed to both. Let him try his strength 
 oT^Mriptural argument and reason on these cardinal points, and it 
 -rill, ■• onr time is so fer exhausted, save the tediouanesa of nume- 
 — delaila.^[Time expired.] 
 
 BO^rAN CATHOLIC SBLI6I0N. 
 
 269 
 
 _ Oaffmi 4 o'tbdkt P* M 
 
 My friends, it is imperative upon me to make one expodtion hefoiw 
 1 pioeoed. if any of you were here when my friend would have led 
 you mto a gross mistake, respecting the Catholic church, by quoting 
 a prelended extinct from Liguori. I asserted then, that noUiiag could 
 be found m that writer's works to substantiate the odious charge, to 
 flTO It io much as a semblance of truth. I have now before me Oio 
 •Blire works of Liguori, and I have placed them in tiie presence of 
 my friend, Mr. Campbell. The SOi volume has an index, containing 
 •¥eiy word of any importance, and I repeat, tiiataftera search throuirh 
 r"J'*T* "i°f Toliuiie«f miking Uke ike qmiaiiom W" lad memns can 
 mfimA I have now placed tiie book in the hands of Pro^ssor 
 
 Biggs, of Lane seminary, one of the moderatore, and t Proleatant of 
 the Presbyterian denommation, if I do not mistake, and I will leavn 
 it to him, or an^f other intelligent and candid man, to say to yon 
 whether the fact is as my friend has stated, or the very contrary of 
 what he has stated. 
 
 Mr. Campbell. Be so good as to explain the matter folly. 
 
 BisBOP PuRCELL. I will explain the exact stale of the case. Mr. 
 Smith, the author of the translation, from whom my friend read this, 
 as well as many other things, km given a fabe quotation, and mado 
 Liguori say, what he never said, "nie facts are these : a canon of tho 
 council of TVent, and Liguori, according to the canon, say, ^* that if 
 a priest falls by criminal intercourse, as specified, firom the holy 
 state of purity, to which he is bound by a voluntary, deliberate, and 
 solemn vow, he shall be deprived of a large portion of his salary for 
 the first offence. If he does not refrain after admonition and such 
 punishment, he is again admonished, and deprived of his whole salary, 
 and suspended from all his functions as a priest in the Catholic chureh« 
 But afler Uie third admonition, if he is still incorrigible, he is excom* 
 municated, and cut off from the church, even as St. Paul cut off the 
 incestuous man of Corinth." 1st. £p. Corinth, ch. 5. v. 5. Nowhere, 
 in any part of these volumes, is it said that a priest may sin thus upon 
 paving a fine, &c. 
 
 Thus, my friends, you see how the poisonous fountains of error and 
 prejudice have been swelling over the land, and infecting the public 
 mind, until many an honest and upright man has thought, when he 
 denounced us for our (imputed) doctrines, he was doing God a service. 
 Were he aware of the imposition practised on his credulity, he would, 
 I have no doubt, have turned his indignation on more deserving victims. 
 ** ijr t^« leave off $landering tkem^^* said the ministera of Amsterdan^ 
 to vossius, who remonstrated with them on their injustice to the Ca* 
 tholics, " our people will soon leave m." *' We shall do no good wiik ike 
 people,^ said Shaflesbury, speaking of the Mocedo plot, **ifw€eannoi 
 make them swallow greater nonsense than /Am." ** Thou shall not bearfalM 
 witness agmnsi thy neighbory'*^ is a commandment which Maria Monk 
 and her reverend protectors reckon not to belong to the ** weightier 
 things of the law." Their stale calumnies are paid for with the blood- 
 money ! Our doctrine, many of its ministerial adversaries know to be 
 p*ire and holy; but, overwhelmed with confusion, whenever they at- 
 tempt argument, they have no resource but in addressing themselves 
 to the prejudices of their implicit believera. These mock at Catholics 
 for **heanng the church ;" and whom do tkey hear 1 
 
 As to the bible, the whole difficulty is to be gone over again and 
 again. Every new translation, it seems, lies open to objections on 
 grave and important grounds. I have here a paper, printed at Kana- 
 wha, in Cabell county, Virginia. In it a coosiaerable class of Bap* 
 tiets, I think they are, quarrel with their brethren near Zoar, in Ohio, 
 and quarrel with the bible. They insist that all the existing iranskf 
 Horn of it should be rejected, and a new one commenced tor them- 
 selves from the original Hebrew and Greek scriptures — if they get 
 them ^ They can never get a bible they are sure of. They cannot get 
 the original Hebrew in which the gospel of St. Matthew was written. 
 St. Jerome says he had seen it, and that is all we know of it since, 
 lliey cannot in twelve months of the time that the getting up of their 
 bible will require, determine, on grounds satisfactory to a biblical 
 
 i 
 
170 VIBATX. ON THE 
 
 «ritle« wad on Piotetttnt prinoiplet, whj HioY adofit or iftjeet, tt Hm 
 •f Ml iitv bo, the Mvtitli ▼orao, of llio ftllli ekaptor, of the let Epistle 
 
 of St. Join. 
 
 Wiilo tliit ptper wis being printed at Charleston, Virginia, the 
 •• Churchman," at New York, perhaps at the same hour, was printinflr 
 the very proof 1 have read to you, in favor of the Catholic doctrine of 
 eonfeaaioii. Let the Burmese and all others. Pagans or Christians, 
 He on their oars, till the new scriptures appear. Then let printers, 
 ■fWts and missionaries* be well paid, and the enmbrous machinery 
 ■et to work, and conipm heaven and earth to make one proselyte, 
 who sorely eannot be more settled in his faith than they who thus do 
 •|iise the ** inspired, authoritative, perpetual, catholic, perfect and in 
 'Mligible rule.** 
 
 Me says the doeuments I have read are not pertinent Now he eer- 
 lainly did not suspect that I thought A« would so consider them. In his 
 tstiinalion, there ts nothing pertinent, lo^cal, relevant, in all this dis- 
 cission^ bnl what he says himself. This he has neglected no oppor- 
 Imity of impressing on our attention. But the public will be the best 
 judge, and they can see through the attempts of either disputant to 
 idiestall their impartial and unbiassed verdict. The printed report of 
 itis controversy, will shew the pertinency or impertinency of our re- 
 spective argruments, and, for my own part, I have not the slightest feai 
 01 the result. 
 
 1 am very far from believing that I am worthy of advocating the 
 holy cause, in which my humble talents, and all my heart*s affections 
 an enlisted, but such is my confidence in the power of that truth, 
 which I embraced on conviction as soon as I was able to judge for 
 myself, and whose evidences have been, ever since, brightening to my 
 miMlefstanding, the more I examine them, that I ask no more than that 
 WKJ unadorned arguments should fall into the hands of thinking men. 
 
 My oppaient says that the whole structure of Catholicism is an as- 
 Mranflion, and rests upon two liet. The gentleman pledcred liimself at 
 iM oomiicnceiiient of this debate, to use no opprobnoos language, and 
 I pfomised not to set him the eiamole. How he has kept his word, 
 ■s the terms in which his propositions are expressed are so very re- 
 ined, let these, by which they aie defended, decide. I will not bandy 
 epithets with him, but I must say that the Catholic church has two 
 ■onnd legs to stand upon. The gentleman tedders her crutches which 
 tie modestly declines, with the suggestion that as his argument is 
 lame he wmj have occasion for them himself! I will argue these va- 
 rious doctrines which he has enumerated and prove them all to be 
 •niiided in the bible, and believed, in all past ages, from the time of 
 Chrlal and his apostles. The gentleman has misrepresented, or he 
 does not understand our doetrine. We believe that there is no other 
 name under heaven, but the name of Jesus given to men, whereby 
 they may be saved. Acts tv. 19. We believe that ^by me oblation 
 Gmd hath perfected fur ever them thai are mnctifitd^^ Heb. z. 14. 
 fhat atonement by His vicarious sacrifice, if not the first, is one of the 
 grsat cardinal doctrines of the Roman Catholic church, no man who 
 pretends to any ac<|uaintance with that doctrine, will, or can venture 
 to deny. Christ has paid an all-sufficient price for our ransom. But 
 do we arraign the sacrifice of Christ of insufficiency, when we san&' 
 lil^ the Sahlath, when we give ahns to the poor, when we abstain from 
 
 B09IAN CATHOUC RELIGION. 
 
 271 
 
 evil, when we hear preaching, or go to prayer 1 When St. Paul chas- 
 tis'H) his body and brought it under subjection, lest, wh,ie he prwiched 
 to others he should himself become a reprobate, did he believe Chnst s 
 sacrifice incomplete 1 that it needed his supplementary austerities? 
 Or that the other Apostles should command us, to make sure mr election 
 and vocation by good works ; to work out our salvation with fear and 
 trembling! No; God who made us withoutourselves, will not save us 
 without ourselves. He requires our co-operation, and with his grace 
 he aids our weak endeavor. This grace he communicates to us by divers 
 channels, and in various ways. Of these the principal are the seven sa 
 eraments, which, if I may use the gentleman's figure in its proper appli 
 cation, like the seven mouths of the Nile convey the healing waters from 
 the fountains of the Savior to every portion of the church. The will 
 is made and recorded. The executors, the apostles and pnests of the 
 church, convey and apply an adequate portion to the wants of men. 
 Wherever a captive may be presumed to groan in spiritual slavery, 
 they seek him out, they proclaim to him the glad tidings of his deliv 
 erance, they pay, with the treasures of Chris^ of which they are thi 
 depoeitaries, the price of his ransom ; and this when they find the slave 
 willing to accept the terms on which redemption is offered, do they 
 carry uito eflfect, in his behalf, the charitable intentions of the divme 
 testator. Is this arraigning his bounty, or distributing it as he com- 
 manded ? Is this robbing Christ of his glory, or calling all nations to 
 bask in its rays and exult in ite effulgence ? The Catholic church, in 
 all the institutions she venerates, the sacraments she administers, the 
 truths she proclaims, the sacrifices she offers, the prayers she prefers, 
 the charity she inculcates, the grace she dispenses, acts by the com- 
 mand of Christ, in the name of Christ. This t* the true and hmngway 
 by which she commands all to seek access to the Father, and by Him, 
 with Him, and in Him, to give to God all honor and glory forever. 
 He is the sun of the entire system, and all the ordinances of religion, 
 are but the rays of that sun enlightening and vivifying the chtisiian 
 pilgrim at every step of his weary progress through this vale of tears. 
 Sacrifice, we consider indispensable to religion. It has been offered 
 to God in every age, by every people, under every form of religion. 
 Abel offered sacrifice in Eden, the purest firstlings of his flocks, for he 
 was a shepherd. Cain sacrificed the fruits of the earth, for he was a 
 husbandman. Noah, when the waters of the deluge had subsided, 
 Solomon, when he dedicated the temple, offered sacrifices ; even the 
 Pagan nations of the earth, who changed the glory of the incorruptible 
 G(S, into the likeness of the image of corruptible man, and of birds, 
 and of four-footed beasts, paid homage to this dictate of nature, and 
 continued the rite of sacrifice, however unworthy the objects of idola- 
 try From all this we rightly infer, that the only perfect religion 
 should not be destitute of sacrifice. The scripture everywhere testt- 
 fies to its necessity. Melchisedec, as we read in Genesis, offerwl 
 bread and wine. He was a priest of the most High God. And Uavid, 
 in the 109th Psalm, says of Jesus Christ, King of Justice, King of 
 Peace, "The Lord hath sworn, and it shall not repent him, thou art a 
 priest forever according to the order of Melchisedec. When Uod 
 abrogates the Jewish dispensation, and substitutes a new and better m 
 its Stead, he says to the Jews, by the last of all the prophets, " I have 
 no jdeamrcin you, saith the Lord of hosts i and I will not receive a gifl 
 
 tij 
 
*IU 
 
 DttATB on TUB' 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 273 
 
 ff fiur kmd i for /mm the fuing efikemn even to tke going dmim, m$ 
 mmm m gmd among ike OenHlee^ and in every place t&re is a taerijke^ 
 md there i§ cffered to my name a clean oblation t for my name ie great 
 wmmg the Geniildf eailh the Lord of Aot^t.** Malachias, eh. 11, (&. v. 
 Wlien Jesiis Christ, as we read in three £vaiifr?lists, institoled the 
 Blessed Eucharist, he said to his afioetles, «* TMe my hodv^ wkkh i» 
 iferedfor you, Thie m nif Mood, whiek i§ Aedfor you. DotkiMin com' 
 wt^noraiton of me. 
 
 Catholics obey the injunctioiis of the Sarior, they do wlial he eoni- 
 maiuled them, they oier tk» mmnorial sacrifice, they continue and re- 
 preseat the sacrifice of Jesus Christ upon Calvary. They offer it 
 under the forms of bread and wine as Melchisedec had done in fi^re. 
 They offer it from the rising of the sun to the ^oingr down thereof, 
 as Malachy had predicted. On Asians distant plains, under the burn- 
 ing sun of Africa, in the tangled forests of the western worid, as well 
 as ia its new and blooming cities, the sacrifice is offered and the pro- 
 
 Chmf ohtaiis its glorious aceomplishment. If Protestants say they 
 ate the saeriice of the death of Christ, I answer with our divines, 
 ao had the servants of God, under the law of nature and the written 
 law; for it is impossible that with the blood of oxen and goats, sin 
 should be taken away ; nevertheless they had perpetual sacrifices to 
 represent the death of Christ, and to apply the fruits of it to their souls. 
 Ia the mm manner the Catholics have Christ himself really present, 
 and mystically offered on their altars daily, for the same ends. 
 
 If time permitted, I might call up in review before you those vener- 
 abie bishops and doctors whose blood sealed the doctrine, which their 
 «fitiii|8 had defended. The saint Johns and the Polycarps of the east 
 ilia ItenKUses and the Hilaries of the west-^those venerable men 
 luaa great age, like that of the patriarchs of old, enabled them to 
 lE to their children without fear of error, or multiplying too 
 much the intermediate links— the traditionary chain of their own and 
 llieir forelathera* belief— what they believed and taught themselves 
 and what was daily practised la thoae old centurial churches 
 which we have inhentedfrom them, built many ages before any of 
 the modern dissentient religions were known, and where the altar and 
 the cross, the liturgy and die stone from the wall, bore testimony to 
 the real presence In the Eucharist, to the divinity of the victim that 
 — offered there In sacrifice !— [Time expired.] 
 
 fWDAY, Jakuaiy SO. Majrpmi 9 o'clock, A. J£ 
 
 Mb. CjumDx riiet— 
 
 I did not, in first taking up "The Synopsis of the Moral Theology 
 of the Roman Church,*' say aught of its author, or of the causes which 
 iishepsd it into existence. But sinee it has become a matter of so 
 much debsle, 1 shall state a few things concerning it and its author, 
 Mr. Smith, the author, was a member of that community for seventeen 
 years, several of which he ofiiciated as a priest Convinced of the 
 errors of that superstition, he publiclv renounced it, and is now a Pro- 
 testant minister, greatly devoted to the cause of Protestantism. From 
 
 bis Inamate acquaintaiice with the apirit and tendency of the Roman 
 Catholic institmioo, he has recently translated a considerable portton 
 of the works of Saint Ligori. The uUe of the book is : ' 
 
 - A «jnop.i. of the moral theology of the church of Rome t"^c'. from t^ 
 irorkfi of St. Ligori and translated from the Latin into Lnglish by SAMUEL B. 
 Smith, late a popi«h priest." New York, 1836. 
 
 It is further exoiained in the preface : .• . 
 
 ' WhaTwe pre^nt before the onblic in thb .ynopits, » a «»X"1r"l»in 
 of the doctrine of the church of kome, now taught »" «» . ^;^' '^^^^ ^^^^.^ 
 Uf and exact tmnslation of selected porUoos of the volaminous MoKAL Th^ 
 lIoGV of St. Alphonsus de Ligorio, published at Mechlin m Belgium. Jtifcrte- 
 fum ptrmuvh »n the year 1828." [Preiacc, p. 5. 
 
 Of its author he speaks thus: j^^i.«« u, 
 
 - He was enrolled aiJm:ng the winff . «. the title V^^^^^ Tpi/^ffi ' ^ 
 pope Pin. VIL on the 15tf of September, in the year 1816.' [Pref. p. 6. 
 ■^It seems that this work is so popular, as to be found m almost 
 every priest's library, and is quoted by them, as of ttie highest au- 
 
 ^*S*de. the abo^e testimony ill confirmation of the «"«»'«"*y. *»( ^t. Ligori . 
 we KiTalio that of the Rev. feiher Valera himself, the popish P"est of the c.^ 
 Tf New York This Rev. father Felix Valera. about a year and a half ago. in 
 hi.?t?rmpt at a re u tat ion of my " ,m«nct«rto« o/p«;,en,." quotes. th» v^r. 
 IllmeS^ and decisive authority against something which 
 
 he found advanced by me.'* [Pref. P- 9- . . ^. ^ «^«.;««1 it«plf • 
 
 In some very important matters, he has given the original itself, 
 
 and fearing, as the manner is, that his translation might be called m 
 
 '"af^lSiV denyTai we have given a fair translation, we will then challejjge 
 them to c^om:7om;,^ in a public assembly with the -o'^^S^* f " ?;f;"'^'*,S; 
 we promise to meet them, ind submit our translation, and the original, to the 
 h^TioHf a committee, one half of whom to be ^^t*?*- J>;yj;7;»^*'f*^tiiv: 
 oZThalf by the Roman cler^. Truth never shons "JJ^.^'^*'^" „ J b^ed^tbe 
 not riven a fair, genuine, andtroe transhtion, and if we have not ^^^^'^^^^ 
 d^t^rlne. of Ligo^n and the church of Rome fairly •"^Jj^JT^ '/'J^'^^^^^^^^ ^^ 
 bling. or riving an erroneous construction, we will be wil ing to incur the co^ 
 "equences^that we ought to expect, for having deceived the pabhc. Synop. 
 
 ^l^£ve 'ffiv«n ^°^ a »«"»?!« ^^^^'^ ^°'^' *''?^?,^ have made numer- 
 aus quotMions ; only one of which has been challenged by my ^ntag- 
 onist. That point f touched as lightly as possible, because unsmted 
 to a popular issembly. This the gentleman [""j »"^^i^^,^»; /, 
 slurr^ it over, in terms the least intelligible which I could select at 
 the moment: but he has no reason to object even to the eomment, that 
 Mr. Smith puts upon the arUcle quoted. He weU knows that mar- 
 ria^ in the*^ priesthood is instant excommunicatton ; while poncubin- 
 aee IS matter of forbearance. In the course of this f^^^^^^^\ ^ ^"^ 
 oSwsion to observe, that I found very many canons of the church even 
 hTThe fifth and sixth centuries, on the subject of inamaKe and its 
 abuses. This, from the modesty of my exposition, he took wxMion 
 to use in arffuraent, as proof that the celibacy of the clergy was ear y 
 St?^u^ This Vas k perversion of my observation, which the deli- 
 cacy of my situation would not allow me to expkin. Nor will I now 
 sin against my own feelings, or those of my audience, by ?;"n^/""7 
 into Sch details. I will only add, that I have a superfluity of evi- 
 HceTn prcK,f of the allegation of Ligori The casuistry, dissimula- 
 ?ron, andWmorality of the Jesuits, and the «>?^« g?"^^^^/ V^^^^^^ 
 nal si»irit of the papacv, are abundantly attested in the »*» ^orksiy- 
 SigbSforeme: "The'Provincial Letters," of the accomplished Pa%- 
 
 18 
 
 I* 
 
 
3 
 I 
 
 274 
 
 BBBATI' 0!!' IITB 
 
 i 
 
 •litl, wljfeli I htTii not yet opencid in this ditensaion; nod, **Tlit 
 »«creto Monita of the order of Jesiw," This copy, in the original 
 l!^Z* \ f "I '"^*'"n«<* *>J ^hc lady through whose kindness I have 
 wmm fiimlslied with it, was bronght to this country by the secretarv 
 of the grmt and renowned La Fayette, on his last visit to the United 
 states. This, our national benefiMstor, who, my opponent says, wan 
 a true Catholic, has declared, that if our liberty should be lost, it will 
 of ^ ^^i? ^^ priests. I saw this fact stated in two papers ; one 
 MilHlied in Richmond, the other in New- York : and 1 have no dnubi 
 mm correctness. 
 
 The Secreta Monita has Iwen a few years since, translated at Prin- 
 ceton N. J. and is now found in many book-stores in this country. 
 From the penisal of these two volumes, we shall find that the moral 
 lli®olo|ry of St. Ligori, the doctrine of Smith's Synopsis, is in per^ 
 littimMon with the true spirit of the Roman clergy and institution 
 
 n*e genyeman mentioned the disclosures of Maria Monk. I did 
 not ; beeauan I rely on no sncli documents. What she says, is private 
 property ; and there is no occasion for bringing it into this contro- 
 
 Z2L Ilir "^ **'"* "P^"^**" ***' ** however: but need not its aid 
 
 'OU' III V 'Owasion. 
 
 The gMlliman speaks oHen of the imperfections and difficultiea 
 of Plote^t translations of the bible. Me says that we Protestants 
 are in a deploiable state ; always making new translations, and never, 
 or not long satisfied with any of them : and seems to sympathize with 
 11% as if w« wero without the scriptures. This pretended condolence, 
 
 !*!!:![ "SirA?*^"*®/* ^7* T. ■" opportunity to repeat with em! 
 Masis, mtaJmekmtk, wtih ail her pretended infalUbiHty, cannot pro" 
 «•€»_« tmMMom efanjf sort, in any living language on earth ' With 
 wl the riche% and learning, and infallibility of the Roman hierarchy* 
 she owns not an English New Testament, auUieniic or authoriaed 
 mmm by pope or council, or the church diffusive or responsive. How 
 ■npnuMlf ridiculous, therefore, for the gentleman to talk of Protes- 
 tant translations, as imperfect ! How does he infallibly know that 
 any one of them is imperfect! Two infallible editions of the Latin 
 ▼ilgalc hafo been made by the authority of two popes, not thirty 
 years distant from each other; and yet they differ in more than 2000 
 places !!! Sixtus V. issued a bull, with an anathema, against any 
 man that would change his authorised vulgate, even in the least par- 
 ticle, (m miniina particola,) yet, Clement VUI. had the audacity. 
 In despne of said hull, to order a new translation, and did accomplish 
 It, changing it more tiian 2000 times, and sometimes very serioiislv, 
 to the amount of clauses, and whole verses, as Dr. James in his BcH 
 §um Fmak has amply testified. Thus Oie Clementine vulgate, under 
 
 S5to ?"• •"•® ^ ^ Sixtine bull, carries upon it the seal of infal- 
 
 Jilif lily ! 
 
 I now inyite attention to tiie subject of yesterday eyening. I then 
 •ndeavored to state, as briefly as I could, tiie two fundamental errors 
 on which the Man of sin stands. The >«/,— That tiie sacrifice of Je- 
 sus C host was not alone sufficient, to put away sin ; and the second, 
 — 1 hat persons can do more tiian tiieir duty. To provoke discussion 
 on these two great doctrinal lies, I stated that all the peculiar doc- 
 trines of tiio Roman Cstiiolic church, via. penance, purgatory, tran- 
 substantiationt and all this priestiy sacrifice, confession, Itc. weru 
 
 ROXAlf CATHOLIC EBMOIOW. 
 
 27S 
 
 Mil upon these two doctrinal lies. I shall not further discuss thai 
 auhiocTlill the g-^^- VffX\^^^^^^ church, that the 
 
 is essential to the validity of that ««^^^?\i^^;f3l^^^^^^^ of nS vali 
 ordaining a priest intend io ordam him, all ^^^'^^^^^^ .„ ^^-^ ^,„,,, 
 dity, however exact the f«"« 5 because he did^^^^^^ intention, 
 
 to ordain him ! So, in consecrating a ^^^'^^^'J J"^^'", y^lue. Such 
 Us nature is not changed ; and the recep on of It, ^^ '^^^^^^^^^^ ^^. 
 intention is essential U, every act ^'Vt^/j,^"'}^^^^^ 
 
 time, the word anathema is usee oy i^«"t ^nrmntintr the gospel. 
 
 rpr^Slpf'Narif.^., bishop P^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 to an, mortal, that he U t™'y°';*«"lUTe know lu hearts, from 
 faith in hiB services as a ^'^^"Y^^'^y^^^^^iZenlion was never 
 Peter's time tUl now, >"t''°"i'* ?.^7 *''\*''S.e a^estoriri official 
 wanting from the apostolic age till n°*' '"^J j „ certainty in 
 
 Unes. ^This doctrine lays *^™ V Aj"*/^ %„ ^e jodgment of 
 every part of *e.Romanratho,c religion .for tntn^^^ ^^^ .^ 
 
 that church multitudes of her clergy ''"^f J'^X™ "'Jiere can there- 
 postors, in whose intentions at any prevmust™*^^'^^^^ ^ 
 
 fore be no faith. So far as P™^/""^ |°mTrotesUnt'^feels%o 
 
 are perfectly free from tiils '"^f"'"^*;,. orSnces of religion. The 
 most perfect certainty in «»bmm ng to the ormnances s ^^ 
 
 Protectant minister knows and 'eaf e? ~| °™'"^^^\,„d^ Pe,. 
 
 saving or .^'^'ti^.^^X^V revive tC,T^^^^ *»' ^'^ '^'^l.?" 
 refficLTof'';£'e ^^din^anc^cSendent'of any special virtue tn hun 
 
 that does administer them. , ^ Ughtly, for the 
 
 On the subject »^'°'^»'?^"''*^,i,7!L^^hichhas%een carried 
 W«.t of time. The nch and P/°fi^"« "^^.J^^f h„ merchandize 
 on by Kome in tiie sale of this »"?g'?^V''fi°gliect as connect- 
 "as public as her name. The «.»"»?'''"'*? ™i,^!*J"Z names of La- 
 S wiS. Uie Protestant Reformation '« »« f»"f 'f ^'Verero^ion, from 
 ti,er and Tetiel. It is a »?'»"* l^^'^^J^bankTwhU tiie ilergy 
 the doctrine of human ment-tiiat -mf «"«« ".""^"j "f directors was 
 are directors. The int«lerabk_ abuses of that board ot ^ ^ 
 
 the punclum «Uicn. of *f i^°'«f^"l ?'„!;nxtv million of dollars, 
 president in tiiat day, wanted to pay off some ^^^^"^ g^ p^^^^ ^t 
 Incurred and being incurred for *« «?1«"^''' ^^^^^^^ ^a an indul- 
 Bome. He published a plenary ^"'^f.'?" °lP^\*' 'as a matter of 
 gence to all contributing to tiiis «P'7,''ii""SlRim of tiiese in- 
 Suriosity and of edificaUoo, we shall here read ine lonu 
 
 dulgences. 
 
•»t6 
 
 mMlS fill TBM 
 
 ■OMAN CATHOUC BBUGIOX. 
 
 2T7 
 
 w 
 
 A 
 1 
 
 i 
 \ 
 
 2--«. pet^-r lit'; JTC oAs; io'S SoT,Sr';iS'^li-i- 
 
 W to ■» u thne p«rU, da .bwlie thee, tnt froinSfe^J^SLTi™™'''" 
 •htere, muKr iher fc.« been iocmi^Tttu^CnmMlST^^'"'*''' 
 
 Uwheeaad BrMfcenridn. p. S«. H-<M«ro»eny between Mean. 
 
 liie coancil ol Trent teaches that - whoever shair affirm that wIm^h tfc- 
 p»re of justification m recciVed, the olfeoce of the n««iLI^rri!«;?! r - 
 
 trnvomi ii«ii.|i™«„i to iM^SSTfol^i" ni?^' ^^i there remaiu. .,o 
 
 ciifned/* Id. ib. M^i^. n. ' ™ "" '"''"^*' ""***= "» paigatoiy: let him be ac. 
 
 rahm w« tbmiM alto hear, in tliis pluse, the connetl of Tient- 
 
 It li alM an article of faith in the creed of Pius IV *• thatTkl ^i r*- 
 
 WBC® inon I 
 
 Mlariiiitie, that p«at cardiaal of the Roman r^ilinlL. «.k.^k /• ^ .. 
 J* died in the faith\e willed half of hii mSZ Si Vi^- M '' (^*<»^ «}»•« . 
 Ii«ll to her ion)— Bellarminri™ h!- Lw![ •o«I to the Virwn Manr and the other 
 
 ■» the foundation of indulwncw^^b.t !h A^ i^^u ^*'T'^ *" ^*** *^**'"«'»' "»>'«*» 
 lrea.n^ofsa..ra/tip 
 
 I Will not branch out on this aubj^t farther, unleaa the «»ntlpm.« 
 •fwes to meet me on the iMa mml i«jnments jis? n^anbm^ 
 pfOTe the immoral tendency of snch indolgencCwZld^^K'be ! 
 *^ of anpew«,gation. if «uch a work wire at all ZsiwT 
 ^^^m^l of trananbataiiliation, the c,«mI of^ FimlV. d^ 
 
 Article^»i. " I do also piofett, that in the nuat Hmk it oflerod nnto G«i . #•«. 
 ptiy».;»«t propitwtofy .acriiice for the qniekZKhl dS^2?th^ T-^k** 
 Mtfaolj sacrament of the holvenchariit tUiIiTt!!!, -f « * j that, in the 
 &!?%-»<* Wood, t^^theJ ',Sh ttStuI a^d tS^^^^^^ .ubstant udljr, 
 
 Chfiit; and that there is a conTenLTlI;!. «f .k "**/'7""tr ""^ o"'' Lord Jesus 
 iliKi the body, .,3^ the wbde^bT^ rS^L'^iSt •"^•^ "«• of the bre«i 
 
 •The chnich if Ro.-ie dechiS X^ \^ dT^SSt™"* • . 
 waitls, Aoc «M €m9mmLmrui^\!^l:i^\ S f "*? * Prononncing these 
 
 the species or acciieats ooly of the braad and wf»e ?Jm^„^r^ ^k • * V^"^] 
 >t,iiflen as th« iterifice of tfce mm h^l^Z^ h^!S^^^^^ ^^^^ "^^ 
 pnm communicates alone, arraZI^JS.!S7* a7 "T^.*' ''*^»° tha 
 
 Trent declare, that ^ho^^T,^h^ Z'^J^^^^^ ""*l.*^* .l**"^" o** 
 edoraboliahed, is -ccursed/* Tview of All p!^ ougrht to be abrogat- 
 
 rroni the best aulhoritiT br Tk^niiL '^*''^-'°."!' <=o?P'l^d wwi elected 
 Windsor, Conn. H^^uIb~^ *^''*""' "'""**" **^ *^' «^«P«» «« ««t 
 
 Itia tiwaya rigfat to altiel a doctrine in the wmda of 
 
 urofess it. ETery caidliial doctrine of the yapacy cjm be traced to a 
 oemin period, when it became an element of the system. 
 
 Monachism began to be taught by St. Anthony m ^e 4th centu^^ 
 
 Auricular conflssion in the 6ih ; but was finally esUblished by In- 
 
 nocent III. eariy in the 13th centuiy. , 
 
 Thporetical Durffatory began to be spoken of from the Pagans aim 
 
 Je^rtSe trce^turj; ^did not Sbtain a f ^^d Testdence ti m 
 
 ihrco^ncil of Florence, it became an mtegral part of infallibility 
 
 ^fiiriy in'the 7th century the idea of univeisal father, or pope oh. 
 
 "^uie 801 century, after Wny and ^'rilTr^^'X^A 
 to be set up ; and in the 9th became an integral part of Roman Ivamo- 
 
 ^Irthe year 730, a cooncil summoned by Leo. HI. with only one 
 ii^Tl^^lie. called the worship of images and re ics idolatry. 
 Celibaly aming the clergy began to be canonical in the llth cen- 
 
 *"7.*the9th century, the doctrine of tiansubstantiation began to be 
 talkel of cl^^^^^^^^ was made infallible by pope Innocent III. 
 
 '^'sc^rofToi Catholic -niory,. amrmed tha^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 rh^^7 QuoteTSs as saying so, and admite, "though the scrip- 
 ?u^ Qufflast aboye, seems clear' to us. and ought to convmce ajy 
 mrn tSat fs noTforward ; yet. it may justly be douWd, whether .t be 
 S^ (prayed by scripture.) when the W ^r^,,""^^^?^^^^ 
 as Scotus. in particular, held a contrary opm.on *^"^'°»' V^^'^^"' 
 Ochan and bishop Fisher, mm muUu ahts, held the same opinion. 
 
 AmonsPro^tants. the reason and authority of religious belief and 
 nr^Ss, " Thus skith the Lord." It is not important to ascertain 
 
 K any opinion or practice began,. ^-^J'^^'Z'^^f^^^^Ml^ 
 h^^iUiif BiaLi. no matter how ancient it may be. It wants aposioi re 
 L^on. forTe ip«ri^ saucUon only what was written and ordain*^ 
 hrforLu^eir death. St. Clement, and St. Ignatius, and St. Iren«u«. 
 «d all AToSTsaints in the Roman .^lenlar. weje born too late to 
 sanction any article of feith, or morals, by their »ote. ^^ 
 
 But a few words on transubstantiation. " A mrament, says nie 
 chureh' "U routward and yisible sign of some inward and spiritual 
 m^ " Now. it cannot be both the sfgn and the thing ^YfuL J.« 
 CTthe Euchlrist be > sacrament, it cannot be true that It is the 
 Wy and blood of Christ transubstantiated. Rome ought, then, to 
 •it-ibp it from her list of sacrameiite. ^ i _« 
 
 But Jesurwye the eucharist for a »g«, a keepsake, a memonai rf 
 his loVe It^Aen. a commemoratiyi institnUon. as well as a »ig« 
 of New'Teium^^t blessings: "Do this in remembrance of me." 
 livl^er tokens of lore, it has inscribed upon it the name of the 
 d,;I[r Is wrsdd of th; passoyer; it is <*. Urd'.pauover. so say. 
 
 'Xw"i^ali'rrd^aye a literal and figumtiye meaning, the onl^ 
 nuS^^;"e«isT Are these words to be ^J^^'^^^l^^^^^T'^ 
 it literally, some good reason must be offe«jd: ""^ what w U^ t^ 
 cause soie father, pope, or council so decided 1 W e must haye tne 
 
'TSB 
 
 ||ttttAi*K tyv 1*1tK 
 
 h 1 
 
 il 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 wlUk antliortsdl tiMmi, else tlieir deeition is a mora assiimpi* 
 
 WImw tiall that reasion be found I Is it because Jesus always so 
 •petiiES, llist be inust be thus understood I Then I contend, that when 
 he said, **/ mm the door,''* he was literally transubstantiated into a 
 door I and when he said, ** / am fke hrtad which came down froni 
 heavem,** he was converted into bread; am' when he said, '^lamtAo 
 trm Mne," he was literally ehan^d into a real vine. And why not t 
 Is it mora irrational, marvelous, incredible, than that " this loaf is 
 my body,'* should mean that this loaf was converted into his body, 
 •M changed Into flesh; and that while the apostles were eating the 
 loaf, they were eating the living flesh of him that stood before them I ! 
 Iff then, the bishop assumes a ftteral interpretation in the one case; I 
 assume it in these and various other passages. For, if he may assume 
 adUbUum^ m mmj I; and so may every one else; and then what 
 comes of the certainty of language ! It is, then, without law, precedent, 
 Of autlmiilf , to assume the very point in debate ; and to say, that be- 
 cause It leads iMo u wy Bodfy, it means that bread is converted Into flesh. 
 This style, of the passage in dispute, is very common in botTthe 
 Old and New Testaments. So early as the time of Joseph, we read 
 *' the seven £ood kine are seven years,"-..and ^* the seven good ears are 
 mmmk jmmy What a trausubstantiation ! But change are into re» 
 ■fmmd, which Is its meaning, in a thousand places, and all is plain. 
 
 Again : says Jesus, '* Destroy this temple,'' pointing to his body. 
 •* The field ■H the world — the reapers are the angels."— Are these, 
 als% transiibtiantbtions I Paul also speaks thus, when he says of the 
 iwklloreb, «* that rock mai Christ.'^ And John the apostle, "the 
 seven stars are seven angels;" "the seven candlesticks are seven 
 chuniies*'* And what is the difference between these phrases, and 
 •• tiiis ia ay body !'• — but finally on this part of the subject, Jesus 
 ■aid nf the cup, " this cup is the New Testament" Does not that, 
 on the bishop's oremises, prove that the cup was changed into the 
 New Testament ! ! But, it by pronouncing over a loaf the words of 
 coQseciBtioii a f liest has power to change bread into flesh, and wine 
 into blood, he has, indeed, a power truly miraculous and divine ; and 
 woifca as many miracles in the whole course of his life as he says 
 masses. A claim to such a divine, supernatural, and extraordinary 
 power, ought not to be claimed upon an arbitrary, capricious, and 
 whimslcfl inteipretation of a word f Good rea^ns ought to be offered 
 kf any man, who passes himself on the community, as possessing 
 power e<|tt8l to auickening the dead and suspending the laws of nature. 
 Once more, lor the present : If, you believe the priest and receive 
 the biead as flesh, you never after can with reason believe your own 
 •emses: for, when your eye declares it bread, and your senses of 
 ilMlliii||t tasting, feeling, and I miffht add, your hearing— all declare 
 that tl IS still bread and not flesh— If, I say, you can, contrary to your 
 own senses, which God has criven you as the means of knowledge 
 and certainty, thus implicitly believe the declaration of a priest ; yon 
 am disqualifled for reasoning, for believing the christian religion, or 
 your own senses on any subiect of which they are witnesses. So 
 that it may be truly said, he that believes in trausubstantiation, can 
 latioiiaily believe in nothing else. All the christian miracles, were 
 lo m believed»-^ot because they were contrary to the evidence of 
 —•'■« ' bat becaose they were in accordance with that evidence. 
 
 SOMAN CATHOUC RKLIGION. 
 
 279 
 
 I cannot anrae this point with any sort of ability. I cannot feel in 
 carnesU I seem to myself as if 1 were reasoning against a thing 
 which no person believed ; and I never could with any sort of smnt, 
 discuss a matter, unless there was some little show of plausibility, 
 or shadow of reason in it. The doctrine of transubstantiation is se 
 absurd, that I do not know that I ever read a tract through against it in 
 my life. But this subject gives such glory to the priests and has 
 WTOUirht such miracles upon the superstitious crowd, that it is worm 
 more to sustain the priesthood, than all the other six Roman sacra- 
 ments. And that which causes this most incredible of all things, to 
 be devoured by such multitudes is, that it expiates sin: Hence the 
 body of Christ is daily eaten by hundreds of ^^^o^^a^^^s, as a sin ot- 
 ferine together with "his «m/ and divinity," as decided by the coun- 
 cil of Trent ! The Messiah is then always suff^enng, always bleed- 
 inir, always dying, always expiating sin by the sacrifice of himselt ; 
 wS his people are always literally devouring his flesh ! What a pic- 
 ture !! 1 shall turn away from it ; for my soul sickens at the thought. 
 
 Protestants know that the sin of forgetfulness is the easily beset- 
 tine sin of mortals ; and that they need commemorative insUtuUons. 
 Hence, they highly appreciate the honor of having a Lord s table, a 
 Lo^'s supper, I hJly communion and fellowship, through these sa- 
 
 J;S^emblem8 of a slvior's love. " 'fH^o^^^^i^*^ 7^V•^V ^^ 
 the aposUe, "is it not the communion of the body of ^brisU ine 
 cup Tver which we give thanks, is it not the communion, or the joii^ 
 participaaon of his blood 1 "-Hence, the New Testament with ite 
 Liritukl and heavenly blessings is always contemplated, reaUxed, and 
 remembered with holy thankfulness m the christian assemblies, while 
 they partake of the sacred emblems of that great sacrifice "once of- 
 fer^ for the sins of many. For by one offering up of himself, he has 
 Ibrever perfected them who are sanctified. 
 
 Having yet remaining a few minutes, I shall prepare theway f« 
 the introSuction of my seventh proposition. Having Jouch^j^^^^ 
 roots of all the principal corruptions, and having yet heard nothing in 
 J^W, I will anficipalTthat proposition with a few remarks on the pa- 
 pistical notion of a judge of controversy. _ 
 
 The council of Trent decreed " that the oral traditions of the Cath- 
 olic church," (meaning the Roman) "are to be received, par. 2«e/a^« 
 X/« ae r^verefUia mJiipit ac ren.rfl/«r,-with equal piety and rever- 
 ence as the books of the bid and New Te8tament."-Council of Trent 
 
 *%rcn X asserts : " It belongs to the church to judge of the trae 
 sense and interpretation of scripture ; and that no person shall dare 
 to interpret it in matters relating to faith and manners to any sen^ 
 w^nSary to that which the chureh has held, or contrary to the unam- 
 Dious consent of the fathers."— lb. Id. 
 
 And according to the 33rd article of the creed of pope Pi"" Ij 
 "I do acknowledge the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman chureh 
 to be the mother Ld mistress of all churehes ; and I do promise and 
 swSr true obedience to the bishop of Rome, the successor of Peter, 
 the orince of the apostles, and the vicar of Chnst. 
 
 Xre ^en, we have th^ essential elements of mental slavery and 
 dfiiradation • for, if no person dare to interpret the Scriptures contra- 
 iT&ke chureh hL already held orjto the unanimous consent 
 3 the Faaiers; where is that liberty of thought and speech and ac 
 
 r 
 
 ill 
 
1 
 
 PUPA'PM. ON VMM . 
 
 Him, CM Hwrnott iaMlaiit of mil milJMits, out moral and religlMt m^ 
 MuMi wMioiit whieli, liberty is without metning, and mental inde* 
 P'lideiiee 'bat a name f 
 
 Ib all monarebies, save that of Rome and Mahomet, a jndge is not 
 tonalitntionttlly a judge of his own case. But the Roman judffe of 
 oontroTeroy is the whole churchi says my learned opponent, and her 
 •ouneils affirm ¥rith him. The whole chureh jadginf|r then between 
 what parties f Herself and the heretics !! What a ngfateous, infal- 
 lible and lepubliean judge, is the supreme judge of controTeray in the 
 Caiiolic church ! The controversy is between two parties— 4he ehuieh, 
 «r the clerey, on one side; and the heretics or the reformers on the 
 other, as tiey may hap^n to be ealled % say the church and the here- 
 ties. And who is umpire, who is supreme Judge of both ! One of 
 the paitiea, indeed, the ehnieh herself I This is the archetype— the 
 hmm Uml^ of civil libeity, and republican government, in the supreme 
 Roman hierarchy. It will not help it to place the ermine on the pope. 
 Me is that instant exparte judge. And besides, he is executive of 
 the church. If the pope is to be judge, and executive, and lawgiver, 
 in the ease as he frequently is, what a splendid picture of a republi- 
 can pietident or judge have we got in the Roman church ! 
 
 This ghostly despotism is to be sustained and defended too, by the 
 whole ehnreh, by vows, oaths, and pledges, the most solemn and bind* 
 ing thatreliffion can suggest, or human ingenuity devise. It is trae she 
 
 £ififfiit by ner bishops, liie popes make bishops, on the recommen- 
 tion of bishops, and these bishops serve the pope and govern the 
 people. Their oath, whieh is the same in all countries, 1 will now 
 waif ao lar at least, as relates to this matter. I have the original, 
 •III diierent translationa of it, and if it be disputed, I am prepared to 
 •nstain it. To reconcile it to the genius of our institutions, and to the 
 ■afety and happiness of our country, will require the explanations and 
 
 rsaaoaingt of my jfriend. 
 
 •• I, n,mm of th« church of If. fipon heiicefon»Md will be frithfsl and obe- 
 iient Co Si PMmr th« Apostle, and to the boljr Rounn church, end to our lord. 
 the lord N. Pope N. end hit niccetion, amonicaliy coming in. I will neither 
 advise, coaaeat, or do any thing that they amy lose life or member, or that their 
 peraoM wm be leiied, or bands any wise laid upon them, or anj iujuries offered 
 lo thtm, under any pretence whatsoever. The counsel which they shall intrust 
 to me withal, by tbeni»elves, their messengers, or letters. I will not knowinriy 
 reveal to any to their prejudice. I will help them to defend and keep the Ro- 
 man impacy, and the loyaltiea of St. Peter, savinr my order, acaiost all men. The 
 iecate of the apostolic see, going and coming. I will honorably treat and help 
 liilis necessities. The rkhts. honors, privUi^es, and authority of Ae h^ 
 maa church of our Loid tie FOpe. and his foresaid successors. I will endeavor 
 to peserve. defend, increase, and advance. -I will not be in any counsel, action, 
 •rirc^y, in which shall be plotted waintt oar said lord, andfthe said Roman 
 «h«ch, any thing to tbn hnit or prmodicn of their persons, right, honor, state 
 '^ power; and if I shall know any such thing to be treated or agitated by any 
 jever. I wUl signify it to our said lord, or to some other by whom it may 
 to hia kttowle(%e. The rules of the holy Fathers, the apoalolic decrees. 
 ■ifcM ^, or disposals, rcaervations, provisions, and mandates, I will observe 
 frith all my might; and cause to be observed by others. Heretics, schismatica, 
 •nd rebels to our said lord, or his foresaid successors, I will to my utmost power 
 persecute and o|mose.*' 
 The Latin or the last sentence of which reads : 
 
 •• Mereticos. schismaticos. et rebelles. eidem domino nostro vet succMsorfhut 
 pnedicti* pro posse persequar et impugnabo.*' — [Pontificale Roman. Edit. Ant- 
 werp. A. l>. 1«S6. 
 Here then Is the most solemn pledge and vow given hy every hitmp 
 
 4Mmm, th»» h* wUl to the utnwat of hia POwer |«fii«^ «;"^ 
 Znl^and tMmaim ! Does not this Indiaputable faet, alo^ iw- 
 tain my «•» entli piopoaitioii, and ijiove ^^^J&j^^^^ 
 eimraii ia anti-American and essentially oppoaed to tiM «iit«M»oC aU 
 itm inMitntaooa I [Time expired.] 
 
 Bishop Pueceu. riset— 
 
 You perceive, my friend^ that Aera k acaioely » "^J^* ^•^ ~ 
 Roman Catholie Mth, which my firiend has not hiought into view 
 this mominfl. How then am I to escape the charge of deaultwinesa, 
 In following such an argument ! The whole category, «<«* .^l*f *® 
 Omega, shoots up before me, shilling with the rapidity of IjfhfiinfT 
 It is the necessary effect of the confusion <rf my learned meml a i0eaa« 
 snd of the order in which he arranged the propositiona whose diflei»- 
 sion was to call them forth. The very first of these woposttionsj-tlio 
 first word of it— Holy— would have called up for discussion all wo 
 have heard on the immorality of the church. As my ftiend thongM 
 fit to commence as he has done, order and method conUnue to be ex* 
 iled from this debate. He selected the points of attack and the olan of 
 campaign ; let him not charge on me his own blundera, whwh m Mas 
 now; too late. There was one great question whkh he should have 
 determined, a Uminet it would have cut off all this dejritofy atp. 
 mentation. Itiatiiis. Did Jesus Christ establish an mWlible tribu- 
 nal to determine the meaning of scripture t If so, we are bound by ili 
 decisions. If not, tiie whole Catholic reUgion fells to »• 8'<»^ 
 Now, my friends, I endeavored to prove that Chnatditf estabUah ao^ 
 a tribunal, and I defy any one to bring from the Bible prwtf to tbo 
 eoBtrary. One text alono is sufficient to put this matter at ml ler 
 ever. "The ehnreh ia tiie piUar and ground of Oie *">»• iz2!2 
 to enforce my argument, when my time expired, and my friend seemei 
 unwilling to let slip Uie opportunity, but got up immediacy, and said 
 that my last observations of yesterday wore unworthy of no^. 
 
 He brought aa a paniUel to the woida, " I am with yon u^^avsovM 
 to the end of the world," Ae ouslomary ancient salutation, •• the l«ortM 
 with you ;" and argued fiOBi this, that Christ's words mean no more than 
 that ! But, my fnends, what point of comprison is tiiere between tho 
 words, •* God be wiOi you," which one frail man addresses to another, 
 and the words, tho solemn promises of Uie Savior, oommissioniM hw 
 inosdes to preach hia goaMl, and cheering thew deopondenoy by tho 
 itvine assurance, " BohoU, I am with yoo all davv oven to tho eai of 
 tho worldr Are tho two oosoo tho same! Are f • »<V'**'?/'S 
 that Chriot la with hia ehaieli fomvor,than we are of the offiset of «• 
 •alntaOon of a poor faUiblo man! What Christ does la mfeHibloi 
 
 what he says wfll come to pass. If his chureh WMtofiul, wo 
 have had aa assurance to that effect in tho Bible. There is nono. If 
 his chureh was to fail, we should have had miraculouo dioplays lijo 
 that of Sinai, and of tiio descent of the Holy Ghost at P^j^f^at, mart. 
 inf tho eommeooementof a new era. Or Christ weald havo ooao 
 again upon earUi, rebuked and banished error, and restored the ptiml* 
 nvo lustre and beauty of truth. This has not been dono^ n«ir haa saeli 
 m Mophecy been any where made. Aa Christ, by one oblation, hao 
 perfecUd those that wore to be sanotiiod for over ; so has ho by ono 
 t9 *^ 
 
 
Ill 
 
 wvvlftlioii, mimireii m of diviM tratli hi raligioii f&r evw. The worl 
 ^Qoi tfrai, nedkMl eo mformatioti. If mbn's monA» were bid, tiier 
 ilMnM hm% been eeneeted, but lelifion tkoalil noc lisfe been changed. 
 ]■ i wofd, ntf BMiofi Smith of Kentnehy, hat m #ell toid, ** Reform- 
 ation ahootd hiTO taken place in the ehureh, not out of ft" Let raf 
 friend twiat the words of Ghriataa hepleeaett he can find nothing like 
 in hnman langnage. Christ was God and his word is what it 
 >rt8 to be. He is with his church all days, until the consamma- 
 itf ef am. The heaYena and the earth naj pass away, but his 
 ireid will neter pass away. TTie worse we beeome, the more refrio- 
 My and loMihMiMle, the farther from apostolle times and fenror and 
 filiyy iM'tfiie need hsTO we of authority to control us. So that the 
 
 'Of thechnreh to maintain nnity of Mth, which Christ so much de 
 sifed for hit diteipleat lit tt least, as neeessary now as it hat ever been. 
 The necettily of tiibliiitiinf to the church doet not destroy liberty, 
 while, on the contrary, the tonuses of* error and contentions, among 
 teeta which mndertake to judge for themselvet, tie endlessly multi- 
 plied. ChriaC foresaw Ihe tne when even the apostles would dis- 
 pute. He knew the Itehinf of the Greeks for noTolty, and their prone- 
 to ditpntatioo— elwayt leamlvf and never coming to the trnth^- 
 dowu to-day, and hnildinf np to-morrow : one wsTe of error 
 ■hi followinf another, and waahing away every doctrine, and 
 I, and aeel, in its turn ; and he therefore said : ** Hear the church.*^ 
 
 My iriend argued in the commencement of thia controversy, that 
 liMe theie were aa good men among Prolettantt aa among CathoUct, 
 why ahottld there be any arguBentl Let him antwer that qnestion 
 ainoe be it the challtnger. I eheerfolly admit the foot, bnt what ia 
 ili Werence! Why Int thote Protestants were better than thehr 
 yiliieiplet. Every man who follows out the Protestant principles may 
 It bMJ He warn ind hU mm code of morals as well as his doctrinal 
 Me, in the Bible. Becanae if he choose to interpret the Bible for 
 klmteif, in memlt at well at in faith, he may argue from it in favor of 
 the lawflilnett of lay lilif he pleases. And is it not true that certain vi- 
 eieas acts are done b^noiB^ men on the pretence of their being allowed 
 1^ teri|itQre1 I oonM addnee hondreds of instances of the strong and 
 lenible MntitM aad eiimet, for which their victims persuaded them- 
 ttlvet they fotnd a tiiiellon in the Bible. And if the tincerely piont, 
 the hnmane and charitable cif Protettant commnnionn ask them- 
 telvetthe quettion: "are the virtnet I ttrive to practice, the fruits of 
 my legion V* they would find that their peculiar tenets have no in- 
 iueme on their conduct. Their piety and the purity of their morals 
 are the effects of natiially good diapoaitiont, of virtnoua attociationt, 
 of pfincipiet, which they hold in eonoMM with Catholiet, a leverenee 
 lot the divinity and a detiie for fotnre happlnett, a teate of honor, de- 
 foram^ iwepliily, Iw. 
 
 In this kind of virtue even pagans htve been eminent, hut their 
 virtue it no proof of tlie goodnett of their lellgieii. Aittttdet wat 
 foMf Scipio ehatloy Begulot patriotie, Plato tober, Cineinnatut 
 unambitiout, TItna, the delif ht of the human mee, and Antontnut, 
 piont— and jet they were all Idolatera ! There are, thank heaven, cot« 
 ttiftifO |Minciplet in man's bosom, which correct in conduct, what 
 IB wrong m prineiple. But if we sincerely deairt to know the fruitt 
 of the tefonMlion, we have only to atk its authors. Hear, then, what 
 
 SOMAH CA^TBOIrir XSUOION. 
 
 liUther wat compelled to acknowledge upon thit subject. »* We see,** 
 tayt he, in hit termon the 8nd Sunday in Adven^ " that ihioagh the 
 midioe of the Devil, men are now more avaricioua, more eruel, more 
 diaoidefly, more intolent, aidl much more wicked, thmn they w«e 
 under popery." •♦ If any one wiah, saya Musculus, to see a roultttude 
 of knaves, disturbers of Ihe public peace, &c. let him go to t city^, where 
 Ike ooepel is preached in its purity, (he means a reformed city) tor 
 it in eteiicr than the Ught <rf day, that there never were pagaM 
 more vicious and ditorderiy, than those professore of the gwpel. 
 « The thing," says Melancthon, " speaks for itself m this country 
 among the reformed ; their whole time is devoted to intemperMice and 
 drunkenness, (immanibus poculis). So deeply are the people sunk 
 into bariiarity and ignorance, that many of them would imagine the^ 
 should die in the night, if they should chance to ftst m the day. 
 Ad tjapt. vi. Mat. Neither was the growth of vice and ignorance con- 
 fined to Germany. They grew wherever the seeds of the refonnation 
 were pwmitted to take root. « In this mrftW (England) says Stubbs, 
 after he had made the tour of the island, " I/outid a general deew of ^ 
 good worktj or raiker a plain drfeetum, or failing away from God. 
 (Motives to good works. An. 1596.) But hear how the eloquent 
 Erasmus describes the fruits of the reformation. He was mdeed a 
 Catholic, but a Catholic whom the Protestants allow to have been 
 impartial. He was an eye and ear witness to the introduction ^ 
 progress of the reformation, observed its workings with the eye of m 
 philosopher, and has marked them down with the accuracy of a can- 
 did and correct historian. "And who," he says, "are the gospel 
 people 1 Look around you and shew me any who has become a bet- 
 ter man. Show me one who, once a glutton, is now turned sober, on© 
 who, before violent, is now meek; one who, before avMicious, is 
 now generous ; one who, before impure, is now chaste ;— I can point 
 out multitudes, who have become far worse than they were De'o'e. in 
 their assemblies, you never see any of them heave a sigh ; shed a 
 tear ; or strike his breast, even on the days that are sacred to afflicUon. 
 Their discourses are little else, but calumnies against the priesthoot 
 They have abolished confession, and few of them confess their sins 
 even to God. They have abrogated fasting ; and they waUow m 
 sensuality. They have become Epicureans, for fear of bemg Jews. 
 They have cast off the yoke of human institutions ; and along with 
 it, they have shaken off the Lord. So far from being submissive to 
 bishops, they are disobedient to the civil magistrates. Wha^ tumults 
 and seditions mark their conduct! For what trifles do Uiey fly to 
 armtl St. Paul commanded the first christians to shun the society 
 of the wicked; and behold I the reformere seek most the societjr of 
 the most corrupted. These are their delight. The gospel now flounsh- 
 et foraooth ! because priests and monks take wives in opoosition to 
 human lavrs and despite of their sacred vows. Own it is follv to ex- 
 ehange evils for^evils, and madness to exchange small evils for great 
 ones?' Ep. 47. Lib. 31. John Wesley says, speaking of his own 
 time not one hundred and fifty yeara ago, "^ dissipated age {Bnch 
 as is the present perhaps beyond all that ever were, at least that are 
 recorded m history) is an age wherein God is generally forgotten. 
 And a dimipaied nation, (such as England is at present, ma superla- 
 tive degree) is a nation, a vast majority of which has not God ' in all 
 their thoughts.' We therefore speak an unquestionable truth, when 
 
 i 
 
 p 
 
 r 
 
 3 
 
 e 
 
i 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 III 
 
 m 
 
 I 
 
 Wtt W • there it 101 on tlM iMo of tlM oiitii muahm Mtton f mt lowl 
 litt wo liAYO ofor lioud of ) MovmemliwSmiimkimdumg^d^fmA 
 oalj to tolrilf witlMMt God in io woifd, but to opohIt ■otttng hm 
 ■t Itiuioe. ThofO iiO¥«r wti anotftitlMl wo rooi of m hit toryt iwco 
 Julius Cewf, liiioo Hod^ linco Adas, wImmii diosiMlaoB or nn- 
 goiiliiieM aM fo ipi||illf fmrmk, both tmong lii^ and low, ndi and 
 itof .•♦ Noitliof #111 it lio woU w • Pfotestant, m oidor to mAogm 
 im tiio disoiders, wMoh I hwm roontioDed, to say— ^* that thoy were 
 only tho accidental ofils of a moment, evils of a period of cham 
 and Ibniontation." What 1 tho irsi Ihiits of a ralbrmation disoider ! 
 »lh0 inl Ifuita of a syHen of piety lioentiousoess !«— the first fruits 
 of the reestahlishment of the law of timth, impiety ! Suiely sneh an 
 anoioiry, and yet it is often made* ■• absolntely weak ! There are mnlu- 
 plied attestations of it. " MfcrvUe,*' says Neal. speaking of the time 
 of Elisabeth, and when the fennentations of the reToluUcnafy Yio- 
 lenoe of the refcmnation had subsided, '* nmenM amdkmtkemik wot 
 Us comiilssfli ^ lilt c«imi% f« regmd to relifton.** That y«m may 
 fom some notion of their eondition, hear in what manner the inhabi- 
 tiala of London, in a petttion presented to the parliament durtng this 
 raiga, express themtelYes. '• In one half our churchea," they say, " we 
 have wnlahmen thai have no eyes; and clouds that have no water ; 
 and in the other half, there is sesfoely one tenth man that takes con- 
 ■ilnnii HI wait on his chaiss. Whereby, the Lord's day is often to- 
 ta% Hglseindi ignorance inoroaseth, and wickedness eometh upon 
 08 like an armed man." •« In the county of Cornwall,*' Neal says, 
 ••there were at this period a hundred and forty clergymen, not one of 
 whom could preaeh a semon." The situation of other counties was 
 iMivif ilBilar. Judge of the consequences. I hsTC here the anthen- 
 tie donUDiBtB, Luther's and Westey'a works, to prove what I have 
 eilnd. Bore is the great fother of iie reformation; with Melancthon 
 at hit tiis, both very wifloil^ looking personages, m fkmr Aneet, «e- 
 fin on iwmgt of the cnmix !! (Holda an a large and old volume, and 
 iaaniibea a Sralo, with hit peraon, exhibiting the pictured title page, at 
 vhinh there was eontianed Imghter.) This edition was published by 
 Lawrence Mmaek at WiltMiAii, in 1661. Herr is image worehrn 
 by Martin Liiier and his eo-refiMiMr! and beasts, and monstensll 
 anmnd them. Mr. C. says that the popes mivhi have been much 
 worse men than he has deisiibed them. That bad acta are soon for- 
 milBB, and good ones more apt to be cfaraideled. This is, unfortu- 
 nmsifi not the case, as history but too well attests. Thevirlaosaretoo 
 unohtnialvo to attract pubHe noiiee, and Shakspeare, who wan a 
 elonn ohaarver of human nalnre, inys: If I can quote him eomntlyi 
 
 **Th« svii that men do, itvct «ftrr tb«in ; 
 
 Tha good it oH inUrrMl with tMr bonct.** 
 1 am sorry to say, my friends, Professor ligii informs Bin,%iwt 
 want of time has prevented htm from e x a mi n i iy thoworiu of Li|«on« 
 in relerenoe to my opponent's aoensalion, basodnDon this book. Thsss 
 ismfiailnman of Isaming and intofrity, in this city, who is not a Cap 
 thalS, Mr. Alsxaador Klnmoiil, who will devote some lioM to it, rai 
 who will be here at half-past four, P. M. and give ns the requisite te- 
 formation. i again say, 1 hope a large andienoe will be present at Iha 
 iemmewmtL Bly friend told as he slurred over what was wont ih ths 
 charges against Catholios. He has taken a new mode of doing this. 
 Me has, iadaed, tiii iii impKi tai hslpo itby a vague, bH Mt a ikf- 
 
 SOMAH OATSOLIO SKblGION. 
 
 ring insinuation, that them is more. Bit troMlaiion uxmld make tha 
 lULlen priests' sm ss bad as that of the Corinthian that afflicted by his 
 seaadalotts crime the fervent duistisns of antiquity, instead of being 
 of m diffiuent and less heinous kind. I appreciate his motives. Tho 
 chsrsa is, as I have already stated— 4he chnich punishes §everely for 
 the slightest fault, and excommunicates the impenitent offender, p^wg 
 him up to the civil tribunal, for the punishment, in such cases, inflicted 
 in some countries by the law of the land. 
 
 Me says, we find from the decrees of councils, that scandal has 
 existed in the church. It is true; and it is also true that Christ pre- 
 dicted its existence. What is the world but the theatre of fiilsehood 
 apd truth 1 a field of tares and wheat I 
 
 As for the other volume which the gentleman has broujgrht up, the 
 Seereta Monita of the Jesuits, 1 pronounce it an infamous forgery. It 
 has been proved a hundred times, that no priest had any hand in that 
 document. " The Monita Secrets, or private instructions, a publican 
 tion sometimes brought forward against the Jesuits,^' says the learned 
 Charles Butler, of Lincoln's Inn, " is a most infamous work, and 
 wholly beneath notice. Neither the original, nor any certified Qppy 
 of this work, was ever produced; no circumstances respecting its dis 
 covery, ever proved ; no collateral fact, to establish its authentici^, 
 ever published. There does not live the Jesuit, or the scholar of a 
 Jesuit, who, if any one of the doctrines which it inculcates,^ or any 
 one practice which it recommends, were [proposed to him, would not 
 spurn it with indignation." Francis Xavier was a Jesuit; our first 
 archbishop, Carroll, was a Jesuit; they were botii worthy of being 
 numbered among the best of men, and it was trut^ not forged^ instru» 
 tions that made them so. The copy of this notorious slander, on one 
 of the most virtuous, learned, and apostolic societies that have ever 
 existed, the gentleman informa us, was brought to this country from 
 France by the secretary of La Fayette ! and what was the relijgion of 
 this secretary ! A Jacobin, an infidel, one of the anti-christian con* 
 spirators, that would have blotted all denominations of the followen 
 of Jesns, as well as the Catholic, frim the whole world ! BjpnuU^ 
 it it well known, that such men meant ministera of every creed ; 
 and against all, but chiedy agaioat those best able by learning and 
 virtue to confound them, was their hostility directed. 
 
 A greater than La Fayette, as a statesman, I mean Thomas Jeffer- 
 son, said of the Presbyteriansr—" Their ambition and tyranny would 
 tolerate no rival if they had power. The Presbyterian clergy are the 
 loudest, tbe most int«^rant, of all sects, the moat tyranniciil and am 
 bitioaa; ready at the wcnrd of the lawgiver, if saeh a wmd oould now 
 be obtained, to pot the toroh to the pUe, and to nkiadlo ia this virgin 
 handspbora the fbaea in idiiah thair oiaola, CiAvia» eoosuBMd tht 
 poor tevataa, beeause ha eoald not aabscriba tha prepoiitto* of CM- 
 via, that ma|pstrates hava a ri^ht to exterHiinate all horaties to iha 
 Calviaiatic eraod. They pant to re-establish by law, that Holy Inqai- 
 lition, whieh thoy can now only infuse into pnblio opinion." p. ^18, 
 latter to William Short. WiU my friend taka thia teatimony la iha 
 letter I JeiEeraon had more opportanitiea for judging thaa La Fsyelt^ 
 aad ha know this ooontry bottar. Bat, sir, I agrea with La Fa¥et^ 
 that all priests are to be droadod ta Ihia aaase ; that none of them ahoald 
 
 ha allowad a particla of poUtioal aaeeadeaey ia ihia oountry. Oar 
 
 I 
 
 If 
 
 
 
on ras 
 
 tfiia ItBfef if from tmWtioiis firiettt of Tariooi denominttioM. Whet 
 ihtf emim themtelvet to their onlj sphere of nsoAiliiem, ihey ara 
 HtlMti fiiiswlt of nnnkliid; whtn they depart from It, the wowt ty- 
 rants of tho ikrlieat tgns of Pigarfwn were not more intoleraiit than 
 they. A hyaiit it a lamb, to a minister of Christ, who caste off the 
 liTcry and the peaceful spirit of his master, and tarns round to denounce 
 ■nd abnse his foUow-men for obejinf the sacred dictates of conscience, 
 and ndbering to a relieion, which, no matter how much persecuted and 
 calnmniateJ, they bclicTe to he divine. I could say much more on this 
 snbject, hut It Is not the most suitable time. 
 
 The charge has been made against all denominations, but my oppo- 
 nent has smgled from among them the Catholic, and made it the 
 ■eape-goal, to bear the sins of all to oblivion. I must however re- 
 mind lie audience that the Methodist conference, held, not so many 
 yiwn ago, at Baltimore, denounced the Episcopalians, for contempla- 
 lin# an alliance with England, to subvert the liberties of this coun- 
 Hy; and alleged what they conceived to be no mean proof of trea 
 •onabit dcrfgns on the part of the, then, obnoxious Episcopalians. 
 This prescriptive spirit is is old as Christianity. History infonns 
 us that the inoffensive diw^iplesof Jesus Christ, even in the goldea 
 iti of the apostles, were accused, mrmeted^ and put to the most hoi^ 
 tille death, precisely on the char||e of kaiing aU mtmMndr odio hu- 
 mani generis convicti sunt TMSitas Annal. lib. xv. This celebnip 
 ted historian terms the christians "sontes, reos, novissima ezcmpim 
 meritoB— feriagitia invisos," and calls their relision itself" «ntialis 
 mperetitio.*' They were, consequently, dressed in ihe skins of wild 
 heastft, and thns caricatured, the Pagans set their dogs upon them. 
 Jeans Christ, himself, when the Jews could convict him of no cnnae. 
 
 that moment the just one sank, opntemed beneath the malice and slan- 
 der of his enemies ! We, as his disciples, can expect no better fate 
 than our master's. He foretold all that now befolls us. " Blessed 
 are you,** says he, *• when men shall revile yon and persecute you, 
 wd apeak all manner of evil against you, untruly, for my sake : be glad 
 and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven." St. Matth. 
 
 V. 11, It. 
 
 We have, the gentlemaB iiys, no authentic translation of the scrip- 
 litrot. This is not true. We have a Latin translation, the vnlgate. 
 fhat Is one authentic translation. We have, moreover, an approved 
 IMiilaiion in the vemncular, samdioned by all the Hshops In the 
 lliiitcd States, and Ibr sale in eveij dty in the vni^n. Bat if, by an 
 ~ iiMie bible, we mean one perMly Immaculate^ In point of typo- 
 »Meni exeeution and nieehanleal neatness, I ask the gentleiraB, 
 he pretend that any Protesunt denomination has such a one! 
 Yet my tiiwl aaya, MUfiiMiiiiln^ the fhetn I enoted yesterday 
 ■Mminf , reapeellnf a new bible, that they have a bible that is Mil- 
 etentTlf that Is tiie eaM, where Is the use of a new iMtlttioa ! He 
 
 ■^B of Sixms' and Clemeng'a bible. That only^ewe that the 
 popes inter faneht that their personal opinions were to be reoeived, 
 as aitieles of faith, as my Iriend would nereuade us they did. Pri- 
 vate aniwiity should Hot preMme to alter the authorised veiaion 
 This was the amount of the prohibition. 
 
 BOMAir CATHOLIC WCLIGION. 
 
 Kow to post the books with my Mend on the subject of the bible, 
 1 ask him if he was not Infatuated, for I really cannot call it by any 
 eOier name, when he said he could show us a bible never soiled by 
 the thumb of a inonk, and took us right Into the midst of twenty tw« 
 monasteries, on mount Athos,/or the proof? Home in his Introduction 
 to the study of the Bible, vol. 1. p. 222, quotes Oudin and Michaefis, 
 for the opinion that it was written by an Aecmet^— and written too, say 
 Burber and Wctstein, for a chureh or a monastery. Home says the A«> 
 mets were a class of monks In the ancient church, who flourished partic* 
 hlarly in the east in the fifth century. They were so called, becauM 
 they had divine service perforated without interruption, in their 
 churches. They divided themselves into three bodies, each of which 
 officiated in turn, and relieved the other so that their churches were 
 never silent either night or day. This very Mss. Codex Alexandrinus, 
 In the British Museum, contains a list of the Psalms sung by these 
 
 monks! , , 
 
 My friend says that our getting the bible from monks, does not 
 leave us beholden to them for its spirit. This is a disingenuous eva- 
 sion. I did not say that it did, but this last question belongs to quite 
 another category. My opponent says that the bible, like the unlTerse, 
 must testify to its own divine origin — ^it is the work of God. In this 
 he is completely at issue with one of the most enlightened Protestants 
 of the day, bishop Smith, of Kentucky. «* These christians," says 
 the bishop, in his review of Van Dyck on christian union, " have done 
 well in agreeing upon those sound principles of investigation which 
 lead them to substantiaCand sufficient agreement, what the canon of 
 scripture is. The principle is correct, and therefore all honest minds 
 rest satisfied, in the same results. Abandon the question of the one- 
 ness of the bible, to be agitated and kept afloat on the perturbed 
 ncean of expedience, as the question is, respecting the oneness of the 
 chureh, and very soon we should have amongst us almost as many- 
 books claiming to be bibles, as we have sects claiming to be churches. 
 4nd what are the laws of evidence, guided by which, all christians 
 come to such a desirable agreement as to the canon of the scripture ! 
 Do we settle that grave point by appeals to the scripture alone ? Dn 
 we require a »• thus saith the Lord," for the admission of any book 
 within the compass of the bible 1" Ay, this is the question, do we 
 take up the bible frem the shelf, and putting it to our ear, ask it what 
 it has to say for itself 1 If we do, we shall lay it aside without re- 
 ceiving the desired answer, nrettjr much as the Indian chief did, when 
 the Spanish missionary handed hun the good book.— ♦» It says noth- 
 ing," said the Indian. How then shall we proceed in this investip- 
 tionf *• We select," says bishop Smith, " some period of christian 
 antiquity by univereal consent anterior to great corruptions, and that 
 we may be safe, anterior to great causes tending to corruption ; the 
 year 300 for example, prior to the convereion of Constantino ; or the 
 year 350, when the documents of the then existing Christianity were 
 abundant; or the year 200, when men were living who had conversed 
 with the disciples of John, and we ask, what books were received by 
 christians, every where, and with one consent, as sacred books; and 
 these, and no others, we admit into our canon. Then with the ut- 
 most care we look into every previous writer, for concurring or for op- 
 posing evidence. Finding every thing neariy clear and satisfactory^ 
 we repair to the books of the New Testament tl^emselvee for acc» 
 
 , 
 
ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 289 
 
 ■ad mtenial eviieiifse, to mdmm ibr Mid oonfirm the wholes 
 And hf ro we rasi ratiafied thtt we kaoe grtuped the tbutr/^ 
 
 How will tlie ehanpioii of Protestantisin extricate himeelf from 
 IMS dikmBia I Does lie eonliBM Ms igaoniice of the leiding doctrinee 
 of eminent Protestant dtvines f Hiqr ftnd a nnanimons consent. 
 
 lie talks of two great lies I I Mice strong laaguage, Imt ttds is soeli 
 as Milton's Satan would Imve lietter nsed« tlian a pro^BssIng ehristiaa. 
 Mow Jews and Infidels wiU trinmpli, when assnied by my opoonent 
 that (/hrist's preaching and miraelee, so stgnally Ihiled, that the largest 
 hody of christians in the entire world, have been based upon two great 
 lies, since the year 350, or aboot that neriod! Take awayth« 
 9,000|<MI0 Catholie and Greek christians fliat belieTO in these tw6 
 great Imlla, and think it blanihemy to call thfim lies, and what h^ 
 comes of the few strasglen that remain in the Tslleys of the Al|is, 
 or where yon please— the " rmri tmntti in gurgik mmP^ Did Christ 
 eipend all his labor, all his blood, to giro mankind, one kind of 
 'idioiatiy for another ! OmiM Imdmm* 
 
 liow, my friends, dispossess yonr minds of pnsludice ; forget ^om 
 wdimmm edncation, if possible; take np the Bible, and see if it be 
 wholly silent upon these two great truikif not /i«f. For 3, or 300,000,000 
 who hare not all lost their reason, adhere to these divine doctrines, 
 which they find in this blessed ▼olome. I speak onto you as wise 
 and pious men. Judge yon, youruheB, and do not let others judge for 
 yon, what I say. I quote the Bible which you all admit, as I haTO 
 hitherto quoted Protestant anthority, which |ou admit on all eases, to 
 be not o¥er friendlv to Roman Catholic doctrines. 1 disdained to avail 
 ■lyaelf of the wccibisisci fen lAreio ever your garden isdSb, I mean im 
 Moral and degraded ministers, as my opponent has done with discarded 
 
 Iiriests, to east your doctrine with them. With sach, we hold no lei- 
 owship. The pure of lilS^ the men of honor and of learning, whom 
 we receive from your ranks, we cherish. From the Bible, then, the 
 fathers, the most eminent Protestants, I shall select my proofs, that, 
 00 these two in^mied list, the Catholic church, like St. Paul, so Christ 
 b her witness, speaks the truth in righteousness. 
 
 To begin from the Bible. If there is a single tenet of christlaa 
 laith, clearly established in the Bible, I contend that it is the real 
 presence of Jesos Christ, in the adorable sacrament of the Eucharist. 
 And If we cannot take In the literal sense, the words of Christ, 
 ** This Is my body ; This Is my blood,** the plainest that God or man 
 could utter, but must adopt, instead of tills, some one of the two 
 Hhumnd inkmiW Invent^ by the saaamentarians, and the anti- 
 sacramenlarians, for this teact. we may bid adien to the doctrine of tha 
 intnlliiibility of scrlptare. I distinguish two principal epochs in the 
 Goapal aanaHtes the iiat,wlien Jesus Christ promises to give us hii 
 body and Mood in the Eucharist; the second, when he^lwi them to 
 na. Before announcing his desire of bequeathing to the world this 
 divine legacy, as we real in the 6th chapter of the Gospel of St. John, 
 he wrougnt a splendid miracle, even the feeding of 6000, with a few 
 Inaves, in the wBdemess, to prove himself the God whom the heavens 
 apd the earth obey, and thus conciliate the &ith of the multitude in 
 tiie divinity of his mission, and the truth of his doctriiwa. He speaka 
 of the alwnlnte necessity of this (aith— of Its aearcity, and expressly 
 
 hefat ftith. In a wad, llaf m mmmmmmtokim, unkm 
 
 Utfithir irmo him. He then continues his divine inBcruetions, by 
 alluding to the miracle which he had wrought, in which was a most 
 striking resemblance to the greater miracle which he designed to 
 work, via. the multiplication of his own body and blood, for the daily, 
 the super-substantial bread, or food, of men, with whom, as he els©, 
 where assures us, in scripture, it is his delight to dwell. He renunds 
 his hearers of all the wonders wrought in their favor, in the old Law, 
 shews them all the wisdom, the power, the love of Heaven, displayed 
 in thftir behoof, from the commencement of their history ; how dear 
 Ihey were to God, and further and better gifts, which, if want of faith op- 
 posed no obstacle, so many divine pledges gave them a right to antici- 
 pate. The greatest of Kmgs, even Solomon, in all his glory, h^ 
 nothing better to give them toangold and silver, a city, a tract of land. 
 Ko earthly king can comjbte with God, in conferring benefits. This 
 the hbtory of uie Jews sufficienUy attested ; and the miracle of the 
 loaves brought affectingly to their minds, what their fathers had told 
 them, what they, themselves, had read in the testimony, of the manna 
 or miraculous bread, which, for so many years had been showered 
 down from heaven, to feed their ancestors in the desert. They were 
 thus prepared for all that Goo could accomplish to show his excbss of 
 Lovi. They whom his father called, who are taught of God, hear with 
 faith ; they whom his fother called not, hear with incredulousness, 
 while he ttius announces At* own iotended benefactions. 
 
 ♦* This is the bread which came down from heaven. If any eat of 
 this bread, he shall live forever; and the bread that I wUl give is my 
 flesh for the life of the worid. The Jews therefore strove among 
 themselves, saying, »* how can this man give us his flesh to eat ! 
 Then Jesus said to them, * Amen, amen, I say to you, except you eat 
 the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have 
 life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath 
 everlasting life ; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh 
 is meat indeed; and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my 
 flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. As the 
 living Father sent me, and I live by the Father, so he that eateth me, 
 the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down 
 from Heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna and are dead ; he 
 that eateth this bread shall live forever.' These thines he said, teach- 
 ing in the synagogue at Capernaum. Many, therefore, of his disci- 
 ples, hearing it, said, this is a hard saying, and who can hear itl 
 But Jesus knowing, in himself, that his disciples murmured at this, 
 said to them, * doth this scandalize you ? If then, you shall see tho 
 Son of man ascend up where he was before 1 It is the spirit that 
 
 auickeneth ; the flesh profiteth nothing. But there are some of yo 
 lat believe not.* For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they wer 
 that did not believe, and who he was that would betray him. And he 
 said, » therefore no man can come to me unless it be given him by my 
 Father.' After this many of his disciples went back, and walked no 
 more with him. Then Jesus said to the twelve, will you, also go 
 away! And Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we gol 
 thou hast the words of eternal life, and we have believed, and know 
 that thou art the Chnst, the Son of God. Jesus answered them, 
 ♦ have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil.' Now he 
 meant Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, for thid same was about to 
 betray him, whereas he was one of the twelve." 
 z 19 
 
 If 
 
Mil 
 
 imF Wn^ ^^ 
 
 BEliATE ON THB 
 
 We liave here a continaous argument, and faith and infidelity, pie- 
 tDied to the life; murmuring at impoesibilities then, as weil ua utWm 
 reliiiked by the Savior, and acfiniescence in his word and his love, bj 
 Peter, as the first belleTer of the dirinity of the Son or Goi>-— of Bii« 
 •lAlf PBEStifoc In the Eucharist. If he spoke figuratively, would hA 
 ktve Mibad his disciples, who understood the rmh'tu^ to leave him , 
 'ha who came to save the lost sheep of the house of Israel ! Would 
 kfi have suffered all his disciples to |ierish, rather than tell them this 
 iiiifl»/aef« that they misunderstood him ! If he spoke of a figurativo 
 f nteiMset ^ words, ** kow eon iftm Mieve when you me the Son </ 
 liHM, meending up to Hemmn^ wkert he was bdttre** would hate had no 
 mmm. In the Catholic view of the Kuchanst, it is divinely strong. 
 If you cannot believe, now, that my flesh and blood are visible, p^. 
 pable objects of every sense, that 1 can give them to you for food, 
 how much leas can you believe it, when you see the Son of .Man as- 
 cending up to Heaven, &c. The flesh surely profiteth nothing to un- 
 derstand this mystery^it requires the faith and the spirit of faith, to 
 impose silence on the senses, and say, with St. Peter, ^ Lord, to whom 
 should we ft^-Thou hast the words of eternal life.'* This is the 
 hiMd which strengthens us to live out successive ages. This is not 
 •m iamiinl doctrine. It elevates man to know that he is thus loved. 
 Thst he Is of a holy race, a purchased people, a royal priesthood, 
 iie especial object of incessant wonders. That he beholds God with 
 Mm^ Imiaiue!, in Bethlehem, home of bread, hid beneath the sacra- 
 mental veil, hut destined, and prepared by this nourishment, to enjoy 
 him hereafter, without a veil, in the rieh effulgence of the beatifie 
 liiiiiii* [Time expired.] 
 
 Ba^jmd II 6*clo€k^ J. M 
 
 lis. Campbxu. ris«»— 
 
 My opponent in commencing observed, that almost the whole circle 
 of Cfitholie tenets came in review In my last speech. If such be an 
 timr, wlmse fhult is it I I have no respondent. How many hours hat 
 tiM geitlenM spent in reading against time, without any relevancy 
 In the questions at issue, or to the proposition before us. And 
 when he does reply, it it frequently to something said a day or two ' 
 
 I tilieleil two points yesterday af^moon as comprehending the 
 tililiiMn of the error opposed in my fifth proposition, and even to the 
 f ntem iwiaent he has not presumed to meet me on these vital mat 
 tan fo discuss them. In my last speech, I therefore not only recapitu- 
 lated tome important items ; but argued one or two specifications, io 
 proof of the proposition legally before us. I also introduced in part my 
 ■eventh proposfaon, and so far discussed its bearings at to show the 
 ■itI-American, and anti-Repabliean theories of the Latin church. 
 
 The bishop hat, indeed, thit time, selected the doctrine of transuh- 
 ttantiation : but has he adverted to the various poinU of argument I 
 have made ! Ought he not, at least, to have glanced at these points, 
 in order 1 
 
 1. The incongruity of the idea of a sacrament with that of transuh- 
 ■nlittion. 
 
 i. the unreatootblenest of prelerrin.the literal to the figurative. In 
 the interpretation of a phrase common m scripture, which in no other 
 ease Is so interpreted hy the party themselves. 
 
 KOMAN CATHOLIC BBLIGION. 
 
 SIfl 
 
 3. The arrogance of the priests in assuming the power of woTking 
 miracles, for the sake of a forced interpretation of a phrase without 
 precedent cr analogy. 
 
 4. The belief of such a transubstantiation destroys the credibility of 
 nil testimony, human and divine, and necessarily tends to atheism. 
 
 6. That the institution of the supper is commemorative and not ex- 
 piatory, having nothing of the nature of a sacrifice for sin. 
 
 To which of these important considerations has the gentleman m- 
 plied in his last speech I Has he formally and specifically met any 
 one of them 1 
 
 It was also alleged, that the admission of such a pretention, on the 
 part of any priest, was debasing and paralizing to the human under- 
 standing, and subjected to imposture and fraud those who implicitly 
 acquiesced in it. There art few persons, who so observantly trace 
 moral effects to their causes, as to be able duly to appreciate how 
 much influence in the formation of human character may philosophi- 
 cally be ascribed to such idle, absurd, and irrational pretensions. 
 We sometimes see with what little power, reason, philosophy, and 
 experience combat the belief in witches, ghosts, apparitions, and 
 other legendary tales, the effect of the nursery and eariy impressions. 
 When the imagination is once filled with such tales and delusions, it 
 requires a power equal to the dispossession of demons to rectify it, and 
 elevate it above such a tormenting infatuation. 
 
 The gentleman, indeed, with a show of respect for scripture, seem- 
 ed to appeal to the 6th chapter of John, as though it spoke of the 
 tame thing. Now, unless this discourse relates to the last supper, 
 and was delivered with respect to it, how idle to seek to prove from 
 it what was never said in it! It was a discourse upon loaves and 
 manna, delivered to the people of Capernaum in their synagogue, on 
 the occasion of our Lord having fed five thousand men in the desert, 
 upon a few loaves and fishes. And as at the well of Jacob he spoke 
 of the waier of life ; so here, when the miracle of loaves is the topic, 
 he speaks of the bread of life .• and of eating that bread, as to the wo- 
 man of Samaria, he spoke of drinking that water. He goes on to 
 speak fi^ irati vely o{ coming io him, eating him, never hungering, never 
 thirstinu again, &c., and in the most figurative style, continues his 
 discourse, till at last, after he had spoken of their eating his flesh and 
 drinking his blood, he told them that the words he spoke " were spirit 
 and A/iC" not literal flesh and blood — that flesh and blood could not 
 profit the soul. And so the apostle Peter understood him when he 
 said, " Lord thou hast the words of eternal life." In metaphori- 
 cal language, it is usual to say * one hungers and thirsts after knowl- 
 AArro ^n-Ktaniisnpaa * Jtri*. • and ta Htkv that one eats what he believes 
 
 »uw • 1MU «— .«. -"- -.-"w -- very op- 
 posite of the transubstantiation before us. It was flesh into bread, as 
 
 But the gentleman relies upon the Savior's leaving them in error, 
 suffering them to go away in a mistake. If this were true ; I can find 
 a similar case. To the proud and captious, he often deioT)ed no reply. 
 Hence, when some went away ftom his discourse, alleging that he 
 
f92 PBBATC OH T1IK 
 
 wm hmn im Namntli, lie Im^k no pains to correct tlm error, tlioiigli 
 It wimM ■eem tliat a tin|i:le mord would have deeided the case, lie 
 knew what manner of spirit they were of, and never said once ; I was 
 not born in Naiarelh ; but im Bethlehem. But to conclude, the stib 
 ject of discusfiion in John vi. is about receivingr him — coming to him 
 Mlievinf hiin to be the Messiah, &€., and \¥as addressed to ambitious 
 obitinate Jews. The subject in Matth. xxri. and 1 Cor. xi. is his 
 Savior's death, sacrifice and the commemoration of it, addressed to his 
 disciples. Ii is, then, every way illogical to reason from the one to 
 the other, as parallel cases. 
 
 But I would ask, how is a man to believe the same sense at one 
 liime, ani disbelieve it at another, when in readinnr Paul or Matthew 
 lit aeet the words, " t/m if my body,^^ and when looking on the table, 
 lie sees not flesh but bnaJ, why should he believe what he sees in 
 Ike former case, and disbelieve what he sees in the latter case. That 
 he feet bread is certain ; why not then believe his eyes ? Or, if he 
 injects tlMii here, why not reject them there, on the words, «* This is 
 my body!'* and believe that it reads, " this tepreunh my body !" 
 But even after the consecration, and after Jesus had said, "This is 
 my blood," he clearly teaches, that he spoke in a figure : for, adds 
 he, ** I will not drink again of this fruit tf the vine with you," &c. 
 And Paul, after consecration says, " He that eateth lAit breads and 
 drinketh lAts cup iinworthily"--&c. 
 
 Were it, however, converted into flesh, we would have to ask, 
 wliat sanctifying power in/eM ? or, what spiritual food would them 
 Iw in the human nesh of the Son of God 1 And were it omnipresent, 
 how would the eating of it as a sin oflfering, take away sin from the 
 conscience ! ! The virtue was in the altar, on which the sacrifice 
 was oflTered : for ** it is the altar that sanctifies the gift," And had 
 it not been for the true and pope? divinity of the Son of God, his 
 llith as a sin offering, could in no sense profit any person. But the 
 
 Ciiest can bfillf down the divine Savior from heaven, and oflfer him, 
 ody, soul, and divinity, as often as he pleases; and have the people 
 adore both him and the miracle in his hand ! ! He that can believe 
 all this, is not to be reasoned with. 
 
 The gentleman's remarks on, '* lam with you,*^ even aftei so many 
 hours' reflection since I expounded them, have not the slightest refer- 
 
 BOMAR CATHOLIC UBLIGION. 
 
 293 
 
 to any thing I have said. I could not have thought it possible 
 for a child to have to misunderstood and misapplied them. I need 
 not again repeat them. They are wholly misrepresented. He has 
 •* deled heaven and earth." What a daring logician ! Yes ; he 
 **dalied heaven and earth," on what! To weaken his argument on 
 infallibility ! It would be hard indeed, to weaken that, which has no 
 strength. Perhaps he might defy Omnipotence to weaken what does 
 mot exist. But the bishop is just as fallible as your humble servant ; 
 and his church (I may with confidence say) is even more fallible 
 than the Protestant church : for, our rule of faith is perfect and com- 
 plete : his rule, as I have shown, is imperfect and immoral. 
 
 *• But Protestants are better than their principles !" Indeed ! Their 
 principles are the bible alone. Their acknowledged principles, cer- 
 tainly, are those to which- my friend refers ! A good argument ! I 
 read the other day something like this— >* Bad as human nature is, 
 Ihare is no man on earth bad enough to make a good papist." •' Tbi 
 •ystem cannot be carried out fully by any prsou." Would my learn 
 
 sd antagonist call this a good argument against his 83rstoiii I and iff 
 it not as logical as that which he has just alleged { 
 
 The bishop accuses Mr. Smith of ingratitude. I have something 
 moie to do than to defend Mr. Smith from such groundless imputa- 
 tions. Every one who abjures Catholicism, is a wretch : for Protest- 
 ants are all heretics ! The best return Mr. Smith or any person can 
 make for favors received, is to disabuse the minds of his benefactors 
 from error, if they happen to entertain it. The best and most grate- 
 ful return that I could make to a Roman Catholic benefactor, for any 
 benefit conferred, would be, if possible, to convince and save him from 
 the most ruinous and destructive heresy that time records, or ever 
 will record. 
 
 Next comes the Seereta Mtnita ; for we must circumnavigate another 
 circle in this speech also. The Seereta Monita, then, is just as accu- 
 rate and fair a view of the spirit, design, and policies, of that order, as 
 can be given. Such is our faith : and that on no mean testimony 
 cither. 
 
 We shall give some account of the discovery of this said book : 
 
 " We are indebted for this " terrible book" of Jesuits* 
 •ecret?, to the parliameot of Paris. They passed the act to abolish the Jesuits 
 society : and the execution came on the Jesuit college tike a thunder stroke. 
 Their palace was surrounded b^ troops, and their papers and books, and these 
 ** Secret Instructions ' were seized before they had heard that the parliament 
 had taken up their cause!" 
 
 ^ The reasons which the parliament of France, in 1762, gave for ex- 
 tirpating this order, which has thirty-nine times been proscribed, speak 
 volumes : 
 
 **'nie consequences of their doctrines destroy the law of nature: break all the 
 bonds of civil societv: authorizing l>>ng". theft, perjury, the utmost unclcanness, 
 murc'er, and all sins! Their doctnnes root out all sentiments of humanity: excite 
 rebellion: root out all religion: and substitute all sorts of superstition, blasphe^ 
 Wiy. irreligioQ, idolatry." 
 
 Other reasons for the suppression of this order, will be found in the 
 following extract from their oath : 
 
 ** In the presence of Almighty God and of all the saints, to 
 
 you. my ghostly fsther, I do decbu^ that his holiness, pope , is Christ's 
 
 vicar-reneral, and the only head of the universal church throughout the earth: 
 and that br Tirtue of the keys g^ven him by my Savior, Jesus Christ, he hath 
 power Co depose heretical kings, priacet, states, commonwealths, and govern* 
 ments: all bemg illegal, without his sacred confirmation; and that tbe^r may 
 safely be destroyed. Therefore I, to the utmost of my power, shall and will da* 
 fend his doctrine, aud his holiness* rights and customs against all usurpers," &c. 
 
 ** I do renounce and disown any allegiance as due to any heretical king, 
 princ'e, state, named Protestants, or obedience to any of their inferior magistrates, 
 or oflkers.'* 
 
 **I do further promise and declare that notwithstaodine F am dispensed with, 
 to assume any religion heretical for the propagation of the mother church's in 
 lerett. — to keep secret and private, all her agent's counsels," Ate. 
 
 ** All which I, A. B. do swear by the blessed Trinity, and the blessed sacra- 
 ment, which I am now to receive. And I call all the heavenly and glorious 
 hosts above, to witness these my real lA/en/soiM, to keep this my oath. In tes> 
 timony hereof. I take this most blessed sacrament of the eucharist, and set my 
 hand and seal." 
 
 Such is the order of men restored by Saint Pius VII., who, for re- 
 storing them and the inquisition, (" the vice of the dark ages ! I") has 
 been mftatified, and enrolled in the Roman heavens, as a saint of the 
 first order! Is it not in striking and thrilling harmony with the ge- 
 nius of our institutions, to have priests of this order, all over the land 
 
 I 
 
 ^Mi-apaStii 
 

 IMBATB ON THB 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 295 
 
 la diargo of tbe souls iid eoiiieiencea of Araeriean eiliiens ! ! So 
 niiich for Jesuitism. 
 
 I ought not to have called ernn ** Hea,** i« the ipo«tle John, and 
 tho other apoatles, have done. Why 1 All errors are lies ; and all 
 who propagate them are, by the same apostle, John, called liars. "All 
 liirs," aays he, (teachers of error,) shall have their part in a certain 
 lakfl. Was it not impolite for the apostle, thus to use such a vulgar 
 ■tylel I must, then, have fallen into had company, when I said, tho 
 man of sin stands upon two cardinal lies! 
 
 Next comes the doctrine of majorities ; and these are every thine 
 with a Romanist. The? are the root, and reason, and ilhisiralion, and 
 proof of infallibility. The man who seeks the truth by the tests of 
 ■imefity, majority, and anti'iuity, will never find it on earth. This is 
 wnply tmo of the present ard all past ages. There are sincere Turks, 
 Jews, pgaiis, Infidels. There are very ancient errors, heresies, and 
 sects. And, as for majorities, from Enoch till now, they have gener- 
 ally, if not always, been wrong in religion. Where was the majority, 
 when Noah was building his ark ! when Abraham forsook Urr of the 
 Chaldees? when Lot abandoned Sodom! when Moses forsook 
 Egypt! when Elijah witnessed against Ahab ! when Daniel and bis 
 companions were captives in Babylon f when Malachi wrote! when 
 the Baptist preached ! when Christ was crucified ! when the apostleSy 
 and many of the first Christians, were persecuted ! ! 
 
 And, compared with paganism, when had Roman Catholicism tbe 
 inajority ! Strange, indeed, that infallibility, afler all this, should 
 come to be the attribute of majorities ! But the bishop, in his speech 
 igainst Luther, delivered here in October last, said there were one 
 liwndred and fifiy million Roman Catholics. I cannot find them on the 
 earth, unless I count many millions of atheists and pagans along with 
 them. But, after a more accurate search, I find there are in all, but 
 mm biiMirad and ten millions of professed Roman Catholics, and 
 amongst these, millions of sceptics : of Protestants, there are seventy- 
 five millions ; and of the Greek church, above forty millions ; making 
 at least one hundred and fiAeen millions of Protesters against tho 
 nail of sin. If, then, there be anything in majorities, the Romanists 
 lave it not. Infallibility is somewhere else. The time comes, (and 
 may heaven speed its flight !) when the kin|dom, and the greatness 
 of the kingdom, under the whole heaven, shaU be given to the people 
 of the saints of the Most High, when all dominions shall serve and 
 obej him. But Babylon mtll never see that day ; for she will be 
 boned In bet own ruins before it comes. And when the angel, with the 
 Inmpet of everlasting good news, shall sonnd the hour of her jodement 
 ■•come, and announce the triumph of the gospel t then, but not tllltlien, 
 will the majority be on the side of God, and Christ, and heaven. 
 
 I am oalv now at the place where I left off in mj former speeeh, 
 ■lid my half hour is almost expired. I eannol again condeacend to 
 i«ch a sacrifice of time to so many points. 
 
 I was showing, when I sat down, that the theory of spiritua] des- 
 ptism always precedes the practical display of it ; and that the theory 
 of the terrific and appalling despotism of papal Rome, is to be found 
 In primelples and theories promolged, and believed, and taught, before 
 the reign of darkness and terror began. 
 
 The fict of paltiug the bible under a bushel, of forbidding the read- 
 
 Inir of it, of swearing for ever to interpret lim it htu hem interpreted, 
 ofliot permitting men to think or speak for themselves on religion, of 
 teaching them the power of the priests to work miracles, to create a 
 god out of bread, that the people might adore it and them, of making 
 a supreme judge of controversy out of one of the parties, or combining 
 the legislative, executive, and judicial powers in one person, (the 
 model of the most cruel despotism,) is the paragon of supreme tyranny, 
 never surpassed, never equaled on earth. 
 
 How any person can, from such a system, elaborate a single ele- 
 ment of free government, or of civil liberty, I cannot imagine. Indeed, 
 the radical ideas of papal supremacy, are as anupodal to republK»n 
 doctrine and American institutions, as are the aenith and the nadir 
 But my time has fled. 
 
 Thifeive o^ehek, M. 
 Bishop Purcell rises— 
 
 1 have only to stand here for half a minute, and to open the bible, to 
 reduce to dust the arguments which it costs my opponent such a waste 
 of time and labor to construct. Was not Civil and Ecclesiastical power 
 united in the high priest, by the Almighty God, himselfl Is not Uus re- 
 corded in Deuteronomy, and admitted by my worthy antagonist ! What 
 
 says the scriptore. . . . .r , ^ • 
 
 •• If yoa perceive, that there be amon^ you, • hard and doubtral matter in 
 ittdement, between blood and blood, cause and cause, leprosy and jeprosv; nnd 
 thou see that the words of ju(1jrment within the gates, do vary ; ari»e and go up 
 to the place which the Lortf thy God shall choose. And thou shalt come to the 
 priests of the Levitical race, and to the judge that shall be at that time; and 
 then shalt ask of them, and they rhall shew thee the truthof the ludginent. And 
 Ihou shalt do whatsoever they shall say, that preside in the place, which the 
 Lord shall choose, and what they shall teach thee accord in- to this law: and 
 thou shalt follow their sentence, neither shalt thou decline to the right hand noc 
 to the left hand. But he that will be proud, and refuse to obey the command- 
 ment of the priest, who niinisteretb at that time to the Lord God, and the decree 
 of the jndye. that man shall die, and thou shalt tokc away the evil fipoin Israel. 
 — Dent. xvil. «, rt i^q. . , , . , . 
 
 Here is civil power, and ecclesiastical authority blended m one 
 ttibiinal, of the presiding priest and of the Levitical ministry, and the 
 penalty of death ordained by God, against him who contends for private 
 judffTtient and refuses to obey. 
 
 Now, my friends, if Mr. C. seriously intends t-i employ reason and 
 argument, instead af the calumny and abuse too oft^n employed in r^ 
 ligious discussions heretofore, why does he rake up from a pile of 
 rubbish, sad memorial of the havoc made by the enemies of the le- 
 ■nits, and exhibit the tattered, and sordid, documents found there, for 
 woof! I expected " hofwr hriM^ from my friend, when we began 
 &is debate, and I still expect it. Have I not dealt fairly myselfl 
 Have I gene to the sewers and streets, as he has done to those of C racow 
 and Paris for the Seertia mmta, for evidence agntnst the Protestants 1 
 No ! I have quoted their most respectable authorities— 1 have taken up 
 Southey, and Waddington, and such writers. I do not think it honor- 
 able to stoop down, and pick op from the gutter, all the vile trash, that 
 Protestants have written against one another; much less that, which 
 Oie enemies of Protestants may have invented ; and I do not expect 
 this course from my friend, in his attempt to fasten upon Catholics, the 
 sins which they abhor. *» Why did the parliament of Pans destroy the 
 society of the Jesuits 1" I will tell the genUeman. Because they 
 
 V 
 
WB 
 
 DEBATE on TUB 
 
 had liecoiiie the disciples of th« man, who boastf^d that '* he was tiret? tf 
 mmlmg it said, that iweke men bad been able to coirrert the world A .m 
 ipigaoism to cbristianitjr, for that he would let it be seen that one bian 
 wis able to onehristianize it." This was the boast of Voltaire, who, 
 at Ihe bead of his letters to the infidel conspirators leagfiied with him 
 afalnst revelation, was accustomed to write the words ; " Ecrasom Pirn 
 JuRe,*' Ld m ermk fke wrekkt meanin|; Jetos Christ and his bolj re 
 Igioii. These anti-christian machinations could never succeed, and 
 iMir authors were too wide awake in their hostility to the christian 
 ililht lot to be aware of the fact, as long as relig^ion eommanded the 
 •ervieea of so learned and eiemplary a body of men as the Jesoite. 
 In &I1 the entire world, in China and in Frarnse, in America and in 
 Sinope, society, as well as pure religfion was their debtor. In every 
 lanfoaiire they wrote the most admirable treatises on the mathematics, 
 on medicine, on geography. Their historians, orators, poets, mission- 
 aries, have never been surpassed. Mr. Secretary Cass and Richard 
 Peters of Philadelphia, recorder of the Supreme Court, will inform 
 you, for they have eiamined it, bow perfectly accurate Is their map of 
 Lake Superior with its 1500 miles of coast, which one or two of these 
 fathers, while seeking the red man, for Jesus Christ, in their frail 
 canoe, found time to survey. In a word the Jesuits were omamenta 
 to human nature, but they had, at the same time, the mitfwium to be 
 the ornaments and the |>illars of Religion. This Voltaire knew. His 
 laiilel colleagues knew it. And as they were conscious that the livet 
 if th« leeaits defied their malice, and the learning of the Jesuits would 
 ©onime to confoond their sophistry, they had no resource but to op 
 press them by calumny. Hence they spared no pains to render them ob 
 ■oiions to the Parliament of Paris, and reprodnoed the Seerda 3§miftu 
 fabricated by some anonymous calumniator in 1612. The spurioiisnc ss 
 of this paper has been every where admitted by the critics. Let not any 
 one who reads this controversy on the theatre of its eiposure, learn 
 ftfim it that erudition and honor are at so low an ebb in the United 
 States, as to admit as argument, an appeal to so contemptible a slander 
 ^ As to the eeih of the lesaita, it is taken from the same book * There 
 m no Jesuit that ever takes such an oath. Every Jesuit in the United 
 ttaiee, who is not a native of the country, and intends to reside in 
 it, has taken the oath of allegianee to our government. And in Georm- 
 ••wn. In the District of Columbia, in Virginia, Maryland, Kentoeky, 
 ape native American Jesuits, tome of the most whole-eonled and the 
 toiigh-goinf ra|»ablicans in the world, nrepared, at any moment, to imi 
 tate the fatiiotie eiample of the first of their older in the United Stales, 
 AplnNahop Carroll, the friend and associate of Washington. In thin 
 niflt they are rivaled by the rest of our clergy. That venerable 
 Id priest, now before you, has done for half a centary, and specially 
 In those periloos times that tried men's souls, when a formidable ene- 
 my was on our frontier, within our bordere— nay in onr very eapilai, 
 and eommitaing our noblest monuments to the flames, more for freedom, 
 lMp|iiness and the union, than any other living man, perhaps, of the 
 ekfical profession. The Latin poems, which he published during the 
 war, breathing the energy and spirit of the songs of the Greeks, when 
 they struck down the tyrants, were translated into English, and 
 Widely cireulaled. General Harrison, if he were here to-day, would 
 tnfoim yoi, as h« has informed me, by my fire-side, what loyal men 
 
 BOMAJf CATHOLIC RELIGION. 
 
 397 
 
 Slid true n'Cre the (Catholic missionaries of Indiana and Missouri, in 
 mutd tang syne. How they exened all their influence, and it was not 
 inconsiderable, to keep the Indians faithful to the cause of free govern- 
 ment. My friends, if I must have an opponent, let me have an honorable 
 one: let me have facts and proofs, instead of slanders and insinuations. 
 And, to say all in one word, in answer to the charges against the 
 Jesuits, Why did the pariiament of Paris restore the order in France « 
 Ay, that is the question. I will tell the gentleman. Because they 
 discovered their blunder, and the injustice they had committed in sup- 
 
 Eressing them, and the prostrate state of education, after the Jesuits 
 ad been expelled the colleges. Then, with the magnanimity of the 
 corporation of London, a few years ago, who honorably chipped off 
 the inscription from the pillar, which, like a tall bulli/, raised its head 
 mnd Ued, by attributing the conflagrat'on of 1666 to the Roman Catho- 
 lies, did the pariiament of Paris make partial atonement for the wrong 
 done to the Jesuits. These are examples worthy of our imitation in a 
 free and happy republic, where the iron heel of religious bigots should 
 not bo allowed to bend so much as a blade of grass ! 
 
 I continue my argument for the real presence. 1 shall first produce 
 the sequel of the scripture evidence, and then reply to the objections 
 of my friend. The institution of the eucharist is related by three 
 evangelists, and by St. Paul ; by St. Matthew, who wrote his gospel, 
 in India, seven years after the death of Christ ; by St. Mark, who 
 wrote his gospel in Rome, two years later, under the direction of St. 
 Peter ; by St. Luke*, whose gospel was written in the nineteenth year 
 of the Christian era, in Asia; and by St. Paul, from Macedonia, in 
 Greece, fifty years later than St. Matthew, and who had learned what 
 he teaches, not from the other evangelists, but from the revelations 
 made to himself by Jesus Christ in person ; all writing at difi*erent 
 times, and in different places, and yet all using the self-same words, 
 the plainest in the languages in which they wrote, or in any other, 
 and the best adapted to the poor and illiterate, who had the gospel 
 preached to them. All these tell us, with one accord, in the Holf 
 Ghost, that the Lord, the night before he suffered, took bread into his 
 venerable and creating hands ; and lifting up his eyes to heaven, (to 
 heaven, to show us whence that power was derived, that goodness 
 emanated,) he blessed and brake, and gave it to his disciples, to whom 
 ho had made the promise of his body, saying : " Take, and eat. This 
 M my body.'* In like manner, the chalice, saying : " Drink you all 
 of this. This is my blood of the New TestamenU" Now, these 
 words are so intelligible, and so clear, that if ever the principle, 
 that every one can interpret the bible for himself, should be admitted, 
 and enforced, and insisted on, it is surely here ; for there is scarcely 
 a possibility that words so plain, and so frequently repeated in their 
 plainness, should lead us into error. We may even safely ask, in the 
 hypothesis that Jesus Christ had really wished to leave us his body 
 and blood in the eucharist, what other words he could have used, to 
 signify more clearly the real presence in the sacrament I He has, 
 however, in his incomprehensible wisdom and love, found something 
 plainer still; for he not only said, "This is my body," but, as he 
 was then making a law, a will, where nothing should be left, in the 
 slightest manner, ambiguous, he added, "This is my body, which is 
 oivEJf FOR YOU, this is my blood, which shall bk shkd roa rou." 
 
 38 
 
f98 'IISBATl Oil 'TH'S 
 
 Wm it ft inifitlf c body, tli»l wai delivered for us 1 Was il liy figu* 
 fitlTO Mooi, tliit we were ieduwiied I Then are we yet in our sioa, 
 and lesiis Christ has deceived us. This it were, in the last degree, 
 inipioiiB to suppose; and, therefore, tieadfasi in the trulh of what the 
 Son of God has done for us, w© may say, as Terlullian said, on t 
 different occasion, to the innovators of his time : Under what pretence 
 do you come ! and why do you remove the landmarks. The estate is 
 ours : we have the ancient, the firior possession of it : we are tlie 
 heirs of Jesus Christ: he made his will in our favor; and, eternal 
 piaise be given to him, he himself, the oridnal proprietor, has deliy- 
 ered to us the title deeds (laying our hands on the bible.) Here is 
 the pillar, the last anchor of our faith in the eucharist. But it is not 
 jet eifedient to lay aside these lexis, without conferring on them one 
 meri of attention more. In the twenty-second chapter of 8t. Luke, 
 18th, 19th, and 20lh verses, we read of the institution of the eucharist, 
 as a sacrament, and as a sacrifice, in a manner more and more eipli- 
 cit "This," says the benefactor of the world, taking leave of it, 
 •• this is my bo^Ij, which is given for you ;" and in the Greek text of 
 tlie Epistle of St PftuI to the Corinthians, " which is broken for you :• 
 ••this is the chalice, the New Testament in my blood, which shall be 
 •hed for you ;" and in the Greek text, •• which is shed for you, for 
 the remission of sins : do this in commemoration of me." Here, then, 
 is every thinjg essential to a true sacrifice, cleariy prescribed. The 
 bcead and wine are changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, 
 teid iJffered, and ordered to be offered to his heavenly Father, for the 
 temission of sins. Now, hear how St, Pnul, whose authority, upon 
 what I have already remarked of the circumstances in which he was 
 called to the apostleship, is entitled to special lespect, speaks on this 
 fubject, in his Epistle to the Corinthians: "Wherefore," says he, 
 • my dearly beloved, 1 speak to you as to wise men ; judge ye your- 
 self cs what I say. The chalice of benediction which we bless. 
 Is it not the communion of the blood of Christ ! And the bread which 
 we break, is It not the partaking of the body of the Lord! Behold 
 Israel according to the flesh: are not they who eat of the (Papn) 
 •acriicet, partaiers of the altar ! But the things which the heathens 
 sacrifice, tney sacrifice to devils, and not to God. And I would not 
 that you should be made partakers with devils. You cannot drink of 
 the chalice of the Lord, and the chalice of devils : you cannot be par- 
 takers of the table of the Lord, and the table of devils." Who doee 
 not see. In a text so plain, that St. Paul contrasts the table of Christ 
 with the altar of the Jews, and the table of devils, which the Gentiles 
 f e^nented. So that, in the same manner as the Jews partook of what was 
 ilftml on the altar, and the Gentiles of what was placed on the table af* 
 ler having been first sacrificed to the idols, so do the Christians par- 
 take of the table of the Lord, eating of that flesh which had been offered 
 Ik then, and with whose blood they had been sprinkled and purified. 
 But this argument would be weak and utterly inconclusive, if the 
 iiitlfil, like tne Jews and the Heathens, were not partakers of some- 
 thinf leiilly offered by them in sacrifice. Again, St. Paul, not only 
 here, but also in tiie Ep. to the Hebrews, speaks of an altar, " of an 
 altar, whereof they have no power to eat who serve the Tabernacle." 
 Now It is altogetlker an abuse of terms, a wilful leading of othen 
 Into error, to cm\ that an altar on which sacrifice ia never 'UTcred ; and 
 when St. Paul said we have an altar, whereof they canuot eat, who 
 
 ■OMAH CATHOLIC EELIOION. 
 
 m99 
 
 lemam attached to the Jewish religion, he meant, no doubt what was 
 tiien understood by every one, that there was a victim offered by 
 christians at that day, 36 years after Christ, and eaten by priest and 
 people. This is the victim of the eucharist, of which Matthew, 
 Mark, Luke and Paul speak so cleariy, and so forcibly, and which 
 we must either now admit on the evidence of scripture, or fling the 
 aacred volume into the flames. My opponent may talk of Christ's 
 saying; "1 am the vine;" " I am the door;" "destroy the temple;" 
 tlMJ ten lean kine, and the ten years of famine ; but, my friends, does 
 ■ot the scripture explain its meaning, so as to leave no doubt as to the 
 sense of these, and twenty such texts besides. The dream of Pharaoh, 
 and his bntler's were most minutely interpreted and perfectly ex- 
 plained. The evangelist expressly informs us, Christ spoke of the 
 temple of his body ; lest this expression should leave any doubt on 
 the mind of the reader as to the Savior's meaning. But where is the 
 parity between these passages and the words of Christ : "this is my 
 body — this is my blood." " My flesh is meat indeed — ray blood is 
 drink indeed." Our Lord does not say of the vine, " this vine shall 
 be hung up for you," he does not say of the door, this door shall be 
 hung up for you, he does not say of the temple, or o/ the vine, " they 
 shall be offered for you ;" but he says all this as I shall shew, when 
 I come to speak of the institution when speaking of the divine 
 food which he gives us in the Eucharist. "This is my body which 
 i» tffered for you, this is my blood, which is shed for you"— and as 
 he was then at the last hour of his lifij, and speaking heart to heart 
 to his friends, it was no time for parables and figures. The traitor 
 was nigh ; the hour was at hand, when he was to pass out of this 
 world to the Father. He knew how this doctrine would be contested, 
 that the vast majority of christians would believe in it, as they do at 
 this day, according to the obvious and literal meaning of the text, and 
 yet he speaks not one word to induce us to believe in a figurative pre- 
 sence. Why T Because he meant it to be understood literally, with 
 faith in his almighty power and his infinite love. Because as God, 
 he operates his gieatest wonders, by the simplest words. " Let there 
 he light i'' ''Thy son liveth}'' ** Lazarus, come forth i'' *' I will, be 
 thou eldimsed:^^ " TaAe up thy bed and walk;'^ ''Peace! Be still i^* 
 •• This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise ," " This is my bodVf 
 tki9 is my blood,^' This Luther himself was forced to admit. He 
 tells us now very desirous he was, and how much he labored to over- 
 throw this doctrine, knowing how much he could, thereby, annoy the 
 pope : * but,' says he, * I found myself caught, without any way of 
 escaping ; for the text of the gospel, was too plain for me." Epist. 
 ad Argintenses, t. 4. fol. 502. Ed. Wittemberg. In another place, he 
 says, condemning those who denied the corporal presence; "The 
 devil seems to have mocked those to whom he has suggested a heresy 
 •o ridiculous, and contrarr to scripture, as that of the Zuinglians who 
 explained away the words of the institution in a figurative way." 
 He elsewhere compares these glosses with the following translation 
 of the first wortis of the scripture : In prineipio Deus creavit ealum 
 d terram, — In the beginning the Cuckoo ate the sparrow and his fea- 
 thers. Def. verb. Dom. On one occasion he calls those who deny 
 the real and corporal presence ; " a damned sect, lying heretics, bread- 
 breakers, wincMlrinkers, and soul-destroyers." In parv. catcch. 
 On other occasions he says, " ITiey are endeviliaed, and superdevi 
 
BXBATB ON IHB 
 
 \im4J* Ftnlly he devotes them to ererlasting flames, and buildn 
 his own hopes of merer at the tribunal of Christ, oo his having with 
 all his soul^ condemned Carlostad, Zuinglius, and other believers in 
 the aymholieal presence. Bishop BrarahaJl thus writes : ** No genuine 
 ton of the church ^of England) did ever deny a true, real presence. 
 Christ said — m$ i« my My, — and what he said we steadfastly be- 
 liefe. He said neither Con, nor Sub, nor Trams : therefore we place 
 those among the opinions of schools, not among articles of faith." 
 Ana. to Miliiiare, p. 74. Bishop Cosin is not less explicit, in favor 
 of the Catholic dcctrine. He says, " It is a monstrous error to deny 
 ^that Christ is to be adored in the Eucharist. We confess the neces- 
 sity of a supernatural and heavenly change ; and that the signs can- 
 not become sacraments, but by the infinite power of God. If any one 
 make a hare figure of the sacrament, we ought not to suffer him in 
 our churches." Hist, de Transub. Lastly the profound Hooker ex- 
 presses himself thus; I wish men would give themselves more to me- 
 ditate in silence, on what we have in the sacrament, and less to dis- 
 pute of (he manner how ; since we all agree that Christ, by the sacra- 
 ment, doth really and truly perform in us his promise, why do we 
 vainly trouble ourselves with so fierce contentions whether by con- 
 substantiation or felse by transubstantiation ?" Eccles. Polit. B. v, 67. 
 
 My opponent says that when we meditate any doctrine, we eat it. 
 So, then, when we meditate on hell we eat it and all its contents ! lie 
 iays we eat it spiritually, but this is nonsense. I want not the sto- 
 mach or the mind, such orthodoxy requires. 
 
 My friend observes, that the doctrine of transubstantiation is con- 
 trary to the testimony of our senses. We have nothing but our sen- 
 ses to guide us. This is the scepticism of Thomas Tanew : ** Uhkm 
 I mail see in kis hands the print tf the nmk^ tmd put my fingers intn 
 ike place tf ike nails, andpui my hmd into kis side, I will not believed 
 The Savior condescended to give the requisite proof of the senfios, to 
 the doubting apostle, but he replied to the confession "My Lor»l and 
 my God," " Becwise thou hast seen me, Thomas, thou hast believed. 
 
 BlISSED are TH«Y that have not SIEN, AND HAVE BELIEVED." The 
 
 emme^mncea of the doctrine of the real presence are not unworthy of 
 God. Every pretended absurdity is as justly chargeable on the In- 
 emmmifon m on the Eucharist. In Pope and McGuire's discussion, 
 one of these is to be found, where my friend got the foregoing. It is 
 that of a mouse, that it said to have once run away wiUi the sacra- 
 ™«o\]fWle the priest had his eyes shut saying his prayers. But in 
 this ndiculous story an argument ! Then deny that sin could be com- 
 mitted, for sin is a greater insult than this, to Jesus Christ. Deny 
 that his sacred person was outraged with blows and spittle ; that he 
 wtf dragged through the streets o/ Jerusalem, with the halter of ig- 
 nominy around his neck J that he was scourged, crowned with thorns, 
 craciltod ; that his blood trickled to the ground ; that his executioners 
 trampled upon it; that insects and quadrupeds partook of it! all these 
 adorable scandals are the consequences of the infinite love with which 
 Jesus Christ loved us. The more he is humbled for our sakes, the 
 dearer should he be to us. But if the scandal of his humiliations 
 shake our faith, let the wisdom and the power of the Godhead, dis- 
 played in the midst of these humiliations, sustain and animate it. 
 Behold ! the earth that receives that falling blood, trembles to hei 
 very centre ; the sun, unable to behold the bloody tragedy, withdrtwe 
 
 BOMAN IJATHOUC REUGION. 30l 
 
 his light, and leaves the world in darkness and mourning and terroi, 
 for its author^B dissolution ; the rocks are rent asunder; the graves 
 give up their dead ; the pagan centurion strikes his breast and ex- 
 claims •» Truly this man was the Son of God." Let us also believe 
 and adore ! — [Time expired.] 
 
 Three 6'eloek, P. Mi 
 »Mr. CampbEIX rises — 
 
 Knowing, my fellow-citizens, how much depends in such a discus- 
 sion, as that now in progress, on having authentic documents, I deter- 
 mined from the beginning to rely on none which could, on proper evi- 
 dence, or with justice be repudiated. I knew that in all debates so far 
 back as the very era of the Reformation this party have been accus- 
 tomed to deny authorities, to dispute versions, translations, &c. even 
 of their own writers who were so candid as to give a tolerably fair re- 
 presentation of themselves. And as all their historians, good and bad, 
 frequently tell the truth, they are all occasionally to be censured, when 
 that truth is quoted by a Protestant and turned to its proper account. 
 I have not then, to my knowledge or belief, introduced an unworthy 
 author. And so long as my opponent can disprove nothing which I 
 have quoted, either from Du Pin, or Ligori, his frequent allusions to 
 them, with such unqualified censures, only shows how much he feels 
 the truth of their testimony. 
 
 The Jesuits, that standing army of the pope, are revived, and are 
 Inundating our country. Other fraternities are but the militia: but 
 these are ihe trained band life-guards of the papacy. Their oath is full 
 proof of the spirit of the corps. My worthy opponent says, that they 
 are a very learned body of men, and that he is not now a Jesuit. So 
 much the worse. How then can he defend the order from the doc- 
 trines of the Secreta Monita j and affirm that they do not nrtw take the 
 oath which I read to you ! — He would represent me as picking out of 
 the streets, or out of the ruins of some fallen edifice the oaths and 
 books of the Jesuits. If that were the fact, would it disprove the con- 
 tents of these documents? It would not. Truth is truth, wherever, 
 found, in the street or in a temple— in a cellar, or in a mountain. But I 
 did not so seek or find them. They are public and authentic documents, 
 and my opponentcan only deny or dispute, but he cannot disprove them. 
 
 Here is another document, not from the ashes of a monastery. I 
 do not know the writer of this article : but it is from an Encyclopaedia. 
 
 Bishop Purcell. Is it the book of Fessenden & Co. I 
 
 Mr. Campbell. It is from their press. 
 
 Bishop Purcell. Ah ! i know it ! 
 
 Mr. Campbell reads: 
 
 * in 1801 the society wai restored io Rusiia by the emperor Paul; and In 1804 
 bv kiiM[ Ferdinand, iu Sardinia. In Aurvst, 1814, a bull was issued by pop« 
 Fiua VII. restoring the order to all theirfbrnier privileges, and calling upon all 
 Catholics to atford them prote<;tion and eocouragenient. This act of their re- 
 vival is expressed in all the solemnity of the papal authority; and even affirmed 
 to be above the recall or revision of any judge, with whatever power he may be 
 clothed; but to every enlightened roind it cannot fail to appear u a measure al- 
 together incapable of justification, from any thing either in the history of Jeioit- 
 iaiu. or iu the character of the present times. 
 
 *• The essential principles of this institution namely, that their order is to be 
 ntaintained at the expense of society at large, and that the end sanctifies the 
 means, are utterly incompatible with the welfare of any community of men. 
 Their svstem of im% and pliant morality, justifying every vice, and autborixin^ 
 
DSIATB 091 THE 
 
 VOM4N CATHOLIC ]iliI«iniON. 
 
 Wrs 
 
 «»«ff alrorit? hm left deep Mid iMtinf «▼•««• on this face of th« moral world. 
 
 Their teal to extend the juritdictioii of the court of Rome oter erery ciyiI 
 
 inr to tenets respecting the doty of opposinc pnncef 
 Catholic ftiith, which sliook the basis of all political al- 
 
 .fovctnnieiit, .gave cun«ii< 
 
 wh© were hostile to the ( , • • -j • • ui 
 
 icfiaiice, and loosened the obligations of ererir human law. Their indefatigabla 
 industrj, and countless artifices in resisting the progress of the reformed reli- 
 fiont perpetuated the most pernicious errors of popery, and postponed the tri- 
 iiiiiph of tolerAnt and christian principles. Whence, then, it may well be asked, 
 whence the recent restoratioul What long-latent proof has been discovered of 
 (he excellence, or e*eii the expedience, of such an institution? The sentence of 
 theii al>olition was passed by me senates and monarchs, and statesmen, and di- 
 TMies, of all nrligions. and of almost tstery civilised country in the world. 
 
 jyuMMt every land has been stained and torn by their cnmes: and almost eve- 
 ry huid bears on its public record the most solemn protests against their exis- 
 tence. The evils of Jesuitism arise not from the violation of the principles of 
 the order; on the contrary, they are the natural and necessary fruits of the sys- 
 UMi; they are eoofiued to no age, place, or person; they follow like the tail of 
 llw conit:!, the same disastrous course with the luminary itself; and, in cons*- 
 
 rBttce, not thb or that nation, hut humanity, is startled at the re-apnearance of 
 a conuiion enemy of man." [Encyclopsedia of R«ligious Knowledge, p. 685, 
 
 Riniember, my friends, that one of the cardinal principles of Jesuit- 
 ism is, that •' lie mdmsti/kB the iMennt." This maiiro justifies every 
 crime in our criminal code ! if th i cause of the Roman church can be 
 llpreby promoted. 
 
 The gentleman aslceil ** Why bas tbis order been so often restored, 
 if it be not food 1" I answer. For the same reason that the Inquisi- 
 tion has been restored, and by the same persons too. Whenever tho 
 power of the papacy and the state of the community would tolerate it. 
 It bas been revived ; and 1 presume so long as the papaey livefl« it 
 will, being infallible, pursue the same course. Does the restoration 
 of tlie lni|uisilioo prove it to be good ! 
 
 The fenileman would trace to the hatred of Christianity, the oppo- 
 sition of Voltaire and other sceptics in France, to the order of the Je* 
 •nits. This is a non emum. The infidels hated the Jesuits, not foe 
 Chrtst*8 sake, for no one could hate them on that account: but because 
 they supported the political desputism of this pretended vicar of Rome. 
 This was the true reason of that mortal hatred of the Jesuits by all 
 the republicanism of France, and throughout the world. 
 
 The bishop has confessed that he would have the legislative, judi* 
 cial, and executive powers in the same hands, and quotes Deuterono- 
 my xvii. to prove that it is right, even now. What an admirer of 
 American institutions ! Certainly, he bas forgotten himself: and the 
 Jewish institution too! It was a theocracT. God himself was law- 
 giver—the priests kept and expounded the law— the judges and kings 
 executed it. Where, then, were all these powers accumulated in one 
 and the same dynasty ! It is a mistake of the case, as well as of the 
 ■Milpe nf the government. The very elements of a just and pure gov- 
 •rnment will be found in separating these powers; the very essence 
 (»f a despotism in uniting them in one and the same person. 
 
 The gentleman, I am glad to observe, understands my discovery of 
 the elements of all tyranny in the supreme judge of controversy, or, 
 councils of the Roman church. But he fails in vindicating it. The 
 MMneil is '* the church repreaini&iive j*^ consequently, it is the church 
 Jidfing for herself against the heretics or reformers. She is always 
 a party in the case of which she is judge. Most controversies are on 
 points affecting the prie»tliood. All disputes, more or less affect the 
 •laiidinn or temporal interest of the clergy. Now the councils are 
 
 eoaiposed only of clergy. Is it not then the clergy jndgfing in their 
 own case 1 And socb is the model o*" a Roman Catholic Republic ! 
 
 A word or Iwo more on transubstantiation. Will the bishop please 
 inform us whtfher the bread ami wine are framubsfanh'afed info the 
 natural body (4 Christ, or into his glurijied body? !f into the natural 
 body, in which he said " this is my body, '^ " this is my blood i* of what 
 profit to eat it? and how dare christians to eat it, according to the de* 
 creesof the apostles! and iTTit be his glorified body, how can there be 
 iesh and blood in it ! for flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom 
 of heaven ! 
 
 The allusions of my opponent to the Episcopalians and Unitarians 
 In vindication of his gross interpretations of the eucharistal words, ia 
 unworthy of a serious reply. Besides, their opinions are not the sub 
 Ject of controversy here. It is transubstantiation. and not consuhsian- 
 tiation, or any other theory of the presence of the Lord in this ordi- 
 nance, which I assert, and which he is 'bound to defend, if he can. 
 The Episcopalians would abhor the comments and interpretations 
 which the bishop dares append to their words. He treats them as he 
 treated Luther ? 
 
 One of the most unfortunate references I recollect to have heard m 
 debate, was that of the bishop to the unbelief of Thomas. The Sa- 
 vior's answer to Thomas fully expresses his sophistry on transubstan- 
 tiation : for Jesus said, ** reach hither thy finorer," — " handle me**^ 
 •* thrust thy hand into my side." So we reason : " Take this loaf into 
 your hands, feel it, taste it, smell it, — ^Is it flesh, or is it bread 1 Test 
 It by your senses. Believe not, contrary to your senses. Jesus made 
 his appeal to the senses. So do we. Why has ray opponent quoted 
 this passage 1 Is he turning Protestant 1 
 
 I wish the Roman Catholics would hear Paul in this case. He has 
 positively said, that it is bread that is eaten in the act of celebrating 
 the supper. "As often," says he, " as you eat this bread, and drink 
 this Clip, you do show forth the Lord's death till become." To "drink 
 m cup** is certainly a figure as much as ♦* this is my body;" and goes 
 to show that words are not to be taken literally in this passage. If 
 then, Jesus called it the fruit of the vine, after consecration, and Paul, 
 the bread and the eup, in the very act of communicating, I ask, What 
 foundation is there for the miracle of the mass ?! 
 
 My learned opponent tells you a story about a mouse. It may, in- 
 deed, have a good argument in it ; but I do not use such arguments, 
 on so grrave a subject. He did it, he said, to anticipate me. He did 
 not however anticipate me : for I had no ititention of telling such a 
 tlory, or any other of the same type. I think it would be more appo- 
 site for him to show how a person can believe against his five senses, 
 that a priest can, by a few words create the body, soul and divinity ot 
 he Son of God out of a little " paste i^* than to relate such mouse 
 •lories, how true soever they ma^ be. Surely, before they kneel 
 down and adore a wafer, they ought to be fully assured that the priest 
 Has converted it into a divinity ! , . j . . 
 
 I must return to my last proposition. This concerns him and his 
 oarty more, than any other one of the seven. We will soon be able 
 to Judge, whether be is determined to evade or canvass it. I would 
 emphatically tell him, the community expect him to discuss this sub- 
 ject above all others. They are much excited and inteiested ou ihia 
 
 if" ™ 
 
 ill' 
 
BBBATE OW THE 
 
 INiiiiL Mtnir wtio litve no antipathy against RontdO Cathcli(«a baf« 
 mmm fearo of them. I bel<Mif to that class. I hare no antifMthj : huf- 
 Ihafe mf finfSt I do honeeOy think, (and I avow it here, that I may 
 plve my tngenioua opponent an opportunity to remove theriinpreasioa 
 if he can.) I say, I do sincerely believe and think, that Roman Cath- 
 olicism, in any country is detrimental to its interests and prosperity : 
 and in a repnhlic,' directly and positivel? lending every moment to its 
 Mhversion. Such is my conviction. I avow it, that if possible, it 
 may be removed* I always distinguish between a system and those 
 irho piofett itr— between a creed, and the people. And therefore I 
 war against pnnctples and not men, I am not singular in th<*.8e senti* 
 ments. They are possessed by a large portion of the most intelliffent 
 of this community. I have, indeed, been asked, perhaps, a hundred 
 timeSf aliiee October last, in different places, and by different persona, 
 of all lelif ions parties and biiperaons of no sect: "Are you not afraid 
 to meet the Catholics in debate?** — Afraid of what! — " Of your life 
 —of being killed,*' was the renly. ** Are you not afraid that they will 
 lay violent hands on you !'* No ; was niy answer. I met the infidel 
 Owen and feared nothing; and certainly I have no more to fear from 
 **the Mother and Mistress of all christians" than from infidels ! 
 
 It gives me pleasure to say, that there are some Roman Catholici, 
 10 whom I could trust my life and my all as confidently, as to anj 
 Protestant. To such men, as Fenelon, as Paschal, as Kollin, as Du 
 Pin. as St. Pierre, as Thomas a Kempis, I could commit my life, as 
 freely and as cheerfully as to any Protestants. In such cases the man 
 rises above the system. I state ibis fact to interest my opponent in 
 discussing my aevenih proposition; and to assure him that it will give 
 me pleasoret ^^^ 1 have no doubt the whole community, to learn that 
 all such fears are perfectly groundless; and to see that he is able sa- 
 islaetorily to remove them. Let the public mind be disabused : for 
 as present advis#>d, Protestants |enerally think that civil liberty and 
 the papacy are wholly incompatible with each other : and that the in- 
 troduction of large numbers of Roman Catholics into this community, 
 would inevitably subvert this p^overnraent ; and place us under a spi- 
 ritual and political despotism, intolerant and cruel as those, which tna 
 see of Rome has estabiisLed in every country on earth, where she has 
 obtained a majority. 
 
 Let the gentleman, then, turn his attention to this subject, and im- 
 prove the opportunity in wiping from his escutcheons those foul stains 
 that have associated with the name Roman Catholic everv thing that 
 is intoknmtf inhuman abd tyrannical. Let him show us here in what 
 manner the decrees of councils, the bulls of popes, the oaths of the 
 clergy, and the infallibility of the church are to oe disposed of, if w 
 could promise ourselves that the prevalence of his party in this conn- 
 try would not be an end of all those free and equitable institutions, 
 which have made these United States the wonder and the admiration 
 of the world. 
 
 Is it of the essence of this superstition to root out and destroy every 
 antagonist principle, tenet, and party ; or is it merely accidental, that 
 Rome can endure no living rival I Has not the Roman see even when 
 a foreign empire always sought to he above all gods or magistrates: 
 and does it not now bind every bishop on earth under the most hea»1 
 searching and conscience binding oaths and anathemas, to defend and 
 
 SOMAN CATUOUC RBLI6I0N. 
 
 keep the Roman papacy, and the roj/ailia nf St, Peter , saving his own 
 order against all men 1 Is not my opponent thus sworn 1 Has he 
 not bound himself as he shall answer to God in the great day, by the 
 most solemn imprecations to preserve, defend, increase znd advance the 
 authority of his lord the pope, and his successors canonically coming 
 io 1 — He has so sworn— just as certainly, as he has sworn »• to perteeaU 
 mnd 9ppo$e all heretics and schismatics," as we read from an oath 
 which he has not yet had the courage to deny; It is, indeed, a part 
 of the same oath. 
 
 It will require the ingenuity of a Jesuit to show how these duties to 
 the pope can consist with the obligaiions of the oath of nainraliMtion, 
 or the duties which a citizen of this country owes to its government. 
 But before I comment further on the oath, we will hear it to the end : 
 
 ••I will come to u council when I am called, uolew I be hindered bjr a cano- 
 Bical inipedimenl. I will by myself in person visit the threnholJ of the apostlei 
 every tJiree years; and give an account to our Lord and his aforesaid successors 
 of all my pastoral office, and of all things any wise belonging to the state of ray 
 church, to the discipline of my clergy and people, and lastly to the salvation of 
 •ouls committed to mv trust; and will diligently execute the apostolic coniniands. 
 And if I be detained 'by a lawful impediment I will perform all things aforeMid 
 by a certain meMtnger hereto specially empowered, a member of my chapter, 
 or some other ecclesiastical dignity, or else having a parsonage; or m ««»<!" 
 of these, by a priest of the diocese; or in default of one of the clergy, [of the 
 diocese] by some other secular or regular priest of approved integrity and re- 
 lirion, fully instructed in all things above mentioned. And such impediment 
 I will make out by lawful proofs to be transmitted by the. aforesaid messenger to 
 the cardinal proponent of the holy Roman church in the congregation of the 
 •acred council. The possessions belonging to my table, I will neither sell, nor 
 rive away, nor mortgage, nor grant anew in fee, nor any wise alienate, no, not 
 •▼en with the consent of the chapter of my church, without consulting the Ro- 
 man Pontiff. And if 1 shall make any alienation, I will thereby incur the penal- 
 ties contained in a certain constitution put forth about this matter. So help me 
 God and these holy Gospels of God." Pontif. Rom. Antwerp, Anm 1626— 
 pp. 59, 86. [Time expired.] 
 ^^ Hatf pad 3 o'clock, P. M. 
 
 Bishop runcEu. rises- 
 Mr. Campbell begs me to follow him. I am following hina ; but 
 Ihe truth is that my learned friend runs away so fast from his own 
 reason, that it is not surprising if he gets ahead of mine. My friends, 
 1 promise to satisfy you on the vital question of civil liberty. He 
 will not be able to draw me off from my argument. He is a foreign- 
 er, an Irishman, as well as I, and I am soriy to see, that while he 
 breathes, he would infect, the atmosphere of freedom. We are both 
 indebted to America for the liberty which we enjoy, which he as a dis- 
 senter, and 1, as a Catholic, would not have enjoyed under the Pro" 
 ieslant Government of Great Britain, in our native land. For mvself, 
 I am ?n adopted American citizen, having renounced, by oath, all for- 
 eign allegiance. It is my only desire to live and act as an American 
 freeman should, and escape the charge which rests on foreigners like 
 my worthy opponent, and those Scotch fanatics in New York, who 
 Tolunteer to teach Americans how to understand their own consti- 
 tution. These, and their like, are the men who cause all the excite- 
 ment about religion. They, and not the Catholics, are the real mis- 
 chief makers. This, I say, more in sorrow than in anger, and exclu- 
 sively with the view of doing justice to the truth. Let us appreciate 
 the blessings we here enjoy, and not withhold, or mar them. We 
 have not here imbibed the spirit of controversy, which may be called 
 2a2 20 
 
.APmH A I MM IFXl M J I JB 
 
 iM tiilrit of the world, bat tho spirit of charity which is the spirit 
 of Ood. ITic former is predicated for another meridian. 
 
 I will mow finish mj ar^ments on the real presemN!. St. Panl, 
 •|l«afciiif of the dispositions with which the Eucharist was to be re- 
 ceiTed, seals the proof deduced from the words of the institution and 
 the promise. His words are these : ^* When you come therefore to- 
 fether into mm place, it is not now to eat the Lord*s supper." The 
 apostle QMiiiiiiMtiieir partaking of this, as of ordinary food. " What,^' 
 aays he, ** hare yoo not houses to eat and to drink in ! or despise ye 
 the church of God ; and put them to shame that have not ? What 
 ■ImII I say to you I Do I praise you ! In this I praise you not. For 
 I hwm receired of the Lord, that which also, 1 delivered unto you, 
 that the Lord Jesus, the same nig^ht in which he was betrayed, look 
 bread. And ^ving thanks, broke, and said : • TVke ye and eat ; this 
 is my body which shall be delivered for you ; this do for a commemo- 
 fation of me.' In like manner, also, the chalice, after he had supped, 
 •ayiiig: *This chalice ih the New Testament in my blood; this do 
 y© ■■ otkm as you shall drink it, for the commemoration of me.' For 
 as oilem •• you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall 
 •hew the death of the Lord, until he come. Therefore whosoever 
 •hall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall 
 ii0 giiilty of the body, and blood of the Lord. But let a man prove 
 Uasolf, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that chalice. 
 For h© that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judg- 
 ment unto himself, not discerning the body of the Lord." Ist. Kp. 
 Cor. ch, xi. Here the most virtuous and pious dispositions under 
 the dread penalty, of receiving the body and blood of the Lord un- 
 vorthily, and thus incorporating, and making our condemnation a 
 imlion of our flesh and blood and being, are required of the Catholic 
 eommunicant, and yet my worthy opponent quotes this sanctifying 
 doctrine among the immoralities of the Catholic church ! 
 
 But my friend objects to transubstantialion. Then let him differ 
 from Luther and the Episcopalians, for the real presence, without 
 Iransiibstantiation, which they teach, is a greater difficulty. If the 
 MWe be our guide, let us adhere to it What was the first miracle 
 which our Savior wrought! Was it not the changing of water into 
 wine ! transubstantiation 1 My friend says that he has never read on 
 this subject, nor studied it. 1 do not wonder that he says it is so ab- 
 surd, if he never gave it serious consideration. (Ma. Campbkix here ex- 
 plaineii that he had said that he had never read a controversial treatise 
 on the subject, but affirmed that he had reflected on it, and studied it ) 
 Not only the first miracle, but every thing in nature confirms the doc- 
 trine. The bread and meat that my friend ate, a week ago. is, this 
 day, flesh and blood and bone of his body. So of trees, — the juices 
 they draw from the soil, are converted into branches and verdure. Na- 
 tmre, in fact, is replete with evidences illustrative of the possibility 
 of transubstantiation. If you wish for a human testimony, interro- 
 late ehristlan antiauity. St. Ignatius, the disciple of the apostles, 
 ii his Epistle to the church of Smyrna, speaking of heretics, says, 
 " They do not admii of Eucharists and oblations, because they do 
 not believe the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior, Jesus Christ, 
 who suffered for our sins." 
 
 Origen says ; " Mamia was formerly giTen, as a figure ; but now 
 
 ROlffAN CATHOLIC RELIOION. 
 
 307 
 
 the flesh and blood of the Son of God are specifically given, and ara 
 
 real food." 
 
 St. Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, says: ^ ^. . ^, % - ^ 
 « Sioc€ Christ himself affirms thn* of the breiid, ThM M my fto*r; wmu m 
 imrine m to doubt of ill and since he affirms, this is my blood; who will deny 
 that it is his blood 1 At Cana in Gal ilee, he, by an act of hi. will, turned water into 
 wine, which reseoiblrs blood, and is he then not to be credited when be «)*nge« 
 wine into blood ? Therefore, full of certainty, let us recede the body and blood 
 of Christ; for under the form of br«ad, i» given to thee liis body, and uoder 
 the form of wine, his blood.'* ^ , . ., • 
 
 St Ambrose thus argues with his spiritual children : , 
 
 -Yott will say, why do you tell me that I receire the body of Cbnst, 
 when I see quite another thingl We have this point therefore to prove. How 
 Viany examples do we produce to show you, that this is not what nature made it; 
 twit what the benediction has consecrated it; and that the benediction is of greater 
 force than nature, because bv the benediction, nature itself is chanced! Most • cart 
 h\* rod upon the ^ound, and it became a serpent; he caught hold of theserpent s . 
 tail, and it recovered the nature of a rod. The rivers of Kpcy pt, 4c. Thou hast 
 read of the creation of the world: If Christ, by his word, was able to make some- 
 tbinfc oat of nothing, shall be not be thought able to change one thing into another. 
 
 My friend spoke of the period at which lhi« doctrine was introduced, 
 and quoted Scotus. I venture my life, that he does not know who 
 Scotus was, or when he lived. I ask my friend to tell me, who is this 
 Scotus, to whom he referred. 
 
 Mr. Campbbllw — 1 presume he was a father of the church. 
 
 Bishop Purcell.— I do not speak disrespectfully of my friend, but 
 
 I do not like this index learning : 
 
 " Which turns no student pale. 
 Yet hoMs the eel of science by the tail." , ™. - 
 There were two individuals whom he hM confounded. The first, 
 called Scotus Evigena, lived in the ninth century, and wrote a treatise 
 atrainst the real presence, which was condemned in many councils. 
 The second flourished in the fourteenth century, and taught theology 
 in Oxford and Paris. Or, instead of either of the foregoing, does the 
 gentleman quote Soto, the theologian, sent by Charles V. of Germany, 
 tn the council of Trent! Of which of them does the genUeman 
 •peak 1 I pause for a reply. (Pauses.) 
 
 Mr. Campbell. — You may proceed. 
 
 Bishop Purcell. — I will proceed to settle this point. 
 
 Mr. Campbell. That is not the question before us. 
 
 Bishop Purcell. Well, then, my friends, I will take up the sub- 
 ject of indulgences, against which my friend had directpd his batteries. 
 An indulgence is no license to commit sin. The Catholic church ana- 
 thematizes the doctrine that any man, or set of men, can grant a license 
 to commit sin. She teaches that an indulgence is nothing more nor 
 less than a remission of the temporal punishment, which often remains 
 Attached to sin, after the eternal guilt has been forgiven to the smner, 
 on his sincere repentance. Before proving this doctrine both scriptural 
 and rational, and that the church is guilty of encouraging no immora- 
 lity by the power which she exercises in the granting of indulgences,! 
 must shew that the charge of immorality presses heavily on my oppo- 
 nent's doctrine, and not on mine, for he teaches that the distinction be- 
 tween crreater and lesser sins is not found in scripture. He has advo- 
 cated the monstrous, and insupportable doctrine, that the child who 
 tells an untruth, to save itself from punishment, is as guilty as the 
 parricide who cuts his father's throat! and accuses Catholics of being 
 
 « 
 
m 
 
 't 
 
 30i DIBATI OH TBS 
 
 inmnnlf ttoraate ihej do not subscribe to sneh a doctrine as tbitt 
 Wint it tli« tiect of this doctrine, that all sins are equal ? Wh j, i| 
 m this : thai the man who has coroniilted the sii^^htest ain, is as guilty 
 i» Ilia aigbt of God, and as desenring of being damned, as if his sina 
 ««n ever so enormons. •• If this he my lot," Is hit spontaneous rea- 
 soffling, «• I see no cause whj tot passions should not hsTe all the ad 
 vanlap of this doctrine. I will, therefore, continin to sin. No na- 
 tiial JaWt no divine legislation, no civil conyention, or moral restraint, 
 ahalt debar me of my pleasures.'* This is revolting ; it is horrible 
 Siiiptafe, reason, and Catholicism, anathematize It. I now resnme 
 heproof of mj position, touching indulgences, and maintain thatafWi 
 the eternal guilt is remitted, a temporal pain is often inflicted for the 
 aatiafaction of divine justice. Thus, when Adam and Eve had sinned 
 ii pafadise, when they had incurred the Divine displeasure, and heard 
 the dread sentence pronounced against them and their posterity, even 
 in his wrath the Almighty remembered mercy. They were driven 
 ffoni Eden, but not into hell. In other words, the eternal guilt of their 
 ail vat fofffiven, but the temporal punishment still remained to be 
 MdllfBd. (There is some doubt whether Eve partakes of her consort'p 
 iMpillMta in heaven, or not; but Adam, we arc assured by scripture 
 It la heaven.) " In the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat thy bread,' 
 aaid the Lord, "the earth shall be accursed in thy toil, briars and 
 tinima,*» lie. We are bearing a part of their pnnishment. We feel 
 th® effects of this primeval prevarication. The whole earth is a hospi 
 td. Poverty, crime, disease, war, pestilence, and famine ; physical 
 nrnly aad neital afflictions, and evils; all the quarreling; all tha 
 diiamiiees of opinion; this very controversy; all this Is a part of 
 tie temporal punishment of our first parents' transgression. This 
 •hewa the difference between the temporal and eternal punishment of 
 ain. Behold another Illustration. David takes Uriah's wife— he orderi 
 Uriah into the front of the battle that he might be killed. The Al 
 imi|hty, incensed at his double crime, sends his prophet to rebuke him, 
 aiM Havid trembles before his wrath. God is moved, and pardons 
 llliii. Me remits the eternal guilt of his sin, bnt not its tempoial punish- 
 ment "The child that is born for thee shall die.*' We know all the 
 evils that followed ; Absalom, &c. The doctrine of indulgences is this : 
 
 WHIM A HUMAH BKIKG DOES EViaV THIKO US HIS POWER TO ATGTIt ro* 
 
 811, God has left a power in the chnrch, to remit a part or the entire ot* 
 the tomporal pnniahment doe to it. It is always understood, that a: 
 malter what the chnrch does, the indnlgence is of no effect, if the *i» 
 peiitance be not sincere. I will give yoo a striking eiample frois 
 ^''jf *"."*• ^' '* **^® *^^^® where St. Pin! absolved the incestuous mat 
 of Corinth, 2d Cor. 11. 6, 8, who had been guilty, even in the eariy agf 
 
 ^^1*?^.*'*'"'^'*' ^^ " *^""*** *^'*'^ •*"'®*^ •"* ^^^ ^^ ■" ***® church 
 with dismay. St. Paul wrote to Corinth and aaid, when he heard that 
 
 lii man waa overwhelmed with contrition, and shunned by all the 
 
 ftople, "To him that is such a one this rebuke is sufficient, that ia 
 
 iftaby many. And to whom you have pardoned anything, I also 
 
 or what! have pardoned, if I have pardoned any thing, for yoursakes 
 
 have 1 done it in the person of Christ." One teit is worth twenty 
 
 ■rgoments. The obedience rendered to St. Paul on this occasion, by 
 
 the eimpeh of Corinth, my friend denonneea. But the eariy christians 
 
 wei« amu humble, and Paul waa guilty of do assumption in demand 
 
 S03IAK CATHOUC RELIGION. 
 
 309 
 
 tng It. "In the person of Christ,"— mark those words— that he, in 
 the person of Chnsi, forgave— what 1— not the eternal guilt of the in- 
 cestuous man— God alone could forgive that ; hut the temporal punish- 
 ment; to restore him to the privile^ of the church and of christian 
 society. Nothing is more frequent m the ecclesiastical history of the 
 early ages, than the narrative of the acts of the martyrs ; and this, 
 among others, of their being visited in prison, or met in their way to 
 execution, by persons condemned to perform public penances, accord- 
 ing to the discipline of the church in those days, and supplicated for a 
 ticket, or other intimation of intercession in their behalf, with the pas- 
 tors of the church, that the terra of these penances might be abridged. 
 Id consideration of the martyr's generous sacrifices. One drop of 
 Christ's precious blood was sufficient to ransom a thousand worids. 
 He left this treasure and its keys to the church, saying, »* Whatever 
 you shall loose on earth, it shall be loosed in heaven," &c. But I will 
 give you other examples to Illustrate the doctrine of indulgences. The 
 English church grants indulgences. Luther granted them, of an extra- 
 ordmary kind too. Our government grants Indulgences. An insolvent 
 debtor hangs his head with shame ; there is nothing he would not do 
 to pay his debts. The law takes him to jail— he gives a schedule of 
 his property, and upon surrendering all he possesses in the world, upon 
 oath, he is allowed to take the benefit of the act. This is what the 
 church does to sinners, who sincerely repent and do all they can, first, 
 to pay the spiritual debts that stand against them. Shew me that there 
 is anything wrong In the Insolvent laws, and then you may find fault 
 with the practice of the church. As for the pope, or bishop, giving a 
 license to sin, I will repeat as often as it Is repeated, that the Catholic 
 church reprobates it. If all the bishops in the worid, and the pope 
 were to sign such a license, the sinner would not be forgiven, if he re- 
 mained in sin. God himself does not pardon sin upon thi^se terms. 
 But I cannot consent that the gentleman should force down oui Ibroate 
 doctrines that we abominate. — [Time expired.] 
 
 JRwr o'c/ocA, P. M. 
 Mr. Campbell n%*^— 
 
 Really, my friends, it would seem as if I on^ht to go back some 
 two or three days to help my opponent forward to the subject now 
 before us. But I will not. There is no person in this house, with 
 the exception of my ingenious opponent, who believes that I repre- 
 sent all sins as equal as respects man. Though as respects the di- 
 vine law, as already observed, they are equally transgressions of it. 
 Ilence, as James the apostle avers : ** He that offends in >me poini,^^ 
 though he should keep every other, " is guilty vf alV! The gentle- 
 man, then, may defend his " white lies," and other violations of God's 
 law, as he pleases ; but God will show the universe that, as respects 
 his character, as Lawgiver and King, the least Infraction, as respects 
 man, ia the highest insult that can be rendered to the Lawgiver. 
 Eve's ** little sin," as the infidels call it, is the best exposition of the 
 logic of Roman theology. Though it differs much in the estimation 
 of man from the treachery of Judas : yet, does not every page and 
 letter in man's sad history, bear witness, that even the pulling off an 
 apple against the law of God, is an offence that justifies the Gover- 
 nor of the Universe for having suffered the while creation on our 
 
DEBATE 031 THE 
 
 planet to gnmii and travail logether in pain and deadi for thousands of 
 
 To tbo anpropittous destiny of my opponent I attribute all lits ro- 
 marks on my saying that I read no tracts in confutaUon of transub* 
 ■lanllation. Does uiat prove that I cannot refute — or that I have not 
 refuted his defence of it. The bible alone qualifies me to expose all 
 his sophistry, or that of any man, on that grossest and most un- 
 feasible of all the impostures that have, in any age or nation, been 
 obtntded on mankind. 
 
 The gentleman has spoken of various natural transnbstantiations 
 Astonishing! Who ever thought any thinff else, but that all organi* 
 led bodies, all earthly substances, nay, indeed, that all matter was 
 •Uiceptible of real changes, and new combinations and transubstanti- 
 •tioiisl Bnt where is the analogy! They are real and apparent, 
 visible and sensible transubstantiations. But the universe affords 
 no transttbstantiation, similar to that for which the Bishop contends— 
 Nothing transubstantiated, and yet the same to all our sense and 
 
 SOMAN CATHOMC BSLIOION. 
 
 Sill 
 
 But in the name of reason itself, what distress or pressare of mis- 
 fortune has induced this learned gentleman to appeal to the miracle 
 in Cana of Gali!ee-»to the transubstantiation of water into wine I That 
 was really a transubstantiation. It did not look like water — ^laste 
 like water, smell like water, nor operate like water. It was real wine, 
 in color, taste, smell, and all its sensible properties. What a refuta- 
 tion has the gentleman found in his own illustration ! ! 
 
 The Bishop's remarks upon ** eating the ivord,'*^ &c. &cn are equal- 
 ly unhappy, and extrava^nt. He has not done himself any honor on 
 this occasion. Jesus said, ^* it is my meat and my drink to do the 
 will of him that sent me." Truth is an aliment of the soul, and do- 
 ing the will of heaven is n feast to every christian. But can the soul 
 feast on literal flesh and blood I ! 'Tis an outrage on common sense ! 
 
 I was flad to hear him even quote the words, " Jud&re you what I 
 say:" any appeal to reason, any Vord favorable to exaiEiation, com- 
 ing from that quarter, falls on my ear like the sound of the dulci- 
 iner. Jesus says, *' Why do you not of yourselves judge what is 
 rifht;*' and Paul says, ** Judge what I say;*' and John commands, 
 "Believe not every spirit; but try the spirits, for many false prophets 
 are gone forth into the world.** Now all these commands are address- 
 ed to the common mass of christians. Well, then, says Paul, ** The 
 lot^ for which we give thanks, is it not the communion of the body of 
 Christ," &c. ; " and the cup which we bless, is it not the communion 
 of the blood !** &c. : and the whole is called the Lord*8 table, the 
 Lord*s snpper--an institution in remembrance of one that is absent, 
 •• TILL HI com :** — not the eating of one present, but the memorial 
 of one absent. " You then,** says Paul, " do show forth the Lord*s 
 death iiil Ae eofiic.** 
 
 The Corinthian abuses show, that they had no notion of a wafer 
 and no wine — of a mass, a transubstantiation. Paul reproved them 
 for their irregularities, and said this was not to eat the LtmPi supper^ 
 (not to partake of a mass) : for some had eaten and even drunk to excess. 
 The nch had brought a large supper, and put the poor to shame, who 
 had no supper to bring, 'fhese were abuses which could never have 
 arisen cmt of the doctrine of transubstantiation. In one word, there 
 transubstantiation in the passover, because il is called the 
 
 " Lord's passover," as there is in the institution of the supper, be- 
 cause it is called the " Lord's body :" and he that cannot thus " dis- 
 eem the Lord*8 body," in this institution, is not to be reasoned with 
 on any religious question. . • j -i. • 
 
 Next comes the gentleman*s splendid episode on the identification 
 of the unfortunate ScottiSj whose peculiar age and country I am no 
 more bound to remember, or to tell here, than I am to relate the per- 
 sonal or family history of every individual I quote. How many au- 
 thors are daily quoted, whose age and country, not one in a hundred, 
 may be able to relate with historic accuracy ! Are those who cite Co- 
 pernicus, Zoroaster, Euclid, or even Newton, obliged to tell when or 
 where they were born, lived and died ? It is, however, on the au- 
 thority of Bellarmine I quoted this celebrated Roman Catholic au- 
 thor, and ought I not, on such an endorsement, to regard Scotus as of 
 high authority in the Roman church 1 
 
 Time is becoming very precious, and as I have only two speeches 
 after to-day, I shall not go farther into the details of the proposition, 
 now under discussion, especially as I have not been met by the Bish- 
 op on the two grand errore which nourish and sustain the baseless 
 dream of purgatory and the sacraments of penance, auricular confes- 
 sion, the mass, &c. &c. 
 
 Indulgence is not identical with absolution, as my opponent seems 
 to argue. Indulgence, as the term imports, is a licence to sin : abso- 
 luUon is the forgiveness of sin. An indulffence gives licence to sin, 
 because it promises the person prospectively an exemption from the 
 punishment; and even to remain, in full force, in the moment of 
 death ! 
 
 My seventh proposition says: 
 
 "The Roman Catholic religion, if infallible and insutreptible of reformntion 
 ns alleged, 19 essentiallv anti-American, being opposed to the genius of all frea 
 institations, and positively subversive of them, opposing the general reading of 
 the scriptures, and the difl'usion of useful knowrledge among the whole coiumu- 
 nitj, so essential to liberty and the permanency of good government. 
 
 "Essentially anti-American."— This I have so far proved, as refer- 
 ence has already been made to those doctrines, which make the Roman 
 Catholic population abject slaves to their priests, bishops, and popes— 
 to that hierarchy, which has always opposed freedom of thought, of 
 speech, and of action, whether in literature, politics, or religion. Such 
 are the laws of mind— such the intellectual and moral constitution of 
 man, that if in religion the mind be enslaved to any superstition, espe- 
 cially in youth, it rarely or ever can be emancipated and invigorated. 
 The benumbing and paralizing influence of Romanism is such, as to 
 disqualify a person for the relish and enjoyment of political liberty. 
 For in all history, civil liberty follows in the wake of religious liberty ; 
 insomuch, that it is almost an oracle of philosophy, that religious liberty 
 is the cause, and political liberty an effect of that cause, without 
 which it never has been found. Compare not Protestant America with 
 the republics of Greece or Rome; for there is scarcely any point of 
 coincidence in this respect. There never was on earth so free and so 
 equitable an institution as the Protestant institutions of these United 
 
 States 
 
 We'shall now exemplify the spirit and tendency of Romanism, taken 
 from the five hundred years in which it was most triumphant. 
 
 Ae t apeeimon of that abject slavery of Romanists to their superiors. 
 
312 
 
 uniATi OR' ms 
 
 ■ml of iie homiliiT of the popeti of which my friend has so often 
 
 indkiiii, take <he followinpr example. 
 
 *• Accordiof to this dortrine tbeo current at Roin«, in the last L«t«T»n great 
 ttnod. under ihc Pope's noie, and in hit car, one biihop tUlad him Prtnee of 
 lb worUt another orator called hitn King of kinjr*, and Monarch of the earth; 
 aailihcr i^eat prelate said of him, that he had tdl power mhove mil powtrw, 
 ftufft ^ heatm and earth. And the saine roused up Pope Leo X. in thete hrara 
 teffaa: ** Snatch up therefore the two-edged sword of divine power, committed to 
 IhM; Hid anjoin. command, and charge, that an universal peace and alliance b« 
 made among christians tor at least ten years; and to that bmd kmgs in fetters 
 of the great king, and constrain noble* bj the iron manacles of censures: for 
 to thee IS gt»«B all power in hearen and in earth." 
 
 ••This b I he doctrine which Barronius. with a Roman confidenc*»,doth »o often 
 •fsert and dfita forward, saying:, " that there can be no doubt of it, but that th« 
 cWI Jiriiid^aWy >> subject td the sacerdotal: and that God hath maHe the poll- 
 Ifeal gof«filiiieBt subject to the dominion of the spiritual church." Epis. Patrac. 
 Sesi. 10, p. 133. Barronius, Annal«, 57. 23. 
 
 It is Barronias, and not Du Pin, says, " that God ha» made fhepoH" 
 Uml gmernmeni mtbjeei to ike tpirituaiy This is the true doctrine of 
 popery. But we shall hear another great cardinal. 
 
 Again Bellamiiiie says; ••By reason of the spiritual power, the pope, at least 
 indirectly, hath a supreme power even in temprnral matlers." 
 
 CoMeming which, Dr. Banow rightly observes, "If the pope may 
 
 •trllce princes, it matters not much whether it be by a downright blow 
 
 or slailingly." 
 
 We shall now very hastily ran hack ftom A. D. 1585 to 730, and 
 give a few specimens of the trae spirit, and tone, and action, of this 
 
 lostitntion, during its ascendency. 
 
 A. D.15»5. "Tiie bull o( Pope Sixtus V. apinst llu two wm afwmth, 
 Henry, King of Natarre. and the Prince of Contft, beginneth thus: 'The au- 
 thority gi»en to St. Peter and his succesttors, by the immense power of the eter* 
 ail kiag. eicela all the powers of earthly kings and princes.— It passes uncon- 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC RXLIGION. 
 
 MZ 
 
 tffollabla lemenca upon them all— and if it find ai»y of them resisting God's or- 
 dinance, it takes inoreserere vengeance of them, castine them down from their 
 thniwi, Ihmigh never so (Missant, and tumbling them down to the lowest iiorts 
 ®f the earth, as the ministers of aspiring Lucifer.' And then he proceeds to 
 Ihinder against them, • We deprive thera and their posterity forever of their 
 dominions, and kingdoms;' and accordingly he depnveth those pnnces of tlieir 
 kiMidonis and dominions, absolveth their subjects from their oaths of allegiance, 
 unf itiffWddcth them to pay any obedience to them. ' By the authority of these 
 presents, we do absolve and set free all persons, as well jointly hs severally, 
 imn any such oath, and from all doty whnt^oever in regard of dominion, fealty 
 aad ohtdlence, and do charge and forbid all and every of them that thev do not 
 dare to obey them, or any of their admonitions, laws, and comtuands. Bulla 
 Sixti V. Contra Henr. Navarre, R. Ac. m • • # 
 
 Is this the genius of oar government! Are these the doctrines of 
 the Uilted States! Here you have kings buried from their thrones 
 •mi sml>|eels released from their allegiance, without ceremony, by the 
 vicars of Christ and the head of the church ! Who is this that sets 
 •side oaths, and religious obligations, in the ntnis of the Ijord? 
 •* Why,'* says the modem Roman Catholic, "do you bring up these 
 old things r Not so very old! But wUl the bishop menUoa the 
 council mat ever repudiated this doctrine! 
 
 The bishop says, * they have been repudiated.' I thank him for 
 conceding that they once existed ! But now for the proof of their re- 
 pudiation. Nothing is infallible but a general council ; and what gene- 
 ral council has set since the days of pope Sixtus V.! ! ! The council 
 of Trent convened Dec. 13, 1545, and all its decrees were confirmed 
 by the pope Jan. 36, 1564 ; oonsequently, the bull of pope Sixtos V 
 
 is the bull of the Reformed Infallible Roman church after the council 
 of Tront ! ! If it were orthodox then, it is orthodox now. 
 
 We shall now hear pope Pius V. (almost canonized,) excemmuui* 
 cate the queen of England, and for aught I know, we Protestants were 
 all excommunicated at the same time. 
 
 ^ A. D. 1570. ** He that reigiieth on high, to whom is given all power in heaven 
 and in earth, bath committed the one holy, Catholic and Apostolic church, ont 
 of which there is no salvation, to one alone on earth, namely, to Peter, prinre 
 of the apostles, and to the Roman pontiff, successor of Peter, to be governed 
 with ajpienitade of power; this one he hath constituted prince over all nations 
 and alf kingdoms, that he might pluck up, destroy, dissipate, ruinate, plant, 
 and build." — And in the same bull he declares, that * he thereby deprives the 
 queen of her pretended right to the kingdom, and of all dominion, dignity, and 
 
 Erivilege whatsoever; and absolves all the nobles, subjects, and people of the 
 ingdom, and whoever else have sworn to her, from their oath and all duty 
 whatsoever, in /egard of dominion, fidelity and obedience." [Camp. Hist, 
 anno. 1570. 
 
 That this was not peculiar to one individual, but of the spirit oi the 
 system, appears from the following facts : 
 
 Pope Clement Vl. did pretend to depose the Emperor Lewis IV. 
 
 Pope Clement V. in the great synod of Vienna, declared the emperor subject 
 to him, or standing obliged to him by a proper oath of fealty. [Clem. lib. 
 ii. tit. 9. 
 
 Pope Bonifrce VUI. hath a decree extant in the canon law running thus : 
 
 * We declare, say, define, pronounce it to be of necessity to salvation, for every 
 human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff." 
 
 A. D. 1294. "For one sword, saitb he, must be under another, and the tem- 
 poral authority must be subject to the spiritual power; — whence, if the earthi* 
 power doth ^ astray, it most be judged by the spiritual power." Ibid. 
 
 This definition says Dr. Barrow, at the foot of whose pages we have the Latin 
 ordinal of all these decrees, might pass for rant of that boisterous pope (a man 
 above measure, ambitious and arrogant) vented in his passion against kine Philip 
 of France, if it had not the advantage (of a greater than which no papafdecrea 
 is capable) of being expressly confirmed by one of their general councils; for 
 
 * We (saith Pope Leo X. in his bull read and passed in the liatei-an council^ do 
 renew and approve that holy ^constitution, with approbation of the present noly 
 council.' Accordingly Mech'Cauns saith, that * the Lateran council did renew 
 and approve that extravagant (indeed extravagant) constitution:* and Barro- 
 nius saith of it, that * all do assent to it, so that none dissenteth who do not by 
 discord fell from the church.' 
 
 The truth is, pope Boniface did not invent that proposition, but borrowed it 
 from the school; tor Thomas Aquinas in his work against the Greeks, pretend- 
 eth to show, that H it of tucesnly to salvation io be stdject to the Roroaa 
 
 The appendix to Mart Pol saith of pope Boniface VIII. * Reg-em se Regvm, 
 Mtmdi Monarchmn^tatieum in spirUualtbus et ten^oraWna Dominvm promtd- 
 gmvil;* that be openly declared himself to be the king of kings, monarch of the 
 world, and sole lord and governor both in spirituals and temporals. 
 
 Before hin, pope Innocent IV. did hold and exemplify the same notion; de* 
 ^hiring the emperor Frederick II. his vassal, and denouncing in his general couo* 
 ctl of Liyooa, a sentence o( deprivation against him in these terms: We having, 
 about the forgoing and manv other his wicked miscarriages, had before a care 
 ful deliberation wiu our bretnren and the holy council, seeing that we, although 
 nnworthy, do hold the place of Jesus Christ on earth, and that it vras said unto 
 us in the person of St. reter the apostle, whatever thou shall bind on earth — the 
 said prince (who hath rendered himself unworthy of empire and kingdoms, and 
 of all honor and dignity, and who for his iniquities is cast away by God, and that 
 he should not reign or command, being bound by his sins and cast away, and 
 deprived by the Lord of all honor and dignity) do show, denounce, and accor- 
 dingly, by sentence, deprive ; absolving all who are held bound by oath of alle- 
 giance from such oath forever; by apostolical authority firmly prohibiting, that 
 uo man henceforth do obey or regard him as emperor or king; and decreeing. 
 
 2 B 40 
 
'■•Si 
 
 m 
 
 DSBATB ON Till 
 
 wlioscer ihall licretftcr jidd ■dtke, or lid. or hfW to hiiii •■ smparor ot 
 :, liiall iinnittdktelr lie under tlie band of excomniuiiicatioii. ' 
 
 ROMAlf CATHOLIC RM^IGION. 
 
 aift 
 
 M^mM^tm him, pope imiooeiil the third, (tbet true wonder of tlM world, and 
 cIlMttcr of the ife.) did affirm the pontifical authority so much to aicead the 
 9mmptmw, at the sun doth the moon; " and applieth to the former that of the 
 
 Cphet Jeremiah: Ecce. eomtUui U taptr gtiUiS «* r«|TW,*--«!e. I hate Ml 
 imm the iMilioiii and of er the kingdoms to root out and to poll down, •ad 
 to destroy and to throw down," 4c u i. ■ r» ,1. i- j 
 
 Article xxiii. Pope Pius IV. •• I do acknowledge the bolf Catholic and 
 apoatolic Roman chufch to be the mother and mistrew of all churchet; and I 
 do promiae and iwear true obedience to the biibop of Rome, the tocceiaor 01 
 IMir, the prince of apostlet, and the vicar of Je«ii Chrirt." [Tiine «»pir«i.] 
 
 Maifpatt 4 •^ehckp P. M. 
 fiimor PUBCf 'Js riiet— 
 
 My iiMMk ir. Kimnml will i«Mia, belora I eloM, what Ligaori nyt on 
 §m aub^ of Mr. Smitli's charges against the Catholic church. It aflbrds 
 IW vmm pieaanro than I can exprww, to have an opportonity of proving, by a 
 itntlemm, who is not a Catholic, and therefore is a disinterested witnewi, ■■ fei 
 as I and my religion are concerned, that it is all a base alander. 
 
 W« hava heard a great deal about the pope*s deposing Mnga, and ab«)iving 
 
 mljicli fniin their oaths of allegiance, and so on. In your presence and 
 iMliliilg liiarolbie. I am going to put my friend into one of the most terrible di- 
 lenunas in which he has ever been placed in his life. Now, sir. (addressing 
 Mr. C.) suppose you had bean ttving tt tha time of the American Revolu 
 lion, and waio witness to the tyranny, which these colonics had to endure, 
 m Iho pailiif lis most gracious majesty, king George III. of England : when 
 the spirit of a mighty and a numerous people was roused by excess of wrong, 
 to make one vast efibrt for freedom. Under theae circumslaaosa, the Gene* 
 ral in chief, the officers, and the army, the revenue department, and poel- 
 in«lBn» all of whom bad taken an oath of allegiance to that king, ap|>eal to 
 von, il^liiinf , 'What ia to 'be done 1 .Asking you if the oath was hmdinf 
 What wonM be your reply f 
 
 Ma, Camj'Bkx.i.. If iity liad taken a solemn oath, Ihey should not 
 bisak ill 
 
 Biaaor Piibob£&. TImo waa George Washington a per}iiier. and all the 
 ofllcen of the army and navy, all the signers of the Declaration of Indo- 
 petttece, and all the subjects of the king of Great Britain were pciju- 
 levs! ! 
 
 Mb. OAMPaai.1^ That does not follow from my answer to your question. 
 
 liBwit PvBCBLi.. And what would you have peiaons to do^ who had 
 taken' the oath of allegianoe! 
 
 Ma. Campbbi.i» « it li better not to vow, than to ww and not pay"— aa 
 saith thif good Book. 
 
 Mr. Campbell rose and said, that for hia prt, we ahould always do our 
 dniy, and laave conaequences to God. When he inlenda the deliverance of a 
 Mfle, he will efiect foe them ledemption, aa he did for his people out of 
 BgypC 
 
 Bisnop PvBCBLi. There ia no oath of artificial contrivance, stronger than 
 the natural tie between the auhfect and the king, the governed and the gov- 
 ^pment ; of whatever form it may be. This is an oath, prior and superi ir to 
 41 otiMt oaths. But if tboaa of the colonists, who had not taken a conventional 
 egllii or an oath of office, to the king of England, had alone lehelled. what could 
 thay have done! Were not the army and the civil and military officers bound by 
 their oath to resist rebellion t How then could human rights have been vin 
 dicated, or human wrongs redressed ? You have repeatedly said *' vex /fspn/l, 
 
 wm 2>esV' in the course of this discussion ; in other wotds that th* 
 people's will was the most authentic interpretation of the will of (Jod^ 
 that it could eive a call to the ministry and j^ive to its choice a right 
 to exercise spiritual powers I ! Thus, my friends, you see the dilem* 
 ma to which the gentleman has been reduced, and that, while Catho- 
 lics are reproached for their slavish tenets, he himself teaches the 
 whole doctrine of passive obedience, and condemns the very principle 
 of the American Revolution. I leave you to reflect on what the gen- 
 tkman has uttered. Now mark the difference. Had my friend deci- 
 ded ray question, as the Father of his country did similar ones, he 
 would have been sustained by the voice and the spirit of the American 
 |>eople— -and of all denominations thereof, both Catholics and Protests 
 ants, the contemporaries of a struggle in which, they, who engaged at 
 this side the water, ^* periled every thing but thbib sacbed honor.*' 
 Whereas, the pope, when he absolved from their oath the English 
 Catholics, whose were the lands, and the houses, Uie churches and the 
 schools, the hospitals and the glory of England ; whose suffering ex- 
 ceeded those of the American colonists as much as the Alleghanies do 
 a grain of sand, decided upon far better grounds than did the sages of 
 our Revolution, that passive obedience, under such circumstances, 
 ceased to be a virtue. Yet one word more— the absolution was con* 
 tidered by those very Catholics, an exceeding of his powers, and they 
 did not act upon it. His decision was, for them, no article of faith. 
 
 My friend's next resort, in the way of documenury evidence, is to 
 the Encyclopedia of religious knowledge, just published. He does 
 not know the author, or the entire title of the work, nor the history of 
 its ** getting up." Fessenden is the author of the volume. • 
 
 Mb. Campbell. I do know the author, but bishop Purcell does noC 
 
 Bishop Purcell. That is Protestant Jesuitism. He is the pub* 
 Usher. In the New York Churchman of a recent date, there is a story 
 told of a most egregious imposture practised on the patrons of this 
 same volume. The editors professed to give the views of the 
 different secta, in the very words of their respective sundards, or ac 
 credited writers, and carefully disguised the fact, that it waa to be sob* 
 Benrient to the interests of one particular sect, the Baptists. They ap- 
 plied to an Episcopal minister, to write an article on Episcopacy, and 
 to patronize the publication. This looked like fair play— the poor 
 niiniater was caught in the snare and signed his name recommending 
 the Encyclopiedia. But lo ! when the work appeared, it was wholly 
 opposed lo Episcopalianisro ; and this flagrant violation of the foith 
 due to the public from the publishers, elicited a most cutting, but at 
 the same time, most merited castigation from the (Episcopal) Chureh- 
 Boan. I hope the article will be read, hy every sincere enquirer after 
 Imtli, that he may he able to appreciate, according to its value, this 
 lew humbug. 
 
 We come back to the Jesuits. It was so notorious to Frederick, 
 the Great, of Prussia, that the Jesuits had been calumniated, and most 
 foully dealt with, that. Protectant, as he was. he received them in hia 
 dominions, and placed them in many of his colleges. He told the other 
 kings of Europe that they would soon be sorry for the expulsion of an 
 order that had done so much for literature and science. **The day will 
 come," said he, **when you will be offering me, 300 poinds for a pro- 
 curator, 400, for a professor, 600, for a Rector, and a ptr valorem^ for 
 
 ' 
 
 t 
 
116 
 
 ^^■P^ ■Mr ^^ 
 
 DmATB ON THS 
 
 MBiinr {Mom of tlie Iwuitm Inil a©p«iid wpoo It, I will Urnee ym 
 w%n. I will Bake jm pay dearly for your folly.'* Frederick was a 
 mat Jadfe of human natim, my friends, and he had a keen aense of 
 Sm tapeftoff elaims of the Jesuits, for good echolarahtp, and moralitf. 
 Eenoe his kingdom and his palace were given them, with his own 
 eonMenee. The celebrated preacher, Bourdaloue, was a Jesuit, and 
 who has ever preached a sounder, or a purer morality ! 
 
 My worthy friend said, the Jesuits supported kings and monarchi, 
 and weie for crushing the people ; and most grossly did he contradict 
 fclmaelf, hy slating almost at the same moment, that they were the most 
 ibrmidalile enemies of kings, and it was for their opposition to their 
 measoAs, Hiat kings hanished them from several of the kingdoms of 
 Buiope. Thus they were, according to his account, the supportt^rs of 
 kings and the enemies of kings! The infamous Pombal of Portugal 
 Imm iie crasade against the Jesuits. , Read his history, and it will be 
 inlr best vindieation— or see them among the savages of Pakaooat ! 
 This word alone reveals to the intelligent reader, a series of wonders 
 
 Crformed for God, humanity and virtue, such as the world, perhaps, 
 s never witnessed since the establishment of Christianity. 
 Next comes the theocracy of the Jews. And is not Jehovah owr 
 king also f Is he not ever Lord over all ! Do we not acknowledge 
 that there is no power but from him I My argument was this. If it 
 be eaaentiallw Incompatible with liberty, to obey the same ruler in 
 temporal and eoclesiastieal things, God could not have established 
 siieh a government on earth. But, God did establish such an author^ 
 Ity; ibiMfore, it is not incompatible with liberty. I do not wish to 
 ace it now, unless God should vouchsafe to be as manifestly our king, 
 aa he was the kin| of the Jews ; which is not to happen under the 
 CkiisilM dlanensation, as it did under the old law. Christ has de- 
 daiid, that Ua kingdom is not of this worid. My worthy opponent 
 aald, that the fleshly body and the heavenly body of Christ, were not 
 the same. I ask. then, what became of his fleshly body 1 Did it rot 
 la IImi ground! I call on him to answer this question. "Thou wilt 
 MH laawe my soul in hell," says David, " nor wiU Hum tufftr iky Hoiu 
 mm mm €immplimu** (Ps. xv. 10.) It was spiritualized, but stiU 
 Iha tanie body, according to what he said to his disciples, frighted at 
 -:*i^- «......«^;«» ♦»»«, u^A c«ian a anirit • ** Su Mv kondM mnd 
 
 iJUmandhoneM^ 
 ever living," 
 I. vii. 35,) to make intercession for us, by the eloouent mouths of 
 iia vonMls, which he exhibits, for us, to his Father in heaven. He 
 pave tlMm, aa he had previously done to Thomas, the signs they 
 asked i while he reprehended them, as he did that apostle, *^ for slaw 
 mtm ^Mff." It was thus that, when the Jews murmured for meat 
 in the wilderness, loathing as light food the manna of heaven, God 
 gave them meat to salaety ; and afterwards, for their onbelief, not only 
 axelnded them from the land of promise, but aeatteiad their carcaaea 
 
 liy friend told you, how much afraid he was of Catholics. My 
 friends, what a pretty tale he made of it. I was really going to say : 
 «* Poor baby, do not be so afraid : do not be such a coward : shake o(f 
 IImmo old woman'e feara about raw head and bloody bones, and be 
 manly." Washington, though he lived in a less enlightened 
 
 ilia ifparitioo, supposing they had seen a spirit : ^Sui 
 m§fiki' ii tf mift^i Jumdk and §eetfyra ipirii kaik mif 
 m fmt am mm .io hme,** (Luke xxiv. 39.) He ta **< 
 iiM. vii. 25,) to make intercession for us, by the eloouc 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC BELIOIOX. 
 
 317 
 
 age than this, was not afraid of Catholics. They stood by his aide in 
 the battles for freedom. They never flinched, even at the cannon*a 
 mouth. When he drew his sword for this republic, they followed its 
 beaming to victory or to death. La FayBtte, and hosts of others, 
 whose chaplains had said mass for them in the morning before the 
 engagement, bled or conquered in the trenches of liberty. And never 
 was greeting more cordial, or triumph more glorious, than theirs, 
 when they mingled their salutations and tears with thoro of their 
 American companions in arms, at the surrender of Lord Cornwallis, 
 In York-Town. Witness, too, those noble poles, (Kosciusko ! may 
 his shade rise up, and rebuke this spirit of intolerance !) the Irish, the 
 South Americans, all fighting for liberty, all Catholics. Look at 
 William Tell, a Roman Catholic. Go to Venice, for five hundred 
 years a republic, though surrounded by absolute governments. Look 
 at the little republic of San Marino, of which John Adams has related 
 the remarkable history. There is not such a people for liberty, on the 
 globe, as the Roman Catholics. Look nearer home, at Maryland, 
 where the Catholics were the firSt that proclaimed freedom or 
 
 CONSCIENCE IN THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE ! ! LeT THIS BE OUB ANSWER 
 TO A THOUSAND SLANDERS. 
 
 I come now to the oath of bishops. I have taken the oath of alle- 
 giance to the United States. It was the first I ever took. So have 
 all my brethren in the episcopacy taken it. The head of the Catholic 
 ciiurch in the United States, is an American ; so is a large number of 
 our clergy. The rest preferred this country, believing there was here, 
 what their own country denies, what our constitution guarantees, lib 
 erty of conscience. The oath that the bishops take, is not a recogni- 
 tion of any temporal power of the pope, out of his own territory, called 
 the States of the Church, in Italy. We would never take the oath in 
 the odious sense, which my opponent would force upon it. This so- 
 lemn and authentic abjuration should, alone, be sufficient to settle this 
 account ; for I surely know what I swear to, and that what I here 
 state will be seen and read by those, whom no human fear could deter 
 from denouncing me for error, if I could be gjjilty of any, on a point 
 with which I ought to be so well informed. The arms of our wuforo 
 are not carnal, but spiritual. He that lakes the sword, we believe 
 with Jesus Christ, will die by the sword. Hence, we assume no ob- 
 ligations by that oath, but such as God imposes ; and those to be dia» 
 charged in his own divine spirit of meekness, charity, and good will. 
 It is cruel to impute to us crimes, and to insist that we hold doctrines, 
 which we disavow. Suppose I were so base, as to suborn two or 
 three wicked men, to calumniate my friend Mr. Campbell, and to pre- 
 tend that he was in active correspondence, for treasonable purposes, 
 with some foreign king, ought my opponent to be condemned unheard ! 
 And, in the absence of proof; should we, in spite of all his protesta- 
 tions to Uie contrary, condemn him on suspicion 1 And, if any family 
 had their reputation blasted by some base miscreant, ought this to 
 destroy their estimation in society, where his baseness is known 1 All 
 the ministers in the world may exert their talents and influence, to 
 
 5 reserve and promote peace and love among mankind ; but as long as 
 ifferences in religion are suffered to create jealousy, distrust, and ha- 
 tred between brethren; and certain men make it their trade, to go 
 from town to town, for tibe express purpose of ftmning these anbera 
 2b2 
 
 fl 
 
 »: 
 
.TB Olf TM'B 
 
 I 
 
 816 
 
 PIMI ooRtiiie to Iw tie ▼ietiina of the maltfolent, imi our relii^ioii, uid 
 iNif eoDStitiiiion, provo to be no more than the idlett day-dream. AD 
 the Mnp and states of Europe, Protestant and Catholic, know that 
 the biahiiiie take that oath, and yet, in none of them is a bishop looked 
 upon with distrust. In Prussia, Sweden, Denmark, England, the 
 goYemment never molests a bishop aboat an oath, which is luiown to 
 eontain nothing at which the most capttous statesman could justly take 
 eieeption. Is not this sufficient proof, that there is in that oath ijptb- 
 jlig of what my friend attributes to it I assure him. Catholic bish- 
 ops are not the enemies that this repoblie needs to fear. 
 
 fiTerr argument my friend employs agiinsi the Eachaiist, only 
 proves him an inconsistent reasoner, or a deist, as lar as the argument 
 foes* The paschal lamb was i figure of the eucharist, and the %ure 
 Siwe siiiely nobler than the reality, if we hsTe nothing better than m 
 bit of bread in the eucharist. Bat the apostle tells us that the weak 
 and bentrly elements of the Jewish rites, were to obtain their glori- 
 ous fumlment in the land of grace— and only in .the Catholic church 
 Is thie verified. We eat the paschal lamb sprinkled with, or in other 
 woidSf veiled beneath the appearance of bread ; and every objection 
 urged a^inst the real presence is eqiially strong, or weak against the 
 incarnation. Can this paste, says Mr. C. be God ! I answer by an- 
 other i|uestion : can this informal embryo in a virgin*s womb be God I 
 
 We come now to Scotus. The gentleman says he heard or saw 
 him quoted by the Catholics. He says many people quote Zoroas- 
 ter and Confucius without knowing any thing about them. There is 
 no parallel between them. If a man quotes, as evidence, a writer, 
 like Scotus, he ought to know who he was. I do not blame him for 
 knowing nothing of Chinese theology. But of Christian theology, 
 it is a £ame for a man, who pretends to be, himself, a teacher in Isra^ 
 el, and a polemic, who challenges Catholic bishops, to be so grossly 
 'Iguorant. 
 
 My friend mja we bow to the pope. In England, Protestants bow 
 to the foot-stoof of the throne. 1 bow to any trlend I meet — I do not 
 pay him, nor the pope divine honor. We know the meaning of our 
 own bows, and words, and oaths, and would not pledge them insin- 
 eetelj, much less blasphemously. No wonder that the pope let kirn- 
 mf ie permtaded to do good, in the case cited by my friend. Should 
 he hftie preferred a contrary course ? Have done evil t 
 
 Temporal power is infenor to spiritual power, as human power is 
 inferior to divine ; just as heaven is superior to earth, in dignity and 
 ▼alue, and God superior to creatures, in every divine excellence, but 
 not in the sense that he who has been invested with spiritual power 
 by God, has also been invested by him, in m kinsdom which is not of 
 this world, with temporal power. Thomas Aquinas, the greatest 
 scholar of the 13th century, and eminent scholar in the darl ages, 
 read his works, with those of a Kempis, for proofs of Catholic piety, 
 Instead of garbled extracts from forgeries, and the works of apostates, 
 whom we liscarded from our communion for immoralities, which no 
 Protestant communion would tolerate. They breathe the spirit of 
 devotion, the spirit of God. 
 
 My friends, Mr. Kinmont will now tell you whether the pretended 
 quotation of Mr. Smith from Liguori, is eoirect. You will recollect 
 ttiat Mr. Smith said, that, aee^rding to Liguori, the Catholic church 
 
 KOMAN CATHOLIC WRLIGION. 
 
 Sin 
 
 aIIowi priests to keep concubines upon a fine. Upon hearing this I 
 at once said that the charge vras an infamous falsehood ; and I wiU 
 now show that Liguori said no such thing ; that Liguon says the con- 
 trary. If I tell a falsehood Mr. Kinmont will confound me; if 1 
 do not, somebody does. Thus truth wiU triumph and falsehood he 
 confounded. 
 
 
 niounaea. . ^ • i u ..«:«. 
 
 Mr. Kihmont. I am called on in my professional character sim- 
 ply, und have no part or lot in this debate, (Mr. K. is understood to 
 m m Swedenborgian) I sincerely believe they are disputing about 
 •hMl^ws, and that both parties are equally in Oie wrong ; but I wUI 
 do what I can to assist m clearing up the difficulty ^/ac/. 1 find 
 it stated in Samuel Smith's work and marked as a quotation from 
 Liiruori under the article headed " concubines of clergy. 
 
 CoNCULINts UF THE CLtRGr.-" A bishop however poor ^f j^'^y ^* ^^^J"} 
 appropriate to hin.wlf pecuniary fines without the license of the Apostolicri 
 See. *But he ought to apply them to pious uses Much less can he a^lj hose 
 fine, to any thiol else but pious uses, which the Council of 7ren^ has aid upon 
 non-resideat cle^ynien.or upon those tUr^^tn who ke^ concubmts. -Ligor. 
 Ep. Doc. Mor. p. 444. 
 
 ▲ad the following is Smith's commentary.— „ ., .u ♦ • a . 
 
 How thameful a thing, that the Apostolical See, u they call it. that ".that 
 _ __ _r D .u^f.iA o«..:..K hia roffpn. hv the 6ne8 which he receive* froni 
 
 for it; but U tney morrvi tney luusi uc c-.v«.» "»»."- • n .u^ ;-i„-j 
 
 once, for the custom in Spain, and other countries, and especially on the island 
 of Cu^. and in South America; where almost every pnesthas concubines, v^ho 
 SreC^n by the name of nie^e*. These abandoned ™^" ^^^ '^'"'.Jg/^ri 
 ?he fiSe rather than forego the gratification of the. r lustful W^*^/- J^* 
 " Narrative of Rosamond," who was once herself one ol these concu- 
 binelTn t^e fsland of Cuba, portrays the general ^^<^-f}<^TTj[t^J^JT. 
 clerg;. in color, so shocking, that the picture cannot be ^^^^^ Jil^'^^^lt 
 WoS. Here we see the doctrine fiilly exemplified bv practice. This keeping 
 of^ncabfn«ri. a thing so common In the popish West India islands and in 
 Sooth Amerlc, that it fs rarely noticed, fhe offspring of t*^" P""^'^^ °*"; 
 course are numerous. They afe known to be the chilcfren of J^^Pnff • bat. 
 becauae it is the general ci#foin.f< is lawful; and it passes off merely with a 
 
 ^'ThT.r£rtext and commentary a. I find it in Mr. Smith's hook. 
 This is marked as Liguori, p. 444. If taken from Liguori at all, it ts 
 taken from m different edition. The present purporte to be a complete 
 copy of the works of Liguori. It bears no mark of being an expur- 
 iratod edition. It is said to be an edition f what was mU and written 
 tefore with additions. On turning to the place where he treats of fines 
 and punishments inflicted for concubinage, he says that pnests guilty 
 of this offence, were, after two ineffectual reprimands, to be degrad^ 
 from Uieir functions. He refers to the council of Trent, and states 
 what that council decreed. Smith throws us on Liguon, wid LiguOTi 
 on the council of Trent. There is nothing in Liguori relating to that 
 subject but this. The council was called about the year 1642. /^is 
 edifion of the decrees of the council was edited bv tae council itself. 
 1 haye had an abstract taken which I will read. It would take some 
 Hme to lead the original, and I have a translatton made by one ot my 
 
 ^^tZ: relrdl^nSf ]^^ of the ronncil of Trent. Se«.on 25th. char. 
 14th. the^T, described the method of proceeding in the cases of clergy, who 
 
 •^A^fir'i^win'rtheSal and enormity of this sin. especially in clergy, who.- 
 int^rity ollifef Aould recommend and fUpret. the precepts of religion and of 
 
f 
 
 tlM' ch'itrcli; 'Hie mtmi tjiiod forbids tbat any iiidifidiml Mdiag the clarietl 
 oiics fliall l«ep at hm mm or eliewlMrt, mj nitstren or niicliasto woown or 
 Cnhtliit witl> any utich, under the peoalty of sariii|[^ enlbrc«d against hini ihm 
 tacrdi canoDf , awl eccleaiastiod statutes regarding that matter. It is,tlien,espe- 
 ciallj anaetMi lliat if wlien admonished by their superiors they shall not desist 
 froni all such unlawful and forbidden acts, they shall be depn>ed of the third 
 |«rf of all their revenues and ecclesiastical dues: and if still perseTeriof In their 
 connetthcy shall not even he«d a 9te<md admonition, they shall b« deprived of 
 mil their ecclesiastical re/enne and suspended from the administration of eccle- 
 aiatticai functiont; and if, dnrin? this suspension, they shall continue obstinate 
 md §mmrigiht€, they shall be declared altogether unfit and incompetent to ex> 
 ercis* any spiritual office whatever belono^ing to the church ; unless after a clear 
 •Ml nneqalvocal amendment of life, the church should think proper to with. 
 draw the diaoinliication, and allow them to resume their former station of 
 honor and trust But if after the resumption of the duties of their office, they 
 shunld resort to those impure oractices which they had abandoned, besides the 
 ialiction of the above named penalUes, an act of excommunication with its 
 •wurd of justice shall cut them oli; as dead branches from the body of the faith- 
 ill and church of the living God. And it is fiurlher enacted that no appeal, or 
 •atmption shall hinder the execution of any of these decrees, but that tney shall 
 he iUMiarily eaccuted. at the will of the bishop, after he has ascertained the 
 existence of the enonuities. A similar provision in its eflects and spirit is made 
 tljh relation to bishops themselves, but the order of proceeding ts different 
 This b in sub^itance the provision of the decree of the council of Trent. Sat 
 SifCap^ 14. [Time 'eipi;r«d.J 
 
 4 
 
 SATURDAY, Jamujiet SIot, Ma^-pad 9 o'dot^ J. M, 
 
 Mft. Campbell rises — 
 
 Unier any other circnmstanoes than the preaent, I shonld Itava in* 
 aisled on heing allowed the same number of minutes oyer my stipu- 
 lated hour, which mj fncnd has taken with Mr. Kinmonfa expoei 
 tion, over his usual tmie. 
 
 Bishop Purcsli — ^I have no objeetion to Mr. Campbell's oocudy 
 ingthat much more time. It it nght thai he should. 
 
 J "iti?**"'""''^ ' ^' oblifled to the gentleman for his courtesy, 
 and will therefore proceed. My friends, you will doubtless have oh 
 served, that of all the extracts read from Ligori, found on the paffea 
 of Smith, but one was challenged by the Bishop, on the ground^l 
 itia mot found in the page of Si Ligori in the edition now befoie na. 
 llie ease la siiii|ily this. Aecoiding to the moral theology of the choich 
 of Rome, marriage is a greater sin than eonenbinage : for. If a piieat 
 raanyt he la forthwilli excommunicated; but if he keep a conenhine 
 he only pays a fine. This is the statement tbat Mr. Smith makes. 
 and tianalalea Ike fvaasage in Ligori aa followa : 
 
 '* A bishop, however poorhe may be, cannot appropriate to hiuMelf pecnBiary 
 f^iTli °°i. .l'*^*"f '**' the Apostolical see. But he ou^bt to apply them 
 
 *® P^iSfir*!: ^'"*='*.I«« <»«> be apply those fines to any thmg else Kut pious 
 uses, wttleu the c:»iincil of Trent has laid upon non-resident clenryroen. or unon 
 ihtm eitM«MiiiA« lr«<|i eoneiiWitet.- Lig«r. Ep. Dor. Mor. ^AU. ^ 
 
 Mow, Biahop PuBCELL denies that there is such a passage in Ligo- 
 fi, or that there is in the council of Trent any such arrangement; and 
 in pioof of It, he has brought us an edition of St Ligori, and the de- 
 eieea of the council of Trent. But the edition which he has produ- 
 eed, haji not, upon the page referred to, the passage quoted. In the 
 pasaage quoted, the reference to Ligori is to a decree of Trent. But 
 
 BOMAN CATHOUC BSLIOIOX 
 
 iiera are always two waya of quoting a passage : the one mfhaHmi 
 and the other, mMbUantially. Whether Ligori quotes the decree of 
 Trent literally, or only quotes the substance, we cannot affirm. Ihe 
 bishop referred this matter to Mr. Kinmont, without consulting me. 
 It was an exparte reference; and therefore, comes not fairly before 
 ma. Although I have no objection to Mr. Kinmont; but on the con- 
 trary, I thill him very competent to decide a matter of this kind, if 
 he had time to examine all these volumes : and perhaps, had I been 
 consulted, I should have agreed in selecting him : yet as tiie refer- 
 ence is wholly one sided ; it can have no authority here. However, 
 ao far as the decrees of Trent have been read, they do speak of fines 
 er forfeitures of those who have concubines, and these do substan- 
 
 ttally sustain all that I have alleged. ^ ,, c, • ,.♦ • u- 1. 1 
 
 I have this morning received a paper of Mr. Smith's, in which J 
 find an article " on ihe autkonty of Ligori,'" which I will now read. 
 
 " Alphonsus dc Ligori was canonized by Pope Pius VII. on the 15th oJ bep. 
 teniber, A. D. 1815, under the title of the Most Illustrious and Most Reverend 
 Lord Alphonsus de Ligorio. He has written the Modern Theology of the 
 church of Rome, in nine large volumes, containing 4701 pages, which was pub- 
 lisbed at Mechlin. Superiorum Permissu, A. D. 1828. 
 
 His Theology is called, in the preface of the work, "The Light. 'His doc- 
 trine after having been explored, was approved of by Pope Pius, VII. on the 
 18th May, 1803, after the Sacred Congregation of Rites had given it their sanc- 
 lioD. and had declared that there was NOTHING IN FT WORTHl OF C1W8UWB. 
 Ligori was spoken of by the sacred Pontiff, Leo XII. in the highest terms; and 
 his eminence the Serene Cardinal of Castile, the Major Penitentiary, in his letters 
 to the Bishop of Massilien, says.thnt Saint Ligon is not only an ornament to the 
 Episcopal character by the illustrious splendor of his virtues; but he shines re- 
 splendent by his soUND DOCTRINE, which ia acconhng to Ood. Uoctrinam 
 lauctam.ac secundum Deum." (Pref. Editoris.) 
 
 In his pie&ce to his Synopsis Mr. Smith observes : 
 "If they deny that we have given a fair translation, we will then challenge 
 them to come forward in apublw assembly with the works of St. Ligon. when w« 
 promise to meet them, and submit our translation, and the original, to the inspec. 
 lion of a committee, one half of whom to be chosen by ourse^lves, and the other 
 half by the Roman clergy. Truth never shuns investigation. If !^c *\^va not 
 giveDit fair, genuine, and true translation, and if we have nft"^**^jf•3 
 twines of Ligori. and the church of Rome fairly and correctly, without garbling, 
 orrivingan erroneousconstruction, we will be willing to incur the consequences 
 that we ought to expect, for having deceived the public. Sy nop. Fret. p. «. 
 
 I vrill thank the Bishop to inform me the date of his edition ot the 
 
 '^Bishop Pubcell ^What is the date of Mr. Smith's edition ! 
 
 Ma. Campbell. — 1828. 
 
 Bishop PtrBCELL— This edition [pointong to his own] was tlao 
 published in 1828 : so that it appears both are the same. 
 
 Mb. Campbell [here taking up a volume of the Bishop s copy of 
 Ligori read] *'i?rff7to iVotw Emendaia,*^ It hence appears that the 
 Bishop's IB anew amended edition ; so that, probably, this and tha 
 006 used by Mr. Smith are not the same. Be this, hovrever as it mar, 
 ■othing is lost by the examination : nothing is proved a^msl Mr, 
 Smith as a translator, and I shall write forthwith to New York to Mr. 
 Smith for the original Latin of this passage in his edition, and have 
 it certified and published among this community. 
 
 But were it lawful to read in this assembly, I have before me the de- 
 erees of councils, and the words of bishops and cardinals, teaching 
 the very doctrine which the Bishop would represent as a reproach 
 or Mliimny on his clergy and church. Here is the decree of a conn- 
 Si 
 
 I 
 
 y 
 
I 
 
 
 MBA1S mv THB 
 
 eil alfibltdo, wnA hem ave tefefeDcet to ▼arioin eoniMilt, mrali •• B^ 
 ▼ii Concilift, Tom. I. pp. 737, 739. Crabb. Ooneil. Tom. I. p. 449. 
 Editioo of 1551, and Pithou Corp. Ju. Canon, p. 47, as quoted by Dr. 
 
 Blliwiik% wliinii jfo to prohibit priests **Jf0m kemimg more than one 
 mmeMfmf** and deelare marriage in a priest to be " m mortal sin.*' 
 And here it Costema and cardinal Campvgio who taught what I date 
 MH Dead hero ; but I will reserve all this for a more convenient season. 
 [Mr. Campbell here called for the reading again of the seventh 
 
 Cropoaitioii, which being read by Mr. Bttt, one of the Modeiatoit, 
 • pfooeeded.] 
 
 iObiNit the year 1068, Urban II. decrees : 
 
 ••That Mbjecti are by no authority constiained to p«y the fidelity which tli«y 
 haire iwora to ■ chmtiaii prince, who oppo«eth Ciod and his mints, or violatetfc 
 their precepts.* An imtaooe whereof we have in his granting^ a privilegie to the 
 SSf ®''T<Ww; •which,' MJth he. • if any emperor, kiur, prince, 4kc. thati 
 "■*•■■" -tj^npt to thwart, let him be deprived of the dignity of his honor and 
 [Barrow, p. 32. 
 
 , the ooiineil of Toledo ttil! more folly expresses the spirit 
 
 of tie igo^ 
 
 •• We the holy council proroulge this sentence or decree, pleasing to God, that 
 whoHMVtr hcfeaHer shall succeed to the kingdom, shall not mount the throne, 
 till h« h«i pt ofa maomg other oaths, to peiroit no man to live in bis kingdom, 
 wAo M iMf • p^mik. And if after he hat taken the reins of govemraetit, he 
 shall tiolate hia promise, let him be anathema maranatha, in the sight of the 
 etmnlCaod, aad become fuel of eternal ire— pabulum ignis aitemi. [Carania, 
 
 Innocent III. (that tme wonder of the world and changer of the 
 
 ^■■el 'iliiiiis : 
 
 •* Ondtf Alfa laaooeat. III. it was ordained, that tf any temporal lord, being 
 r quired and aditioiiiahed br the church, should neglect to purge bis territory 
 from heretical filth, he should by the metropolitan and the other comprovincial 
 bishops, be noosed in the band of czcommunicaUon ; and that if he should slight 
 to make satts&ction within a year, it shooid be signified to the Pope, that be 
 ■MKhlfroni that time denounce thasabjecU absolved Anom their fealty to him, 
 aad eipose the territory to be seised on by Catholics." Barrow, p. ^ 
 
 Adrian I. A. B. 773t thus decrees: 
 
 •* W« do bv general decree constitute, that whatever king, or bishop, or po« 
 iale, shall heMaHar believe, or permit, that the censure of the Roman pow- 
 ■ OMy he violated in any case, he shall be an execrable anathema, and shall be 
 ilty belbro God, as a betrayer of the Catholic feith." P. Had. I. Capit apad 
 
 ■t. Caus. m»v. qa. 1. c. 11. 
 
 Leo IX. says, that Constantine M. "did think it very unbecoming 
 that thaf aheuld be subject to an earthly empire, whom the Divine 
 Mtjesty had set over an heavenly.'* Of Gregory II. who lived 
 A. D;730, Baironius says, " He effectnally caused both the Romana 
 and Italians to recede from obedience to tlie emperor.'* «• So," «}ob 
 Holies this authentio hiaieiiiiir-*^ he did leave to posterity a worthy 
 eiample that hewtieil princes should not be suffered to reign in the 
 dmnti of Christf if being warned they should be found pertinacioiiff 
 §■ iiiif.'* To consummate the whole, Gregory II. did say to the em- 
 piet Mnios : " All the kingdome of the west did hold St. Peter as 
 an earthly God." 
 
 Wiihing to crowd ae much into this speech as I possibly can in 
 
 one hour, I shall, witli as much rapidity as is consistent with distinct- 
 oeiaof enunciation, hasten througii many documents. Thus we have 
 seen, that for at least five centuries, the heads of the Roman church 
 clearly and unambiguously taught, that the spiritual sword was above 
 **^ tempenl, and that the vicar of Chrt»t h by a divine right Loi4 
 
 BUit] 
 
 KOHAH CATHOLIC BEUGION. 
 
 of thrones and all earthly tilings. This, I have no doubt, is the true 
 doctrine of the immutable and infallible church of Rome! aud ccitain 
 it is, that it has never been disowned, or renounced, by a general 
 council, the organ of infallibility. If the church of Rome be msus- 
 ceptible of reformation, or infallible ; it is proved to be essentially 
 anti- American, and opposed to the genius of our institutions. 
 
 To resume the bishop's oath. The gentleman at length admitted 
 that he had taken the bishop's oath, by saying, that he took the oath 
 of naturalization/r«< / / There is but one oath for Roman bishops m 
 all countries, therefore, the Bishop is sworn to »* increase and advance 
 the authority of the pope," and persecute and oppose (fight against) 
 heretics and schismatics. If he have not taken this oath, he will please 
 refer us to the oath he has sworn, and specify its peculiarities. 
 
 The defence is a very singular one. He first swore allegiance to 
 the United Stales, and then to that foreign prince the pope. Does he 
 mean, contrary to common usage, that the first oath is more binding 
 than the second ; or, that it neutralizes the anti-American attributes 
 of the second. But his explanation is but half given in the first point, 
 that he took the oath of American allegiance before he took the oath 
 of Roman allegiance. The other ground of defence was in the 
 query, which, with such a triumphant air, he put to me yesterday 
 evening— via. whether I would not have been justified in breaking 
 my oath to England, had I been an American colonist or soldier at 
 the time of the revolution, when the king tyrannized over the AjMcn- 
 cans 1 I have already answered this question, and have aflSTmed that 
 in Protestant doctrine, no circumstance or contingency, can ever ab- 
 solve a person from the obligation of an oath, into which be has in- 
 telligently and voluntarily entered. It is in the estimation of chris- 
 tians most impious and daring for any prince or pope to presume to 
 absolve men fiom the obliffations of an oath solemnly taken. If, in- 
 deed, an oath has in it the nature of a covenant, then one of the 
 parties failing, so for vacates the covenant as to set the other free 
 from his oath : but this is not absolution for breaking it; it is a simple 
 annulling of its conditions. Now, in the case supposed, the kin^ of 
 England was generally allowed to have receded from the conditions 
 on which that oath was taken by the persons who renounced alle- 
 giance to him ; he having failed to protect and cherish his American 
 subjects, according to the tenor of the charter given, they were freed 
 from the obligations of allegiance. But I beg my audience lo re- 
 member that the bishop attempts to defend himself for breaking his 
 oath in certain contingencies : else, why ask me such a questton f 
 The hishop's plea is, therefore, that oaths may he broken, and that 
 the pope can absolve men from allegiance on a justifiable emergency, 
 when the church, or some other great interest may demand it ! Of 
 what use then is the oath of naturalization 1 — 
 
 That the incompatibility of the bishop's oath with our oath of al- 
 legiance may be obvious, I shall quote the oath of naturalization, «• 
 proposed to every foreigner by the laws of the United States: 
 
 The lairs of the U. S. provide; That any alien, beioff a free white person, 
 may be admitted to become a citizen of tbeU. S. or any of them, on the follow- 
 bg condition, and not otherwise: That he shall have declared on oath, or afllr- 
 Stion, before the supreme superior, district, or circuit court, of some one of 
 the states, or a court of record, having a clerk and seal— 3 years at least befora 
 admission. 
 
824 
 
 WMBAVM OM rax 
 
 Iff. 0*14 ^ Jbf«iilltii.. 
 "■TlMt it wai hmmjidi, hb iotentioo to become « citiien of tlM U. S. and to 
 IKWK« foreTer, afi allegiance and fidelity, to aiij foreign Prince, Potentata, 
 Statu or Sovereif ntj, whattoever; and partjcalarly, by namet the Prince, Potaa* 
 
 tate, State or Sofereknt^. whereof he niaj.at the time be aetlttm orfMAf'icl. 
 •liallt at the time of his application to be admitted, declare, on oatl 
 
 Tnatbe , ^^ 
 
 or affirmation, liiiforaacourt as above. 
 
 U. Omth ^ Mtmmeimimm,MwmHon, tfc. md *f FUUUiy on Admimwm. 
 
 **Tliat ho will support the coastitution of the U. S. and that he doth absolutely 
 and oaiiralj renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to every foreira 
 Mnee, Plofoiata, State or Sovereienty whatever; and particularly by name 
 the Frinca, Potentate, State, Sovareigaty whereof he was before a citizen or 
 
 TIm court admitting the alien to be wtkied that he has resided five yeui 
 within the U. S. one year in the state, and that he has behaved u a man of 
 good moral diaracter, attached to the principles of the constitution of the U. S. 
 ■ad well dteoMli to the good order and happiness of the same. The retidenca 
 to be proved by a witness, not by oath of the applicant. 
 
 1|f Imm a iWfMMI coming into the United States 3 years before 21 yean of ag% 
 proving tame ciiaracter, and continued residence 5 years, admitted as befora 
 stated on the first application, on taking final oath of abjiifation, renmnciation, 
 iLi.i;*. jtc. without the first oath of intention 
 
 Pliliar providad; That in case the alien applying to be admitted to cititen* 
 dMipt aiall hmm bomm any heredttaiy title, or been o? any of the orden of No- 
 bility, in the kingdom or state from which became, he shall in addition to tha 
 abova requisites, make an express renunciation of his title or order of Nobility, 
 
 at tia time to be recorded, Iec. 
 Further provided— That no alien who shall be a native citiaen, deniseo, or 
 
 ■algort of wan OMmtiy, state or sovereign, with whom the U. S. shall be at war at 
 Iha twia of iis application, shall ba than admitted to b« a citisen of the U. S.' 
 
 Ac. 'At. 
 
 Siioli are llio oaths and laws of naturalisation. Now, as the pope 
 of Rome Is a foreign prince— «it this veij moment a prince temporal 
 •8 well as spiritual, exereimng poHHad auikoriiy over ike »iaie§ ^ 
 Mome, and claiminpr alle|riance in temporals as well as spirituals, 
 throti^^hout the whole Roman Catholic world ; I ask, can any one 
 who has sworn •* to inereate and admnee hit mUkofity^''^ or feeling 
 kiiiself so boimd, as he shall answer for it to the supreme judge of the 
 ttniterse, lake m keep the oath of eitisenship in this country without 
 lieriiary f ! In my most deliberate judgment, it is impossible. 
 
 The case is simplj this : The oath of naturalisation requires the 
 cBMlliiate for citiienship to swear that ke doet absolutely and enHreh 
 remmmee ail aliegianee and fidelity to every foreign prince, potentate, 
 iliJi, sr SiMrctfM^f Now, the pope of Rome is a mvereign of Eu- 
 iji|>e--«/iifiil|ii|iilefifa^ issuing bulls, laws, or briefe, Simughout 
 IM world : oileii to secure, augment and advance his authority, in 
 1aa|iefals, as well as spirituals ; as the testimony of 500 Tears now 
 before you, amply demonstrates ; and every Roman Catholic lajrmaa 
 feeling a paiamount obligation to his bishop, and through him to the 
 pope ; and all the rulers of the Reman Catholic church, being swora 
 to the pope absolBlely and foierer, I ask, can such persons m good 
 fiuth solemnly ewevr aliegianee to this government ! If a person can 
 be sworn to iiip]Mrt two antagonist constitutions, governments, powers, 
 —two masters, as opposite as the poles : then may he, without per- 
 jurir, swear to our government, and to that of papal Rome ! 
 
 But bishops are sworn " to persecute and oppme (penequar d im- 
 
 CffHiAeJ heretics and schismatics. Papal Rome is and always has 
 en, a persecuting government. She is essentially so. I intend no4 
 now to dwell iMiei on this theme. But I will sustain my prt^Kieition 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC BBUGION. 
 
 32li 
 
 And fiist, I admit that Protestants have persecuted,— that they have 
 perseeutod even to death. I deny it not ; and therefore my opponent 
 ^ not prove iL It is a matter of record indisputable however, 
 that their persecutions have not been as a drop to the ocean, in compa- 
 fhon of papal persecutions. Still they ha^e persecuted, and we frank- 
 ly awn itl ^ But we have an excuse for them. 'A \f ^^.^^'^f ,^"^ 
 tfter the Lutheran Reformation, came out from a bloody and cruel 
 mother, who had accustomed them to blood and slaughter, and toughi 
 them that the blood of heretics was a sacrifice, most a^^eP^ble to 
 God. Thev were taught that it was just to destroy thieves, rob- 
 hers, and murderers ; and that heretics were the worst of thieves, 
 robbers, and murderers, and ought when incorrigible to be slam for 
 no the ffood of society did imperiously demand.— As soon as they 
 cot out of the great city, they began to contend among Aemselves, 
 wheLr persecution was right, f hey soon saw it was o? the manners 
 and customs of Babylon; and that "all who take the sword must 
 perish by the sword f" therefore they laid it down. They have ab- 
 lured it in their creeds and remonstrances a^inst the papacy; and we 
 'leioiee to state the fact, that there is not m Protestant Christendom 
 n single creed that does not repudiate persecuUon and assert the great 
 principle of christian and religious liberty. „^„^, 
 
 ^ But I have said that papal ftome is essentially a persecuting power 
 —still a persecuting monarchy ; because she has it yet written in her 
 infallible and immutiible decrees of councils, in the bulls and ana- 
 themas of her popes ; and in the constitution of her m^f^onB, which 
 as a church she still acknowledges and maintains. A feW ot her in- 
 
 fiilUble decrees must be accepted as a sp^»«je"|- . ^ ^^ .^^^^^e holv 
 
 " io the fifth council of Toledo. Can. 3rd. the holy f^^^Jf " *«Z,V ?^*!^^^^ 
 council promulge thU sentence, or decree plewing to God. That wnofw^w 
 hafeafter.halltucceedtothekin^om, shall "«'?»»"»**?** *^"\'f ,!**„" 
 t^n among other oaths, to permit no man to hve in his kingdom who is not a 
 SSolic (Nullum noa CathUcum.) And if after he has taken the reins of gj»- 
 JSnment. he shaS violate thi, promise, let him be anathema ™a™"> hf '"J^^. 
 aiX of the eternal God. and become fuel for the eternal fire, (Pabulum ignit 
 leterni.) Caranra Sum. Conciliorum, p. 404. . . 
 
 The great Lateran council under Innocent III. who instituted the in- 
 quisition and transubstantiation, has still more expressly decreed : 
 
 •* We excommunicate, and anathematiie all heresy, condemniug all^heretics. 
 
 bv what namea soever they are called. * * . „„_:,u^,j 
 
 ^The«J being condemned, must be left to the secular P^'^f, *<> *»*,P"f ';'„^f * 
 And Sose whS are only suspected of heresy, if they purge not themselves in tl.« 
 •pm>inted Zay. are to 6e exc^ununicated, 'and if within a year satisfaction is not 
 riven, they are to be condemned as heretics. .„j „ui. -ii 
 
 ^ Thiy must take this oath.-** That they will endeavor, bona fide, and with aU 
 thSrii^rto extenninatefrom-every ^ of their dominions all bere 'c^» f-b- 
 Sects, universally, that are marked out to them by the church. So that from 
 Sis^ime fo^a i when anyone is promoted to any Powertenipomlor spin ua^. 
 he shall be obliged to confirm this.*^ But if any temporal o-^' ^^"'ff TfX"-f 
 and admonishea by the church, shall neglect to purge h.s ''^"^ fr<>"l '^^ « ^^ 
 SSl ?Uhine...he sU be tied up L"!!*- ^^^ :i tjrZul^^^^^^^^^ 
 
 that time pronounce the subjects absolved fr'*" »»«&'^"^t h.^S« Aidl V^T- 
 his territories to be seiied on by Catholics, who expelling heretics, shall poi- 
 
 ■ISurC^lSirwrratfjiken the badge o^he cross shall set Jem^^^^^^^^ 
 O extirpate heretics, shall enjoy the same indulgence and be fo^'ff .^J'*'',**'.* 
 iLe prmlege. at ii granted to those who go to the recovery of the holy land. 
 
 9C 
 
I 
 
 J' 
 
 And, to mwe tlnw, lie it empliatlctllj obterfed, that tli« coomtil of 
 Tteit fully establitlied, adopted, and re-mmiilfBd thane deefaea, and 
 thejr are, at tliia moment, in Hill foreeal Rome. Until, then^ m teneral 
 eoancil is ealled, and maldi Ikllible the deeltiona of the g^at Lateran 
 cooneil; auch is, and moat be the dictum and belief of the Roman 
 church ; and, aa I judgre, there never will be another general cooneil 
 tbia vil ever be the doctrine of papal Rome, till the day of her death. 
 la fbis, I emp'atically ask, the pnius and aplrit of republican 
 America f 
 
 But edicts, canons, and decrees, are not a dead letter. They havt 
 been all personified, and acted out to the letter. Who has not heard 
 of tbtt personiacation of every thins that ia diabolically cruel— the 
 Holy Ornci or thb Inqitisitioii ! What abuse of lan&ruage ! Think 
 iot, my Mends, that I will rake up its aahes ; that I will rehearae its 
 horrible racks, and engines, and instniments of torture ; that I will 
 leaerlbe a single auio da /e, one of the horrid tragedies of the acts of 
 fidtb, *hose flagrance language fails to speak. ** It was the vice of 
 the a|i%*' my opponent has said. Of what age 1 Of Innocent III. I 
 Of the era of transabstantiation f No, indeed ; but of the age of Na* 
 polfM; of the age of pope Pius, the saint of 1814 ! Yes, of the pros- 
 •nt afs ! It was got up, indeed, by Innocent (inapposite name !) III., 
 and was fully in operation in Italy, A. D. 1251. Its first officer, Do- 
 ■Inlc, was afterwards made a Moini ! In Spain and Portugal it waa 
 petiiected; and ita reign of terror, in unfigurative truth, transcends all 
 aeacription My soul sickens at the thought. In Spain alone, from 
 1181 to 1814, about half a million suffered by it. Lorente (Paris 
 edit. torn. ir. p. 271,) sets down the victims of one department of to^ 
 ment, those burnt, at 33,912 \ and of other rigorous punishments, at 
 iilfdlill. Me ia, by other historians, supposed to be far below the 
 full amount From the records of the inouisition, the manuscripts 
 tsken fion the imiuisitorial palace at Barcelona, when taken by siege 
 ii ISiS, one may reekon. that in all Spain, in a little over three centu- 
 lies, half a million Buffered all manner of cruelties from this infernal 
 
 It was oven employed aa a means of converting the heathen, in pi» 
 
 gM lands* It is said, that 800 persons have been condemned at one 
 aeaalon, by one of ita tribunals. And, still worse, in Seville, in the 
 year 1481, 2000 persona were condemned to the llamea, and 20,000 
 moie to inferior punishments. Such were the tender mercies of these 
 Roman gospel arguments to save men's souls from hell ! It was the 
 vice of a dark age, and yet restored by Pius VII. in 1826! ! What! 
 
 But, this is only one of the tribunals -of persecution : it was only 
 •no of the msaiiB of persecuting and destroying heretics and schis* 
 IMiea. Shall I relate the persecutions of the Waldenses and Albigen* 
 as% and other Protestants, sometimes called Lollards, Wickliffites, 
 MigMota, &e. &o.? Shall I tell of the milliona in France, Spain, 
 Portufsl, Hdlaiid, England, Ireland, and elaewheie I Shall I tell of 
 the Maaaacro of St Banholomew'a day! of the persecutions conse- 
 f ipnt upon the revocation of the edict of Nantt I or the Irish massa- 
 cre! and of all the other deeds of horror! I shall not attempt it I 
 eannot describe the slaughter of two millions, in the early crusades 
 ■pdnst Jews and inidela; nor of fifteen millions of Indians and pa- 
 gaipi nor of a million W^aldenses, murdered and banished in a singit 
 
 BtfMAIf CATHOLIC BBLIGIOX. 
 
 fsneimtioB . I say, again^ I eannot relate these heart-stirring scenes ; 
 and I shall only say, that historians and martyrologists variously give 
 the aggregate from fifty to tixty^ghi milliam cf human beings, thai 
 have been merifiud and devoured by this Moloch ; this insatiable de- 
 mon of persecution, as taught in theory and carried out in practice, by 
 her who calls herself Holy Mother I ! ! What a acarlety crimsoned^ 
 true! mother she is ! On her will be avenged the blood of all mavtyra 
 Even the persecutions of those whom she taught to persecute, he just- 
 ly chargeable against her. What guarantee, then, have we that this be- 
 ing the native spirit of the system, it would not again repeat the same 
 tragic scenes, in any country where it obtains an ascendancy ! Tis 
 true, indeed, that the Protestant powers in Europe hold it now m 
 check. But were these removed, from what premises would we in- 
 fer, that the same means would not be resorted to in this and every 
 Protestant country, so soon as this kind mother should feel it a duty, 
 " to extirpate heresy*^ out of the land 1 ! ^ 
 
 The doctrine is actually tauffht in her New Testament, in the no,-*# 
 appended to the Rhemish version. I will give you a passage or two. 
 
 ''rAod when his di«ciple8 Jamei aad John had seen it, they said. Lord wilt thou 
 we say that lire come down from heaven, and consume them? And turning, he 
 rebuked them, saying, you know not of what spirit you are.** Luke ix. 54, 55. 
 
 " Ver. 55. He rebuked them. Not justice nor all rigorous punishmeol of 
 •innen it here forbidden, Elias' ft«t reprehended, nor the church or chris- 
 liao princes blamed for putting heretics to death: but that none of these >hould 
 be done for desire of our particular revenge, or without discretion, and regard 
 to their amendment, and example to others. Therefore, Peter used his power 
 upon Ananias and Sapphira, when he struck them both down to death for ifc 
 frmtding the church." Rhem. N. Test. p. 109. ^ ci ^ • j 
 
 This is a mistake. Peter struck not Ananias and Sapphira tor tfe 
 frttuding the chnreh, (as these purblind commentators say Q but the 
 Lord himself struck them dead, for lying against the Holy Spirit. 
 Christian princes, thus, in reading the Roman Testament, are taught 
 
 to put heretics to death. . 
 
 "And many of them that had followed curious things, brought together Uieir 
 books and burnt them before all : and counting the prices of them, they fottiid tb« 
 ■loney to be fifty thousand pence." Acts x\%. 19. », . t. j u l 
 
 '• Ver. 19. BookM. A christian man is bound to born or deface all wicked iMwkt 
 of what sort soever, especially heretical books. Which though they infect not 
 him always that keepeth them, vet being forth coming, they may be boisoim 
 and pernicious to other that shall have them and read them after his death, or 
 otherwise. Therefore hath the church taken order for condemning all such 
 books, and against the reading of them where danger may ensue: and ihechrit- 
 tian emperors, ConatMitiU8,Magnus, Valentinian. Theodosius, Marcian. Justin- 
 ian, made penal laws for the burning or defacing them." lb. p. 207. 
 
 This proscription of beietical books is of the same spirit, a prt of 
 the same system, and explains the march of papistical uniformity and 
 
 iinitv ^ 
 
 " As we have taid before, so now I say again, if anv evmngeiixe to yoo, betide 
 that which you have received, be he anathema." Gal. i. 9. 
 
 »' Hierome useth this place, wherein the apostle givcth the cune, or ana- 
 
 Iheraa to all false teachers, not once, but twice, to prove that the zeal of Catholic 
 men ought to be so great toward all heretics, and their doctrines, that they 
 should rive them the anathema, though they were never so dear unto them. 
 In which case, satth this holy Doctor, I would not spare mine own parentt." Id. 
 
 ^ This is stronger still. " I would not spare mine own parents !' 
 This is the spirit, the naked spirit of the system, pure and unmixed. 
 V'jmember, then, my friends, that childrei ought to inform agaiiiat 
 
.TB Olf THX 
 
 i 
 
 HfMt 
 OS§G 
 
 * 
 
 tMr mm fmraits, tnd brother against lirotbcr, for th« eitirftitjon 4 
 
 ** And I iMr the woman dranken of tlie blood of the Saintt and of the blood 
 ©f the warty rt of Jetaa.** Rev. xvii. 6. 
 
 Fkr. 6. DrmMkmn of the blood. It h platn, that this wotnan siniiiteth tho 
 whole corps of ail the persecutors that have and shall shed so much blood of 
 the juat : of the prophets, apostles, and other martyrs, from the beginning of 
 tha iroffM In th« m. The Protestants poMibly expound it of Rome, for that 
 th^ pal faflMtiet to death, and allow of their punishment in other countries ; 
 Bat their blood is not called the blood of saints, no more than the blood of 
 fhievett mankillers, and other malefactors: for the shedding of which by order 
 of fostice. no commonmealtk shall mmwer" Id. p. 430. 
 
 No commonwealth, con8ef|iieiitlj no member of it, shall sufler for 
 <illieg heretics. If I have not soalained this proposition, I can prove 
 notbiof. If theae faets and documents can be set aside b]r rhetorical 
 deelasatioB, or reckless denial ; then are history, and testimony, and 
 Iwit #f mo value in controversy. 
 
 Anmlier specification comes under this propoaition. I have too many 
 of tbem for the occasion. I must be brief. This is the divorcing, re- 
 IMlliaf , diaorganizinor, and demoralizing dogma, that '* no faith 3uhM 
 mkepi with herdieM,*^ 
 
 Gregorv YII., in a council at Rome, declares : 
 
 ** We tbllowing the statutes of our predecessors, do, by our iqwitfolic author- 
 ity, «Ajoiliiall those from their mik oi idelity, who are bound to excommmd^ 
 ciM fiffitiif . either by duty or oath; and we unloose them from everr tie of 
 alMdieaoe, till the excomiuunicated petions have made proper satis&ction.** 
 PeCMl. t part. cans. 15. quest. 6. 
 
 Urban II. teaches the same doctrine : 
 
 ** You aro to discharge the soldiers who have tieorn JIdtUhf to count Hugo 
 from payiag ■■/ obedience while he is ^xfommunieated: for they are not obli^ 
 la Im|| that ideli^ iaviolate, which they have «icom fo a christian prime, who 
 
 Ood^ mmd his smints, and despises their precepts." Ibid. 
 Clfegory IX has laid down the general principle, with the greatest 
 
 ^■^^aii^i' aswaiMi ■'a ^^'iM'BiaPBnMFMii # 
 
 ''Be it Inown to all who are under the dominion of htrsHes, that they are 
 sal ioaa from every tit ofjidelityonddutyjo them; all oaths or soUmn agree* 
 aimf to the eomlmtj notwithstanding." l>ecret. Greg. lib. 5, tit 7. 
 
 Hear now the decree of the council of Constance, in the case of 
 lofam Huse, and Jerome of Prague ; who appeared there under the 
 MililM f Mgo of the imperial proteetion. 
 
 ^** Coaacii of Constance, 1414. did solemnly decree that no faith it to be kept 
 with am heretic. The person who has given them the safe conduct tu come 
 Hotter, shall not in this ease be obliged to keep his promise by whatever tie he 
 ai^y have been enmed, when he baa done all that has been in his power to do.** 
 B^racc. Frae^ Thouiiit, p. 110. 
 
 TIm oonneil of Conalance them, not only to decided ; but cauied 
 ilHae men, who appiiiied before them under an imperial pledge, to be 
 ialMi and burned, llius faith waa not to be kept with heretics accord- 
 iiftotud decree, and the practice under it by these " holyfaihera !*' 
 
 TO eonirm the whole with the utmost brevity I would add, the ho- 
 ly, iiiliillible, and last council of Trent formally recognized this de- 
 cree of the council of Constance. It is then the standing and unrepealed 
 doctrine of the Roman Catholic church, which must be as immutable 
 and imUlible as the council of Trent. 
 
 Next we must notice the proscription of hooka as another specifi 
 
 Tim council of Trent in its WSk session, decreed that a council 
 liier At pope thouM draw np and publish an index of books which 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC 1BU6I0N. 
 
 to be prohibited in the church, l^ua commenced and keeping 
 
 pace with the introduction of liberal, or Protestant, or anti-Romaa 
 Catholic volumes it has grown into a respectable volume ; so that 
 orie of the finest libraries might be collected out of these proscribed 
 books. Among these is the bible, which is said to have been the 
 first prohibited in the council of Toloso. In the 4th of the 10 rules 
 concerning prohibited books established by the Holy Fathers of the 
 council of Trent, a license to read the bible is put into the control of 
 bishops and inquisitors. But he that presumes to «*read without 
 such license cannot receive absolution of sins." Among theseprohib- 
 itcd books also are those of Locke, Milton, Bacon, Grotius, Galileo, 
 Claude, Saorin, Sir Matthew Hale, Jeremy Taylor, Luther, CaMn, 
 Melapcthon, — and, indeed, all the standard Protestant authors. 
 
 Touching the liberty of the press, a decree of the 10th session of 
 the Lateran council A. D. 1215, even Leo X. presiding expresses the 
 Roman Catholic views of that chief root of the tree of liberty. The 
 decree of the Lateran council waa sanctioned by Trent and is now the 
 
 orthodox faith of Rome. 
 
 " By order of the holy council, we, in fine, ordain and decree, that no person 
 shall presume to print, cr canse to be printed, any book or other writing whatso- 
 ever, either in our city (Rome) or in any other cities and dioceses, unless it shall 
 fint have been carffally examined, if in this city, by our Vicar and the master of 
 the holy palace, or if in other cities and dioceses, by the bishop or his deputy, 
 wUhthe inquisitor of heretical pravily for the diocese, in which the said impret- 
 iion is about to be made ; and unless also it shall have received, under their own 
 hand, their written approval, given withont price and without delay. Whoso- 
 ever shall presume to do otherwise, besides the loss of the books, which shall 
 lie publicly burned, shall be bound by the sentence of excommnnicaiion.** 
 iJaranza, p. 670. * , * * * » -w 
 
 The council of Trent has also confirmed the doctrine of Leo X, 
 and his Lateran council of 1515. Their first rule concerning pro- 
 scribed books is : AU books condemned hy the supreme pontiffs^ or gen» 
 eral eouneib before the year 1615 and not comprised in the praeni index 
 are condemned,^* The creed of this said council of Trent moreove; 
 compels every Roman Catholic ** to receive undoubtedly, all things 
 delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred canons, and general councils 
 andparticularly hy the Holy council of TVenf." 
 
 This church is as much opposed to the freedom of the press and 
 free discussion, and the circulation of the bible, as ever she was ; but 
 she has to yield a little to thai irresistible innovator, called custom. 
 Still however a Roman bishop cannot, as a good and liege subject of 
 the pope, but oppose, freedom of thou^t, 8p««ch and action in ail 
 matters religious. Listen to the following little bull of the bishop 
 •f New York, published the other day ag^.iinst free discussion. 
 
 In this document the bishop writes, in his address to the editor of the ** Truth 
 Teller,"—" Sir, I consider it my duty to request you to publish the following 
 copy of my letter to the editor of the " Catholic Diary," in order to obviate as 
 soon as possible, the mt*c/iie/| which such a Society, if countenanced, might pro- 
 duce, you know my opposition to controversial disputes on religion, particular- 
 ly in debating societies or newspapers." 
 From the letter alluded to. we extract the following : 
 "To the Editor of the Catholic Diary :— - , . • 
 
 In the Catholic Diary of Saturday last, October 1, 1 find a notice from yon, of 
 a Societv, calling itself the New-York Catholic Society, for the promotion of 
 religious knowledge. Of the existence of that Society, I was itterly ignorant, 
 and feel surprised that you. who ought to know better, would think of encour- 
 aging and drawing public attention to such a society, without first ascertaining 
 the teotimenta of your Ordinary oa to important a tabject. The Church wisely 
 Sc2 42 
 
ON 
 
 tliftt nothinr of tlM latan of tltii toeiety cui Im Mtablitbed witlioat tfia 
 
 Sirobatbo of the Bisliop of tiM IMoCMe, where it it ■wt to introdttce it, and 
 t pennittMl, it ■hould be TOverned by such rales and regulfttioBi as to him niav 
 lacin proper, for it obviousfy partakes of the natnre of a Theological schooL 
 Far be it from me to impede the pnif retsof religiovi knowledge ; nothing could 
 be more dear to mj heart than to enconrage whatever contributes effectuall;^ to 
 Us ppooiotioa i bat placed as I am, as a sentinel over the sacred ark of religion, 
 It itair iapnmiTa anij to prevent it from being touched by pro&ne or nnprac- 
 
 SOMAN CATROUC BBLIGION. 
 
 sai 
 
 viewing this society in the light you see it, it is my decided con- 
 ficiion that it ought not to be sanctioned l^ me ; how can it be supposed that 
 jmmif men, whoae education is chiefly mercantile or mechanical, can come with 
 ■Milcient preparation to the discussion of a question that requires vast erudition, 
 will m dei|Mn of research, which they cannot possess ; you cannot be ignorant 
 of tho awnfi iMntal discipline to which students are subjected in our Theologi- 
 cal Semiaariea, before they are allowed to commence the study of theology. 
 Toa know alto thnt this study is r^;ulated by experienced and able professors, 
 HhI young men are not allowed to ^pe their wav with only their own feeble 
 lUfl, Ihf CMU^ the dark maies of deceitfiil cnvil, ana infidel sophistry. 
 
 ^Hm members of this iocjet} . who thirst so much for religious knowledge, can 
 imd iMr elementary works, ant. also, the masterly productions of Milner, Fletch- 
 'OtJ'— — itt't iiitofy of the Variations, lately prmted, and others, where they 
 ■n aare to ind the tenets of our faith explained with a precision and elegsnce 
 ilnl onnnot lail to aatiify Iho sincere inquirer after truth. The precision of 
 iiiiM, and elegance of eipfeasion in the imparting of religious knowledge, theii 
 ptiMMble sets forth to be the main objects of this society, and it covers the destrt 
 and intention of acquiring that species of tact and de&terity in theological de» 
 hiie, which would enable them to fbllofr into the arena the lanatics of the 
 dny. All this I must condemn as well as a publication of the crude essays of 
 ^voi among us. Let us dispute leas and practice more. 
 
 The church in the most positive manner prohibits all laymen from entering 
 iBllldis|Mite on points of religion with sectarians, ** inhibenius,'* says Pope Alex 
 ■■lloff IV., ** ne nnipMl Laioai Forsonoi liceat pablice vel private de fide Catholi 
 on di^ptttare ; qui vera contradicerit, E&communicationis laqueo innodetur."* 
 Waifim MCollected this sentence, I am sure you would be tor from calling on 
 the Cfatholic young men of this cily to become members of a debating society 
 •• retigioos subiects, open to so many serious objections. 
 
 •• + John, Bishop of New-York." 
 
 After hariiif read you a ^tf^''* Ml against ^ The New York 
 OailiNilk aoctety for the promotion of relipous knowledge," I wii, 
 while on this subject, read you also a bithop't curse against a refrac- 
 logf priest in Philadelphia. I quote it from one of the News-papers 
 •jf that day. It happened some twelte or fifteen years ago. I have 
 ■eteral such cases in the books around me : but they are some two or 
 three centuries old, and in foreign countries ; and therefore, I select this 
 modem one which is almost a copy of them, because a little acclimated, 
 
 [Ami • #fcttodfjp*tn PmMtr.J We hnve at length obtained n correct copy 
 of the eacooHMMivatton of W ilCam Hogan, Pastor of St. Mary's Church, of tnis 
 city* It is at fellows: 
 
 By the authority of Ood Almighty, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and the 
 nndeliled Virgin Mary, mother ana patroness of our Savior, and of all celea- 
 tinl virtues. Angels, Archnngels, Thrones, Dominions, Powers, Cherubims and 
 Sicaphims; anoof all the Holy Patiiarchs, Prophets, and of all the Apostles and 
 IStaagelists of the Holy Innocents, who, in the sight of the Holy Lamb are 
 ilNiiMr worthy to sing the new song of the Holy Mulyrs and Hoiv Confiissort, 
 and of all the Holy Viigins, and of all Saints, together with the Holy Elect of 
 God— amy he, Wuliam liogaat be damned. 
 
 We excommunicate and annthematise him, and from the threshold of the Hofy 
 Church of God Almighty, we sequester him, that he may be tormented, disposed 
 
 and be delivered over with Athan and Abiram, and with thorn who lay unto the 
 Lord, • depart from us for we desire none of thy ways ;" as a fire is quenched with 
 water, so l«t the light of him be pot out forevermore, unless it shall repent him, 
 and naake satisfiiction. Amen! 
 
 May the Father, who created man, curse him ! May the Son, who suffered for 
 ns, curse him ! May the Hloly Ghost, who suffered for us in baptism, curse him I 
 May the Holy Cross which Christ for our salvation, triumphing over bis enemies, 
 ascended, curse him ! 
 
 Miyr the Holy and Eternal Virgin Mary, mother of God, curse him ! May St. Mi- 
 chael, the Advocate of the Holy Souls, curse him, May all the angels, prmcipali- 
 ties, and powers, and all heavenly armies, corse him ! 
 
 May the praiseworthy multitude of Patriarchs, and Prophets, curse him! 
 
 May St. John th^ Precursor, and St. John the Baptist, and St. Peter, and St 
 Paul, and St. Andrew, and all other of Chrift's Apostles together, curse him! and 
 may the rest of our Disciples and Evangelists, who by their preaching converted 
 tlie universe, and the holy and wonderful company of Martyrs and Confessor, 
 
 * 'Tiie EaglM of which MmU .Is :— ** The Chureli |proh.lhilS' la. 
 privatflljr, fra« arc ainf on Bnl||acla sppertainine to the Oailiotie 
 
 4IWP" MNnHni ap^p^ ■PSiwuHmPWi ^w nwisp wsn^w nffiws ws ^iwi 
 
 n, either fNibUdy er 
 
 ith, and wbeaaavef shal 
 
 to everlasting ages, who are found to be beloved of God, damn him! 
 
 May he be damned wherever he be, whether in the house or in the stable, the 
 garden or the field, or the highways; or in the woods, or in the waters, or in the 
 church; may he be cursed in living and in dying! 
 
 May he be cursed i*t eating and in drinking, m being hungry, in being thirsty, 
 in fasting, in sleeping, •«. slumbering, and in sitting, in livmg, in working, in 
 resting and blood letting! 
 May he be cursed in all the faculties of his body. 
 
 May he be cursed inwardly and outwardly; may he be cursed in his bnuns 
 and in bis vertex, in his temples, in his eye-brows, in his cheeks, in his jaw bones, 
 in his nostrils, in his teeth and grinders, in his lifi in his throat, in his ahoulders, 
 in his arms, in his fingers. 
 
 May he be damned in his mouth, in his breasts, in his heart and purtenance, 
 down to the very stomach! . . . , 
 
 May he be cursed in his reins and in his groins; in his thighs, in hii genitals 
 and in his hips, and his knees, his legs and feet, and toe nails! 
 
 May he be cursed in all his joints, and articulation of the members; from the 
 crown of his head to the sole of his feet, may there be no soundness. 
 
 May the Son of the living God, with all the glory of his majesty, curse him! 
 And may heaven with all the powers that move therein, rise up against him and 
 curse and damn him; unless he repent and make satis&ction! 
 Amen. So be it. Be it so. Amen. 
 
 Ridiculcus as this may appear — ^laughable or profane ; it is never- 
 ^eless, but the echo of one of the one hundred anathemas com- 
 manded in the council ot Trent — one of the greater excommunications 
 due to an obstinate heretic. 
 
 As still more indicative of the present views and feelings of the 
 Roman see, on the subject of civil and religious liberty, I shall give 
 you a few more extracts. 1 had laid off several modern documents 
 of much point, and bearing on this proposition ; but unfortunately, 
 they were misplaced in my library, and I find them missing Among the 
 books I have brought with me. I hold in my hand, liowover, a little 
 work in which I find some of them. This little volume containing 
 ** Dr. Beecher's Plea for the West," ought to be in every family, and 
 read by every adult in the great valley, who feels an^ interest in the 
 preservation of our free and happy institutions, I wish I had time to 
 lead much of it. I can only read a few passages of the documentary 
 daia which it contains : 
 
 I am about to read from Gregory XVI. the present succe*?sor of Pe- 
 ter, under date of 1832, the present faith of Roman Catholics on the 
 fubject of conscience, and liberty of the press. 
 "From this polluted fountatu of iudiOlreiice, ilows that absurJ an-J erroneous 
 
 < n>i 
 
DBBATC ON' THS 
 
 SOMAN CATUOUC BELIOION. 
 
 333 
 
 ) 
 
 dbctri'iic, or nllMr raving, in fiiror mi 4il— n of*'ltta%i»f efMMQkcM/lw 
 which moH ptetlkntial error, the eomm It ofWiMl fiwr 'Ihit •■lira wid wild lib- 
 mtfotmiimmt which it every where tttempting the overthrow of religk><N md 
 civil imtiliations; and which the uobluibing impudence of tooM hH held forth 
 •• HH dlTmiitare to religion. Hence thai fest, of all othsrg moff ft be drtmdtd 
 im m •!■<€, umridkd ItAtrly tfapwdom^ IkentioutneM of ipeech, «nd lutt of no- 
 vtltj, which. Mccording to the experience of ell sees, portend the downhill of 
 th« most powerful and tfonrishinr empires. " Hither tends that worst and ■«• 
 ver snlficientlj to be execrated and detested ubertt or THE pmsn for the dif« 
 fusion of all manner of writings, which some lo loudly contend lor, and so ac- 
 lively nmnote.** p. 121. 
 
 Tlii so Hesli from Rome, stamped with the seal oi infyiibiltty, 
 withoiit another word, sustains that specification in my proposition 
 relating to the anti-American spirit and genius of the grand elementt 
 of jpupeiy* 
 But eootinues he on the subject of unlicensed books : 
 **Jio ipeaaa must be here omitted, says CIrmeni Xlil., oar predecessor of 
 happy BMiMyry, in tfie Encvclical Letter on the proscription of bad books — 'no 
 meant mtut he here omitted^' as the extremity of the case calls for all oar exer- 
 iMMMi lo MlirmtiMilc the JmUd 9e$t which spreads through so many works; nor 
 CM m mtarials of error be of Acrwiti dc«frof id lAnii 6y the flames, which con- 
 some the depraved elements of the evil.** 
 
 The secretanr of the court of Vienna and counsellor of legation — ^1 
 
 neu FiedericK Schlegel, who, in 1828, lectured on the (vhilosophy 
 •if iiittoiy in iiiYor of monarchy and popery— one supreme bishop, and 
 0110 fnpmiie auMiarch — ^who was one of the Austrian cabinet, the eon' 
 Jkkntimi eoumeihr qi Prince Mdkrmeh — ^whose policy and opinion) 
 opened llie way for Austrian efforts on the foundation of St. Leopold, 
 til add Anieiiea to the pope's dominions — ^I say, of this great man and 
 Ms oninlons, the author of a foreign conspiracy, as quoted by Ooct<» 
 Beedier, thus spedks : 
 
 **In the rear 1828 the celebrated Frederick Schtegel, one of the m^st dis> 
 timgiilihed lilefary men of Europe, delivered lectures at Vienna, on the philoso- 
 ph| of hiflorjr, (which have not been translated into English) a great object of 
 which it to loow ^ewmimimffoH mkkh p<^eiy mnd monarch^f derive from 
 caeh Other. He conmieiidi the two systems in connexion as deserving of uni- 
 ranal ffaeeption. Hoallampts to prove that the sciences, and arts, and all tba 
 pmnitt of nan, as an intellectual being, aro best promoted under this perfect 
 system of church and state: a pope at the head of the former; an emperor at the 
 head of the latter. He contrasts with this, the system of Protestantism; repre- 
 aenta Piroteatantism as the enemy of good government, as the ally of republican- 
 ism, as the parent of the distreiies of Europe, ai the cauie of all the disorders 
 with which legitimate governmenti are afflrted. In the clote of lecture 17th, 
 ¥ol. II. p. m, ho thai apeaks of this country: The TRUE NUBSBRY ^oil 
 ihem detlrmtim primemhe, the rewbUionary school for France and the rest ^ 
 Emwf§9 hm heem JVWii Amtriem, Thenee the evil ha* eprutd over numy other 
 hmitt ^ker Af luilimil confiyMm, or by arHtrmry eommiumemtion. Ih. p. 12t, 
 
 Such are the popular Tiews of our institutions in the best and purest 
 ebureh district in the world : and the emigrants of that country with 
 Ifcosfi opinions are daily crowding to our shores, and filling up this 
 inunense Talley. These are they who are taught to execrate the lib- 
 iity of the press, and to consider liberty of conscience pestilential er* 
 lor, and that a spiritual monarch, and a political emperor are the Tery 
 paragon of all excellence in church and state. Is this compatible with 
 the genius of our institutions ? Are not such Tiews and reasonings, 
 pimiiveiy auftversise tfikem? 
 
 Let me observe from that book of Fessenden's of which my oppo- 
 Mat 'Seemed tO' know so m'ooh yesteiday : but the author of whieh hm 
 
 oaanot now name, as I believe, (if he can, howerer, he may tell us 
 something about him) — I say from the Encyclopedia of Religious 
 Knowledge, and from some omer documents before me, I would wish 
 to read a few statements, to show that this said Roman Catholic In- 
 stitution, chameleon like, first accommodates itself to the customs of 
 every country, and seems to inhale and exhale tlie popular atmosphere 
 until it reaches its end ; (for well the Jesuit knows the means may be 
 infinitely various, while the end is one and immutable,) and so soon as 
 It gains the fulcrum of popular opinion and the lever of the majority, 
 if builds up an empire, after the model of the Prince Metternich. This 
 has hitherto been its history, in every climate, and country, and age. 
 A single example of this policy, taken from the Encyclopedia, must 
 
 suffice : 
 
 *• Various attempts have been made to bring this church under the papal yoke: 
 but without success. The Portuguese having opened a passage into Abyssinia in 
 the fifteenth century, an emissary was sent to extend the inthience and authority 
 of the Roman pontiff, clothed with the title of patriarch of the Abyssinians. The 
 lame important comniission was afterwards given to several Jesuits, when some 
 circumstances seemed to promise them a successful and happy ministry; but the 
 Abysiinians stood so firm to the faith of their ancestors, that towards the close of 
 the sixteenth century the Jesuits had lost nearly all hope in that quarter. 
 
 About the beginnmgof tbe seventeenth century the Portuguese lesu its renew- 
 ed the mission to Abyssinia, when the emperor created one of them patriarch; 
 and not only swore allegiance to the Roman pontift', but also oblipd his subjects 
 to forsake the rites and tenets of their ancestors, and to embrace the doctrine and 
 worship of the Romish church. At length the emperor became so exasperated 
 at the arrogant and violent proceedings of the patriarch in subverting the es- 
 tablished customs of the empire, for the purpose of confirroine the pope's au- 
 thoritv, especially in imposing celibacy on some, and requiring divorce of others, 
 who had married more than one wife, that he annulled the orders formerly given 
 in favor of popery, banished the inissionariea out of his dominions, and trea'ed 
 with the utmost severity all who had any connexion with the undertakinff. From 
 this period the very name of Rome, its religion, and its pontiff, have all along 
 been objects of peculiar aversion among the Abyssinians/' — Encyc. Relig. 
 Knowl. p. 22. 
 
 Thus have the Jesuits done in every country, and this will they do 
 — first ingratiate themselves with the people, and when they think 
 they are secure of their object, they will proceed to subvert the gov- 
 ernment : for they are sworn and sold to the pope forever. 
 
 The gentleman says, We are both foreignera ; indicating that we 
 have equal rights and privileges. I did not use that term in an invi- 
 dious sense, when speaking of my willingness to receive foreigners. 
 Nor do I oppose the principles of^my opponent, because of their hos- 
 tility to Protestants only : but because of their hostility to Roman 
 Catholics. It is from my views of the political and religious bear- 
 ings, the temporal and the eternal consequences of the system, that 1 
 expose and oppose it. As a philanthropist, I am rpposed to the papal 
 empire, whether at home or abroad — in Europe or America. 
 
 But although politically considered, in one sense, we both may he 
 called foreigners ; yet, we are not foreigners in the same sense. I 
 claim a very intimate relation with the Protestant family. I am one 
 of that family. It was then my family, that first settled this country. 
 The bishop's family settled Roman Catholic America. He is a for- 
 eigner here, as I would be a foreigner in Mexico or South America. I 
 belong to the persecuted — ^he to the persecutors of that family. 
 
 In the next place, I never took but one oath of allegiance. I never 
 ffowsd to support but one political constitution. My opponent first 
 
8M 
 
 IIIBATK Olff TBS 
 
 tvofe to America and ttieo to Rome. He is bonnd to a fonim ] lims: 
 I in not. If that ptiiice shodd reward him for any senrlee with a 
 €afilnal*s eap, lie migiit be commanded away to Rome next week. 
 
 lienor PviciLL. No, I will not leiie this country. 
 
 Mb. Campbbll. The gentleman is under the " Holy Lord liio 
 fiilie.'' I am not a foreigner in thi« sense. 
 
 But still better, I am the father of a family : my children ire natiTt 
 AmerMans : and through these I am more a kin to the great Ameri- 
 ean family than he ever can be. Without perjory or apostacy from 
 his office, he can neter have a wife, nor family. He is a stranger to 
 fkMe IMV and holy relations. He has no conntry— no home. He 
 lives and he must die under the command of foreign superiors; and 
 they may, by authority or promolion, remove him to Europe or Asia at 
 pleasure. For these and other reasons I am identified with Protestant 
 a, and claim a relation here to which his heart shall ever be a 
 r*— [Time expired.] 
 
 Bmam PumcBLi. riiei— 
 
 AMtlMr iiBtance of the unfairness with which Catholic prineiplet 
 «PB ii|WiMated : another occasion for a holy triumph ! 
 
 lliit Ehemish Testament, from which the gentleman has just now 
 iwdf was never sanctioned by the Catholic church. It was published 
 by a caucus of parsons in New York, (whose names are pr«»fixcd to it,) 
 for the flZfiiM purpose of vitifyinff the faith, and outraging the feel- 
 ings of Catholics ! And this is caflcd a Catholic bible ! Good God I 
 whither has justice ied ! Archbishop Murray, of Dublin, has lately, 
 in the most solemn manner, condemned these notes. They are not to 
 be found in the Catholic bible, used in this or in any other country. I 
 am laboring to inspire my opponent with sentiments of self-respect; 
 and assure him anew, that " evil eommunieation eorrupfs good man' 
 fwrt.** The occasion oilled for original documents, candid statements, 
 ami reputable authorities ; but, instead of these, the public are mocked 
 by my friend with spurious, garbled extracts, which a dignified con- 
 troversialist would have treated with contempt. We repudiate the 
 notes, which Protestants have appended, /or im, to this bible. 
 
 Mb. Camfbili«— Produce another. 
 
 Bishop Pubcbuu— I will. Behold It. Here is the bible to be 
 found in every book-store, where Catholic works are for sale. Here 
 is Luke, chap. ix. 65 ! Not a word of it there! (Holds it opened, 
 towards the audience, and towards Mb. Campbbuu) 
 
 hlblt, was published In the very year and the very place with the edi- 
 tion, from which Mr. Smith pretends to have quoted. You have 
 heard Mr. Kinmont 
 
 The gentleman has cited the words of Christ, •• Do this in commem 
 onilon of me,*' against the real presence. This is all I wanted, to 
 complete my argument. Here Is the answer : 
 
 ** AUcr having proposed the tentiiiientsof the church upon tbete words," thtsig 
 iitf ft«lf »*' we M»«it t<^" what the thinlw of these others, whirh Chri«t added : " ila 
 Um in memory of me.** It it dmr that the intention of the Son of God ii to 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC RKLIOION. 
 
 OS hf theie words to raneniber the death which he soflTered for our laket: 
 Si. Paul concludes, froni these aanie words, that we annouooe, in this myst*- 
 ly, the death of the Lord. But it must not be inia^ned that this remeiubranca 
 of his death, excludes the real pretence of his bodr; on the contrary, by only 
 considering what has been just now explained, it will fully appear that this cora* 
 menaoration it founded upon the real presence. For as the Jews, in eating their 
 peace offerings, remembered that the^ had been sacrificed for them, so we, in 
 eatinr the flesh of Jesus Christt our victim, should remember that he had beea 
 immolated for us. It is therefore this same flesh eaten by the faithful, which not 
 only awakes in us the memory of his immolation, but which confirms to us the 
 truth of it. And far from being able to say that this solemn commemoration 
 which Jesus Christ orders us to make, excludes the presence of the flesh, it if 
 visible, on the contrarv, that this tender recollection, which he wills we should 
 have of him, in the holy communion, as immolated for us, is founded upon the 
 real receiving of this same flesh; it being surely impossible to forget, that it is for 
 us he hath given his body in sacrifice, when we see that he gives us still every 
 day this victim for our food.'* 
 
 I now come to the subject of purgatory, which my friend calls the 
 lever of the pope, to raise the world. 1 should be glad to see the 
 pope raise the world in any way. If he has not the power to raise 
 mortals to the skies, he, at least, wants the will to pull men or angels 
 down. The doctrine of purgatory can be proved by a few plain texts. 
 The first is from 2d Machali^es, lii. 42; where we read, that the val- 
 iant Machabeus sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem, 
 for sacrifice, to be offered for the souls of the dead. ** // is, therefore^ 
 sajfs ike scripture, a holy and a wholesome thought to pray for the deadf 
 thai they may be loosed from their *tn«." 
 
 My mend will say, the book of Machabees is not canonical. But, 
 is it not, as Du Pin would say, very ill done of him, to reject a booic 
 of scripture, because it pinches him. This is a fine way of confuting 
 Catholics: to mutilate the scripture when it favors our doctrine; to 
 believe our enemies, when they misrepresent it; and to attribute to« 
 and force upon us, doctrines which we do not profess. 
 
 The books of the Machabees are to be found in the Codex Alexan- 
 drinus, and in all the approved bibles of the Catholic church, from the 
 bennning. Why tear them, at this late day, from the canon? Be- 
 sides, they are, at least, authentic history, and, as such, faithful rec- 
 ords of the belief of the only people who, at the time when they were 
 written, professed the true faith. 
 
 Jesus Christ says, that there is a blasphemy against the Spirit; 
 which is a sin that will not be forgiven, neither in this world, nor in 
 that which is to come. (Matt. xii. 32.) These words clearly imply 
 that some sins wiU he forgiven in the world to come. Where 1 Not 
 in heaven, which ** nothing defiled can enter;*' not in hell, for out of 
 hell there is no redemption. What is that plarc, called Abraham's 
 hosom^ on which Lazarus reposed, until heaven was opened to the 
 souls of men, by the death of Jesus Christ I Was it heaven, or hell, 
 or that Intermediate place or state, which Catholics call by the name 
 of purffstory I It is necessarily the latter : apart from the suflfering of 
 sense oy purifying fire, it would be a state of mental or spiritual su^ 
 fering : as it was one of separation from God, whose beauty the soul, 
 released from the prison of the body, and the darkness of sin and ig>* 
 norance, so clearly discerns, and so ardently desires to enjoy. The 
 Savior tells us to be reconciled quickly with our adversary, while we 
 are in the way : lest we be delivered over to the judge, and cast into 
 pnsoo, whence we shall not be released, until we shall have paid the 
 
 iwi 
 
 m 
 
J W ll A i M M WZ1 A U'M 
 
 lait fartliiii|. (Ifatt. ▼. 36.) Wbai pfiwiii is this! What place of 
 torrowfiii iitoiiliiMi on the way to ktaweniif glory f Neilher heaTen. 
 tor the abode of oTerlastiiig torments: conseqaentlYtpiiri^tory. 
 
 •* CkrM died for our aim," says St Peter, (1st fipist. ui. 18,) " ft©- 
 mgjmi lo demh in ihejletk^ hui mMwmed in tke ipmt r m wAteA dbt 
 mumng, ke preached io ikom fnrtli lAol were in primmJ* This is the 
 ■iaee, of which it is said, io the apostles* ereed, ^^ He de$eended inU 
 Idf f** which was surely not the bell of the damned, but that tempo- 
 fary hell, or hades, or purffatoiy, to whose Inmates he announced the 
 joyful tidinga of their deGferanee, where the first and the second 
 Adam met, the type and reality. What is the meaning of the uniTer- 
 ■ally prevalent practice, of whieh St. Paul speaks, of prforminff 
 pious works, called baptisms for the dead : ^* El$e what maU they & 
 tdb are bt^zedfor the dead, if Ike dead rim noi ai oiL Why art Ihey 
 Am hifHmd'for ikem T^ (Ist Cor. jlt. 39.) 
 
 ** Ueiice, th« council of Trent teaches: **Tbit there ii a porgatory, end that 
 the souls detained there, are helped by the prayers of the nLithful, aod particn- 
 My by the aiC:ceptable sacrifice of the altar.'* 
 
 ii Cjtil of Jerasaleni, Eu«ellias, St Epiphaniust St. Ambrose, St. Jerome. St. 
 Aepistine, and several other ancient fotners and writers, demonstrate, that tbe 
 dbelrliM of the church was always, and u now the same, as that which was de- 
 ined by the conncil of Trent, with respect both to prayers for the dead, and aa 
 intermediale slate, which we call purgatory. How express is the authority of 
 the l&tt named father, where he says: ** through the prayers and sacrifices ottbn 
 «b«Rh and alms-deeds, God deals more mercifully with the departed than their 
 ■iaa deserve.** Serm. 172. Enchirid. cap. 109, 110. 
 
 SI. Chrysostom, who flourished within three hundred years of the age of the 
 ■pmlles, and must be admitted as an unexceptionable witness of their doctrine 
 and practice, writes as follows: **It was not without rood reason ord«in»dhy 
 tke t^ottlett that mention should be made of the dead in the tremendous mys- 
 teries, because they knew well that these would receive great benefit from it** 
 la Cap. 1. Philip. Hom. 3. Tertnllian, who lived in the age next to that of the 
 apostles, speaking of a pious widow, says: ** She prays for the soul of herhoa- 
 band, and begs refreshment for him.'* L. De Monogam. c. 10. St. Cyprian, 
 who lived in the following age. says: ♦• It is one thin|r to be waiting for pardon i 
 anuliier to attain to glory: one thing to be sent to prison, not to go from thence 
 till the last farthing is paid; another to receive immediately the reward of faith 
 and f irtue: one thing to suffer lengthened torments for sin, and to be chastised 
 and purified for a long time in that fire; another to have cleansed away all sin 
 by suffering.*' S. Cypr. L. 4. Ep. f. 
 
 The doctrine of the oriental churches agrees with that of the Catholic church, 
 in the only two points defined by her, namely, as to there being a middle state, 
 which we call pnr^toiy, and as to th« souls, detained in it, being helped by the 
 reis of the livinr fiulhfnl. True it is, they do not generally believe, that 
 m souls are punished by a material fire; but neither does the Catholic chnrcb 
 
 _ lire a beliei of this opinion. On some occasions, Luther admits of purgMtory* 
 tin article founded on scripture. Melancthon confesses that the ancients pray* 
 •d for the dead, and says that the Lutherans do not find fault with it. Cfalvin 
 iaiinates, that the souls of all the jnstaro detained in Abraham's bosom until thu 
 day of judgment. In the first liturgy of the chnrch of England, there is an es 
 press prayer for the departed, that **God would grant them mercy and everlasl- 
 Ik pace." Colliers Eccl. Hist. Vol. II. p. 257. 
 
 Bishops Andrews, Usher, Montague, Taylor, Forbes, Sheldon, Barrow of S* 
 Asaph's, and Blandford, all believed that the dead ought to be prayed for. To 
 these, I may add, the religioos Dr. Johnson, whose published Mediutlons prove, 
 that be constantly prayea for his dccened wife.'* 
 
 The Universalists make hell a purgatory. 
 
 The notion, that this doctrine fills the pone's eoiers with gold, it 
 loo ridiculous to be refuted ! Erery Catholic knows ita absurdity. 
 ^a tcf the intenlaon of the priest, about which the gentleman has found 
 
 waiP'iamPP*''' ^r^m^ 
 
 ■OMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION 
 
 337 
 
 •o imidi to say, that la no diffienlty. How do we judge of the Inten- 
 tion f Simply, by the act, the surest evidence of its existence. Can 
 we ask if a man has any intention to eat his dinner, when we see him, 
 sit down to table, take his knife and fork, use them, and eat till he is 
 filled ( so when we see the priest does what every priest does, and 
 the faithful people know that he ought to do, we nave the best evi- 
 dence of his intention. Besides, what motive could he have for such 
 a gratiiiUHis violation of the law of God and profanation of a sacra^ 
 menL iV'cnie repenU pemmta is an old and a true maxim. He would 
 fall into other excesses, first, and be suspended — God will not aban- 
 don his church ; and the sincere christian will always be rewarded by 
 him, according to his deserts. No man goes suddenly, &c. see Secreta 
 Monita. It was placed invidiously among the rubbish by the enemies 
 of the Jesuits, if found amid the ruins of their house, as the whole 
 society repudiated it. 
 
 Every learned and sound critic, who is at all honorable, deaounces 
 the imposition — it is an old trick. 
 
 Ovid in his I3th book, verse 59, 60, suggests the idea, in speak- 
 ing of Ulysses* treachery, when he first had ^old hid in the tent of 
 Palamedes and then denounced him for having been bribed by the 
 enemies of Greece. 
 
 ** Firtumqne probavit 
 ** Crinirn, tt ostenditqo kI jam pr.pfoderat aiinini.** 
 
 Shall I invent calumnies, when run out of proof of any man*8 dishon- 
 esty 1 God forbid ! What virtuous and immaculate family may not be 
 thus assailed 1 And the more virtuous and honorable they are, the 
 more will they be disconcerted and overwhelmed, for the moment; 
 but the more complete will be their own vindication and their slander- 
 ers* disgrace in the end. 
 
 The gentleman cannot get over what he said of Washin^on and 
 our KevoluLionary heroes, *'• the fatal shaft is sticking in his side.** 
 
 God has given to the people, neither too much, nor too little power* 
 He has given them no spiritual authority ; for as Jesus Christ said to 
 his apostles, so may the priest say to his flock : ^* You have not cho- 
 sen me.** ** No one durst assume the ofllice of priest, but he that is call- 
 ed to it, ag Aaron was*^ — and he was not called by the people, la 
 the Catholic church we solemnly appeal to the people for Ceatimony 
 for, or against, a candidate for holy orders. God has ^ven the peo- 
 ple reoMwiable power, in temporal matters, and revolutions have too 
 ofien shown their evils and calamities, in the most horrid and brutal 
 excesses and the loss of innumerable lives. This is an awful penalty 
 for the rash exercise of temporal power on the part of the people. Onr 
 own revolution was, perhaps, the calmest, tht> most temperate, the 
 Ie4wt abused for evil purposes by wicked man, because we had 
 Washington and kindred spirits to direct the storm. These, my wor- 
 thy friend calls perjurers ! As God has restricted the people, he has 
 also restricted their rulers, in their exercise of power. How many 
 terrible lessons have not kings been taught, for its abuse. Why can- 
 not nations unite to select a common umpire ; to whom all disputes 
 should be referred, and thus the crimes of kings, and revolution, 
 with all its accompanying horrors, by the people, extinguished in the 
 bud. 
 
 I do not undertake to defend the popes in their use of the deposing 
 power — and were my voice, at this moment, ringing in the Vatican, 
 2I> 22 
 
DEHATt OK THE 
 
 .iittmil of tlie Baptist tliiiKeh, STcamofe street, Cincinnati, I should 
 not bo nffovoii. Tliero tre in tiie niligioiiSv at well as in the ftpiri 
 tutl iPorM, two fofoos, the eentrlpetal, and tlie centrifugal. 'I'h<^ see 
 of Rome is as the nun and centre of the sjstem, to which all the pla* 
 nets, revolving in beauteous harmony, tend. We bless, we love, we set* k 
 with ardor, by a kind of religious instinct, strong as the law s of gravita- 
 taoB, this Gomnion centre, which gives us all, our proper impetus and 
 eoheiwicy. But like the planets, we are not absorbed hy it. Wc 
 know its excellence, its usefulness, its destination, its limits. 
 Mow, to show you what our sentiments are, with regard to Uie tan- 
 
 Krai powef of the pope, here is a standard work, the identical texl- 
 ok of theolopf which I studied in Paris many years ago. The au- 
 thor is still living, and instead of being rebuked for what I am going 
 to say, he has, on the contrary, been made bishop of Maus, in France. 
 His name is Bouvier, and he is as pious a christian as he is a sound 
 divine. 1 read you evidence from scripture, tradition and reason, in 
 favor of the doctrine which is the burden of the proposition, viz. that 
 ** the pope has no right, direct, or indirect, by any divine commission, 
 to the temporalities of kings or other Christians." When was the 
 lofiofllnf power first claimed hy the pope! Ecclesiastical history 
 answers, in the 10th century. Then by the rule which I have alrea- 
 dy laid down, it is no part of Catholic doctrine. It came a thousand 
 years too late. 
 
 ** FropoMtioD. That th« Roman Ponliir doi>t not poneai, by divine rtf ht. any 
 ipwer, either direct or indirttct. over the temporal itiet of ktn|p*,or other chrt«- 
 liaili." Tbi» proposition It proved 1st, from the sacred scripture: •'^t Itm #k- 
 fl«r tcnl Mc. Imtm §€mt you, (John xa. 21.) The Soti of mmm hath nof wAert 
 imimkh ktmd, (Mat viii. SO.) Who kmih made me ajudge, or « dMiet 09tt 
 
 Cmf' (Luke xii. 14.) Hence we may reason thus. The M>ver««i^ Fontiff'ran 
 re noauthoritv over the tempural goods of wen by divine right, unless it be 
 Kranted to him by Christ, but be has received no such power from Chrt«t. for 
 Chritt gave to no man a power, which, he himscif, when on e9rth, did not pos- 
 §■•■; but Christ when oa earth possessed no such power, n-latingto temporal niat- 
 lifa, as appears both from his poverty, and from these words of his, ** who hmth 
 ■i mJMd^e or m Mvidtr over you." Therefore the Roman Pontif does not 
 
 IS, by divine authoritv, any power, Stc. 
 
 Besides, Christ cxpmnlr declared that be was a hinr , but at the same tini^. he 
 positively denied that his kincdom was of this world, (John xviii. 36.) fhr this 
 pmpof t / ami mio Hu world, h€ mys, that I mit^ bear testimony to the truth: 
 M another place be ordered to ^ve to Caamr the thingt that belong to Ceesar, 
 fllii. sali SI.) By a miracle, he caused the stater to be found in U.e uiouthof a 
 ish,|]Mtthc tribute might be paid for himself and Peter, (Matt. xvii. 27;) and 
 surely be couM not shew, in mora eapfcsa temi*. that he did not wish to eier> 
 cise any temporal authority. Farthcnnofc, when he sent hts apostles, he by no 
 ■nans, spoke to them, concerninf temporal aflairs, or any political authority, 
 bat only of ih4 Jrcyt o^ th* kk^dtm |f keemm, and the nower of binding and 
 mmimg; he oiderao tiat, goinf tbroi^ the entire world, they wouM teaek 
 iksm ikSngg wkkk Af eonunatulf^ thtmf k§ mmnounced to Iktm meiiy tribula 
 9imM ^ twery toW, and even death; he commanded thtm, ioadmtt and repron 
 liof •. who tranupr§m* bni ikmi ikiy MkmM moimmiik I4fm. mtkMi by jgrari/tml 
 fmimM: ^ k* wm mM kimr tk§ ektmk^ my§ At, iff Aim As to lAe«, a# lAe heathen 
 emd tk§ pmbiiean, (MatL sviii. 17.): he that beHeveth not, $hall be condemned, 
 (Mark avi. 16.) *i%t apottles, in like manner, far from exert!i<iin«r any tempo- 
 ral pwer, oa the contrary, stronf ly recommended obedience and respect to all 
 
 gan princes and perBecuton, and rulers sent by them. 
 
 It can be proved, 2od. from tradition. We would be tedious, were we to ro. 
 
 ■rso all the testimonies of Fathers, Doctors and chief bishops, who by their 
 word and etample clearly taught, that the civil power was entirtrly indepen* 
 ■mtii nf the: eeeMastical. 
 
 TSfftaliaa in bit Apologetic, chap. 30, say»: ••They, (ibc christians) know 
 
 SOMAN CATIiOUC RKUtaON. 
 
 339 
 
 who hath given power to fmperori........they know that it was God, alone, in 
 
 whose jfower they are, to whom, they are second, and after whom thej are first 
 .......an emperor has his authority, from him by whom he was created man. 
 
 ncfore being emperor. He receives power from him, from whom also he receiv- 
 ed the brcHth oflifc fVe prayjor all emperors.** All christians, imbued with 
 
 this doctiine, op|M)8ed the anus of patience alone, to the most unjust and 
 mo«t cruf I tortures, for more than three hundred years. 
 
 Osius, bishop of Cordova, wiites thus to the emperor Conetantins, who favor- 
 ed the Arians. ** Do you not interfere with ecclesiastical matters," as already 
 quoted. 
 
 Pope Ge.asius, in his epistle 8th to Anastasius, a violent enemy of Catholics, 
 fays, * There are two things, O emperor Augustus, by which principally, this 
 world it governed, the sacred authority of the popes, and the authority of kings. 
 (La'^be torn. 4. p^e 1122.) This pope, therefore, ci|Dsidered that each powef 
 was indenendeut o( the other. 
 
 It can be proved, 3d. By theological reasoning. 1. That opinion ought to be 
 rejected, which was entirely unheard of during the ten first a^es; but that opin- 
 ion which holds that the chief bishop has any just right even indirect, over the 
 temporal possessions of princes, or other christians, was, by no mean?, heard oi 
 during the ten first ages, to wit. down to the time of Gregory VII. who in the year 
 lOUU, attempted to depose Henry IV. and disturbed the peace of the entire world, 
 by the assertion of this novel right. Therefore that opinion should be rejected, &c. 
 *2. That opinion should be entirely rejected which would occasion most 
 grievous evils, but the opinion which we oppose, gives, &c. 1. It renders harmo- 
 ny between the priesthood, and the sovereign power, impossible. 2. It would 
 prevent infidel princes from embracing the christian religion, and heretics firom 
 returning to the true church. 3. It would aA'ord a necessary occasion for con- 
 tinual wars, if it were practised, which, experience has already too clearly shewn. 
 Therefore, it should be entirely rejected, &c. &c. &c. 
 
 Now see here the scholastic method of proving propositions, and 
 an admirable one it is. We say 1st, scripture teaches it, — 2nd, anti- 
 quity corroborates ity— 3d, reason confirms it. That is the method 
 we follow, in all our schools. This is the solid, and irrefutable man- 
 ner in which this proposition is laid down and established. Does this 
 look like submitting to the dictation of the nope in temporal matters ! 
 Did the En§rlish Catholics obey the pretenoed absolution bull ? Did 
 not Catholics under arms; and with arms, as in the case of Julius II. 
 leaist their acknowledged, and in his proper sphere, respected Pon 
 tiff f Did they not tie his hands while they kissed his feet ! 
 
 Waddington tells us that when Louis XII. of France quarreled 
 with the pope, he called a council of bishops at Tours, and proposed 
 the question, whether he could detain the pope, as his prisoner, on av 
 ocftaaion, which he described. They gave an affirmative answer 
 Fhis, in addition to what I have said, shows how the distinction of 
 power, and of rights, was understood at that period, and every epoch, 
 back to the apostolic ages. 
 
 My friend asks for a disdairoer of these pretensions, on the part 
 of the pope. 
 
 Mr. Campbell. — Not by the pope, but by the councils. 
 
 Bishop Purcbll. — ^The general councils never made the recogni 
 tion of this power, an article of faith ; why, then, should they dis- 
 slaim it! 
 
 Here is what pope Innocent III. said. His account of this affair 
 Is very curious. It is, indeed, a strong disclaimer, and every word 
 deserves to be matuiely weighed. 
 
 Cum rex superiorem in temporalibus minime recognoscat, sine juris alteriut 
 Ispsione in eo se jurisdictioui nostrae subjicere jiotuit, in quo vic'er. tur aliquibus, 
 
 auod perseipsum, non tanquam pater cum filiis, sed tanquam prince™ rum sub- 
 itis potuit (liapeuMire. Hegi igitur gratiam feciiuus requisiti: — quod uon solum 
 
:i40 
 
 BIBATB Oil TM» 
 
 EOMAN CATHOLIC SELIGION. 
 
 341 
 
 III 
 
 in Etximtn ptininoiiici, Mper quo plentn in temporalibai fcriiniia potestntein, 
 tcntni etiam in ftliis regioiimiis, certtt c«ufliiintff«ctn«ten|}onilcaij«iri#dtctioneiii 
 dOilM^er etercenins. Noo qnoclatieno Jurt prxjudir^re veltniiii, tcI potestatein 
 mollii iwldMlMii utarpare, cam non ignoraniui Chriatuiu in eTiin]^elio rt- tuondiMe; 
 mdite, i|iiaiiant€««ari!<. Ciesari, et qussuot Dei, Deo. Propter quoci postula« 
 tut utMiMiftelnn dtvidtret iattr duos : quii, inqutt, coustituit iiiejudicciti intef 
 rmj Sed quia in Deuterouoniio coutioeter, si difficile et aiiibiKuuiii apud t« 
 Miiicitiiii «■■« penpexeris, Suree et aicende nd Iocuid, quem dipt Doniinus 
 Heiistiiiiftfte. Liber V. £pistl2. Innocent III. 
 
 Since tlie King bjr no means recorniies a superior in temporal aothoritj, ha 
 cwiM Mlmiit to our jurisdiction without infrii%ing upon the right of another, 
 b wMd it iMiiis to some, that be coald dispense, not as a father with his children 
 Uutasn prince with his subjects; therefore we granted the King what was re* 
 i|ilisfl% D«ewae we not onljr exercise a temporal power, in errtaincuget, in the 
 iMtriiMMjr of the church, over which w« act with full authoritjr in temporalities, 
 but also in other districts, certain matters bcinf considered un : Not that wn 
 with to determine prematurely of another's right, or usurp a power not due to 
 ■s : since we arc not iarnoraut of what Christ has said in the gonpel. On account 
 ©f whkh he was aakea to ditide an inheriiHoie between two, who, savs be, has 
 
 ippointed me Judge between r« ? But that it is written in Deuterotoiuy, if 
 
 Ci ind a diflicult and doabttnl case, rise and repair to the phsce, which the 
 111 your God has chosen, &c. B. V. E. 12, Innocent III. 
 Here the pope, himseir, quotes scripture and precedent, against 
 tlie aMunplioa of such power. Nex|p— behold the testimony of a 
 ptitimlar council, the doctrine of the ancient Fathers, of an eminent 
 iiviae, tlm celebrated Arthur O'ljeaiy, on the matter before us, and 
 oiperaeeutton for conscience sake. 
 
 ^The Council of Toledo forbids the use of violence to enforce belief: **Bccanse,** 
 add the fathers, ** God shows merry to whom he thinks fit ; and hardens whom 
 
 ha pleases." ^ Pneciptt sancia synodns nemini deinceiM ad rredendum rim in- 
 liire. Cui enini Dens vult, niiseretur ; et quem vult, indurat."* AikI the 
 CMMcil of Lateran. under Pope Alexander the third, acknowledges, that tha 
 chwvh rvjects bloody executions on the score of religion, which proves to dem« 
 onstration. that the canon charged tu the fourth council of Lateran, under Inno- 
 cent the third, in which canon, ** the secular powers are addrtssed to take an 
 iMKlo ailMinlnate all heretics oat of their territories, and in case of refusal, to 
 lata tbtk- luli^acts abwilvad from their allegiance, and the bnds of the heretics 
 to be aeiied by the Catbolica,** *c. is snurioas. Collyer. the Protestant his- 
 torian, in his fifth volume of Ecclesiastical History, acknowledges that it is not 
 Ibnnd in any copy, coeval with the council. Some hundred rears after the 
 council, it was produced to light by a German. And we know full well, that at 
 that time, savcral spurious pieces were produced, to serve the purposes of 
 
 Wen even such a decree, or any other of a similar nature, genuine, the Cath- 
 olics would reject them, without any bvaach of faith ; because the church has 
 BO power over life, limb, the rights of sovereigns, the property of individuals, 
 or any temporal concern whatsoever. Her bishops, then, whether separate In 
 or in a collective body, cannot graill anv such power into their spirttnal coniniis- 
 iioB. Thev would act in an extrajudicial manner, and beyond the limits of tlieir 
 ■phare. This I have proved in my remarks on Mr. Wesley's letter, and elsewhrra. 
 
 Far from rounteiiancing cruelty, death and oppression, ** tha spirit of tha 
 chorrh was, in snch a ntanner. the spirit of meekness and charitv, that she pre- 
 Taalcd, as much as in her power, the death, of criminals, and even of her most 
 cruel aneniies." says Fleary. " You have seen how the lives of the murderers 
 of the martyrs ot Armenia were saved ; and St. Austin's effort to preserve the 
 Ooiiatials, (who had exercised such cruelties against t be Catholics) from the 
 tkor of the imperial laws. You have seen how much the church detested the 
 {■discreet seal of those bishops, who prosecuted the heresiarch Priscillian to 
 death. 
 
 la general, the church saved the lives of all criminals, as fiir as she had power. 
 St. Augustine accounts for this conduct, in his letter to Macedoaius, where we 
 
 * Cufi de Jadww, dist. ii. 
 
 r^ that tha church wished there wcve ao paina n this life, but of the faealhig 
 kind, to destroy, not num. but aia, aad to preserve thesinoer frmueieraai tor 
 ■lents."* If, in after ages, some popes and bishops deviated from this plan of 
 meekness and moderation, their condoct should not involve a conseqaence inju* 
 rious to the principles of the Catholic church, which condemns such proceedings. 
 The religion of Catholics and Protestants condemns frauds, fornications, drunk- 
 enness, revenge, duelling, perjury, Ac. Some of their relaxed and impious 
 writers heve even attempted, not only to palliate, but even to apolngiie lor such 
 disorders. The children of the christian religion daily practise them, — is tha 
 christian relipon accountable for the breach of her own laws? 
 
 My friend made some dtsplatf, on the persecutingr canon of the coon- 
 cil of Lateran, and yet Collyer, a Protestant historian, in the 5th to- 
 lume of his ecclesiastical history, pronounces it spurious ! He ac- 
 knowledges that it is not found in the copy of the decrees coeval with 
 the council ; that it was manufactured by the Germans, hundreds of 
 years afterwards ; and that there were several spurious documents 
 manufactured about the same time. Now hear a distinguished pre- 
 late of our church, Dr. England, in his speech before <«congress, io 
 which he leaves nothing important unsaid on this topic. I am happy 
 to incorporate his eloquent remarks in this debate. 
 
 ** A political difficulty bas been sometimes raised here. If this infallible tribu- 
 nal which you profess yourselves bound to obey, should command you to over- 
 tura our government, and tell yon that it is the will of God to have it new model* 
 ed, will you be bound to obey? And how then can we consider those men to 
 be good citizens, who profess to owe obedience to a foreign authority, to an au- 
 thority not recognized in our constitution; to an authoritv which has excommu- 
 nicated and deposed sovereigns, and which has absolved subjects and citizens 
 from their bond of allegiance. 
 
 Our answer to tliis is extremely simple and very plain, it is, that we would not 
 be bound to obey it; that we recognize no snch authority.^ I would not allow 
 to the pope or to any bishop of our church, outside this Union, the smallest in- 
 terference with the humblest vote at our most insignificant balloting box. Ha 
 has no right to such interference. You must, from the view which I have taken, 
 see the plain distinction between spiritual authority, and a right to interfere in 
 the regulation of human government or civil concerns. You nave in your con- 
 stitution wisely kept them distinct and separate. It will be wisdom and prodence 
 and safety to continue the separation. Your constitution says that Congress shall 
 have no power to restrict the free exercise of religion. Suppose jrour digni 
 fied body to-morrow attempted to restrict me in the exercise or that right; though 
 the law, as it would be called, should pass your two houses and obtain the signa- 
 ture of the president, I would not obey it, because it would be no law. it would 
 be an usurpation: for yon cannot make a law in violation of vour constitution; 
 yon have no power in such a case. So, if that tribunal which is established by 
 the Creator to testily to me what he has revealed, and to make the necessary 
 r^^lations of discipline for the government of the church, shall presume to go 
 beyond that boundarv which circumscribes its power, its acts are invalid, my 
 rights are not to be destroyed by its usurpation, and there is no principle of my 
 creed which prevents my using my natural right of proper resistance to any tyraa- 
 Bical usurpation. You have no power to interfere with my religious rights, tha 
 tribunal of the church has no power to interfere with my civil rights. It is m 
 duty which every good man ought to dii^chnrge for his own. and for the pnbhe 
 benefit, to resist any encroachment upon either. We do not believe that God 
 gave to the church any power to interiiere with our civil rights or oar civil conceros. 
 Christ our Lord refused to interfere in the division of the inheritance between two 
 brothers, one of whom requested that interference. The civil tribuiiaU of Judea 
 were vested with sufficient authority for that purpose, and he did not transfer it 
 to his apostles. It must hence be apparent that any idea of the Roman Catholics of 
 those republics being in any way under the influence of any foreign ecclesiastical 
 power, or indeed of any church authority in Uie exercise of their civil r^ts, it 
 a serious mistake. There is no class of our fellow citixens mora firee to think^ 
 
 Sod 
 
 * Flaury. Discours, 3. No 9. 
 
iWi<w 
 
 'fiS'ii A 'fw ma ivn v 
 
 MMmUA mK Vn 1 MM 
 
 mOHlH CATHOLIC EELIGION. 
 
 843 
 
 ■ml to •d. im thcikiielf ct on iM: nl»j«et of oar 'riglits tli«» we ftfe, ond I beltcro 
 tiMfe k noloilf forlionof tkfi Anicnaui hmlif morejealoutof ibrrigainflaenr^ 
 or mon raodj to retbt it. W« bare brethren of oar churrli in every pirt of tb« 
 
 Eloboi oodor 9wmj hrm of goironinicnt. Thii b • tubiect upon which ench of ui 
 frto fo act ■• Im thbilis |Mroper. We Inow of no tribunal in our church which 
 cwi interfcr« in oarproctsectinff as citixen*. Our ecclesiastical authority existed 
 lialbn oor constitntiont ia not aAectod, bj it; there is not in the world a consti« 
 tation which it docn not precede, with which it could not co-exist; it has teen 
 iMtboa periah, djnasties decaj, empires prostrate; it has co-existed with allt it 
 lug gumred then all. it is not dependent upon anj one of them; tliey niajr itill 
 flh«M|c. and it will itill continne. 
 
 We MOW conie to examine what are called the pertecatin|^ lawsof onrchorch 
 In the Tear 1213, at the council of Lateran. certain heresies were condemned 
 by the nrsi canon; and anionfst other thinp this canon recites as Catholic faith 
 in oppoaHion to fie errors oitboBe whom it condemned, that there was but one 
 C3odf the Creator of all thin|i.of apirits as well as bodies; the author of the Old 
 Testament and of the Mosaic dispensation, equally as of the New Testament 
 nnd of the Chriilian dispensation: that be created not only the good angels 
 but also the devil and the bad anfenif originaiijr coniinr good from his hand, and 
 becoming wicked by their own nialicCt iuc. In its thircT canon it excomumnicatei 
 those heretics, and declares them to be separated from the body of the church 
 Then follows a direcliun, that the heretics so condemned, are to be given up to 
 the secular powers, or to their bailiJb, to be duly ptmished. This direction con 
 tinues to require of alt bishops and others having authority, to make due search 
 within their several districts for tlioao heretics, and if they will not be Induced 
 to retract their errors, desires that they should be delivered over to be punished. 
 TlMio is an injnnctlon then to all temporal lords to cleanse their dominions by 
 l i fl 'n ai lnf those heretics: and if they will not. within a year from having 
 been so admonished by the church, cleanse their lands of this kentieal filth 
 thej shall be deprived if they have superior lords, and if they be superior lords 
 niwl be negligent, it shaM be the duty of the metropolitan and his provincial 
 bishops to excommunicate them, and if any one of those lords paramount so ex* 
 commonicated for this negligence shall continue during twelve monthf nnder the 
 escomninnication, the metropolitan diall certify the same to the pope, who, find- 
 ing admonition useless, shall depose this prince, and absolve his lubiects from 
 iliiilr ontbo of lealty. and deliver the territory over to Catholics, who having es> 
 tetniinaldl the heretics shall remain tn peaceable possession. 
 
 Tliis is the most formfdable evidence adduced against the position which I 
 have laid down, that it is not a doctrine o( our church, that we are bound to 
 perseentn thoee who diflier from us in belief. I trust that I shall not occupy 
 very nMci of jonr time in showing, that Ibis enactment does not in any way 
 weaknn that asaertion. I shall do so, b^ satis^ing you that this is a special law 
 iir a particniar case : and also by convincing yoai thnt it is not n canon of the'chnrr h 
 respecting any of tnose points in which we admit her infallibility; nor is it i 
 tmmm of the chnrch. 
 
 Vbe doctrines condemned in this irtt canon or^onted in Syria, touched lightly 
 milM islands of the Archipelago, settled down in Bulgaria, and spread Into the 
 ■MMli of £arope,bat were principally received in thevicinttv of Albi, in France. 
 Tin ptnoaa nondemned held the Manichcan principle of there being two cren- 
 tom of tiM snivotM; one a good being, the antbor of the New Testament. th« 
 cnainr of good nngiiti, and nenerally of spiritBal essence; the other an evil be- 
 ing, tbo crMior olllodiet, tie nnthor of the Moaak diapenntion. and generally 
 ofthe Old TmlMMnt. Tlieir stated that marriage was nnlawfni. and co-opera- 
 lion with tbo ffineiple of evil wns criminal. The consequences to society were 
 of the very worst aescription, immoral, dismal, and desolating. The church 
 tianiined the doctrine, condemned it as heretical, and cnt off those who held or 
 nbelind It. from her oommunion. Here, according to the principles which I have 
 maitttained before ^ou, her power ended. Beyond this we claim no authority: 
 the chvreh, by divine right, we say. infallihlv testiUes what doctrines Chri«t has 
 rttvealed, nmf by the same right, in the same' manner, decides that what conlra- 
 diets this revelation is erroneons; bntshe has no divine authority to make a law 
 which shall strip of their propeHy. or consign to the executioner, those whom 
 she convicts of titror. The doctrine of onr obligation to submit does not extend 
 to force us to submit to an osurpalioo; and if the church made a law upon a 
 
 •irtiiect beyond her commission for legislation it would be invalid there wonld 
 be t%o proper claim for onr obedience: nsorpation does not create a right. The 
 council could by right make the doctrinal decision; but it had no riffht to make 
 the temporal enactment: and where there exists no risht to legislate on one 
 siile, there is no obligation of obedience on the other. It this wa* then a canon 
 of the church, it was not one in luakiiij which she was acting within her consti- 
 tutional inns'liction, it was an usurpation of temporal government, and the doc 
 trine of in&llibility does not bear upon it. . . . 
 
 Every document respecting this council, the entire of the evidence retpectinr 
 it, as well as the very mode of framing the enactuient:*, prove that it was a special 
 law r^aadiiig a particular case. The only persons whose errors were con- 
 demned at that council were those whom I have described. The general prin- 
 ciple of legal exposition restraining the application of penal enactmenU niiist 
 here have lull weight, and wilt restrain the application of the penalty to the 
 only criminals brought within its view. But the evidence is stilt more confirnied, 
 by the special worus of definite meaning, this, and JUth, which were specially 
 descriptive of only those persons; the first by its very nature, the second by the 
 nature of their crime; antl the continued exposition of the enactment restrained 
 its application to the special case, though frequently attempts had been .niade 
 by individuals to extend its application, not in virtue of the statute, but in virtue 
 o'f analogy. It wooJd then be improperiy forcing its construrtion to say that lU 
 aiieretion was to be general, as it evidently was made only for a particular case. 
 
 In viewing the preamble to this council, as well as from our knowledge of 
 history, we discover that this vras not qaertly a council of the church, but it was 
 also a congress of the civilixed world. The state of the tiiu« rendered such 
 asMinblages not only usual but necessary: and each legislative bodj>' did its own 
 business by its own authority; and very generally the subjects which were de- 
 cided upon by one body in one point of view, came under the consideration of 
 the other assembly in a ditferent point of view, and their separate decisions were 
 engrossed upon a joint record. , c • 
 
 Sometimes they were preserved distinct and separate, but copyists, for their 
 own convenience, brought together all the articles regarding the same subject, 
 from what source soever they were obtained. Such was precisely the case in 
 the instance before m. There were present on this occasion, by themselves or 
 by their legates, the king of Sicilv, emperor elect of the Rotnans, the emperor of 
 the east, the king of France, the king of England, the king of Arragon, the king 
 of Jerusalem, the king of Cyprus, several other kings, and lords paramount, so- 
 vereign states, and princes. Several of the bishops were princes or barons. In 
 the ecclesiastical council, the third canon terminated exactly in one sentence, 
 which was that of the excommunication or separation from the church, of those 
 whom the 6r8t canon had condemned, whatever name or names th^ might as- 
 sume; becnnse they had in several places several appellations, and were con- 
 tinually dividing off and changing names as they separated. The duty and the 
 jurisdiction of the council came to this; and the ancient records pve no more 
 as the portion of its enactments. But the congress of the tcmporafpowers then 
 madetne subsequent partes their enactment: nnd thu« this penal and civil re- 
 gulation w«s not an act of the council, but an act of the congress : and it is not 
 a canon concerninff the doctrine of the chureh, nor indeed is it by any means 
 n canon, though the copyists have added it to the canon as regarding the very 
 flame subject ; and as confessedly the excommunication in the third canon re- 
 gurded only the special case of Uiose particular heretics, the addition of the 
 penal enactment to this oarticular canon is confinnatory evidence that tho • 
 who added it knew that the penalty in the one case was only co-extensive witn 
 the excommunication in the other. 
 
 Having thus seen that this canon of the Council of Lateran was not a doctrinal 
 decision of our church establishing the doctrine of persecution, and command- 
 ing to persecute, but that it was a civil enactment by the temporal poweragainst 
 persons whom they looked upon as criminals, it is more the province of the pol- 
 itician or of the jurist than of the divine to decide upon its propriety. I ma}, 
 however, be permitted to say that in my opinion the existence of civilized socie- 
 tv required Its enactment, tnough no good man can approve of several abuses 
 which were committed under the pretext of its execution, nor c-an any rational 
 wan pretend that because of the existence of n special law for a oarticular |iar 
 
 a 
 
MA BERATE 031 TlH 
 
 |M»M, CTeqr case which amj Im thought anilogoun to that for which proviiica 
 «•• inwla IS to be illrrallj subircted to tbote provi«ioos. 
 
 We «rc iic*iv arriveJat the nlare where we mmy eaBiljr Ami the ortfin end th« 
 estemt of the mpaA power of depoAinr lOTerci^ns, and of absolriug subjcrtt 
 mm liieif Mtis of allei^iaoce. To judje properlv of lacU. we luiiit know their 
 
 rfltl elfCiliiMlaDcet, not their men: outiiiie. I'he circumstajices of Christen- 
 I were then widelj diAer^nt from those in which we now are placed. £uro|}« 
 was thrn onderthe feudal fjtieni. I have seldoui funnd a writer, not a Cathol»c, 
 who. in treating of that afre and that t^tt* ni, ha» been accurate^ and who ha* Dot 
 Aiiie us Terjr icrioas inmstice. But a friend of ntine. who is a rei|icctable meuibtr 
 of ) our honorable bodjr, hat led nie to read Hailanj's arcount of it, and I nmst 
 mj thai I have srldoni met with so mtich candor, and, what I call, so much 
 tfMlk Fmni reading Ilia statement of that tjstem it will be plainly seen that 
 tlwra^tiated amongst the Christian potentates a sort of federation, in which the/ 
 iMMMl themselres by certain regnlatinnt, and to the observance of those thcv 
 W«M held not mertrly by their oaths but by various prnulties. sometiuies tbrr 
 consented the penalty should be the loss oi their station. It was of cottrsc ue- 
 ressary to ascertain that the &ct existed before its coiisf qu* nces should be deriared 
 to follow ; it was also necessary to establish soiue tribunal to examine and to de- 
 cide asto the existence of the fact it5»-lf, and topro<;laim that exi^teuce. Amonrst 
 WMMMndent suvereknt there was no superior, and it was natural to fear that 
 ■Mtral jealousy would create great diliiculty in selecting a chief; and that what 
 mpittlad in concession might afterwards be claimed as a rwrht They wert 
 liowater all members of one church, of which the Pope was the head, and, in 
 tilt nspactf their common fiither : and by universal consent it was regulated 
 that he thouM examine, ascertain the lact, prochim it, and declare its conse 
 i)ttences. Thut he did in reality possess the power of deposing monarrbs. and 
 of absoiring th«ir inbjecto from oaths of fealty, but only those nionarchs who 
 Wf n memhem ©f that federation, and in the cases legally provided for. and by 
 their concession, not by divine right, and durine the t^nii of that federation and 
 the existence of his commission. He governed the church by divine rights he 
 deposed kings and absolved subiecU from their allegiance by human concession. 
 I preach the doctrines of my church by divine right, but 1 preach from this spot 
 not by that right but by the permission of othera. 
 
 It is not then a doctrine oi our church that the pope has been divinely com- 
 itiissioned either to depose kings or to interfere with republics, or to absolve 
 the subjects of the foniier from their allegiance, or interfere with the civil con- 
 cams of the latter. When the penccoted English Catholics, under Elixabeth. 
 mma m Me malior an unfounded claim to this right, and upon the shadow 
 Of that unfounded right making inroads upon their national independence, by 
 declarini who should or who should not be their temporal ruler, they well 
 showed how little they r^rded his absolving them from their allegiance, for 
 they volunteered their services to protect their liberties, which their Catholic 
 ancestors mm taborad to establish. And she well knew that a Catholic niisht 
 ■afely be eatrntted with the admiralty of her fleet, and that her person waste- 
 cure amongst her disgraced Catholic nobility and gentry, and their persecuted 
 adherents ; altboi^ the Court o( Rome had issued its bull of absolution, and 
 ■ome divinca were Ibund who endeavored to prove that what orklaated in vol- 
 jataiy eonceasioii of states and monarchs waa derived from divnic iostitutioo. 
 if then Elisabeth, of whose character I would not wish in this place to express 
 Mr opinion, was safe amidst thoae whom aba persecuted lor their <aith. even wkea 
 m head of their church absolved them firom allegiance, and if at such a moment 
 ey flocked round her standard to repel Catholic invadera who came with con- 
 •ccrated banners, and that it is admitted on all hands that in so doing they vio 
 lated no principle of doctrine or of discipline of their churchy as we all avow 
 ■nrely America need not fcar for the fidelity of her Catholic citizens, whom she 
 rheritbet and whom the receives to her bosom with affection and shelter* from the 
 peraectttion of others. Neither will anv person attempt to establish an analogy be- 
 **!2L**F '"^'ration and that of feudalism, to argue that the pope can do auioiigst 
 ••wjatiiodidamonartt Knropean potentiates under circumstances widely different. 
 Ilj wonhy opponent saidt that he would only touch on pefMeotion. 
 lly friemlt, persecotion had marlied me for a ▼ictim in my natire 
 lamd, and foiced me to seek an Asylum in America, when I wan 
 young and friendleai! Persecution is there, in full op» ration at this 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC KELIOlON. 
 
 345 
 
 tery hour. Scarcely a breeze cornea across the ocean, without bring- 
 *ng on its wings, fresh tidings, of blood, shed under Protestant per- 
 ■ecution — ^by ministers of the Protestant faith. 
 
 Widows there kneel in the blood of their own children ; and, because 
 excess of grief has made tlicm maniacs, they drink that blood, and 
 eurse the authors of tlieir misery. Ls not this true ! Does not the 
 universe know and shudder at it I And baring been compelled to 
 fim from intolerance, having fought against it, must we still see the 
 green-eyed monster, trampling upon the vine and fig tree, here, where 
 we had hoped to sit down under their shade, in safety, and in peace, 
 with our brethren of every denomination! Must we still fear the 
 midnight knock at the door, and the domiciliary visit, by a brutal 
 soldiery 1 Must the perishing orphans see the bread taken out of 
 their mouths by rapacious parsons, and their mother^s cloak (their 
 only covering of a wintry night^ distrained, to pay the tithe proctor f 
 Where will you find tyranny like Ihisl Would this be a better slate 
 »f things, than what we, in this free country enjoy 1 Bigots would 
 blast this glorious prospect. They would proscribe one sect after 
 another, 'fhe appetite for blood, they have, even now, evinced, and 
 we know, when once indulged, how hard it is to sate it ! But I must 
 call upon Protestant testimony for the wrongs of Ireland — and I will 
 onlif touch uwn the persecution, Taylor, a graduate of Trinity Col- 
 lege, in his nistory of Ireland, says : 
 
 ** It would be a mere waste of words to reprobate this iniquitous law, or ra- 
 ther this violation of all law, human anu divine. No Irish Protestant can pe- 
 ruse its enactmenla without a blush for the shame thus brought on his religion, 
 when it was thus virtually declared that the reformed system should owe its 
 strength and security, not to the purity of its priuciples, nut to the excellence 
 of its doctrines, but to robbery and oppression, to dissentioii between father and 
 child, to stimulating one neighbor to seiie the fruits of another's industry, to 
 the desecration of a solemn sacrament, by making it a test for office. Mow can we 
 be surprised that the reformed religion is unpopular in Ireland, when by this 
 and similar laws, a Protestant legislature virtually declared that Protestantism 
 CoulJ not be secure unless it entered into alliance with Belial, Mammon and 
 Molochr Hitl. of Ireland, By W. C. Taylor, Esq. A. B. of Trinity college, 
 Dublin, page 108. Vol. 2ntl. New York edit. 1833. 
 
 Now tell me if the annals of Catholicism can produce any thing 
 like a parallel to this ! After enumerating the most tyrannical laws 
 that Draco, or Dioclecian ever enacted, can we discover more pro- 
 scription — ^more cruelty ? 
 
 My friends, I do not blame the Protestant religion for this. It is 
 the spirit of the country and government ; and the shame is, that 
 when Catholic governments have ceased to persecute, Protestant ones 
 eontinue to do so. 
 
 My friends, were 1 to eonsult my own feelings, I should be better 
 pleased to draw a veil over these horrors ; but my opponent made al- 
 lusions to the intfuisition, as an argument that, if ever the Catholics 
 became the most numerous, they would make it a part of their system 
 to persecute : as if the same argument, if argument it can be called, 
 would not be equally strong against all the leading churches of Pro- 
 testantism ; and if the gentleman makes any further extracts, I will 
 meet them just in the same way, and condemn both Catholics and 
 Protestants, for that by which they are alike disgraced. Now, as 
 he brings the account of the inquisition before us, and proves it to be 
 the most bloody tyranny, setiin"^ aside all forms of legal procedure 
 &c., I %viU lefer you to Hume's history of England, for an inquisi- 
 
 44 
 

 BKBATB' OH Till 
 
 ROMAN CATnOUC SEUGION. 
 
 347 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 lion equally terrible, ami more imjast, under Protestant Knrrlat 4-« 
 tlie fainoas Btaf^Ckamlier, where, niMm the least sospicioii, witliont 
 proof, the officer was sent to the hoases of the most distinguished 
 men, nay even to their beds, and forced them in the dead of night 
 to a prison. Sir Thomas Moore, bishop Fisher, the aged countess of 
 Salisbury, &c. are instances with which I could fill up some honifio 
 pages. 
 
 la to oaths ; the gentleman says that I haw taken two which art 
 Incompatible with each other. This is not so. My ecclesiastical oath 
 ti if a tmrefy tpiriiual nature. The only oath of allegiance, of a 
 lanporal character, which I haTC ever taken, was to the United States. 
 Theae two oatlis cannot be incompatible. The heavens and the earth 
 •re lot more different from one another, than they are. They cannot 
 possibly Interfere with each othpr. Therefore the bishop's oath is, *y 
 no imeiifM, what the gentleman has represented it. The pope has ab- 
 jured the odious sense which the docnment is made to besr. It is no 
 sin surely, to swear that we will not kill the pope. Would my friend 
 make it such ! * Samng my order' is a clause which the gentleman 
 ■houM have expatiated upon, and our order is forbidden, under the 
 iniist awful penalties, to shed any one's blood, but our own, if we are 
 called upon to suffer martyrdom, and that of the mystic victim of 
 the altar, as a propitiation for our own sins, and those of the entire 
 world. Feraequmr was never intended to mean persecute. It alludes 
 to moral, not brute force. The weapons of our warfare are spiritual, 
 mol canal. The Latin word means only to follow up with persever- 
 ing argument, and persuasion, as I am doing this day. Before I took 
 that oath, I read it again and aj^in, and took the decisions of the 
 bishops of America upon it. We all agreed that there was nothing 
 in It contrary to the allegiance due to the United States. 
 
 My friend spoke of Catholics violating their oaths. I would ask 
 if there is a nation that has eiven such splendid testimony of respect 
 for oaths, as Catholic Ireland ! For 300 years of the bloodiest per- 
 secution that was ever inflicted, they have steadily refused to take 
 an oath which every thing but conscience urged them to take. 
 
 My friends, all this ought to be remembered, not for the gratifica- 
 tion of hostile leellngs, but for justice, and as a fair offset, to balance 
 ilw Spanish Inquisition, which is all the while not Catholic— [Time 
 expired.] 
 
 Haffpttd II o^ekekf J. Jf. 
 
 Mb* Camfbxll ntef*- 
 
 We liav«^ my friends, had matter of debate thrown before os dnrng 
 iM last hoar, that would require seven days more to discuss* An 
 ocean Instead of a harbor opens to our view. Good policy, however ' 
 Instead of concentrating fM liie main points, which, above all others. 
 It behooved tlie bishop to clear np^ If, indeed, he had any hopes of being 
 able to defend himself, he gives ns a little of every thing, great and 
 ■mall ; present, past, and future. Thirty roinntea would not be enough 
 for me to single out, arrange, and state the contrary propositions, to 
 eover all his last premises. As the gentleman knows what he can best 
 defend, and what he cannot, and as his lime is at his own disposal, I 
 have no right to complain* I proceed, therefore, not to recapitulate 
 my argument, as I expected we hoth woaid have done in oor kst 
 
 epeeches : hot to bmsh the dost off a few of the prominent ptiints, 
 erowded together in his last effort. 
 
 The bishop^s denial of the genuineness of this Rhemish Testament, 
 at this time, is exceedingly unfair; and still worse, from whatever mo- 
 tive it may proceed, it is wholly reckless of history and fact. I say it 
 is unfair f because, when near the beginning of the debate, I showed 
 him the Testament, and challenged him to object to it if he had any- 
 thing against it, that it might be settled forthwith, he was silent. I 
 went even farther — ^I asked him for another copy, or edition of it more 
 correct, if be had one : he was still silent. And now, at the close, he 
 baa held up the Douay Bible, without these notes, published long 
 since, not pretending to be the same work, either as to time, place, or 
 eircumstance, as proof that this edition of the New Testament is not 
 authentic! But my audience, and the public, will appreciate all this. 
 I do assert, then, and my assertion has as much logic in it as his, that 
 the gentleman has misrepresented this affair — that this book is truly 
 what its title page declares it; and that both the text and the notes are 
 as truly Roman Catholic as the Douay Bible. Hear the tiile: 
 
 "The Ntw Testanu Dt of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ; tran-latcd o«t 
 
 Again: hear the recommendation of this work by "ministers of the 
 gospel, and other learned persons of various denominations." They 
 say, "This edition contains all the notes of the original edition as pub- 
 lished at Rheims, A. D. 1582." Not a new and amended impression, 
 suppressing the more offensive comments, but the original itself. This 
 recommendation is signed by more than a hundred gentlemen of as 
 much literary and religious reputation as can be found in the U. States. 
 
 Once more : . «. . . 
 
 CKRTincATB. — ^We have compared this New York edition of the Rhemish 
 Testament and Annotations with the first fHiblic«tion of that volume, which was 
 iaaued at Rheims in 1582; and after examination, we do hereby rertifr, that the 
 present rc-print it an exact and faithful copv of the original work, without 
 abridgment or addition, except that the Latin of a few phrases which were trans- 
 lated by the annotalors: and some unimportant expletive words were undesign- 
 edly omitted. The orthography also has been modernixed. 
 
 ^ John Brkckinridok. 
 
 William C. Browwlee.D. D. 
 Thomas De Witt, D. D. 
 DuKCAN Dunbar. 
 Archibaiji M aclat. 
 
 WlLUAM PATTON. 
 
 To all these certificates there are not less than one hundred and t^rfjf 
 mmmm. But the gentleman's calling this authority in question, is in 
 good keeping with his whole course. There is no authority acrainst 
 the church of Rome — neither Protestant nor Catholic to be believed, 
 if they say any thing against her. But infidels, and such Protestants 
 as flatter her in her assumptions, are canonical as holy writ! If the 
 bishop is to be believed, all Protestant historians, theologians, authors, 
 ftc. opposed to the Roman assumptions, are Kan* In proof and de- 
 monstration of the super-excellency of Protestant principles, and of the 
 debasing, degrading, and enslaving principles of the papacy, I intended 
 to have drawn a full comparison between the Protestant and Catholic 
 parts of Ireland; the Protestant and Catholic countries of Switzer- 
 land—between Spain, Italy, Portugal, anji Protestant England— 
 
348 
 
 DBBATB m TBB 
 
 Jjitwwn lilt UnitiHi StatM and iIm Smiai Aracrieaii Stafc,— , 
 Protestant mnd Roman Catholic Amerioi. But I cannot now mtummpl 
 It; aid nueh do I mgm it! for such aeonaparison fiiiriy drawn, would 
 •nioiint to Ibe iMat aatitfactory demonstniuon of the political, literarr, 
 •ad moral tendemaiea of the two tysiema. Plain, as proof from hofr 
 writ. It would thus have appeared, that this superaUlioa, Hke the touch 
 Of the torpedo, lays a beouoibinjr, pardkinf, md blifhtinff hand on 
 HI within Its ffraap. « « 
 
 1 ■• fiMlMiian IS yet on indnlfemses and purgatory, when he onffht. 
 in reply to my last speech, to ha? e endeavored, if possible, to r«liev« 
 Ms cause from imputations the most serious and the most revolting to 
 ABMrinn ears. I have not thought it important to descant upon the 
 tanlTof ains, or to give a tabalar view of the prices at which certain 
 •ins were rated in gold and silver in the market of indulgences. Nor 
 Have 1 at all inquired why, in this lax-book, for killing atayman a less 
 Sf 'ir'^ **'"/*'' simply striking a priest, without breaking the 
 •itii. Ilicie UMtions, though capable of solutioiLfrom authentic docn. 
 aentt, ■» tin dieams of purgatory I deem so inferior, and so un^ 
 blushingiy hanfaeed impositions, that I prefer matters of more grave 
 conwn to this community for the time allotted us. That indulgences 
 ■» iona fide licenses to commit sin, and not simple absolution for past 
 •ins, is as susceptible of proof as that Mardn Luther began the Protes- 
 tant reformation. * 
 
 new tueir crowns at the sovereign pleasure of the popes, is just as oh- 
 I!!!l* 1**'?!''"*^ ?«S»« ^hat there were popes at all. Sometimes, in 
 
 !!!f iJilr*"^ f "f*'^ •«^'"** ^^. iMumptions, and sometimes they 
 •OMWMed. But the ready aubwIinatioR of the state to the church 
 Wljwed in the magistrates eieeaang the anathemas of the church, in 
 pitting to d^th those denoted as heretics by the church, shows in what 
 a slale ofsubserviency and pliancy political priiwes were held by the 
 ppet. That is just the very krrw of chuieh and state—the very 
 aipimiacy which we fear, and which is so antipodal to onr institutions. 
 
 . T l^"!^"* I»««^«« or reformers to death, and supporting a homan 
 pnesthood by the state according to the dictadon of the church, which 
 mates that anion, or subserviency, so wicked and odious in our estiraa. 
 tion. And will the gentleman ask, what Roman Catholic state, nation, 
 or pnnoe, ever did such a thing ! ! » » 
 
 In his MMBiii diipiay t of Roman Catholie doctrine, my friend has 
 Ml pven yoo the Irane-Alpine doctrine. The Cis-Alpine, or Gallican 
 doctors, aie not of the old Roman Catholic aehool. Ihm ara almoot 
 »emi.pioieMant on those very points on which he has introdneed them. 
 Thm are no evidence against the standaid doetrinea of that chureh 
 on th«!e questions. The French Catholics began to stand aloof from 
 Mie high and haughty ntaleniiions of their trans-montane brethren. 
 They are the most liberal portion of the Roman church, and have, con- 
 lequently, done more for the promotion of science than all the rest of 
 the Catholic world put together. Bishop England gives their views. 
 
 I asked for an authentic disclaimer of the attributes of the Roman 
 church, and of those acts and deeils indicative of her tyrannical, op. 
 pressive and persecuting spirit whiiOi I hive detailed. 1 ask this sUir 
 
 SOMAN CATHOLIC RKLfGION. 
 
 349 
 
 tad while f do it in a tone indfcattve of that earnestness ^which the 
 oeeasion requires, I do it in the same benevolence to my opponent and 
 his party which 1 felt and expressed at the beginning of this discus- 
 sion. The times and the occasion peremptorily demand it. We know 
 what individual priests and bishops have said against popes and coun- 
 eils, and their proceedings, and against other parts of that system: but 
 these are said for effect ad captandum vulgus^ and will be unsaid by 
 the same individuals, or by others, when occasion requires. 1 have 
 brought very serious allegations against the Roman Catholic institu- 
 tion, and authorities for them — all of them authentic, and most of them 
 never disputed by my opponent. He disclaims these principles, acts 
 and movements : but he disproves not one of them. Nor would the 
 dtsclaimitig of them by all the bishops in America, disprove one of 
 them. The council of Trent has ordained and enjoined all these prin- 
 ciples of implicit and blind obedience, intolerance, proscription, and 
 persecution. No council has since met, and no power but a general 
 council can define a single article of faith, or rale of manners, accord- 
 ing to the declarations of my antagonist. Indeed, the doctrine of the 
 council of Trent must remain immutable and infallible while time en- 
 dures, according to him : for no other general council can possibly 
 contravene it ; and, therefore, while the Roman church exists, she 
 must be, what 1 have shown she was, before and since the council of 
 Trent. 
 
 This council met in a boisterous time. They met to oppose and put 
 down Protestantism. They knew the allegations of Protestants 
 aj^ainst their doctrine. If then, they could have abandoned those prin- 
 ciples for the sake of either reclaiming or defeating the Lutlierans, 
 that was the time to do it. They sat long enough, and debated with 
 seal enough ; and yet they dare not discuss the papal authority. The 
 pope forbade them to debate his office, jurisdiction, or authority, and 
 they did not attempt it. The pope signed their decrees, and all that was 
 done there was done irrevocably and forever. The disavowal or the 
 disclaiming of any priest or bishop in the Roman Catholic church, is 
 not worth more, and has no more authority, than mine. It is, therefore, 
 of no value for my learned opponent, or any American prelate to say 
 that be does not approve this or that; or, agree to this or that. They 
 must all submit to, and they will all inculcate on all suitable occa- 
 sions, every decree of the council of Trent. Thus did the Jesuits in 
 Abyssinia. They first explained away every thing : but finally ex- 
 plained it back again, and had almost saddled the pope and the coun- 
 eil of Trent forever on those unfortunate Abyssinians. • 
 
 I could, had I the time now, from that very history of Ireland from 
 which the gentleman read you an extract, a copy of which I too have 
 lying on the table,— I say, I can from this book show that the ancient 
 ehristian church of Ireland was subjugated to the church of Rome, by 
 this very species of rhetoric, and that finally the whole island was 
 enslaved to the pope by the same means: for in England, Scotland, 
 Wales, and Ireland, there were Christian churches, ages before the 
 popes of Rome were born. But by this chamelion attribute of becom- 
 ing all things to all men, for a while, she has made all men become 
 what she pleases. 
 
 Thus by degrees under this system, the human spirit is broken, de- 
 faded and debased, night ensues, and finally, gross darkness covers 
 2E 
 
350 
 
 OIBATC O^ THE 
 
 I 
 
 ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIGION 
 
 351 
 
 tlm fMiople. BTtn in Cftnaila tiiMse iIm ptpaey bap §^md llie iseeiMi- 
 •ocj, laws bate hem p ii ii l ia tlit pmnmm aweBifciiia, giving to 
 
 ■oiiiiol fkoiQuitssioneni aod frand jurors tiio privilegie of** mamng ii 
 'wmrkf instead tf writing thar name* /" Nothings can preserve our in- 
 
 piliii«aii inaiiluiliNis but a sysiem of intellectual and mcral cnltnrei 
 aoMitilik tiammj child boro upon our soil or brought to oiir shores* 
 IlnlMS we thus benevolently co-operate in this great cause of human* 
 ily, this last and best hope of the oppressed of all nations will vanish 
 from the earth, and a new and ghostly despotism sball arise and ex- 
 tMiii its iron sceptre over this our beloved land. Nothing but intalli« 
 giiMe anl virtue universallv diffused, can save us from Uiis dread ca- 
 tastioplie. In Prolettant Prussia, with a Roman Catholic minority* 
 they understand so well the importance and utility of education, and 
 its power to dissipate the darkness of superstition, always tyrannical, 
 that every child is by law compelled to be educated, and that morally 
 •a well as intellectually. 
 
 There remains an important point or two yet to be noticed. The 
 fltntlenan m exceediugly squeamish in Ua avowals of this oath, which 
 iiivvar bimis the Roman priesthood to the court of Rome. He admits, 
 however, thai iiDter due coiisullntion or meditation liud lie touk tlie 
 oath, clauwis of which conKiriiin him to ** increase and advauce the 
 auilioi-ity of the pope,'* aiitl to ** persecute tiiid oppo.«<e heretics and 
 schiMiMtictt/* He tttiys pertefuor means nut to per!<ecate. 
 
 Bisuop I'uKCKLL. It iiieaiM to follow, and iiuthiiig more. 
 
 14 w. Camphkll. It is a generic term, tuid means to follow with the 
 swonl or fHi;^n<'^ ^^ ^h*^ hand or foot, only in the way of opposition, 
 however. «!>«fif<ir is lo follow, but permqu&r m to follow with veu- 
 gVMiioe* 
 
 I have learned this morning thai il can be proved under oath that all 
 th« btuhoiM ill America have taken this otith; and ihiil without eqiiivo- 
 catioM or lueutitl reserrulion ; of which fad, however, I was before 
 apprised; bill the {leuilcmau himitelf has admitted it, and I pnraue il 
 no furtlier. I am, however, disapfioin ted to obi^erve that he lia;i been 
 at no paiiisi to reconcile his allcj^iance to two governments so singu- 
 hirlv repngnant to each other in all tlieir elements and tendencies. 
 
 M J friend ied from persecution in Ireland! From paving «/^A/jr, 1 
 Mfipoie, aeeeniing to the Levitical law \ Well, this tiihe system is 
 a falling oonoem, and will soon pass away. But is not tliis, his perse* 
 anliou, an ingenloas off-sel to ifty millions of martyrs sacriliced by 
 tlie papal pewerf I Some are whispering thai this Homau persecu* 
 ting splrll is dying away as the tithe sysiem. Lei those, however, 
 who Ihink so, in addition to what I have already read from va* 
 rious sources, accept a few words from the "Plea for itie West**— 
 from the M ed, of M. Aiguan, of the French Academy in Paris, 
 
 "Passing to the 10th artiele of the A»Meor<l«ir, in whioh it is said that 
 
 his Most Christian Miyesly shall •mploy,in eoaeert with the Holy Father, 
 all the means In hii power to eaase to oease, as soon as possible, all tha 
 iiaerders pu^ ohstaelet whioh ohstruot the welfare of religion and the 
 •zeeation of the laws of the ehurch — were [the Protestants] to ask (al- 
 though the profuse shedding of their blood might have informed them). 
 What are the laws of the churoh 7 The aolf of Pins VII. himself, and 
 the writings on which the ehurch rests her authority, would answer, thb 
 tZTaaifiifATioN OF naaiiics, thi cowriaoATiow op vniia ooona, lan 
 mra raiVAViON op evkry civil peivilbob." 
 ¥• this fha author •ubjoins a aute : *»Ci:rtaiu portions of real estate which had 
 
 belonged to ecclesiastics, had pa«Md into the hapds of Protestant princes. Pius VII. 
 in 18(^, compUlned of it to his nuncio residing at Virhnaisnd reminded him that, 
 according to tlie laws of IIm cbarcli, not only cootd not heretics posi»esa ec- 
 rlesiasticai property, but that also they couH not possess any property whatever, 
 since the crime of heresy ou»ht to be punished by the confiscation of roods. 
 fie added that the subjects ofa prince, who is a heretic, should be released from 
 every duty to him, freed from all oblig:ation and all homage. * In truth,' said he, 
 * we have fallen on times so calamitous, and so humiliating to the spouse of Jesus 
 Christ, that it is not possible for her to practise, nor expedient to recall so holy 
 nwKims; an<i she is forced to interrupt the course of her just severities against 
 the enemies of the faith. But if she cannot exercise her right to depose the 
 pirtizans of heresy from their principalilies,and declare that they have (prfeited 
 all their goods; can she ever permit that, to enrich themselves, they should 
 despoil her of her osm proper ooniiaions? What a subject of derision — would 
 she not present to these vtry heretks and unbelievers, who, wbiie they ins'-lted 
 her grief, would sa^ they had discovered the method of rendering her tolerant? 
 
 "The same pontiff in bis instructions to his agents in Polaod. given in 180ft, 
 professes this doctrine, that the laws of the church do not recognize any civil 
 privileges as belongin<|^ to persons not Catholic; that their marriages are not 
 valid; that they can live only in concubinage: that their children, being has* 
 lards, are incapacitated to inherit; that the Catholics themselves are not validly 
 married, except tliey are united according to the rules prescribed by the court of 
 Rome; and that, when they are married according to tnese rules, their luarrii^^a 
 is valid, had they in other respects infringed all the laws of their country." — 
 Quarterly Register, vol. 3. p. 89. 
 
 Remember then, that according to the acts of Pins VIT. the laws of 
 the church &till command the extermination of heretics — the cfmfiseation 
 of their goods, and their deprivation (^ every privilege — thai Froltsta$iU 
 mane no privilege* ; and that the present calm is owing, not to a change 
 of spirit, but of times : for says the pope : ** the time§ are 90 calamitous 
 
 t h at the ehurch is forced to interrupt the amrse of her just severities 
 agaimt the enemies or the faith V" These are truly calamitous 
 times ! !^ Alas for prosperous days ! 
 
 I am indeed sorry that our debate has been so much out of logical 
 order. An issue has never been fairly and fully formed on one of my 
 propositions. My friend occupied the ground which he chose. He 
 was respondent. How he has responded, it remains for others to 
 judge. He has been positive and declamatory enough, and very aero- 
 pulous about ** mint, anise and cummin :** but how have the great to- 
 pics been met ? I rejoice, however, that it will go to the public, as it 
 was spoken, and that the public wiU read and judge. 
 
 I have heard a hint that the gentleman is about to disprove the fact 
 of the anathema or bi8hop*s curse by introducing Sterne, turning into 
 ridicule the curses pronounced eenturiee before he was born. The 
 hnmor of Sterne found the reality of the curse, or he woold not have 
 laughed at it. 
 
 The gentleman has now to elose the debate. The usages of diaeos- 
 eion forbid the introduction of new matter in the last speech. He will 
 rohabiy again tell you of Catholic devotion to American liberty, and 
 f his brother soldiers, that fought in the Revolutionary war. For, by 
 such arguments he has generally met the decrees of councils, the bulla 
 of oopes, the records of history, and the precepts of the apostles. But 
 before the devotion of a few Roman Catholic soldiers to the cause of 
 the Revolution can be accepted as proof of Roman Catholic love of 
 either civil or religious libierty, it must be ascertained, whether the 
 hatred of Protestant England, rather than the love of rational liberty, 
 instigated those soldiers that served during that war. For my part, 1 
 
 i\ 
 
 •1 
 
 <;il 
 
 *\ 
 

 .If BnA I IS MJ*% f II K 
 
 ilMllM to tlie opinion thnl llie bntred of England was at least at strong 
 «i iaplnr to tlmi eimfta an tlm lot • of liteny^-^Bttt— [Tinm ex- 
 
 ■imi* J 
 
 My friends, in order to meet one of the last allegfatioDS of the gen- 
 
 in« naneij, that the Catholic church has a law, making Proteal- 
 
 children illeg ilimate ; I know of no law to that effect, which ad« 
 
 its of the least practical difficulty ; but I will tell you where it it 
 ■ii if '§nmf wai Inipoees civil disabilities and diaciaalifications of the 
 OMiel niiiNit charaeter. It it in a Ptotestant country. And, here, let 
 ■• any, once for all, that I judge too highly of the character of 8coi»- 
 nen and Knglishmen, and know too well that they detest these laws 
 IS much as f do, to mean anything disrespectful to them, when I al- 
 lude to the acts of the British governoient, or the malpnicticcs of iii- 
 dividuala. Scotland has done much for science. Eagle>like she has 
 icwied to its sunniest heights. May she battle, like the Bruce, by the 
 side of 0*Connell, for human rights. But, facts are facts. Nov;*, 
 a Unitarian minister, Mr. Dewey, whom I have already quoted, sa^s : 
 
 **Tht!diks«'nter» are d«iiiaiidiii|^ to b« rvlifVfMl fruiii titcir hunit^ut. Ffctittuni 
 to parliamriit, either Ibr aii entire abolitiun of the union bf tween church and 
 slate, or Cor an ett«enttat modification of that union, havf, it it well kiidwot be* 
 come mattera of almost every day occiinreiMW. There it a determination on thii 
 poimi, wbieb hmmI al lenrth tucceed; aad I niiiit t«y. indeed, from my own iii;< 
 pf—lmHii abnat thr kanuhiy* of the cate, that if the dissentem — ii' those whose con. 
 JtlfiimattdfMfCrlf auil per$omU reqttet^Uity are alike invaded by the rhurcb 
 Mlabliahnient, ivilt not cause their voice, and the voice of justice to be beard, they 
 
 dtacrve to be oppressed... If the church eodownienis were a bequest for the 
 
 benefit of any particutar class of christians, it was fur the Catholics. The hut* 
 mmi portioo of tli«w were actually Catholic endowments, if it b proper that 
 mmf tlMMild be divailcd inoni that originiil desi|(n at all, it ought at least to ba 
 dona ill aid and ftirthcmnce of the whole rel^ion of the country ......No mam 
 
 I Ibinkc iSMi tratnl through this countrjr without Icnowing that the dissenters are 
 ilfniwotiv treated in a manner anountiiurto absolute indignity ! As to the m> 
 Jmmm m the ty stent, it is well known. Thn distefiter is eicluded fiom the uni* 
 ttnititS. In iact, km tma aeilher be born, nor baptized, nor married, nor buried, 
 bat awkr the opMObtMia <yf the law. That is to say, there can le no leg^al nt^i** 
 tratioa of his birtli; Us baptiauMil certificate does nut entitle him to le^^al marriage t 
 •ad be can receive neither niarriase, nor burial from the hands of his own pastor. 
 
 And BOW trhnl is alle|iad in defence of this state of things? No princifjle or 
 ptelaace of jastice that I have ever heard, but only the principle of eipe<li- 
 eaej. it is said that monopoly and eBclnsMui here are necessary. It it said that 
 religion cannot be Mpoorled in dignily and honor, without ample endowmeAla 
 nnd rich beneices.** Vol. 1. p. 14X 
 
 Such is the state of England in the enllg[htened nineteenth century, 
 nnda Pielty state it certainly is ! Thus, on incontrovertible testimony, 
 Hint of the nation at large, are monopoly and exclusion necessary to the 
 support af a ayatem which Mr. Campbell has solemnly declared to be 
 the onlj bulwark of the Protestant religion ! ! 
 
 Mv mends, for those tremendous curses which you have heard, and 
 at which you have laughed so heartily ! I must spoil or heighten the 
 fun by telling you that they are not Catholic curses, nor yet Protest 
 taut curses exactly, but that they are the Jeu d*esprit of a Protestant 
 ninisier, Lawrence Sterne, all found in this book (exhibiting it,) 
 whieli 1 have had brought me, this moment, from a book store, written 
 liy thai worthy parson himself, and one of the most grossly obscene 
 in the English language ! ! Verily, my opponent has given me, in this 
 iiiale, a measure of revenge which i would not, myself, have asked 
 
 BOXAN CATflOUC BELIGION. 
 
 353 
 
 ibr. And he had these cnrses, stowed away for years, on that bit of 
 •oiled paper, to be produced as the tmtp de grace to the Catholics, al 
 the close of this debate. I saw these curses, when some waggish 
 wight had them published, in Philadelphia ; and the moment he men- 
 tioned them, I wrote on my notes, " Sierne," ♦* Tristram Shandy," and 
 sent for the book ! Dr. Slop cuts his finger, untying a certain case of 
 instruments: he whistles Lillebulero, to ease the pain; and Uncle 
 Toby, or his nephew, with Cervanlic gravity, swears by Juno^s beard 
 to Die genuineness of these curses, and hands them to Dr. Slop, to 
 read by way of an anodyne ! But, seriously, in the 28th chapter of 
 Deuteronomy, are to be found curses, as awful as these here pro- 
 lounccd. Must we mock God that inspired, or the scripture that re- 
 cords them! Now the bible itself is turned into ridicule by the gentleman 
 Christian charity and common sense, truth and justice, require im- 
 peratively, that no one should be condemned without a hearing, oi 
 charged with holding sentiments which he disavows. Here is the 
 fullest, the clearest, the most unequivocal disavowal, of the doctrine 
 of the pope^s deposing power. The Catholics do not believe that he 
 has any such power. We would be among the first to oppose him in 
 its exercise ; and we would be neither heretics nor bad Catholics ; and 
 we each of us bishops swear the very words of the oath : ^^Fersequar 
 d impugnabo, salm meo ordinct*^ in the sense specified, which is the 
 only true sense, the assumption of any such power by the pope, or the 
 pope for the assumption of any such power. Fon ten centuries this 
 
 POWER WAS NEVER CLAIMED BY ANY POPE. 1t CAN, THERSrORE, BE NO 
 
 PART OP Catholic doctrine. It has not gained one foot op land 
 
 POR THE POPE. It is NOT ANY WHERE BELIEVED, OR ACTED UPON, IN 
 
 THE Catholic church. Nor can it be, at this late day, estab- 
 lished, IP ANY MAN COULD BE FOUND MAD ENOUGH TO MAKE THE AT- 
 TEMPT. Let these go before the American people, as the real princi- 
 ples of Catholics concerning the power of the pope. And if we must 
 pronounce a judgment on the past, let it be remembered, that when 
 the pope did use this power, it was when appealed to as a common 
 father^ and in favor of the oppressed ! We should go back, in spirit, 
 to former times, when we undertake to judge them. We should un- 
 derstand the condition of society at the period ; we should know the 
 circumstances, general and particular, which controlled or influenced 
 the great events recorded in history. We should not c|uarrel with our 
 ancestors, because they did not possess knowledge which we possess; 
 nor flatter ourselves that we are vastly their better" because of these 
 adventitious advantages; while they manifestly surpass us in others 
 of greater value, to the Christian, the moralist, the artist. They had 
 tlie substance of good things : we seem to be content with the shadow 
 of them. The very efforts now made by fanatical preachers, and pe- 
 titioners to congress, to proscribe Roman Catholics, clearly show that 
 we arb ftir behind them in the regard for truth, and the exercise of 
 toleiatttHi. Let it never be forgotten, what the sect was^ of what reli* 
 gum tht men were, who first petitioned congress, in this free country, to 
 reitriet, i r, to use a more appropriate word, to abolish liberty of conseientKf 
 and tofwrn a Christian party in politics. They were not Roman Catholics. 
 The B%'1 of Oregory XVL censures bad books. He condemns not 
 the liberty Hut the licentiousness of the press. And is he not riffht ! 
 Can there bt « greater corrupter of morals than bad books 1 Did not 
 2k9 23 
 
DEBATE OH Tllfl 
 
 81. Pivl Imin Iml boolit to tho nnoiiiit of MOO pieces of ■ifTer , as ws 
 Itaii in Acts lis. 19! Is it not sctioiMble in Bnfland and the Unttf;il 
 Slates to publish books against the existence of God! You see what 
 •ne^ided ticws, some would be great men can take, of the doings of 
 f9^m* Tho gentleman blew up the bible, and all tlie mysteries of 
 ehristtanitjr, and himself with them, when he tried to blast the rock 
 of Peter; is it wonderful that he should implicate St. Paul, and Eng- 
 liah and American common and statute law, when he would blow up 
 tlie good old pope, Gregory XVI. I 
 
 In ■ leacript addressed bj his holiness Pius YIL to the Ticars apon- 
 ti^ of Great Britain, dated the 8th of April, 1820, his holiness ex* 
 
 - 11w faithfiil abttaiii from rcwiiiif tb« wicked books, in which in thcM calua. 
 lioias times, our r«l%ion is assailed from all sides; and that thejr should be strength- 
 ened in &ith and woodworks, by the reading of pioos books, and particular! j tbs 
 iiolf scripttiret. in editions approved by the church— joa precedin;^ them by word 
 and eiample.** "Ut a perversomni libroninn lectfone.qufbaSfCalaniitc^issiniis hisof 
 temporibnt sancta nostra Relifio undique iropctitur, ab^tineant; ut piorum libra 
 fiin,pa:aertiiBtcripfiiranini sacranini lectione. ineditionibus ab Ecclesia nppro 
 balls in fdc et in bonis opertbust Tobii fcrbo etexcmplopraeuDtibus,courorteB 
 tor.** 
 
 ** In the pdini ofLoalt XIV. of France, at the safgestion of Bossnet, bishop of 
 MeauSfSOJIiil Mpiei of the new Testament in the vernacular tongue, were dit 
 llibiilid in th« pwrinccs.** See Tindiration of rtligiou^ Orders, No. 40, 3 <. rol. 
 
 The Index Is a book of which I have never had a copy ; and no Ca« 
 HiiIMi tlml I know of, in the United States, has ever seen it. The 
 Inw of nature is as much of an "Index** as that volume, for it forbids 
 «■ to read bad books which the index*finger of conscience points to 
 It as evil, with the word—BiWiiai ! The gentleman greatly mis- 
 takes the Catholic doctrine, the morals of Catholics, the politics, ths 
 intellects of Catholics. I trust, as he becomes more enlightened, he 
 will think better of them. I am sure this audience, and the public, 
 will. All see by the crowds of Catholics thronginor, to the very las* 
 •moment, to this debate, how free and fearless of the investigation of 
 their faith they are, and IbeL They have had the full benefit of all 
 llie gentleman*8 sophistry and extracts; and the effect is infinitely 
 bettor for Catholicism than any sermon that I, or any Catholic bishop 
 in th« wiiMi, has ever preached to them. They see that, with all the 
 |«mdeman*s learning and talents, he has utterlv failed to estoblish a 
 •in|fle one of his propositions. Hence they will be more attached to 
 their faith than ever. 
 
 As to the deposing power, I may recall to your recollection the fact 
 that five great universities of Europe were consulted by William Pitt* 
 tnd thcjr all, in the most solemn language, reprobated such a doctrine 
 Their decisions may appear in an appendix, if we publish one. I 
 have not tint to read them now. In Millner*8 End of controversy, 
 and Charles Butler's nemoirs d'Enfflish, Irish and Scottish Catholica» 
 we*ll find these matters fairly stated and discussed. 
 
 There is nnore liberty in Home than the gentleman gives it crodit 
 for. There is a Protestant chuich, even in Rome, where service is 
 regularly performed according to the Episcopalian rite. Tlie Jews 
 »n not any where more charitably treated, than in the* eternal city. 
 l.ast year, they presented a splendid copy of the Holy Bible, or soms 
 other sacred book, to the pope, as a token of their irratitude. 
 
 Tlie gentlemin calls the system of tithes a dying system. It hue 
 
 BOM AN CATHOLIC BBLIGION. 
 
 VOO 
 
 Indeed been a dying system. It has slain its thousands, and made 
 tlie condition of the living worse than that of the dead. 
 
 Judge Hall, of this place, has treated the question discussed, more 
 learnedly and eloquently than my worthy opponent or myself. I will 
 give his remarks the place to which they are so well entitled for 
 candor and liberality. 
 
 ** riiis question has iiecoroe so important in the United States, that It it tinw to 
 b^n to inquire into its bearings, and to know wbetbtr the public are really la- 
 ter«.i^ in the eicitenient which has been cotten up with unnsaal iodustfy, and 
 has been kept alive with a pertinacity that has seldom been equaled. For sera- 
 tal yw» past the relig^ioas protestant papers of our country, with but few e% 
 «eptio««, nave teemed with vimleot attacks against the Catholics, and especially 
 with paragraphs charg^in^ them substantially with designs hostile to our free iu> 
 •titutions, and with a systematic opposition to the spread of all (rte inquiry and 
 liberal knowledge. These are grave charges, involving consequences of serioua 
 import, and such as should not be believed or disbelieved upon mere rumor, or 
 permitted to rvstupon any vague hrpothesis ; because they are of a nature which 
 renders them susceptible of prooL The spirit of our institutions requires that 
 these questions should be thus examined. We profess to guaranty to evertr in- 
 habitant of our countrv, certain rights, in the enjoyment of which he shall not 
 be molested, except through the lostmmeutality of a process of law which is 
 clearlv indicated. Life, liberty, property, reputation, are thus guarded — and 
 equally sacred is the right secured to every man, to * worship God according 
 to the dictates of his own conscience.' 
 
 But it is idle to talk of these inestimable rights, as having any efficacious ea 
 Utence, if the various checks and sanctions, thrown around them b)- our consti- 
 tution and laws, may be evaded, and a lawless majority, with a high hand, ravish 
 them by force from a few individuals who may be eflfectually outlawed by a per- 
 verted public opinion, produced by calunmy and clamor. It is worse than idle. 
 It is wicked, to talk of libertv, while a majority, having no other right than that 
 of the strongest, persist in blasting the character of unoffending individuals by 
 calumny, and in oppressing them by direct violence upon their persons and 
 property, not only without evidence of their delinquency, but against evidence; 
 not only without law, but in violation of law— «nd merely because they belonjf 
 to an unpopular denomination. 
 
 Thtt>kvery fact that the Roman Catholics are, and can be with impunity, thus 
 trampled upon, in a country like ours, affords in itself the most conclusive 
 evidence ol the groundlessness of the fears, which are entertained by some 
 respecting them. Without the power to protect themselves, in the enjoyment 
 of the ordinary rtghU of citizenship, and with a current of prejudice setting so 
 •trongly against them, that the^ find safety only in bending meekly to the ttorm, 
 bow idle, how puerile, how disingenuous is it, to rave as tome have done, of the 
 danger of Catholic influence! 
 
 We repeat that this is a question which mast rest upon testimony. The 
 American people are too intelligent, toojust, too magnanimous, to suffer the tem- 
 porary delusion by which so many haveoeen blinded, to settle down into a per- 
 manent national prejudice, and to oppress one christian denomination at the 
 bidding of others without some proot, or some reasonable argument. 
 
 We have not yet seen any evidence in the various publications that hav« 
 reached us. of any unfairness on the part of the Catholics, in the propagation 
 of their religious doctrines. If they are active, persevering, and ingenious in 
 tuei- attempts to gain converts, and if they are successful in securing the coun- 
 tenance ana support of those who maintain the same form of belief In other 
 countries, these we imagine, are the legitimate proofs of christian zeal and sin- 
 cerity. In relation to protestant sects, they are certainly to estimated ; and we 
 ■re vet to learn, why the ordinary laws of evidence are to be set aside in refer- 
 ence to this denomination, and why the missionary spirit which is so praisewor- 
 thy in others, should be thought so wicked and so dangerous in them. 
 
 Let us imjuire into this matter calmly. Why is it that the Catholics are par- 
 ■ued with such pertinacity, with such vindicliveness, with such ruthless malevo- 
 lence? Why cannot their peculiar opinions be opposed by argument, by per- 
 ■ua«ion, by remonstrance, as one christian sect should oppose each other? We 
 •peak kimily of the Jew, and even of the heathen; there are thote that bvc a 
 
'MM 
 
 
 Jl^llii or « C1ieTOl«e even better than tbcir own twh mud bfood ; bit • CatlMlle 
 ii an abouiinatioa, Ibr whom iber« is no b«r, bo olMMritjrt no bowl ni cbritliia 
 
 Tbwtt ivflections riM Bfttamllj out of the roceot prorcoding* m MlatNM l« 
 llio RoaMii Catholics. A oaniiorjr Int beea demolished by sn iofiirmted mob— 
 ■ stmli connnnn^f of reined nnd unprotected females, bwfullj and usefullj en- 
 ~~~'* ill tic tnilion of chitdren» whose parents hare Tolantarilj conmitted thea 
 ^ hmm been driven from their home — yH the pcrpelralora hare es- 
 iment, and the act, if not openljr excused, is wiafced at, b^ proleataoC 
 Tio«lMnftt was public, extensive, and undeniable; ana a nMWt ra 
 mmmMmIi who inTei»t|g;ated all the facts, hare shown that it was wn 
 mere wMilon ebullition of sara|;e nalignity. Yet the symfinthier 
 if a larfe portion of the protcstant community are nnUiuched. 
 
 Is aiiolher instance rci|airad. of the pervadioi^ chamrler of thi« prrjadicel 
 How oommon has been the expedient, employed by niiasiooarieB from the w«sl, 
 ill th« noilnrn states, of raisinj^ money for education or for rt- ligion upon the al» 
 iwaiioo that it was necessary to prevent the ascendency of the catholics. How 
 wma has it been asserted, throughout the last Inn years, that thii was the chosen 
 inhi on which the ppists had erected their stanclard. and where the battle must 
 bn ln|ht ibr civil and religious liberty. What tales of horror have bet-n ponrad 
 iato tin tars of the confiding children of the pilgrims— of yonng men emigrat- 
 ing to the west, marrying catholic ladies, and colTaptiiir without a struggle into 
 llwnffnis offtoMnMnn — ofspiendid cdificrs undenuinea by profound dungeons, 
 for iM MC«ption of heretic republicans— of boxes of firearms secretly 
 >rted into hidden receptacles, in the very bosoms of our flonrishing cities 
 ■ _iji_«_ jjunig^ Luropean conspiracies by which Irish catholics sr# 
 I into lovers ofnionarchy, and obedient instruments ot' kii^l 
 piiicn so iadomitable and so blind, conld not fail, in an ingenious and eii 
 1 iiko ours, to be made the subject of pecuniary speculation ; accord* 
 
 
 ingly we find incli works as the * Master Key to Popeiy,' *lS«crela of Femala 
 Convents,* nad * Six Months in a Convent,* manufiuiturad with a distinct view 
 to iHihIng a profit out of this diseased state of the public mind. The abuse of 
 the catholics therefore is not merely matter of p»rty rancor, but, is a regular 
 trade, and the compilation of anti-catholic boolw of the character alluded to, has 
 become a part of the reguhur indnstrT of the country, as much as the making of 
 nutmegs, or the construction of clocks. 
 Philosophy saactioiw the belief, that power held by any set of men without 
 stoaiut or compalitioa. is liable to abuse; and history teaches the humiliating 
 fiKtthat piwor ihns held has always been abased. To inquire who has been 
 '"' "' agwessor against the rights o( human nature, when all who hava 
 
 baas laiBptBd have evinced a common propensity to trample upon the laws of 
 j ui til l MM benevolence, would be an unprofitable procedure. The reformcrt 
 
 heresy by death as well as the catholics ; and the murders perpetrated 
 . ialolcronce, in the nwn of Eltxabeth, were not leas atrocious than those 
 which occurred under * the bloody Mary.' We m%ht even come nearer home, 
 and point to colonies on onr own continent, planted by men processing to havo 
 iod from relifioas peffsecntjoa, who not only excluded from all civil and politi* 
 cnl rkhls those who were separated from them by only slight shades of religi- 
 ons beliei; but persacatcd many even to death, for heresy and witchcraft. Yet 
 Ihesa things «ro not taken into the calculation, and the catholics are assumed, 
 withoat •aamiaaiion, to be exclusively and especially prone to the sins of op- 
 primiijii nd craclty. 
 
 Ho BNneh catholics, at a wtrj earlr period, commenced a system of ainioai 
 ■mt iha eoaversioa of Ibo Indians, aao were reowrkablr socceisful in gainiof 
 coavavis, aad conciliating the confidence and affections of the tribes. While tha 
 BM|aods aad olhar northern tribes wera becoming exterminated, or sold iotc 
 alavtfj, the Biofftt fiortunate savage of the Mississippi was listening to the pioot 
 *i._i: :_-: m^-.. t^ another fiict, vrhich deserves to b 
 
 in the examination of the testimoni 
 . . , f Ity if not quite so keen as is usaall 
 
 |§iand, and that the| exercised, of choice, an expansive beaet oleoce, at a p«n> 
 wt illiaa palastants, similarly situated, were blo<xl-tbirsty and rapacioas. 
 Advancing: a tittle furtharin pfiiut of time, we find a number of colonies ad- 
 ; rapidly towards |mia|iatitT. oa oar Allaatic aea board, 'a ifoial uf civil 
 
 counsels of the catholic missionary.— This is another fiict. which deserves to br 
 remembered, and which ahoald be weighed in tlie examination of the testimony 
 It afaaws that the catholic appetite for cruelty ir not quite so keen as is usaaln 
 
 BOMAN CATHOLIC SBU IIOK. 
 
 357 
 
 Eirerament Ihey were somevrhat detached, each making Its own municipal 
 ws, and there being in each a predoniinance of the influence (»f one rt:ltnoos 
 ienomination. We might therefore expect to see the political bias of each sect 
 parried oat into practice, and it is curious to examine how 6ir such was the fact. 
 It IS the more curious, because the writers and orators of one branch of this 
 iMiiily of republics, are io the habit of attributing to their own fathers, the prin- 
 ciples o» religious and political toleration, which became established throughout 
 the whole, and are now the boast and pride of our nation. The intpartial record 
 of htstor>- aA'ords on this subject a proof alike honorable to all, but which re- 
 
 and South Carolina by a mingled population of roundheads and cavaliers fror 
 LiM^and, and of French hu<^eootit — ^yet the same broad foundations of civil and 
 political liberty were laid simultaneously in them all, and llie same spirit of re- 
 sistance animated each communitr, when the oppressions of the mother (.ountry 
 became intolerable. Religious intolerance prevailed In early times only in the 
 eastern coloniei>,but the witchcraft superstition, though most strongly developed 
 there, pervaded some other portions oHhe new settlements. We shall not ampli- 
 fy our remarks on this topic; it is enough to say, that if the love of monarcbj 
 was a component principle of the catholic faith, it was not develop<Ml in our 
 country when a fair opportunity was oflered for its exercise; and that in the glo- 
 rious strugi^le for libertv, for civil and religious emancipation — when oorfiithers 
 arrayed themselves in defence of the sacred principles involving the whole broad 
 ground of contest between liberty and despotism, the catholic and the protectant 
 stood side by side on the battle field, and in the council, and pledged to their 
 common countrr, with equal devotedness, their lives, their fortunes, and theirsa- 
 cred honor. Nor shouldfit be forgoilen, that in a conHut thus peculiarly mark- 
 ed, a catholic king was our ally, when the most powerful of protestant govern- 
 ments was our enemy.** 
 
 Now, my friends and fellow citizens, let me hare pennission to 
 close this debate by the lan^age of the illustrious Washington, 
 In his' answer to the patriotic address of the U. S. Catholics, f dis- 
 claim all unkind feeling towards Mr. Campbell or any of his friends, 
 and acknowledore my ^titude to him for enabling me to place my 
 relinrion, in its proper h^ht, before the public. I also beg leave res- 
 pectfully to tender to this audience my thanks for the dignity of their 
 tieportment during this debate. Instead of quarreling about religion 
 we ought to be engaged in our vocation of love and peace, as its 
 faithful ministers, and sincere professors. We have all, a great deal 
 to do to improve the morals of the age, to elevate the standard of 
 literature, to promote by such means as all christians approve, the 
 welfare of our common country, and to obtain for our green state, the fer- 
 tile and flourishing, Ohio, a distinguished rank for knowledge, virtue 
 ani patriotism, among her elder and her younger sisters in this fair 
 repufiHc. These are legitimate pursuits, alike pleasing to God, and 
 useful to man. The world is large enough for us all. Some can, in 
 the Abraham and Lot way of settling their diiEculties, feed their 
 flocks in one field, and some in another ; and, as Joseph said to his 
 brethren going home to their father, from Egypt, as we are going to 
 ©ne heavenly Father, " see that ye fell not out by the wajf •' (Reads 
 fiom Washington's letter as follows :) 
 
 To IHE Roman Catholics in the United States of America. 
 
 Gentlemen — While I now receive with much satisfaction your congratulatf jna 
 on my being called by an unanimous vote, to the first station in my ccuitr)-, I 
 cannot but duly notice your politeness, in oflfering an apology for the unav«>idable 
 il.»lt»y. As thiit delay has given you an opportunity of realizing, instead of antici- 
 
 E sting, the benefits of the general government, you will do me the justice to be- 
 cve, that your testimony of the increaae of the public prosperity, enhances tb« 
 
OR 
 
 liliidi I ilioiild othtniiM have expcricwMl inoni jonr aieclioiiaia sA 
 
 J iM thai mj enmiiMil, in irar uid in pence, hat met with more general mpfm 
 lalMiii IbancovM haw ivntoaably bmm expected; aad I lintJ npelf diapoard It 
 •iMlidar lliat fovtnnalc circunittancc* in a great depee, reaurtiai^ from the ablb 
 annporl, mkI eatiMNlinary candor, of my felbw-citisena of all deoominatiooa. 
 TIm pmtpect of national protperitjr now baibre oa. if trulj animating, and 
 It to excite the exertions of all goiwl men, to attabliah and wcara the bappi* 
 of their coantry, in th« permanent duration of iU freedom and indeptsa* 
 
 m. America^ under the Mniles oi diriae providence, the protection of 
 
 • good goTemment, and tfaa cultivation of mannen, morals, and piety, cannot 
 §m of attaining an nncommon degree of amtncnca in litemtnrt, connuerce, agri* 
 cidture, improvements at home, and i-eapectability abroad. 
 
 ila aMMa nd bacnnit more libanl,tbaV will bamore apt to allow, that ntt fAntt 
 «■!• caiwinci llmmtdwa ma woHk§ww9mr§«fth9 eommmnty, mtt ifunUy €wHiUi 
 lb iJI« jwaiMioii ^ cml fovemmenl. 1 hope ever to see America among tha 
 ibffeiiMMt nations in examples of Jnslice and tiberalitv. And 1 presuma that y onr 
 " 'nana trolt naljbifal im pminoik fmH wUek jfon took im tht memm' 
 if Haif 'r gt a l n ii ai i , and lAa §»kiMuhment tfthtir ftwemmeii/, or tnn 
 I. "niiiiiiniiiiTu which they raceivad from a nation in which tha Roman 
 'imii n proieasea. • * • 
 
 I Ibanl yon, gentlemen, for yonr kinfl concern for ma. While my life and 
 my health shall continue, in whatever situation I may be, it shall be my con- 
 ' ' J lo justify the favorable lentinients which yon are pleased to 
 
 of nw cnndnct. And may the nienibers of yonr society in America, ani- 
 Mted alone by the pure spirit of Christianity, and still conducting themselves as 
 tha ttthlul subjects of our govemmant, anjoy avary temporal and spiritual felicity 
 
 GEORGE WASHINGTON. 
 
 Maicli, 17911b 
 
 [mo or THE DEIATI.] 
 
 The foilowing are the extracts referred to on page 324 :— 
 
 ElfOUSH DiVIPECS. 
 
 Brtv, 2S9,) ft jMst like the immjfititmtwn eftki diacaaat qfour frady fo f^ f *ff- 
 •ctan/or God hmth appmnted tkem^m Mpirmti ^lymeium,'* (Thyhr, ut fupma.) 
 F. S. It hmatmrtUd many mtJbiMfl mdtpmdmi^whoinf thtmica km* got hold 
 ^mmm%inaltifork^gtmdyJofmCmlm9ttmr Motim ijutkor^whmim «ome veU- 
 mrhid ** eommentarut" some latent pmmmgt qf •* Tie liiflllwlions,** kokmitm' 
 cotMlcrsd fly adinttttont, weU gtmrded *y enufiouf 'f^,* mid lef^ to their own 
 jdfif wtfliml d^lMce or opohgj, yot mmmm mmk |f nncienl koren. ^nm 
 In fft« Aontffy af Att ^iMinanet, k§ hm itdaimid, em he rtimmod iht dmtif 
 NHnliimn toitMmom^^Oromi CeMm! wmek kmming heOh made thee vmd. The 6«- 
 bk^ mmd the Mk&eihne, is thereMgiom^Frotestmmts, Wh€re hmo frera Protes* 
 fnnlt M mmaiBtmi m» the Comtmmiw mmd m PmHtmiuf Agoigmimg to Roma 
 fft<«ioft tady'^«ftf#iian fsafimatty, ^ii^fflefM;*, and wiadom; mitmreading, 
 m one Hawl, the hromd Immur of prtvmte opinion; coolly ha$iginffamd kuming 
 ihfirhrmther-demoemte wUh the oth§ri estolUng Pruteslantiam u» tht reUgtMrn 
 
 of ma amiiarhteM€diMrhfpro9imgiiikar*Htrion ^ the ignormnt And whomra 
 
 Say ihmi tha Mgmm " m %©!" poimla mi, - Rmmmiatar " Fi^iakerar " mama 
 mtghhora §a^ Hi ,Jlnlyi0ii af niljiitnaltimsr* They mrt mm ioA« hma dtvmiti 
 libtr iioct m Ut afii^ of Iha iapinnfs muthorUiea of^oeirim mmd rite.'* 
 
 ROMAlf CATHOLIC SSUOION. 
 
 3.10 
 
 This was exhibited and the mniea read at the eloee of debate «■ 
 ■INMtolic succession. 
 
 Tabular view of the order of the Episcopal succession fn the prominent vft^- 
 tile) Dioceses mentioned by Eusebius. 
 
 Bishops or Robie. 
 
 Peter and Fkul, according to Eusebius, died as martyrs at Rome; after ihean 
 followed, 
 
 1 Linns. 9 Pius, 16 ITrbanus, 33Xrstii8orSiilntU 
 
 2 Aiieticletns, 10 Anicetus, 17 Ponttanus, 94 Dionysius, 
 
 5 Clement. 11 Soter, 18 Anteros, 25 Felii, 
 
 4 Enarestns, 12 Eleuthems, 19 Fabianns. 26 Eutvchianui, 
 
 i Alexander, 13 Victor, fO Cornelius. 27 Cams, 
 
 6 XystusorSixtus.H Zephyrinus, 21 Lucius, 28 Marcellinua, 
 
 7 Telesphorns, 15 Callisthus, 22 Stcpfaaiius, 29 Miltiades. 
 
 8 Hyginus, 
 
 Bishops of Antioch. 
 
 1 Evodius, 6 Theophilus, 11 Zebinas, . 16 Domnns, 
 
 2 Lniatins, 7 Maximinus, 12 Baby las, 17 TimoRus, 
 
 3 ileron, 8 Serapion, 13 Fabtus, 18 Cyritlus, 
 
 4 Comeliuit 9 Asclepiades, 14 Deinetrianus. 19 Ij'rannus, 
 6 Eros, 10 Pbiletus, 15 Paul of Saniosata. 
 
 Bishops or Alexandria. 
 Tha evangelist Mark, established the church there, and after him came, 
 
 1 Annianus, 6 Eumenei, 11 Demetrius, 16 Peter, 
 
 2 Avilius, 7 Marcus, 12 Heracia?, 17 Achillas, 
 
 3 Cerdo, 8 Celadion, 13 Dionysius, 18 Alexander, 
 
 4 Primus, 9 Agnppinus, 14 Maximus, 
 
 5 Justus, 10 Julianns, 15 Theonas, 
 
 Bishops or Laodicea. 
 Thelymedres, Socrates, Anatolius, Theodotui, 
 
 Hatiodoms, Eusebius of Alexandria, Stephen, 
 
 Bishops or Cesarea. 
 Theophilus Domnus, Agapius, Eusebius. 
 
 Thcoctistus, Theotecous, 
 
 Having revisftd some three hundred pares ot proof ut this debate, before 1 
 left Cincinnati for New Orleans, on the 2nd of March, 1837, I am willing to 
 consider and approve the report, as beiug substantially correct. I have the ut* 
 must confidence in the honor and honesty of the publishers, Messrs. J. A. James 
 ft Co., that the balance of the discussion will be feirly presented to tiie public. 
 
 t JOHN B. PURCELL, Bishop of Cincinnati. 
 
 THE DISPUTED PASSAGE OF ST. LIGORL— MR. CAMPBELL'S 
 DOCUMENTARY SUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 Tka rroder, who looks back to pages 219.253, will there see with what solemn 
 •nd strong assaveratious the Bishop declared that no such passage as that quoted 
 from page 294 was ever written by Saint Ligori.* 
 
 AIr. Smith, in reply to my letter per Mr. Emmons, wrote as follows — 
 
 *' The obnoxious passage, then, whicb the Romish Bishop of Cincinnati calls hen- 
 Xtii and earth to witness is not to be found in the works orligori, is the following^ 
 
 ** A Bishop, however poor he may be, cannot appropriate to himself pecuniaiy 
 Unas, withcnt the licence of the Apostolical See. But he ought to apply them 
 to pious uses. Much less can he apply those fines to any thing else but pioua 
 nses, which tha Council of TVemt has laid upon non- resident Clergymen, or 
 upon those CUrrymen who keep Co»ev6tnet.**— Ligor. Ep. Doc. Mor. p. 444. 
 
 This passage, I will now give in the Latin, as it stands on the 444th page of 
 the 8th volume of the ** Moral THEOLoGir or Alphoksus de Ligorio," ^m 
 whose Work the extract was mada. The words are as follows: 
 
 **Mulctas pecuniarias Episcopus sibi addicara non potest, quantumvls paupar 
 
 * See psfes 900, 310, 330. 
 
'iniATl &c. 
 
 •It, fine licentia Sedis Apottolics. [itt ei plnribni amimcntit S. Cong^regat 
 OTincitiir in Tract. De Srn* Dicec. L. 10. C. 10. N. 2.1 Sed dcsbeut in asaa piot 
 eipeiKii. Multo maris non poaraiit nisi in piot nras applicari ill«e mulctae, qaai 
 Truleiitinani inflixit Clericis non reudentiDiis, aot coocubioariia.**— Ligor. Epit. 
 Doc. Mor. D. 444. 
 
 The woras included in the brackets, were not translatedt nerdjr baemise I 
 did not with to encuniber the *■ Synopsis," fat I have obtenred in tb« *« Puc- 
 FACE or THE SiTifoPflis,") frith too many of the authoritiet quoted bj Ligori. 
 I thall now, however, translate the above wordt in the brackets, much, I know, 
 to the diicomfiture of hit Reverence the Romish Btthop of Cincinnati. The 
 woidt in the brackets, therefore, translated, are at foUowt ■ [**at is evident from 
 many argumentt of the Holy Conrrmtion, in tba Treatise respecting the Dio* 
 ccsan Synods, Book 10, Chapter 10, Kumber 2."] 
 
 Here we have, not oniv the authority of SL Ligori, bat alto that of Htm 
 •' Maly Congrermtum of Rite*.** 
 
 Since this tubject Is now to be probed to the bottom, we will also translate 
 the contracted wordt which I trantferred Into the •* Synopsis" as I found them 
 in the original. The wordt to which I allude are the terminating onet of the 
 disputed pattage, as foliowa:~**Ligor. Ep. Doc. Mor. p. 444.**— which, trant- 
 lated, stand thus:— "From the Work of Ligori, under the head of 'An Epitom* 
 of the Moral Doctrine,' page 444." 
 
 In order to render the testimony still more ttrikinr, it is important to cbservt 
 that this ** Epitome of the Moral Doctrine," to whicB Ligori alludes, is an Epi 
 tome compiled by no less a personage than Pope Benedict XIV. as we are in* 
 formed by Ligori himself, in the 301tt page of the 8th volume of hit **MomAI 
 
 That the prevtona Latin words are truly and faithfully the wordt of St. Ligori 
 and fairly extracted from 8th voluiue, p. 444. is duly certified by the following 
 learned gentlemen. 
 
 We, the undertigned, have carefiilly examined the foregoing extracts from 
 the Moral Theology of St. Ligori; and having compared them with the original 
 Latin copy of that Work, now before us, we do hereby certify that the suid 
 extracts are verimlim^ trnly and correctly given by Mr. Smith. 
 
 In this certificate, we include, particularly, the passage disputed by Bishop 
 Purcell, which is contained in Mr. Smith's "Synopsis," p. 294, par. 7, headed 
 
 •• CONCUAINES of the Ci.ERGr." 
 
 IWNCAN DUNBAR, Pasttr (^ Iks MDomgrnlH. Bapt. Chnrek, 
 jnO. KEIVNADAY, Pmster gj tks MMktHat Ejti»cop9l Church. 
 SPENCER H. GONE, Pmt^r^tMs fmntr-strtet Baptist Chunk. 
 SAITL F. B. MORSE. Pr^. ik.i» thsUmiversitfqfthe Citf ^ Jfem YorL 
 WM. GREEN. Jr. Dmeon in tkM M* JVm Ctvg. Church, Jf. T. 
 C. 6. FINNEY. Pastor ^ Ot Okmrthim ths Broadmay nberuasls. 
 lew York, VmVj 33, ]»37. 
 
 On receiving the above communication from Mr. Smith I asked from bishop 
 Furcell the loan of the works of St. Ligori. He politely complied with my re- 
 quest Turning to the page, 444, volume 8, I found every word in hit own 
 edition as above reported. I carried it and the Synopsis of Mr. Smith to our 
 mutual friend Mr. Kinmont, to whom it was now my time to appeal. Mr. Kin- 
 mont read both the original and the trantlatirm: and then certified at followt. 
 
 The above (version of Smith p. 294) I r^rd to be m/aithfui traotlation of 
 the pasaage at it stands in the 8tb volume ofLigori page 444. 
 
 Cincinnati, Feb*y 3, 1837. AlbxaMDER KntMollT. 
 
 Having rwd all the proofs of thit ditcastion, I certify, that the reader h?t 
 •ubstantially, as correctly, at under all the circumttaocet could have been i;x 
 pected, a fair repretentalon of the whole diacniiioa. 
 
 March 7. 1837. a. CAMPBELL. 
 
 TUB mil 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHIC IRREGULARITIES 
 
 MAIN 
 
 Bibliographic Irregu larities in the Original Document 
 List volumes and pages affected; include name of institution if filming borrowed text. 
 
 Page(s) missing/not available: 
 
 yolumes(s) missing/not available: 
 
 Jl^Illegible and/or damaged page(s): 3*1 ^^P 
 
 .Page(s) or volumes(s) misnumbered: 
 
 _Bound out of sequence:. 
 
 .Page(s) or illustration(s) filmed from copy borrowed from: Sa^ Copjj 
 
 Other: 
 
BEST COPY 
 
THE 
 
 BATTLE OF THE GIANTS: 
 
 THE VATICAN DECREES 
 
 IN THEIR BEARING ON CIVIL ALLEGIANCE, 
 
 BY THE 
 
 RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE. E P. 
 
 WITH THE 
 
 REPLIES OF DR. NEWMAN, ARCHBISHOP MANNING, 
 
 THE RIGHT REV. MONSIGNOR CAPEL, LORD 
 
 ACTON, AND LORD CAMOYS, 
 
 AND A FULL ABSTRACT OP 
 
 GLADSTOISTE'S EEJOHSTDER. 
 
 t 
 
 CINCINNATI : C. F. VENT. 
 
 CHICAGO: J.S. GOODMAN & CO. 
 
 1875. 
 
 la 
 
 Am 
 
Kntered according to Act of CoDgress, in the year 1875, 
 ^ In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington, D. O. 
 
 --^, 
 
 
 
 '(^ 
 
 aTBBKOTVPID *T K^^T^ 
 
 Fbanxlin Typb Fuumdbv, ^l^d^"* 
 
 . 
 
 THE 
 
 VATICAN DECREES 
 
 IN THEIR BEARING ON 
 
 CIVIL ALLEGIANCE: 
 
 BY THE 
 
 BIGIIT HON. W. E. GIAOSTONE, I. P. 
 
THE VATICAN DECREES 
 
 IN THEIR BKAKING ON 
 
 CIYIL ALLEGIAK"OE. 
 
 I, The Occasion and Scope of this Tract. 
 
 In the prosecution of a purpose not polemical but pacific, I 
 have been led to employ words which belong, more or less, to the 
 region of religious controversy ; r.nd which, though they were 
 themselves fe#, seem to require, from the various feelings they 
 have aroused, that I should carefully define, elucidate, and defend 
 them. The task is not of a kind agreeable to me; but I proceed 
 
 i/\ nftrf«>rin it 
 
 Among the causes which have tended to disturb and Perplex the 
 public mind in the consideration of our own religious di2]cujtjcs, 
 one has been a certain alarm at the aggressive activity and imag- 
 ined growth of the Roman Church in this country A 1 are aAvare 
 of out susceptibility on this side ; and it was not, f think, improper 
 for one who desires to remove every thing that can interfere with 
 a calm and judicial temper, and who believes the alarm to be 
 groundless, to state, pointedly though briefly, some reasons for 
 
 *** Accordingly, I did not scruple to use the following language, in 
 a paper inserted in the number of the * Contemporary Eeview 
 for the month of October. 1 was speaking of the question 
 whether a handful of the clergy are or are not engaged m an 
 utterly hopeless and visionary effort to Romanize the Church and 
 
 ^*^"it no time shice the bloody reign of Mary has such a scheme 
 been possible. But if it had been possible in the seventeenth or 
 eighteenth centuries, it would still have become impossible m the 
 nineteenth: when Rome has substituted for the proud boast of 
 semper eadem a policy of violence and change m faith ; when she 
 has refurbished, and paraded anew, every rusty tool she was 
 fondly thought to have disused ; when no one can become her con- 
 vert without renouncing his moral and mental freedom, and plac- 
 ing his civil loyalty and duty at the mercy of another; and when 
 8he has equally repudiated modern thought and ancient history. 
 Had I been, when I wrote this passage, as I now am, address- 
 
 • * Contemporary Review,' Oct., 1874, p. 674. 
 
 (5) 
 
 t'Sl 
 
¥1IJS f AXlliAJl MSLllKISSf 
 
 img myself in considerable raeasor© to my Koman Catholic fellow 
 wmntrymen, I should have striven to avoid the seeming roiigh- 
 neiis of some of these expressions ; bat as the question is now 
 ftboiit their substance, from which I am not In any particular dis- 
 fOtod to recede, any attempt to recast their general form would 
 pnlMibly mislead. I proceed, then, to deal with them on their 
 ateri'ts. 
 
 More than one friend of mine, among those who have been led 
 to join the Boman Catholic communion, has made this passage the 
 subject, more or less, of expostulation. Now, in my opinion, the 
 Assertions which it makes are, as coming from a layman who has 
 sponl most and the best years of his life in the observation and 
 fffMSliM of politios, not affiressive, but defensive. 
 '^ It is neitlcir the abettai of the Papal Chair, nor any one who, 
 Iiowever far from bein|5 an abettor of the Papal Chair, actually 
 writes from a Papal point of view, that has a right to remonstrate 
 with the world at large ; but it is the world at Targe, on the con- 
 trary, that has the fullest right to remonstrate, first with His Holi- 
 ness secondly with those who share his proceedings, thirdly even 
 with sneh ae passively allow and accept them. 
 
 I therefore, as one of the world at large, propose to expostulate 
 in my tarn. I shall strive to show to such of my Roman Catholic 
 fellow-subjects as may kindly ^ive me a hearing that, after the 
 ii^giiliir steps which the authorities of their Church have in these 
 ksl years thoii|;ht fit to take, the people of this country, who fully 
 Wieve in their loyalty, are entitled, on purely civil grounds, to 
 «zpect from them some declaration or manifestation of opinioa, in 
 reply to that ecclesiastical party in their Church who have laid 
 down, in their name, principles adverse to the purity and integrity 
 nf civil allegiiinee. 
 
 Undoubtedly my allegations are of great breadth. Such broad 
 ■ie^itions require a broad and a deep foundation. The first 
 
 Sieslton which they raise is. Are thejr, as to tlie material part of 
 em, true ? But even their truth might not suffice to show that 
 their publication was opportune. The second question, then, 
 which they_ raise is, Are they, for any practical purpose, material? 
 And there is yet a third, though a minor, question, which arises 
 out of the propositions in connection with their authorship, 
 Were they suitable to be set forth by the present writer? 
 
 T6 these three questions I will now set myself to reply. And 
 the matter of my reply will, as I conceive, constitute and convey 
 SB iip>sal to the unaerstandings of my Roman Catholic fellow- 
 fMttliymen, which I trust that, at the least, some among them 
 say detm not altogether unworthy of their consideration. 
 
 From the language used by some of the organs of Roman 
 Cktholic opinion, it is. I am afraid, plain that in some quarters 
 they have given deep offense. Displeasure, indignation, even fury, 
 night be said to mark the language which in the heat of the mo- 
 miiit has been expressed here and there. They have been 
 lustily treated as an attack made upon Roman Catholics gener- 
 •If, niy, as an insult offered them. It is obvious to reply, that 
 df Brnniin Catholics generally they state nothing. Together with 
 
 I 
 
 IK THEIR BEAEINO ON CIVIL* ALLEGUXCB. 7 
 
 a reference to " converts," of which I shall say more, they consti- 
 tute generally a free and strong animadversion on the conduct of 
 the Papal Chair, and of its advisers and abettors. If I am told 
 that he who animadverts upon these assails thereby, or insults, 
 Boman Catholics at large, who do not choose their ecclesiastical 
 rulers, and are not recognized as having any voice in the gov- 
 ernment of their Church, 1 can not be bound by or accept a prop- 
 osition which seems to me to be so little in accordance witn 
 reason. 
 
 Before all things, however, I should desire it to be understood 
 that, in the remarks now offered, I desire to eschew not only re- 
 ligious bigotry, but likewise theological controversy. Indeed, 
 with theology, except in its civil hearing, with theology as such, 
 I have here nothing whatever to do. But it is the peculiarity of 
 Roman theology that, by thrusting itself into the temporal domain, 
 it naturally, and even necessarily, comes to be a frequent theme 
 of political discussion. To quiet-minded Roman Catholics, it 
 must be a subject of infinite annoyance, that their religion is, on 
 this ground more than any other, the subject of criticism; 
 more than any other, the occasion of conflicts with the State 
 and of civil disquietude. I feel sincerely how much hardship 
 their case entails. But this hardship is brought upon them 
 altogether by the conduct of the authorities of their own 
 Church. Why did theology enter so largely into the debates of 
 Parliament on Roman Catholic Emancipation ? Certainly not be- 
 cause our statesmen and debaters of fifty years ago had an aV 
 stract love of such controversies, but because it was extensively 
 believed that the Pope of Rome had been and was a trespasser 
 upon ground which belonged to the civil authority, and that he 
 affected to determine by spiritual prerogative questions of the 
 civil sphere. This fact, if fact it be, and not the truth or false- 
 hood, the reasonableness or unreasonableness, of any article of 
 purely religious belief, is the whole and sole cause of the mis- 
 chief To this fact, and to this f ict alone, my language is refer- 
 able : but for this fact, it would have been neither my duty nor 
 my desire to use it AH other Cliristian bodies are content with 
 freedom in their own religious domain. Orientals, Lutherans, 
 Calvinists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Nonconformists, one and 
 all, in the present day, contentedly and thankfully accept the 
 benefits of civil order; never pretend that the State is not its own 
 master; make no religious claims to temporal possessions or ad- 
 vantages; and, consequently, never are in perilous collision with 
 the State. Nay, more, even so I believe it is with the mass bf 
 Boman Catholics individually. But not so with the leaders of 
 their Church, or with those who take pride in following the 
 leaders. Indeed, this has been made matter of boast: — 
 
 "There is not another Church so called" (than the Roman), 
 "nor any community professing to be a Church, which does not 
 submit, or obey, or hold its peace, when the civil governors of 
 the world command."—' The Present Crisis of the Holy See,' by 
 H. B. Manning, D. D. London, 1861, p. 75. 
 
 The Rome of the Middle Ages claimed universal monarchy. 
 
1 f HB WATWASI DlCBm 
 
 Tlie modem Oiurcli of Komo hti abandoned nothing, retracted 
 nothing. Is that all? Far from it. By condemning (as will be 
 ■e«ii) mom who, like Bishop Dojle in 1825,* charge Ibe medi- 
 ■ml Popes with aggression, she unconditionally, even if covertly, 
 iMiiiitiiins what the mediaeval Popes maintained. Bnt even tills 
 la Eot the worst The worst hj tar is that whereas, in the na- 
 tioniil Charches and communities of the Middle Ages, there was 
 « brisk, vigorous, and constant opjiosition to these outrageous 
 elfiim% an opposition which stoutly asserted its own orthodoxy, 
 wiiub mlways eauscd itself to be respected, and which even some- 
 iiintt gained the upper hand ; mow, in this nineteenth century of 
 ODES, and while it is growin«; old, this same opposftion has been 
 put out of court, and judicially extinguished within the Papal 
 Chareb, by the recent decrees of the Vatican. And it is im- 
 fOiiibk for ptnons accepting tho«c decrees justly to complain, 
 whtii iuch documents are subjected in good faith to a strict ex- 
 saiitiation as respects their compatibility with civil right and 
 the obedience of subiects. 
 
 In defending my language, I shall carefully mark its limits. 
 But all defense is re-assertion, which properly requires a deliber- 
 ato nconsiieration ; and no man who thuM reconsiders should 
 Mmille, if he find so much as a word that may convey a false im- 
 pfHiiiion, to amend it. Exactness in stating truth according to 
 the measure of our intelligence, is an indispensable condition of 
 justice, and of a title to be beard. 
 
 ^J_P^opositions, then, as they stood, are these : — 
 
 1. That " Rome has substituted for the proud boast of semper 
 mdem^ a policy of violence and change in faith." 
 
 2. That she has refurbished and paraded anew every rusty tool 
 she was fondly thought to have disused. 
 
 3. That Eo on© can now become her convert without renonno- 
 iiig his moral and mental freedom, and placing his civil loyalty 
 and duty at the mercy of another. 
 
 4 That she ("Rome") has equally repudiated modern thought 
 and ancient history. 
 
 TI. ThI FllWf AMB THB PoUBTH FrOPOSITIONS. 
 
 Of the first and fourth of these propositions I shall dispost 
 father summarily, as they appear to belong to the theological do- 
 main. Tliev refer to a fact, and they record an opinion. One 
 ImI to which they refer is this: that, m days within my memory, 
 the oowtant, favorite, and imposing argument of Roman contro- 
 Tcrsialists was the unbroken and absolute identity in belief of the 
 Boman Church from the days of our Savior until now. No one, 
 who has at all followed the course of this literature during the 
 lait forty years, can fail to be sensible of the change in its pres- 
 •nt tenor. More and more have the assertions of continuous 
 uniformity ol doctrine receded into scarcely penetrable shadow. 
 
 ♦Lords' Committee, March 18, 1826. Report* p. 190. 
 
 
 i 
 
 IN THBIR BBAJUXO ON CIVIL ALLEGIANCE. W 
 
 More and more have another series of assertions, of a living au- 
 thority, ever ready to open, adopt, and shape Christian doctrine 
 according to the times, taken tneir place. Without discussing 
 the abstract compatibility of these lines of argument, I note two 
 of the immense practical differences between them. In the first, 
 the office claimed by the Church is principally that of a witness 
 to facts ; in the second, principally that of a jud^e, if not a re- 
 vealer, of doctrine. In the first, the processes which the Church 
 undertakes are subject to a constant challenge and appeal to his- 
 tory; in the second, no amount of historical testimony can avail 
 against the unmeasured pow^r of the theory of development. 
 Most important, most pregnant considerations, these, at least for 
 two classes of persons : for those who think that exaggerated doc- 
 trines of Church power are among the real and serious dangers 
 of the age ; and for those who think that against all forms, both 
 of superstition and of unbelief, one main preservative is to be 
 found in maintaining the truth and authority of history, and the 
 inestimable value of the historic spirit. 
 
 So much for the fact ; as for the opinion that the recent Papal 
 decrees are at war with modern thought, and that, purporting to 
 enlarge the necessary creed of Christendom, they involve a vio- 
 lent breach with history, this is a matter unfit for me to discuss, 
 as it is a question of Divinity; but not unfit for me to have 
 mentioned in my article, since the opinion given there is the 
 opinion of those with whom I was endeavoring to reason, 
 namely, the great majority of the British public. 
 
 If it is thought that the word violence is open to exception, I 
 regret I can not give it up. The justification of the ancient defini- 
 tions of the Church, which have endured the storms of 1,500 
 years, was to be found in this, that they were not arbitrary or 
 willful, but that they wholly sprang from, and related to, theories 
 rampant at the time, and regarded as menacing to Christian be- 
 lief Even the canons of the Council of Trent have, in the 
 main, this amount, apart from their matter, of presumptive war- 
 rant. But the decrees of the present perilous Pontificate have 
 been passed to favor and precipitate prevailing currents of opinion 
 in the ecclesiastical world of Rome. The growth of what is often 
 termed among Protestants Mariolatry, and of belief in Papal In- 
 fallibility, was notoriously advancing, but it seems not fast enough 
 to satisfy the dominant party. To aim the deadly blows of 1854* 
 and 1870 at the old historic, scientific, and moderate school, was 
 surely an act of violence ; and with this censure the proceeding 
 of 1870 has actually been visited by the first living theologian 
 now within the Roman communion ; I mean Dr. John Henry 
 Newman, who has used these significant words, among others: 
 " Why should an aggressive and insolent faction be allowed to 
 make the heart of the just sad, whom the Lord hath not made 
 sorrowful ?"f 
 
 * Decree of the Immaculate Conception. 
 
 fSee the remarkable letter of Dr. Newman to Bishop Ullathome, 
 in the ' Guardian ' of April 6, 1870. 
 
10 
 
 'IHB TAnCAK imOIIH^ 
 
 HI. The Second pROPosmoif. 
 
 IN THEIR BKARINO ON CITIL ALLEGUNCB. 
 
 11 
 
 I take Best my second proposition : thai Rome has rcfurtiishcd, 
 MMt fwradiil anew, every rusty tool she was fondly thought to 
 wife diattaed. 
 
 Is this, then, a fact, or is it not ? 
 
 I mnal asaiime that it is denied ; and therefore I can not wholly 
 IMMs by the work of proof. Bat I will state in the fewest po«siblo 
 wefda, and with references, a few propositions, all the holders of 
 wiiei have been condemned hj the See of Rome durinjr my own 
 ipneration, and especially within the last twelve or fifteen years. 
 And, in order that I may do nothing toward importing passion 
 into what is matter of pnre argamenti I will avoid citing any of 
 the fearfully energetic epithets in which the condemnations arc 
 sometimes clothed : 
 
 1. Those who maintain the liberty of the press. Encyclical 
 Letter of Pope Gregory XVI., in 18»1, and of Fope Vius IX., in 
 1M4. 
 
 2. Or the liberty of conscience and of worship. Encyclical of 
 Pwa IX., December 8, 1864. 
 
 3. Or the liberty of speech. 'Syllabus' of March 18, 1861. 
 Prop. Ixxix. Encyclical of Pope Pius IX., December 8, 1864. 
 
 4. Or who contend that Papal judgments and decrees may, 
 without sin, be disobeyed, or differed from, unless they treat of 
 the rules (dog^mata) of faith or morals. Ibid. 
 
 6. Or who assign to the State the power of defining the civil 
 npbta (Jura) and province of the Church. 'Syllabus* of Pope 
 Pins IX., March 8, 1861. Ibid. Prop. xix. 
 
 6. Or who hold that Roman Pontiffs and Ecumenical Councils 
 have transgressed the limits of their power, and usurped the 
 rights of princes. Ibid. Prop, xxiii. 
 
 {It muMt be 6orii€ in mind, that "Ecumenical Councils" here 
 mean Eoman Conncik not recognized by the rest of the Church, 
 The Omneih of the eartij Church did not interfere with the 
 jurisdiction of the civil power.) 
 
 7. Or that the Church may not employ force. (Ecctesia viM 
 inferendm potestatem non habet.) 'Syllabus,' Prop. xxiv. 
 
 8. Or that power, not inherent in^the office of the Episcopate, 
 hot granted to it by the civil authority, may be withdrawn from 
 It at the disefetion of that authority. Ibid. Prop. xxv. 
 
 9. Or that the {immunilas) civil immunity of the Church and 
 its ministers depends upon civil right. Ibid. Prop. xxx. 
 
 m Or that m the conflict of laws, civil and ecclesiastical, th« 
 cml law should prevail. Ibid. Prop. ilii. 
 
 11. Or that any method of inatruction of youth, solely secular, 
 asy be approved. Ibid. Prop, xlviii. 
 
 12. Or that knowledge of things, philosophical and civil, may 
 and should decline to be guided by Divine and Ecclesiastical au- 
 iliority. Ibid. Prop. Ivii. 
 
 13. Or that marriage is not in its essence a Sacrament Ibid. 
 Prop. IX VI. 
 
 ( 
 
 14. Or that marriage, not sacramentally contracted (si sacror 
 mentvm excludaiur), has a binding force. Ibid. Prop. Ixxiii. 
 
 15. Or that the abolition of the Temporal Power of the Popedom 
 would be highly advantageous to the Church. Ibid. Prop. Ixxvi. 
 
 Also Ixx. 
 
 16. Or that any other religion than the Roman religion may be 
 esUblished by a State. Ibid. Prop. Ixxvii. 
 
 17. Or that in " Countries called Catholic," the free exercise 
 of other religions may laudably be allowed. 'Syllabus,' Prop. 
 Ixxviu. . 
 
 18. Or that the Roman Pontiff ought to come to terms with 
 progress, liberalism, and modern civilization. Ibid Prop. Ixxx.* 
 
 This list is now perhaps sufficiently extended, although I 
 have as yet not touched the decrees of 1870. But, before quitting 
 it, I must offer three observations on what it contains. 
 
 Firstly. I do not place all the Propositions in one and the 
 same category ; for there are a portion of them which, as far as I 
 can judge, might, by the combined aid of fiivorable construction 
 and vigorous explanation, be brought within bounds. And I hold 
 that favorable construction of the terms used in controversies is 
 the right general rule. But this can only be so when construc- 
 tion is an open question. When the author of certain proposi- 
 tions claims, as in the case before us, a sole and unlimited power 
 to interpret them in such manner and by such rules as he may 
 from time to time think fit, the only defense for all others con- 
 cerned is at once to judge for themselves, how much of unreason 
 or of mischief the words, naturally understood, may contain. 
 
 Secondly. It may appear, upon a hasty perusal, that neither 
 the infliction of penalty m life, limb, liberty, or goods, on disobe- 
 dient members of the Christian Church, nor the title to depose 
 sovereigns, and^release subjects from their allegiance, with all its 
 revolting consequences, has been here re-affirmed. In terms, 
 there is no mention of them ; but in the substance of the prop- 
 ositions, I grieve to say, they are beyond doubt included. For it 
 is notorious that they have been declared and decreed by " Rome," 
 that is to say, by Popes and Papal Councils; and the stringent 
 condemnations of the Syllabus include all those who hold that 
 Popes and Papal Councils (declared ecumenical) have trans- 
 gressed the just limits of their power, or usurped the rights of 
 princes. What have been their opinions and decrees about 
 persecution I need hardly say ; and indeed the right to employ 
 physical force is even here undisguisedly claimed (No. 7). 
 
 teven while I am writing, I am reminded, from an unquestion- 
 able source, of the words of Pope Pius IX. himself on the de- 
 posing power. I add onlv a few italics ; the words appear as 
 given in a translation, without the original: 
 
 "The present Pontiff used these words in replying to the 
 address from the Academia of the Catholic Religion (July 21, 
 1873):— 
 
 ♦For the original passages from the Encyclical and Syllabus of 
 Pius IX., see Appendix A. 
 

 TBI TATIOAH DWBIIS 
 
 •••There are many enrora leaarding the Infallibility : but the 
 most malicioM of all is that which includes, in that dogma, the 
 rtffhi of depoemir eovereigns, and declaring the people no longer 
 bound by the oblation of idelity. This riaht has now and 
 Jgain, in eritieal circumstances, been exercised by the Pontiffs: 
 but it has nothing to do with Papal Infallibility. Its origin was 
 not the infallibifity, but the authority of the Pope. Tliis au- 
 thority, in accordance with the public right, which was then vig- 
 oioui, and with the acquieseence of all Christian nations, who 
 revewBDed in the Pope the supreme Judge of the Christian 
 Comnioiiwealth, extended so far as to pass jndgm*int, even in 
 dml aWmts, on the acts of Princes and of Naiiom: " ♦ 
 
 Iiai%, I must observe that these are not mere opinions of the 
 Pope himself, nor even are they opinions which he might pater- 
 nally rewamend- to the pious consideration of the faithful. With 
 A*^ promulgation of his opinions is unhappily combined, in the 
 Encyclical Letter, which virtually, though not expressly, includes 
 the whole, a command to all his spiritual children (from which 
 command we the disobedient chilaren are in no way excluded) 
 to hold them : 
 
 •^Itaque onnes et singulas pravas opinionee et doctrinas singil- 
 Mum hi»c« Uteris commemoratag auctoritate nostril Apostolic! 
 iwpiwtoui^ proscribi^ atque damnamus; easque ab omnibus 
 tMholicsB Ecclesim iliis, veluti reprobatas, proscriptas, atque 
 «*?i25f^ o™ni«»o haberi volumus et mandamus." Encycl. Dec. 
 
 o, .I0O4. 
 
 Ajid the decrees of 1870 will presently show us, what they es- 
 mli«h at the binding force of the mandate thus conveyed to the 
 
 '€liii8littii 'World. * *^ 
 
 IV. Thi Thiso Pboposition. 
 
 I now pa«i to the operation of these extraordinary declarations 
 oiUMiaonal and private duty. 
 
 When the cup of endurance, which had so long been filling, 
 b^n, with the counsel of the Vatican in 1870, to overflow, the 
 umI&iiioiis and learned living theologian of the Roman Com- 
 munion, Dr. von Bollinger, long the foremost champion of his* 
 Lhurch, refused compliance, and submitted, with his temper un- 
 di^iirfoed and his freedom unimpaired, to the extreme and most 
 painful penalty of excommunication. With him, many of the 
 iiiojt learned and respected theologians of the Roman Communion 
 m eennaaT underwent the same sentence. The very few, who 
 elsewhere (I do not speak of Switzerland) suffered in like man- 
 ner, deserve an admiration rising in proportion to their fewness. 
 It aeems as though Germany, from which Luther blew the 
 
 ♦ iOiviiiMition and the See of Rome.' By Lord Robert Montagu. 
 Bublin, 1874. A Lecture delivered under the auspices of the Cath- 
 ohc Union of Ireland. I have a little misgiving about the version: 
 but not of a nature to affect the substance. 
 
 IN THKIR BRVRIXO ON CIVIL ALLEGIANCE. 
 
 13 
 
 , 
 
 mighty trumpet that even now echoes through the land, still re- 
 tained her pnmacy in the domain of conscience, still supplied the 
 centuria pretrogativa of the great comitia of the world. 
 
 But let no man wonder or complain. Without imputing to any 
 one the moral murder, for such it is, of stifling conscience and 
 conviction, I for one can not be surprised that the fermenta- 
 tion, which is working through the mind of the Latin Church, 
 has as yet (elsewhere than in Germany) but in few instances 
 come to the surface. By the mass of mankind, it is morally im- 
 possible that questions such as these can be adequately examined ; 
 so it ever has been, and so in the main it will continue, until the 
 principles of manufacturing machinery shall have been applied, 
 and with analogous results, to intellectual and moral processes. 
 Followers they are and must be, and in a certain sense ought to be. 
 But what as to the leaders of society, the men of education and of 
 leisure? I will try to suggest some answer in few words. A 
 change of religious profession is under all circumstances a great 
 and awful thing. Much more is the question, however, between 
 conflicting, or apparently conflicting, duties arduous, when the re- 
 ligion of a man has been changed for him, over his head, and 
 without the very least of his mrticipation. Far be it then from 
 me to make any Roman Catholic, except the great Hierarchic 
 Power, and those who have egged it on, responsible for the por- 
 tentous proceedings which we have witnessed. My conviction is 
 that, even of those who may not shake off the yoke, multitudes 
 will vindicate at any rate their lovalty at the expense of the con- 
 sistency, which perhaps in difficult matters of relieion few among 
 us perfectly maintain. But this belongs to the future ; for the 
 present, nothing could in my opinion be more unjust than to hold 
 the members of the Roman Church in general already responsi- 
 ble for the recent innovations. The duty of observers, who think 
 the claims involved in these decrees arrogant and false, and such 
 as not even impotence real or supposed ought to shield from criti- 
 cism, is frank^ to state the case, and, by way of friendly chal- 
 lenge, to entreat their Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen to 
 replace themselves in the position which five-and-forty years aji;o 
 this nation, by the voice and action of its Parliament, declared its 
 belief that they held. 
 
 Upon a strict re-examination of the language, as apart from the 
 substance of my fourth Proposition, I find it faulty, inasmuch as 
 it seems to imply that a " convert" now joining the Papal Church, 
 not only gives up certain rights and duties of freedom, but sur- 
 renders tnem by a conscious and deliberate act. What I have 
 less accurately said that he renounced, I might have more accu- 
 rately said that he forfeited. To s{)eak strictly, the claim now 
 made upon him by the authority, which he solemnly and with the 
 highest responsibility acknowledges, requires him to surrender 
 his mental and moral freedom, and to place his loyalty and civil 
 duty at the mercy of another. There maj have been, and may 
 be, persons who in their sanguine trust will not shrink from this 
 result, and will console themselves with the notion that their 
 loyalty and civil duty are to be committed to the custody of one 
 

 THE VATICAN DiiOKBEa 
 
 iBiich wiser Ihan themselTes. But I mn sore Umt tbere are also 
 "uonyerts" who, when they perceive, will by word and act reject 
 the oonsequence which relentlees logic draws for them. If, how- 
 ef«r, my proposition be true, there is no escape from the dilemma. 
 Is it then true, or is it not true, that Borne requires a convert, who 
 now joins her, to forfeit his moral and mental freedom, and to 
 pllMt Ilia limdty and civil duty at the mercy of another ? 
 
 Imniiir io place this matter in as dear a light as I can, it will 
 be BMossaiy to go bock a little upon our recent history. 
 
 A eentu^ ago we began to relax that sjrstem of penal laws 
 a|Eainst Boman Catholics, at once petti fogginj^ base, and cruel, 
 wliich Mr. Burke has scathed and blasted with his immortal elo- 
 
 When this process had reached the point, at which the question 
 whether they should be admitted into Parliament, there 
 afose a great and prolonged national controversy ; and some men, 
 who at no time of their lives were narrow-mmded, such as Sir 
 Buliert^ Peel, the Minister, resisted the concession. The argu- 
 ments in its favor were obvious and strong, and they ultimately 
 prevailed. But the strength of the opposing party had lain in 
 the all^gntion that, from the nature and claims of the Papal 
 power, it was not possible for the consistent Roman Catholic to 
 pay to the crown of this country an entire allegiance, and that 
 the admission of persons, thus self-disabled, to Parliament was 
 inconsistent with the safety of the State and nation; which had 
 not very long before, it may be observed, emerged from a struggle 
 for existence. 
 
 An answer to this argument was indispensable ; and it was sup- 
 plied mainly from two sources. The Josephine Laws,* Uien 
 still subsisting in the Austrian Empire, and the arrangements 
 which had been made after the peace of 1815 by Prussia and 
 the German States with Pius VII. and Gonsalvi, proved that the 
 Pa|Mil Court could submit to circumstances, and could allow ma- 
 terial restraints even upon the exercise of its ecclesiastical pre- 
 rogatives. Here, then, was a reply in the sense of the phrase 
 mimimr ambulando. Much information of this class was col- 
 lected for the information of Parliament and the country, f But 
 there were also measures taken to learn, from the highest Roman 
 Gathiilie authorities of this country, what was the exact situation 
 nf Hie members of that communion with respect to some of the 
 belter known exorbitancies of Papal assumption. Did the Pope 
 claim any temporal jurisdiction? Did he still pretend to the ex- 
 ercise of a power to depose kings, release subjects from their al- 
 
 * See the work of Count dal Pozzo on the 'Austrian Ecclesiastical 
 Ijaw.* Iiondon : Murray, 1827. The Leopoldine Laws in Tuscany 
 may also be mentioned. 
 
 fSee * Report from the Select Committee appointed to report the 
 nature and substance of the Laws and Ordinances existing in 
 Foreipi States, respecting the regulation of their Roman Catholio 
 subjects in Ecclesiastical matters, and their intercourse with the See 
 of Jlome. or any other Foreign Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction.' Printed 
 for the Mouse of Commons in 1816 and 1817. Reprinted 1851. 
 
 IN THEIR BEARING ON CIVIL ALLEGIANCE. 
 
 15 
 
 legiance, and incite them to revolt? Was faith to be kept with 
 heretics? Did the Church still teach the doctrines of persecu- 
 tion ? Now, to no one of these questions could the answer really 
 be of the smallest immediate moment to this powerful and solidly 
 compacted kingdom. They were topics selected by way of sam- 
 ple ; and the intention was to elicit declarations showing gener- 
 ally that the fangs of mediaeval Popedom had been drawn, and 
 its claws torn away; that the Roman svstem, however strict in 
 its dogma, was perfectly compatible with civil liberty, and with 
 the institutions of a free State molded on a different religious 
 basis from its own. 
 
 Answers in abundance were obtained, tending to show that the 
 doctrines of deposition and persecution, of keeping no faith with 
 heretics, and oi universal dominion, were obsolete beyond re- 
 vival; that every assurance could be given respecting them, ex- 
 cept such as required the shame of a formal retractation ; that 
 they were in effect mere bugljears, unworthy to be taken into ac- 
 count by a nation which prided itself on being made up of prac- 
 tical men. 
 
 But it was unquestionably felt that something more than the 
 renunciation of these particular opinions was necessary in order 
 to secure the full concession of civil rights to Roman Catholics. 
 As to their individual loyalty, a State disposed to generous or 
 candid interpretation had no reason to be uneasy. It was only 
 with regard to reouisitions, which might be made on them from 
 another quarter, that apprehension could exist. It was reason- 
 able that England should desire to know not only what the Pope * 
 mi^ht do for himself, but' to what demands, by the constitution of 
 their Church, they were liable ; and how far it was possible that 
 such demands could touch their civil duty. The theory which 
 placed every human being, in things spiritual and things tem- 
 poral, at the feet of the Roman Pontiff, iiad not been an idolum 
 speeds, a mere theory of the chamber. Brain-power never sur- 
 passed^ in the political history of the world had been devoted for 
 centuries to the single purpose of working it into the practice of 
 Christendom ; had in tne West achieved for an impossible prob- 
 lem a partial success ; and had in the East punished the obsti- 
 nate independence of the Church by that Latin conquest of Con- 
 stantinople which effectually prepared the way for the downfall 
 of the Eastern Empire, and the establishment of the Turks in 
 Europe. What was really material therefore was, not whether 
 the Papal Chair laid claim to this or that particular power, but 
 whether it laid claim to some power that included them all, and 
 whether that claim had received such sanction from the authori- 
 ties of the Latin Church, that there remained within her borders 
 absolutely no tenable standing-ground from which war against it 
 
 ♦At that period the eminent and able Bishop Doyle did not scruple 
 to write as follows : " We are taunted with the proceedings of Popes. 
 What, my Lord, haVe we Catholics to do with the proceedings of 
 Popes, or why should we be made accountable for them ?"— 'Essay 
 on tlie Catholic Claims.' To Lord Liverpool, 1826, p. 111. 
 
16 
 
 f MB TATfCAH OBOSBBS 
 
 MitM be maintained. Bid the Pope then olaip iiiMIibility 7 Or 
 did he, either without infallibility or with it (and if with it, so 
 nuoh the worse), claim an universal obedience from his flock? 
 ▲lid were these claims, either or both, affirmed in his Church by 
 miiiirilj which men the least Papal of the members of that 
 Cfhareh nmst admit to be binding upon conscience? 
 
 The two first of these questions were covered by the third. 
 And well it was that they were so covered. For to them no sat- 
 isfiMiOlJ answer could even then be given. The Popes had kept 
 up, widi Ddaparatively little intermission, for well-nieh a thou- 
 •ami years their ckim to dogmatic infaUibility; and had. at pe- 
 riods within the same tract of time, oflen enougii made, and never 
 retracted, that other claim which is theoretically less but prac- 
 tically larger; their claim to an obedience virtually universal 
 from the baptized members of the Church. To the third question 
 it was fortunately more practicable to prescribe a satisfactory re- 
 ply. It was well known that, in the clays of its glory and intel- 
 lectual power, the great Oallican Church had not onTv not admitted, 
 but haa denied Papal infallibility, and had declared that the local 
 laws and usaji^s of the Church could not be set aside by the will 
 of the Pontiff. Nay, further, it was believed thai in the main 
 these had been, down to the close of the last century, the prevail- 
 iBg opinions of the Cisalpine Churches in communion with Rome. 
 TEe Cbmicil of Constance had in act as well as word shown that 
 the Pope's judgments, and the Pope himself, were triable by the 
 assembled representatives of the Christian world. And the Coun- 
 cil of Trent, notwithstanding the predominance in it of Italian and 
 Human influences, if it had not denied, yet had not affirmed either 
 proposition. 
 
 All that remained was, to know what were the sentiments en- 
 tertained on these vital points by the leaders and guides of Ro- 
 man Catholic opinion nearest to our own doors. And here testi- 
 mony was offisred, which must not, and can not, be forgotten. ^ In 
 part, this was the testimony of witnesses before the Committee 
 of the House of Lords in 1825. I need quote two answers onl^, 
 given by the Prelate, who more than any other represented his 
 Church, and influenced the mind of this country in favor of con- 
 ceesion at the time, namely. Bishop Doyle. He was asked,* 
 
 ** In what, and how far, does the Koman Catholic profess to 
 obey the Pope ? " 
 
 He repliea : 
 
 *' The Catholic professes to obey the Pope in matters which re- 
 l^tfd his religious faith: and in those matters of ecclesiastical dis- 
 cipline which have already been defined by the competent au- 
 thorities." 
 
 * Committees of both Lords and Commons sat ; the former in 1825, 
 the latter in 1824-5. The References were identical, and ran as fol- 
 lows: **To Inquire into the state of Ireland, more particularly with 
 reference to the circumstances which may have'led to disturbances 
 in that part of the United Kingdom.** Bishop Doyle was examined 
 March 21, 1S25, and April 21, 1825, before theLordii, 
 
 IN THEIR BEARING ON CIVIL ALLEOUNCE. 
 
 n 
 
 And again: 
 
 "Does that justify the objection that is made to Catholics, that 
 their allegiance is divided ?"" 
 
 " I do not think it does in any way. We are bound to obey the 
 Pope in those things that I have already mentioned. But our obe- 
 dience to the law, and the allegiance which we owe the sovereign, 
 are complete, and full, aQd perfect, and undivided, inasmuch as 
 they extend to all political, legal, and civil rights of the king or 
 his subjects. I think the allegiance duo to the kin^, and the al- 
 legiance due to the Pope, are as distinct and as divided in their 
 nature as any two things can possibly be." 
 
 Such is the opinion of the dead rrclatc. We shall presently 
 hear the opinion of a living one. But the sentiments of the dead 
 man powerfully operated on the open and trustful temper of this 
 people to induce them to grant, at the cost of so much popular 
 feeling and national traditi(m, the great and just concession of 
 1829. That concession, without such declarations, it would, to say 
 the least, have been far more difficult to obtain. 
 
 Now, bodies are usually held to be bound by the evidence of 
 their own selected and typical witnesses. But in this instance the 
 colleagues of those witnesses thought fit also to speak collectively. 
 
 Firstrlet us quote from the collective " Declaration," in the year 
 1826, of the Vicars Apostolic, who, with Episcopal authority, gov- 
 erned the Roman Catholics of Great Hrifaim : 
 
 "The allegiance which Catholics hold to be due, and are bound 
 to pay, to their Sovereign, and to the civil authority of the State, 
 is perfect and undivided 
 
 " They declare that neither the Pope, nor any other prelate or 
 ecclesiastical person of the Roman Catholic Church 
 hjis any right to interfere, directly or indirectly, in the Civil Gov- 
 ernment, . . nor to (»ppose in any manner the per- 
 formance of the civil duties which are due to the king." 
 
 Not less explicit was the Hierarchy of the Roman Communion 
 in its * Pastoral Address to tlie Clerj:^ and Laity of the Roman 
 Catholic Church in Ireland,' dated January 25, 1826. This ad- 
 dress contains a Declaration, from which I extract the following 
 words : 
 
 " It is a duty which they owe to themselves, as well as to their 
 Protestant felloiv-snhjects, whose good opinion they value, to en- 
 deavor once more to remove the false imputations that have been 
 frequently cast upon the faith and discipline of that Church 
 which is intrusted to their care, that all may he enabled to knovf 
 with accuraci/ their gemiine principles." 
 
 In Article 11: — . <. 
 
 " They declare on oath their belief that it is not an article of 
 the Catholic Faith, neither are they thereby required to believe, 
 that the Pope is infallible." 
 
 And, after various recitiils, they set forth— 
 
 "After this full, explicit, and sworn declaration, we are utterly 
 at a loss to conceive on what possible ground we could be justly 
 char^ with bearing towards our most gracious Sovereign only 
 a divided allegiance. 
 
IS 
 
 tni TATICA2C DECRBEB 
 
 Tliti'i, Iwsidca inucli else that I will not etop to quote, Papal in- 
 
 llibility was most solemnly declared to be a matter on which 
 ©:ich man might think as h©/ pleased ; the Pope's power to claim 
 obedience wim strictly and narrowly limited: it was expressly de- 
 nied that he had any title, direct or indirect, to interfere in civil 
 gofernaeni Of the right of the Pope to define the limits which 
 ifide the civil from the spiritual by his own authori^, not one 
 word is said by the Prelates of either country. 
 
 Since that time, all these propositions have been reversed. 
 The Pope's infallibility, when he speaks ex cathedrd on faith and 
 morals, has been declared, with the assent of the Bishops of the 
 Koman Church, to be an article of faith, binding on the con- 
 ■eieace of every Christian; his claim to the obedience of his 
 spiritual subjects has been declared in like manner without any 
 plractical limit or reserve; and his supremacy, without any re- 
 serve of civil rights, has been similarly affirmed to include every 
 thliig which relates to the discipline and government of the 
 Church throughout the world. And these doctrines, we now 
 knf»w on the highest authority, it is of necessity for salvation to 
 believe. 
 
 Independently, however, of the Vatican Decrees themselves, it 
 is necessjiry for all who wish to understand what has been the 
 amount of the wonderful change now consummated in the consti- 
 tution «if the Latin Church, and what is the present degradation 
 of its Episcopal order, to observe also the change, amounting to 
 revolution, or form in the present, as compared with other con- 
 ciliatory decrees. Indeed, that spirit of centralization, the ex- 
 cesses of which are as fatal to vigorous life in the Church as in 
 the State, seems now nearly to have reached the last and furthest 
 point of poB:4ibIe advancement and exaltation. 
 
 When, in fact, we speak of the decrees of the Council of the 
 Vatican, we use a phnise which will not bear strict examination. 
 The Canons of the Council of Trent were, at least, the real 
 Canons of a real Council: and the strain in which they are 
 promulgated is this : Jiasc sacrosancia, ecumenica, et generalis 
 Tndeiiiiim Sifnodns, in Spiriiu Sancto legitime congregaia, in ed 
 pr<E»ideiUihn« eiJtd^m tribtu apostolicia Leg a tin, hortaiur, or rfi*- 
 cet, or 9iaimi, or decernit, and the like : and its canons, as pub- 
 lished in Rome, arc ''Canones et decreta SmrosancU ectimenid 
 (hncilii TndenUm,"* and so forth. But what we have now to 
 do with is the OonsUtutio Dogmaiica Prima de Ecclesid Christie 
 fldtlii ill Sesmone ifriid of the Vatican Council. It is n«)t a con- 
 ttitntion made by the Council, but one promulgated in the Coun- 
 eilf And who is it that legislates and decrees? It is Piua 
 ^iscopn^,sertfm Mermrum Dei: and the seductive plunil of his 
 d&ctmms ei declwramus is simply the dignified and ceremonious 
 
 • * Eonife : in Collegio urbano de Propapandit Fide.' 1833. 
 
 fl am aware that, m some liold, this was the case with the Council 
 of the Lateran in A. D. 1215. But, first, this has not been estab- 
 lished ; secondly, the very gist of the evil we arc dealing with con- 
 rists in following (and eiiforting) precedent's from the age i>f I'oik; In- 
 nocent III. 
 
 i 
 
 IN THBIR BEARING ON CITIL ALLEOIAXCB. 
 
 19 
 
 "We" of Royal declarations. The document is dated Pontificor 
 tiU nostri Anno XXV: and the humble share of the assembled 
 Episcopate in the transaction is represented by sacro approbante 
 concilio. And now for the propositions themselves. 
 
 First comes the Pope's infallibility:-- 
 
 " Docemus, et divinitus revelatum dogma esse definimus, Ko- 
 manum Pontificem, cum ex Cathedra loquitur, id est cum, om- 
 nium Christianorum Pastoris et Doctoris munere fungens, pro 
 supreme suJl Apostolica auctoritate doctrmam de fide vel moribua 
 ab universil Ecclesia tenendam definit, per assistentiam divinam, 
 ipsi in Beato Petro promissam, ea infallibilitate pollere qua Ui- 
 vinus Redemptor Bcclesiam suam in definienda doctrm& de fide 
 vel moribus instructam esse voluit : ideoque ems Romani fontitt- 
 cis definitiones ex sese non autem ex consensu Ecclesiae irretormar 
 
 ^' WilTit,' then, be said that the infallibility of the Pope accrues 
 only when he speaks ex cathedrd f No doubt this is a very mar 
 terial consideration for those who have been told that the private 
 conscience is to derive comfort and ass"'^*^^^ .^'•^™ *^«/^^*^ 
 tions of the Papal Chair: for there is no established or accepted 
 definition of the phrase ex cathedrd, and he has no power to ob- 
 tain one, and no guide to direct him in his choice a^o°g «?"J« 
 twelve theories on the subject, which, it is said are bandied to 
 and fro among Roman theologians, except the despised and di^ 
 carded agency of his private judgment But while thus sorely 
 Lnt^lizeS, he^s not one whit protected. Ff ^ *t^«[«J«J*^^^^f.^^ 
 person, and one only, who can uncjuestionably declare ex caM|^ 
 drd what is ex cathedrd and what is not, and who can declare it 
 when and as he pleases. That person is the Pope himself. 
 The provision is, that no document he issues shall ^^vahd with- 
 out a sed; but the seal remains under his own sole lock and key. 
 Again, it may be sought to plead, that the Pope is, after all 
 only operating hj sanctions which unquestionably ^fl^'^g *? «^« 
 rehVious domain' He does not propose to mvade the country^ 
 to seize Woolwich, or burn Portsmouth He wiU only, at the 
 worst, excommunicate opponents, as he has excommunicated Dr. 
 von Dollinger and others. Is this a good answer? After all^ 
 even in the Middle Ages, it was not by the direct action of fleet* 
 and armies of their o>n that the Popes conten^ied w.^^^^^ 
 who were refractory; it was mainly by interdicts, and by there^ 
 7usal, which they entailed when the bishops were not bnive 
 enough to refuse their publication, of religious offices to the peo- 
 ple "it was thus that England suffered under J^«. France under 
 Hilip Augustus. Leon under Alphonso the Noble, and every 
 country in its turn. But the inference may be drawn that they 
 who while using spiritual weapons for such an end, do not em- 
 ploy temporal m^ans. only fail to cmDloy them because they have 
 them not^ A religious society, whicli delivers ^o";y« J?f «P F^ 
 ual censures in order to impede >he performance of civd du i^ 
 does all the mischief that is in its power to do, and brings 
 
 ♦ •Constitutio de Ecclesi4,' c. iv. 
 
20 
 
 'fBB TATIOAN DBCSBBS 
 
 into question, in the fiuse of the State, its title to civil protee- 
 
 Will it be said, inftllj, that the Infallibility touches only mat- 
 ter of faith and morals? Only matter of morals I Will any of 
 Ihe Roman casoists kindly acauaint us what are the departments 
 and functions of human life which do not and can not mil within 
 the domain of morals? If they will not tell us, we must look 
 elsewhere. In his work entitled 'Literature and Dogma,'* Mr. 
 lilMhew Arnold quaintly informs us — as they tell us nowadays 
 how many parts of our poor bodies are solid, and how many aquc- 
 MS— that about scTenty-fiTe per cent, of all we do belongs to the 
 itprtnent of " conduct." Conduct and morals, we may suppose, 
 wsm nearly oo^xtonsive. Three-fourths, then, of life arc thus 
 lumded oTer. But who will guarantee to us the other fourth ? 
 Certainly not St. Paul ; who says, " Whether therefore ye eat, or 
 drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." And 
 " Whatsoever ye do, in word or in deed, do all in the name of the 
 IjO«lJc«u8."t No I Such a distinction would be the unwOrthy 
 device of a shallow policy, vainly used to hide the daring of that 
 wild ambition which at ftome, not from the throne but from be- 
 hind the throne, prompts the movements of the Vatican. I care 
 not to ask if there be dregs or tatters of human life, such as can 
 escape from the description and boundary of morals. I submit 
 that Duty is a power which rises with us in the morning, and 
 goes to rest with us at nighi It is coextensive with the action 
 of our intelligence. It is the shadow which cleaves to us, go 
 where we will, and which only leaves us when we leave the light 
 of life. S<», then, it is the supreme direction of us in respect to 
 all Duty, which the Fontiff aeclares to belong to him, sacro ap- 
 prohante coneiHo : and this declaration he makes, not as an otiose 
 opinion of the schools, hxkitmwiiiBfidelihui credetidam et knettdam. 
 
 But we shall now see that, even if a loop-hole had at this point 
 been lell unclosed, the void is supplied bv another proirision of 
 the Deerees. While the reach of tlic Infallibility is ns wide as it 
 mav please the Fope, or those who may prompt the Pope, to 
 Mtlce it, there is somethins; wider still, ana that is the claim to 
 •n absoluti^ and entire Obeaience. This Obedience is to be ren- 
 dered to his orders in the cases I shall proceed to point out, 
 without any qualifying condition, such as the ex cathedra. The 
 founding name of Infiillibility has so fascinated the public mind, 
 tnd riteted it on the Fourth Chapter of the Constitution de Ec- 
 ehtM, that its near neighbor, the Third Chapter, has, at least in 
 my^ opinion, received very much less than justice. Let us turn 
 to H: 
 
 " Cujttseun(|ne ritAs et dignitatis pastores atque fideles, tam se- 
 orsum singuli quam simul omnes, offioio hierarohicae subordina- 
 tionis verseque obediential obstringnntur, non solum in rebus, 
 qnn ad fidem et mores, sed etiam in lis, qu» ad disciplinam et 
 wgimen Bcdesi, p «r totem orb^ diflh.. pertinent . . . 
 
 •Pages 15, 44. 
 
 floor. X. SI; Col. iii. 7. 
 
 IN THBiR BEARING OK CITIL ALLEOIAKCB. 
 
 21 
 
 H«o est CatholicsB veritatis doctrina, a qnk deviare, salvA fide atque 
 salute, nemo potest. 
 
 " Docemus etiam et declai-amus eum esse judicem snprenmm 
 fidelium, et in omnibus causis ad examen ecclesiasticum spec- 
 tantibus ad ipsius posse judicium recurri: Sedis vero ApoBtohc»» 
 fcujus auctoritate major non est, judicium a nemine fore retrao^ 
 tandum. Neque cuiquam de ejus licere judicare judicio."* 
 
 Even, therefore, where the judgments of the Pope do not pre- 
 sent the credentials of infallibility, they are unappealable and 
 irreversible : no person may pass judgment upon them ; and aU 
 men, clerical and lay, dispersedly or in tlie aggregate, are bound 
 truly to obey them ; and from this rule of Catholic truth no man 
 can depart, save at the peril of his salvation. Surely, it is allow- 
 able to say that this Third Chapter on universal obedience is a 
 formidable rival to the Fourth Chapter on Infallibility. Indeed, 
 to an observer from without, it seems to leave the dignity to 
 the other, but to reserve the stringency and efficiency to itself. 
 The Third Chapter is the Merovingian Monarch ; the fourth la 
 the Carolingian Mayor of the Palace. The third has an overaw- 
 ing splendor; the fourth, an iron gripe. Little does it matter to 
 me wnether my superior claims infallibilitjir, so loM aa he w en- 
 titled to demand and exact conformity. This, it will be obeerved, 
 he demands even in cases not covered by his infallibility; oasM, 
 therefore, in which he admits it to be possible that he may be 
 wrong, but finds it intolerable to be told •©. A« he must be 
 obeyed in all his judgments though not ex cathedrd, it seems a 
 pity he could not likewise give the comforting assoranee that 
 they are all certain to be right. 
 
 But why this ostensible redfuplication, this apparent surplusage? 
 Why did the astute contrivers of this tangled scheme eonolnde 
 that they could not afford to rest content vnth pledging the 
 Council to Infallibility in terms which are not only wide to a 
 high degree, but elastic beyond all measure t ^ ,' „ _ .^. , 
 
 Though they must have known perfectly well tJ»t " feith and 
 morals '^ carried every thing, or every tiiin|5 worth haying, m the 
 purely individual sphere, the/ also knew just as well «»»*. •^JJ 
 where the individual was subjugated, they might and wwild stiU 
 have to deal with the State. ^ . • i i._x i 
 
 In mediaval history, this distinction is not only clear bu* glar- 
 ing Outside the borders of some narrow and proscribed sfeet, now 
 and then emerging, we never, or scarcely ever, k^<w P™*? *"S 
 personal resistance to the Pope. The manfiil "Protestantism 
 of medi«val times had it* activity ahnost entirely m the sphere 
 of public, national, and state rights. Too much attention, m w 
 opinion, can not be fiwtened on this point It is the very root 
 and kernel of tiie matter. Individual servitude, howwer algect, 
 wiU not satisfy the party now dominant in the Latm Chureh : the 
 
 Stete must also be a slave. .,..__ • ^ 
 
 Our Savior had leeogniaed as distinct tiie two P»o™««« «* 
 
 the oivU rale and tiie Church: had nowhere intimated that flie 
 
 ♦ * Dogmatic Constitutions,' etc, c iit Dubiin, 1870, pp. 3(W3. 
 
THB TATIdAH DB0BSI8 
 
 •piritoal atitiiority was to cIaiih the disposal of ph^^sical force, and 
 ti control in its own domain the authority which is alone respon- 
 sible for external peace, order, and safety among civilised com- 
 imiiiities of men. It has been alike the poonliarity, the pride, 
 •iMl §m. niisiiftane of the Eoman Church, among Christian commu- 
 ■itiei, to allow to itself an unbounded use, as far as its power would 
 go, of earthly instruments for spiritual ends. We have seen with 
 what ample assurances * this nation and Parliament were fed in 
 liii; how well and roundly the full and undivided rights of the 
 civil power, and the separation of the two jurisdictions, were 
 •ilfiiied. AH this had at length been undone, as far as Popes 
 mmM mido it, in the Syllabus and the Encyclical. It remained to 
 ocniiilete the undoing, through the subserviency or pliability of 
 the Council 
 
 And the work is now truly complete. Lest it should be said 
 Hlftt lap remaoT in laith and morals, full dominion over personal 
 belief and conauct, did not cover the collective action of men in 
 States, a third Drovince was opened, not indeed to the abstract 
 ■asertion of Inmllibility, but to the far more practical and de- 
 cisive deinaiii of absolute Obedience. And this is the proper 
 work of the Third Chapter, to which I am endeavoring to do a 
 tMdT ja.ti«e. Let as listen .«a>n to >fa> few but pregnant worfs 
 Oil the point: 
 
 '*Mon solum !n rebus, <|ua} ad idem et mores, sed etiam in iis, 
 qiUB ad disciplinam et regimen Ecclesise per totum orbem diffusso 
 fMrtiiieni" 
 
 Absolute obedience, it Is boldly declared, is due to the Pope, 
 tt tho peril of salvation, not alone in faith, in morals, but in all 
 things which concern the discipline and government of the 
 Church. Thus are swept into the Papal net whole multitudes of 
 facts, whole systeiiis of government^ prevailing, though in different 
 immrn, in every country of the world. Even m the United 
 mSm, whsr« the severance between Church and State is sup- 
 
 led to be oomplete, a Ions catalogue might be drawn of subjects 
 onging to the dontaiii mm. competency of the State, but also un- 
 denii£ly aiboting the government of the Church; such as, by way 
 of ttuumple, marriafra, burial, education, prison discipline, 
 1ilii|ih§my, poor-relielt incorporation, mortmain, religious endow- 
 ments, vows of celibacy and obedience. In Europe the circle is 
 far wider, the points of contact and of interlacing almost innu- 
 merable. But on all matters, fsspecting which any Pope may 
 think proper to declare that they concern either faith, or morals, 
 or the icovemment or discipline of the Church, he claims, with the 
 approval of a Council undoubtedly Ecumenical in the Boman 
 sense, the absolute obedienoe, at the peril of salvation, of every 
 member of his communion. 
 
 Itstomsiiol as yet to have been thought wise to pledge the 
 Counci in terms to the Syllabus and the Encyclical. That 
 achievement is probabljf reserved for some one of its sittings yet 
 to come. In the meantime it is well to remember, that this claim 
 
 • iMteiMr, Apfiendiz B. 
 
 i 
 
 IN THEIR BBARIXO OX CIVIL ALLEGU^XB. 
 
 ill respect of all things affecting the discipline and government of 
 the Church, as well as faith and conduct, is lodged in open day 
 by and in the reign of a Pontiff, who has condemned free speech, 
 free writing, a free press, toleration of non-conformity, liberty of 
 conscience, the study of civil and philosophical matters in inde- 
 pendence of the ecclesiaBtical authority, marriage unless sacra- 
 nientally contracted, and the definition by the State of the civil 
 rit'hts (jura) of the Church; who has demanded for the Church, 
 therefore, the title to define its own civil rights, together with a 
 divine right to civil immunities, and a right to use physical force; 
 and who has also proudly asserted that the Popes of the Middle 
 Ages with their councils did not invade the rights of princes : as 
 for example, Gregory VO, of the Emperor Henry IV.; Inno- 
 cent III., of Raymond of Toulouse; Paul III., in deposing Henry 
 VIII.; or Pius v., in performing the like paternal ofl&ce for Eliz- 
 abeth. ... J xl_ i. 
 
 I submit, then, that my fourth proposition is true : and that 
 England is entitled to ask, and to know, in what way the obe- 
 dience required by the Pope and the Council of the Vatican is to 
 be reconciled with the integrity of civil allegiance? 
 
 It has been shown that the Head of their Church, so supported 
 as undoubtedly to speak with its highest authority, claims from 
 Roman Catholics a plenary obedience to whatever he may desire 
 in relation not to faith but to morals, and not only to these, but to 
 all that concerns the government and discipline of the Church: 
 that, of this, much lies within the domain of the State : that, to 
 obviate all misapprehension, the Pope demands for himself the 
 right to determine the province of his own rights, and has so de- 
 fined it in formal documents, as to warrant any and every invasion 
 of the civil sphere; and that this new version of the principles 
 of the Papal Church inexorably binds its members to the admis- 
 sion of these exorbitant claims, without any refuge or reservation 
 on behalf of their duty to tlie Crown. 
 
 Under circumstances such as these, it seems not too much to 
 ask of them to confirm the opinion which we, as fellow-country- 
 men, entertain of them, by sweeping away, in such manner and 
 terms as they may think best, the presumptive imputations which 
 their ecclesiastical rulers at Rome, acting autocratically, appear 
 to have brought upon their capacity to pay a solid and undivided 
 allegiance; and to fulfill the engagement which their bishops, as 
 political sponsors, promised and declared for them in 1825. 
 
 It would be impertinent, as well as needless, to suggest what 
 shtmld be said. All that is requisite is to indicate in substance 
 that which (if the foregoing argument be sound) is not wanted, 
 and that which is. What is not vranted is vajjue and general as- 
 sertion, of whatever kind, and however sincere. What is 
 wanted, and that in the most specific form and the clearest terms, 
 1 take to be one of two things ;• that is to say, either-- 
 
 1. A demonstration that neither in the name of faith, nor m 
 the name of morals, nor in the name of the government or dis- 
 cipline of the Church, is the Pope of Rome able, by virtue of the 
 powers asserted for him by the Vatican decree, to make any 
 
 I L 
 
21 
 
 THB wjmtsm wmmMm 
 
 clftiin ajpon those who adhere to his commmiioii, of such a nataro 
 as ean impair the integrity of their civil allegiance ; or else, 
 
 II. That, if and when such claim is made, it will, even al- 
 tfumgii resiiig on the definitions of the Vatican, be repelled and 
 rejeiied ; just as Bishop Doyle, when he was asked what the Ro- 
 man Catholic clergy would do if the Pope intermeddled with 
 their relimon, fepued frankly, " The consequence would be, that 
 w© should oppose him by every means in our power, even by the 
 exercise of our spiritual authority." * 
 
 In the absence of explicit assurances to this effect, we should 
 appear to be led, nay, chriven, by just reasoning upon that docu- 
 aeiitarT evidence, to the conclusions : — 
 
 1. That the Pope, authoriied by his Couneil, claims for him- 
 ■iif the domain (a) of faith, (b) of morals, (c) of all that con- 
 cerns the government and discipline of the Church. 
 
 2. That he in like manner claims the power of determining 
 the limits of those domains. 
 
 3. That he does not sever them, by any acknowledged or in. 
 telligible line, from the domains of civil duty and allegiance. 
 
 4. That he therefore claims, and claims from the month of 
 Jn^, 1870, onward with plenary authority, from every convert 
 and member of his Churcn, that he shall "place his lojralty and 
 civil duty at the mercy of another: " that other being himself. 
 
 ¥. Beino True, abb the Pjcofositions Material ? 
 
 But next, If these propositions be true, are they also material ? 
 The claims can not, as I much fear, be denied to have been made. 
 It can not be denied that the Bishops, who govern in things 
 ■pintaal more than five millions (or nearly one-sixth) of the in- 
 Imbitants of the United Kingdom, have in some cases promoted, 
 in all cases accepted, these claims. It has been a favorite nur- 
 pose of my life not to conjure up, but to conjure down, puolic 
 alarms. 1 am not now going to pretend that either foreign foe or 
 dumestic treason can, at the bidding of the Court of Rome, dis- 
 turb these peaceful shores. But though such fears may be vis- 
 ionary, it is more visionary still to suppose for one moment that 
 the claims of Gregory Vll., of Innocent III., and of Boniface 
 Tin., have been disinterred, in the nineteenth century, like hid* 
 •<MS miiiiiiies picked out of Egyptian sarcophagi, in the inters 
 Mta of archieology, or without a definite and practical aim. As 
 Vilional bcinp, we must rest assured that only with a very 
 chsrlj coneeived and foregone purpose have these astonishing 
 re-asaertions been paraded before the world. What is that pup- 
 posel 
 
 I can well believe that it is in part theological. There have 
 always been, and there still are, Ho small proportion of our race» 
 and those by no means in all respects the worst, who are sorely 
 open to the temptation, especially in times of religious disturb- 
 
 • • 
 
 Report/ March 18, 1826, p. 191. 
 
 
 IN THEIR BEARING ON CIVIL ALLEQIANOE. 
 
 25 
 
 V; 
 
 ance, to discharge their spiritual responsibilities by power of at- 
 iorney. As advertising Houses find custom in proportion, not so 
 much to the solidity of their resources as to the magniloquence 
 of their premises and assurances, so theological boldness in the 
 extension of such claims is sure to pay, by widening certain cir- 
 cles of devoted adherents, however it may repel the mass of man- 
 kind. There were two special encouragements to this enterprise 
 at the present day : one of them the perhaps unconscious but 
 manifest leaning of some, outside the Roman precinct, to undue 
 exaltation of Church power ; the other the reaction, which is 
 and must be brought about in favor of superstition, by the levity 
 of the destructive speculations so widely current, and the nota- 
 ble hardihood of the antichristian writing of the day. 
 
 But it is impossible to account sufficiently in this manner for 
 the particular course which has been actually pursued by the Ro- 
 man Court. All morbid spiritual appetites would have been 
 amply satisfied by claims to infallibility in creed, to the preroga- 
 tive of miracle, to dominion over the unseen world. In truth 
 there was occasion, in this view, for nothing, except a liberal 
 supply of Salmonean thunder : — " Dum flammas Jovis, et sonitus 
 imitatur Olympi." * All this could have been managed by a few 
 Tetzels, judiciously distributed over Europe. Therefore the 
 question still remains, Why did that Court, with policy forever 
 in its eye, lodge such formidable demands for power of the vulgar 
 kind in that sphere which is visible, and where hard knocks can 
 undoubtedly be given as well as received? 
 
 It must be for some political object, of a very tangible kind, 
 that the risks of so daring a raid upon the civil sphere have been 
 deliberately run. 
 
 A daring raid it is. For it is most evident that the very asser- 
 tion of principles which establish an exemption from allegiance, 
 or which impair its completeness, goes, in many other countries 
 of Europe, far more directly than with us, to the creation of po- 
 litical strife, and to dangers of the most material and tangible 
 kind. The struggle, now proceeding in Germany, at once occurs 
 to the mind as a palmary instance. I am not competent to give 
 any opinion upon the particulars of that struggle. The institu- 
 tions of Germany, and the relative estimate of State power and 
 individual freedom, are materially different from ours. But I 
 must say as much as this. Firstly, it is not Prussia alone that 
 is touched; elsewhere, too, the bone lies ready, though the con- 
 tention may be delayed. In other States, in Austria particularly, 
 there are recent laws in force, raising much the same issues as 
 the Falck laws have raised. But the Roman Court possesses in 
 perfection one art, the art of waiting; and it is her wise maxim 
 to fight but one enemy at a time. Secondly, if I have truly rep- 
 resented the claims promulgated from the Vatican, it is difficult to 
 deny that those claims, and the power which has made them, are 
 primarily responsible for the pains and perils, whatever they may 
 be, of the present confiict between German and Roman enact- 
 
 * JSn. vi. 586. 
 
 3 
 
2(* 
 
 Tlii: YATk-.VX IIIBCKKKH 
 
 m TEEIR BEARING ON CIVIL ALLEOUNCB. 
 
 27 
 
 m®nt*. Antl that wliieh was once truly said of France, may now 
 also be said with not lem truth of Germany : when Germany is 
 diaqiiieted. Europe cao not be at rest. 
 
 1 should feel less anxietj on thia subject had the Supreme Pon- 
 tiff franklv recognized his altered position since the events of 
 1870; and, in language^ as dear, if not as emphatic, as that in 
 which he has proscribed modern civilization, given to Europe the 
 assurance that he would be no party to the re-establishment b^ 
 blood and violence of the Temporal Power of the Church. It is 
 easy to conceive that his personal benevolence, no less than his 
 fcefingis as an Italian, must have inclined him individually to- 
 wards a course so humane; and I should add, if I might do it 
 without presumption, so prudent. With what appears to an 
 English ©y® a lavish pn>digality, successive Italian government 
 have made over the ecclesijistical powers and privileges^ of the 
 Monarchy, not to* the Church of the country for the^ revival of 
 the ancient, popular, and self-governing elements of its constitu- 
 tion, but to the Papal Chair, for the establishment of ecclesias- 
 tical despotism, and the supnression of tlie last vestiges of inde- 
 pendence. This course, tto tiifficult for a foreigner to appreciate, 
 or even to justify, has been met, not by reciprocal conciliation, 
 but by a constant fire of denunciations and complaints. When 
 the tone of these denunciations and complaints is compared with 
 the language of the authorized and favored Papal organs in the 
 press, and of the Ultramontane party (now the solo legitimate 
 party of the Latin Church) throughout Europe, it leads many to 
 the painful and revolting conclusion that there is a fixed purpose 
 among the secret inspirers of Roman policy to pursue, by the 
 road of force, upon th«! arrival of any tavorable opportunity, the 
 favorite project of re-erecting the terrestrial throne of the Pope- 
 dom, even if it can <inly be re-erected on the ashes of the city,. 
 and amidst the whitening bones of the people.* 
 
 It is difficult to conceive or contemplate the effects of such an 
 endeavor. But the existence at this day of the policy, even in 
 bar® idea, is itself a portcnttius evil. I do not hesitate to say that 
 it is an incentive to general disturlmnce, a premium upon Eu- 
 ropean wars. It is in my opinion not sanguine only, but almost 
 ridiculous to imagine that sui^h a project could eventually suc- 
 ceed ; but it is difficult to overestimate the effect which it might 
 pfodnce in generating and exasperating strife. It might even, to 
 som© extent, disturb and paralyze the action of such Governments 
 as might interpose for no separate purpose of their own, but only 
 with a view to the maintenance or restoration of the general 
 peace. If the baleful Power which is expressed by the phrase 
 Ciin'a Ronmna, and not at all adequately rendered in its historic 
 force by the usual English equivalent "Court of Rome," really 
 entertains the scheme, it doubtless counts on the support in every 
 country of an organized and devoted partv ; which, when it can 
 command the scales of political power, will promote interference, 
 and, when it is in a minority, will work for securing neutrality. 
 
 * Api>end!x C. 
 
 As the peace of Europe may be in jeopardy, and as the duties 
 even of England, as one (so to speak) of its constabulary author- 
 ities, might come to be in question, it would be most interesting 
 to know the mental attitude of our Roman Catholic fellow-coun- 
 trymen in England and Ireland with reference to the subject ; and 
 it seems to be one on which wc are entitled to solicit information. 
 
 For there can not be the smallest doubt that the temporal power 
 of the Popedom comes within the true meaning of the words used 
 at the Vatican to describe the subjects on which the Pope is au- 
 thorized to claim, under awful sanctions, the obedience of the 
 " faithful." It is even possible that we have here the key to the 
 enlargement of the province of Obedience beyond the limits of 
 Infallibility, and to the introduction of the remarkable phrase ad 
 disciplinam et regimen EcclesicE. No impartial person can deny 
 that the question of the temporal power very evidently concerns 
 the discipline and government of the Church — concerns it, and 
 most mischievously as I should venture to think; but in the 
 opinion, up to a late date, of many Roman Catholics, not only 
 most beneficially, but even essentially. Let it be remembered, 
 that such a man as the late Count Montalembert, who in his gen- 
 eral politics was of the Liberal party, did not scruple to hold 
 that the millions of Roman Catholics throughout the world were 
 copartners with the inhabitants of the States of the Church in 
 regard to their civil government ; and, as constituting the vast 
 majority, were of course entitled to override them. It was also 
 rather commonly held, a quarter of a century ago, that the ques- 
 tion of the States of the Church was one with which none but 
 Roman Catholic powers could have any thing to do. This doc- 
 trine, I must own, was to me at all times unintelligible. It is 
 now, to say the least, hopelessly and irrecoverably obsolete. 
 
 Archbishop Manning, who is the head of the Papal Church in 
 England, and whose ecclesiastical tone is supposed to be in the 
 closest accordance with thtit of his headquarters, has not thought 
 it too much to say that the civil order of all Christendom is the 
 offspring of the Temporal Power, and has the Temporal Power 
 for its key-stone ; that on the destruction of the Temporal Power 
 "the laws of nations would at once fall in ruins; " tnat (our old 
 friend) the deposing Power "taught subjects obedience and princes 
 clemency."* Nay, this high authority has proceeded further; 
 and has elevated the Temporal Power to the rank of necessary 
 doctrine : 
 
 "The Catholic Church can not be silent, it can not hold its 
 peace ; it can not cease to preach the doctrines of Revelation, 
 not only of the Trinity and of the Incarnation, but likewise of 
 the Seven Sacraments, and of the Infallibility of the Church of 
 God, and of the necessity of Unity, and of the Sovereignty^ both 
 spiritual and temporal, of the Holy See."f 
 
 ** Three Lectures on the Temporal Sovereignty of the Popes,' 1860, 
 pp. 34, 46, 47, 58-9, 63. 
 
 t 'The Present Crisis of the Holy See.' By H. E. Manning, D. D. 
 London, 1861, p. 73. 
 
TIIK VATIOAX DI-XrRKBB 
 
 I mmr, for my own part, lieard that the work oontoining this 
 »iii«ri«ble paasage was placed in the ' Index Prohibitorum Li- 
 brorain.' On the contrary, it» distinguished author w^ elevated, 
 on the firet opportunity, to the headship of the Konian Episcopacy 
 in England, and to the guidance of the million or thereabouts of 
 Bouls in its communion. And the more recent uttemnces of the 
 oracle have not descended from the high level of those already 
 ®ited. They have, indeed, the recommendation of a comment, 
 mot without fair claims to authority, on the recent declarations 
 of the Pope and the Council; and of one which goes to prove 
 how far I am from having exaggerated or strained in the foregoing 
 
 Eages the meaning of those declarations. Especially does this 
 old good on the one point, the most vital of the whole — the 
 title to define the bordfer line of the two provinces, which the 
 Archbishop not unfairly takes to be the tr^ie criterion of the 
 supremacy, as between rival powers like the Church and the 
 
 IN THEIR BEARING ON CIVIL ALLEGUNCE. 
 
 29 
 
 If, then, the civil power be not competent to decide the limite 
 of the spiritual power, and if th© spiritual power can define, with 
 ft divine certointv, its own limit*, it is evidently supreme. Or, in 
 other words, the ^spiritual pwer knows, with divine certainty, the 
 limitR of its own jurisdiction : and it knows therefore the limits 
 and the competence of the civil power. It is thereby, in matters 
 of religion and conscience, supreme. I do not see how this can 
 be denied without denying Christianity. And if tiiis be so, this 
 is the doctrine of the Bull Unam Saneiam* and of the Syllabus, 
 and of the Vatican (Council. It is, in fact, Ultramontanism, for 
 this term means neither less nor more. The Church, therefore, 
 
 is separate and supreme , « . ... .1. 
 
 "Let us then ascertain somewhat further what is the meaning 
 of supreme. Any power which is independent, and can alone 
 fix the iimits of ih own jurisdiciion, and can iherebtj fx the 
 'iimits of ail other jiinsdktiom, is, ipso facto, supreme.j But 
 the Church of Jesus Christ, within the sphere of revelation, of 
 faith and morals, is all this, or is nothing, or worse than nothing, 
 an imposture and an usurpation — that is, it is Christ or Anti- 
 christ t 
 
 But the whole pamphlet should be read by those who desire to 
 
 know the true sense of the Papal declarations and Vatican decrees, 
 as they are understood by the most favored ecclesiastics ; under- 
 stood,! am bound to own, so far as I can see, in their natural, 
 legitimate, and inevitable sense. Such reiuiers will be assisted 
 bv the treatise in seeing clearly, and in admitting frankly that, 
 whatever demands may hereafter, and in whatever circumstances, 
 be made upon us, we shall be unahle to advance with any fairnesa 
 the plea that it has been done without due notice. 
 
 ♦On the Bull iMnm Sanrtmrif "o! a most odious kind; '* see Bishop 
 l)oyle*8 Essay, already cited. He thus describes it. 
 
 fThe italics are not in the original. 
 
 i ' Csesarism and Ultraiiiontanism.' By Archbishop Manning, 1874, 
 pp. 35-€. 
 
 !• 
 
 There are millions upon millions of the Protestants of this 
 country who would agree with Archbishop Manning, if he were sim- 
 ply telling us that Divine truth is not to be sought from the lips of 
 the State, nor to be sacrificed at its command. But those millions 
 would tell him, in return, that the State, as the power which is 
 alone responsible for the external order of the world, can alone 
 conclusively and finally be competent to determine what is to take 
 place in the sphere of that external order. 
 
 I have shown, then, that the Projwsitions, especially that 
 which has been felt to be the chief one among them, being true, 
 are also material ; material to be generally known, and clearlv 
 understood, and well considered on civil grounds ; inasmuch as 
 they invade, at a multitude of points, the civil sphere, and seem 
 even to have no very remote or shadowy connection with the 
 future peace and security of Christendom. 
 
 VT. Were the Propositions proper to be set forth by the 
 
 PRESENT Writer? 
 
 There remains yet before us only the shortest and least signifi- 
 cant portion of the inquiry, namely, whether these things, being 
 true, and being material to be said, were also proper to l^e said 
 by^ me. I must ask pardon, if a tone of egotism be detected in 
 this necessarily subordinate portion of my remarks. 
 
 For thirty years, and in a great variety of circumstances, in 
 office and as an independent Member of Parliament, in majorities 
 and in small minorities, and during the larger portion of the 
 time* as the representative of a great constituency, mainly cler- 
 ical, I have, with others, labored to maintain and extend the civil 
 rights of my Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen. The Liberal 
 party of this country, with which I have been commonly asso- 
 ciated, has 8ufi*ered, and sometimes suflbred heavily, in public 
 favor and in influence, from the belief that it was too ardent in 
 the pursuit of that policy; while at the same time it has always 
 been in the worst odor with the Court of Rome, in consequence 
 of its (I hope) unalterable attachment to Italian liberty and in- 
 dependence. I have sometimes been the spokesman of that 
 prty in recommendations which have tended to foster in fact the 
 imputation I have mentioned, though not to warrant it as a mat- 
 ter of reason. But it has existed in fact. So that while (as I 
 think) general justice to society rec^uired that these things which 
 I have now set forth should be written, special justice, as toward 
 the party to which I am loyally attached, and which I may have 
 had a share in thus placing at a disadvantage before our country- 
 men, made it, to say the least, becoming that I should not shrink 
 lirom writing them. 
 
 In discharging that office, I have sought to perform the part 
 not of a theok)gical partisan, but simply of a good citizen ; of 
 
 ■W— ' I II mm 11.11 i _ ii 
 
 •From 1847 to 1865 I sat for the University of Oxford. 
 
m 
 
 ■fit V V M. 1*T/T M. Hff 'TI1iy*1? WW 
 
 one Iiopcful that many of his Roman CathoHo fnends and fellow* 
 countrymen, who are, to say the least of it, as good citizens as 
 Mrnself, may perceire thst the case is not a frivolous case, but 
 one that merits their attention. 
 
 I will next proceed to give the reason why, up to a recent 
 date, I have thought it right in the main to leave to any others, 
 who might feel it, the duty of dealing in detail with this question. 
 
 The great change, which seems to me to have been brought 
 about in the position ofKoman Catholic Christians as citizens, 
 reached its consummation, and came into full operation in July, 
 1870, by the proceedings or so-called decrees of the Vatican 
 Council. 
 
 Up to that time, opinion in the Roman Church on all matters 
 involving civil liberty, though partially and sometimes widely in- 
 timidated, was free wherever it was resolute, During the Middle 
 Ages, heresy was often extinguished in blood, but in every Cis- 
 alpine country a principle of liberty, to a great extent, held its 
 own, and national life refused to be put down. Nay, more, these 
 pfecious and inestimable gifts had not infrequently for their 
 ehampions a local prelacy and clergy. The Constitutions of 
 Clarendon, cursed from tho"^ Papal throne, were the w^ork of the 
 English Bishops. Stephen Langton, appointed directly, through 
 an extraordinary stretch of power, by Innocent III., to the See of 
 Canterbury, headed the Barons of England in extorting from the 
 Fapul minion John, the worst and basest of all our Sovereigns, 
 that Magna Charta which the Pope at once visited with his anath- 
 emas. In the reign of Henry Vlll., it was Tunstal, Bishop of 
 Durham, who first wrote against the Papal domination. Tunstal 
 was followed by Gardiner; and even the recognition of the Royal 
 Headship was voted by the clergy, not under Cranmer, but under 
 his unsuspected predecessor Warham. Strong and domineering 
 m was the high Papal party in those centuries, the resistance 
 was manful. Thrice in history, it seemed as if what we may call 
 the Constitutional part? in the Church was about to triumph: 
 first, at the epoch of the Council of Constance ; secondly, when 
 the French Episcopate was in conflict with Pope Innocent XL; 
 thirdly, when Clement XIV. leveled with the dust the deadliest 
 foes that mental and moral liberty have ever known. But from 
 July, 1870, this state of things has passed away, and the death- 
 warmnt of that Constitutional party has been signed, and sealed, 
 and promulgated in form. 
 
 Before that time arrived, although I had used expressions suf- 
 ficiently indicative as to the tendency of things in the great 
 Latin Communion, yet I had for very u>any years felt it to be 
 the first and paramount duty of the British Legislature, whatever 
 Rome might say or do, to give to Ireland all that justice could 
 demand, in regard to matters of conscience and of civil equality, 
 and thus to set herself right in the opinion of the civilized 
 world. So far from seeing, what some believed they saw, a 
 spirit of unworthy compliance in such a course, it appeared to 
 me the only one which suited either the dignity or the duty of 
 ny country. While this debt remained unpaid, both before and 
 
 
 IN THEIR BKARDfG ON CIVIL ALLEGIANCE. 31 
 
 after 1870, I did not think it my province to open formally a 
 hne of argument on a question of prospective rather than imme- 
 diate moment, which might have prejudiced the matter of duty 
 lying nearest our hand, and morally injured Great Britain not 
 less than Ireland, Churchmen and Nonconformists not less 
 than adherents of the Papal Communion, by slackening the dis- 
 position to pay the debt of justice. When Parliament had passed 
 the Church Act of 1869 and the Land Act of 1870, there re- 
 mained only, under the great head of Imperial equity, one seri- 
 ous question to be dealt with— that of the higher education. I 
 consider that the Liberal majority in the House of Commons, 
 and the Government to which I had the honor and satisfaction 
 to belong, formally tendered payment in full of this portion of 
 the debt by the Irish University Bill of February, 18i3. Some 
 indeed think that it was overpaid; a question into which this is 
 manifestly not the place to enter. But the Roman Catholic prel- 
 acy of Ireland thought fit to nmeure the rejection of that meas- 
 ure, by the direct influence which they exercised over a certain 
 number of Irish Members of Parliument, and by the temptation 
 which they thus ofiered— the bid, in effect, which (to use a 
 homely phrase) they made, to attract the support of the Tory 
 Opposition. Their efforts were crowned with a complete success. 
 From that time forward I have felt that the situation was 
 changed, and that important matters would have to be cleared by 
 suitable explanations. The debt to Ireland had been jxiid: a 
 debt to the country at large had still to be disposed of, and this 
 has come to be the duty of the hour. So long, indeed, as I con- 
 tinued to be Prime Minister, I should not have considered a 
 broad political discussion on a general question suitable to pro- 
 ceed from me; while neither I nor (I am certain) my colleaguoa 
 would have been disposed to run the risk of stirring popular 
 passions by a vulgar and unexplained appeal. But every diffi- 
 culty, arising from the necessary limitations of an official posi- 
 tion, has now beea removed. 
 
 m 
 
 VII. On the Home Policy of the Future. 
 
 I could not, however, conclude these observations without an- 
 ticipating and answering an inciuiry they suggest. "Are they, 
 then," it will be asked, "a recantation and a regret; and what 
 are they meant to recommend as the policy of the future?" My 
 reply shall be succinct and plain. Of what the Liberal party has 
 accomplished, by word or deed, in establishing the full civil 
 equality of Roman Catholics, I regret nothing, and I recant 
 nothing. 
 
 It is certainly a political misfortune that, during the last thirty 
 years, a Church so tainted in its views of civil obedience, and so 
 unduly capable of changing its front and language after Emanci- 
 pation from what it had been before, like an actor who has to 
 perform several characters in one piece, should have acquired an 
 extension of its hold upon the highest classes of this country. 
 
32 
 
 THB TATICAN DWBiaS 
 
 The conquesfci hare been chiefly, as might haVe been expected, 
 among women ; but the numl>er of male converts, or captives (aa 
 I might prefer to call them), has not been inconsiderable. There 
 is no doubt, that every one of these secessions is in the nature 
 of a considerable moral and social severance. The breadth of 
 this gap varies, according to varieties of individual character. 
 Bui it 18 too commonly a wide one. Too commonly, the spirit 
 ®f III® neophyte is expressed by the words which have become 
 notorious : "a Catholic first, an Englishman afterward." Words 
 which properly convey no more than a truism ; for every Chris- 
 tian must seek to place his religion even !>efore his country in 
 lis inner heart But very far from a truism in the sense in 
 which we Imve been led to construe them. We take them to 
 mimii that the "convert" intends, in case of any conflict between 
 Ihe Queen and the Pope, to follow the Pope, and let the Queen 
 shift for herself; which, happily, she can well do. 
 
 Usually, in this country, a movement in the highest class 
 would raise a presumption of a similar movement in the mass. 
 It is not so here. Rumors have gone ab(jut that the proportion 
 iif members of the Papal Church to the population has in- 
 creased, especially in England. But these rumors would seem 
 to be confuted by authentic figures. The Koman Catholic Mar- 
 riages, which supply a competent test, and which were 489 per 
 cent, of the whole in 1854, and 4-62 percent, in 1^59, were 409 
 per cent in 1869, and 4 02 per cent in 1871. 
 
 There is something at the least abnormal in such a partial 
 growth, taking effect as it does among the wealthy and noble, 
 while the people can not be charmed, by any incantation, into 
 the Roman camp. The original Gospel was supposed to be meant 
 especially for the poor; but the gospel of the nineteenth century 
 from Rome courts another and less modest destination. If the 
 Pope does not control more souls among us, he certainly controls 
 more acres. 
 
 The severance, however, of ii certain number of lords of the 
 soil from those who till it, ctin be borne. And so I trust will in 
 like manner be endured the new and very real "agmression " of 
 the principles promulgjited by Papal authority, whether they are 
 or are not loyally disclaimed. In this matt(?r, each man is his 
 own judge and his own guide : I can speak for myself. T am no 
 longer able to s:iy, as 1 would have said before 1870, "There is 
 nothing in the necessary belief of the Roman Catholic which can 
 •ppear to impeach his full civil title; ISir, whatsoever be the 
 follies of ecclesiastical power in his Church, his Church itself has 
 not reouired of him, with binding authority, to assent to any 
 nrincipies inconsistent with his civil duty." That ground is now, 
 for the present at least, cut from under my feet. What then is 
 to be our course of policy hereafter? First let me say that, as 
 regards the gresit Imperial settlement, achieved by slow degrees, 
 which has nlmitted men of all creeds subsisting among us to Par- 
 liament, that I conceive to be so determined beyond all doubt or 
 auestion, as to have become one of the deep foundatioa-stones of 
 iio existing Constitution. Bat inasmuch as^ short of this great 
 
 1 
 
 DT THEIR BEARING OX CIVIL ALLEGIANCE. 
 
 3a 
 
 i 
 
 I 
 
 
 charter of public liberty, and independently of all that has been 
 done, there are pending matters of comparatively minor moment 
 which have been, or may be, subjects of discussion, not without 
 interest attaching to them, I can suppose a question to arise in 
 the minds of some. My own views and intentions in the future 
 are of the smallest significance. But, if the arguments I have 
 here offered make it my duty to declare them, I say at once the 
 future will be exactly as the past : in the little that depends on me, 
 I shall be guided hereafter, as heretofore, by the rule of main- 
 taining equal civil rights irrespectively oif religious differences; 
 and shall resist all attempts to exclude the members of the Roman 
 Church from the benefit of that rule. Indeed I may say that I 
 have already given conclusive indications of this view, by sup- 
 porting in Parliament, as a Minister, since 1870, the repeal of 
 the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, for what I think ample reasons. 
 Not only because the time has not yet come when we can as- 
 sume the consequences of the revolutionary measures of 1870 to 
 have been thoroughly weighed and digested by all capable men 
 in the Roman Communion. Not only because so great a numer- 
 ical proportion are, as 1 have before obser^xd, necessarily inca- 
 pable of mastering, and forming their personal judgment upon, 
 the case. Quite irrespectively even of these considerations, I 
 hold that our onward even course should not be changed by fol- 
 lies, the consequences of which, if the worst come to the worst, 
 this country will have alike the power and, in case of need, the 
 will to control. The State will, 1 trust, be ever careful to leave 
 the domain of religious conscience free, and yet to keep it to its 
 own domain ; and to allow neither private caprice nor, above all, 
 foreign arrogance to dictate to it in the discharge of its proper 
 office. " England expects every man to do his duty ; " and none 
 can be so well prepared under all circumstances to exact its per- 
 formance as that Liberal party which has done the work of jus- 
 tice alike for Nonconformists and for Papal dissidents, and whose 
 members have so often, for the sake of that work, hazarded their 
 credit with the markedly Protestant constituencies of the country. 
 Strong the State of the United Kingdom has always been in 
 material strength; and its moral panoply is now, we may hope, 
 pretty complete. 
 
 It is not then for the dignity of the Crown and people of the 
 United Kingdom to be diverted from a path which they have de- 
 liberately chosen, and which it does not rest with all the myrmidons 
 of the Apostolic Chamber either openly to obstruct, or secretly to 
 undermine. It is rightfully to be expected, it is greatly to be de- 
 sired, that the Roman Catholics of this country should do in the 
 Nineteenth century what their forefathers of England, except a 
 handful of emissaries, did in the Sixteenth, when they M^ere mar- 
 shaled in resistance to the Armada, and in the Seventeenth when, 
 in despite of the Papal Chair, they sat in the House of Lords un- 
 der the Oath of Allegiance. That which we are entitled to desire, 
 we are entitled also to expect : indeed, to say we did not expect 
 it, would, in my judgment, be the true way of conveying an " in- 
 sult " to those concerned. In this expectation we may be par- 
 
34 
 
 APPBXDICES. 
 
 APPENDICES. 
 
 35 
 
 llfl 
 
 tially disappointed. Should those to whom I appeal, thus unhap- 
 pilj come to bear witness in their own persons to the decay of 
 Mnnd, manly, true life in their Church, it will be their loss more 
 Hutu ours. The inhabitants of these islands, as a whole, are sta- 
 We, though sometimes credulous and excitable ; resolute, though 
 sometimes boastful : and a strong-headed and sound-hearted race 
 will not be hindered, either by latent or by avowed dissents, duo 
 to the foreip influence of a oaste, from the accomplishment of 
 Ms mission m the world. 
 
 APPENDICES. 
 
 i 
 
 APPENDIX A. 
 
 f%§ imMhen here ffimn wrrmpfmA with thme of the Eighteen ProposUhns 
 gmm in the ter<, where it wouid have been km cmmntent to cite the 
 #ri|gp»tMils. 
 
 1, 2, 3. "Ex qua omnino falsi socialis reKiminis idei baud ti- 
 aient erroneam illam fovere opinionem, Catholic® Ecclcsiae, ani- 
 narumque saluti maxime exitialom, a reo. mem. Gregorio XIV. 
 prfledecessore Nostro deUramenium appellatam (eadem Encyel. 
 miinri), nimirum, libertatem conscientiae et cultuum esse propri- 
 uai oujuscunque hominis jus, quod lege proclamari, et asseri debet 
 in omni recte constitute societate, et jus civibus inesse ad omni- 
 Modmn libertatem nulla vel ecclesiastici, vel civili auctoritate 
 UHtreliiiidam, quo suos conceptus quoscumque sive voce sive typis, 
 si¥e alii ratione palam pubhceque manifestare ac declarare vale- 
 ant." — EneycHcal Letter. 
 
 4. "Atque silentio praeterire non possumus eorum audacmm, 
 
 3m sanam non sustinentes doctrinam 'ill is ApostolicfB Sedis ju- 
 ioiis, et decretis, quorum objectum ad bonum generalc Ecclesiae, 
 ejusdemque jura, ac disciplinam spectaro declaratur, dummodo 
 fidei monimque dogmata non attingat, posse assensum et obedi- 
 entiam detrectari absque peccato, et absque ulli CatholicaB profes- 
 sionis jiicturi.' " — Ibid. 
 6. "Ecclesia non est vera perfectaque socictas plane libera, ne© 
 
 Sollet suis propriis et constantibus juribua sibi a divino suo Fun- 
 •tore collatis, sed civilis potestatis est definire quae aint Ecclesiae 
 Jura, ac limites, intra quos eadem jura exercere queat."— %^ 
 
 IthUM V. 
 
 6. " Romani Pontifices et Concilia oecumenica a limitibus 8U» 
 imtmtiitis recesserunt, jura Principum usurpirunt, »tque etiam in 
 f®bns idei et morum deiniendis errarunt." — Ibid, xxiii. 
 
 7. " Ecclesia vis inferendae potestatem non habet, neque p^otes- 
 tatem ullam temporalem directam vel indirectam." — Ibid. xxiv. 
 
 8. "Praeter potestatem episcopatui inhaerentem, alia est attri- 
 buta temporalis potestas a civili imperio vel expresse vel tacit^ 
 concessa, revocanda propterea, cum libuerit, a civili imperio." — 
 
 Ibid. XXV. 
 
 9. " Ecclesiae et personarum ecclesiasticarum immunitas a jure 
 civili ortum habuit." — Ibid. xxx. 
 
 10. " In conflictu legum utriusque potestatis, jus civile praeva- 
 let"— Ibid, xlii 
 
 11. " Catholicis viris probari potest ea juventutis instituendae 
 ratio, quae sit a Catholica fide et ab EcclesiaB potestate sejuncta, 
 quaeque rerum dumtaxat, naturalium scientiam ac terrenae soci- 
 alis vitae fines tantummodo vel saltern primarium spectet." — Ibid. 
 xlviii. 
 
 12. " Philosophicarum rerum morumque scientia, itemque civ- 
 iles leges possunt et debent a divina et ecclesiastic^ auctoritate 
 declinare.' — Ibid. Ivii. 
 
 13. "Matrimonii sacramentum non est nisi contractu! acces- 
 sorium ab eoque separabile, ipsumque sacramentum in una tan- 
 tum nuptiali benedictione situm est." — Ibid. Ixvi. 
 
 *'Vi contractils mere civilis potest inter Christianos constare 
 veri nominis matrimonium ; falsumque est, aut contractum matri- 
 monii inter Christianos semper esse sacramentum, aut nullum 
 esse contractum, si sacramentum excludatur." — Ibid. Ixxiii. • 
 
 14. " De temporalis regni cum spirituali compatibilitate dis- 
 putant inter se Chris tianae et Catholicae Ecclesiae filii." — Sylla- 
 bus Ixxv. 
 
 15. "Abrogatio civilis imperii, quo Apostolica Sedes potitur, ad 
 Eccleaiae libertatem felicitatemque vel maxime conduceret." — 
 Ibid. Ixxvi. 
 
 16. "^tate hac nostra non amplius expedit religionem Cath- 
 olicam haberi tanquam unicam status religionem, caeteris quibus- 
 cumque cultibus exclusis." — Ibid. Ixxvii. 
 
 17. "Hinc laudabiliter in quibusdam Catholici nominis regi- 
 onibus lege cautum est, ut hominibus illuc immigrantibus liceat 
 
 f)ublicum proprii cujusque cultus exercitium habere." — Ibid. 
 xxviii. 
 
 18. "Romanus Pontifex potest ac debet cum progressu, cum 
 liberalismo et cum recenti civilitate sese reconciliare et compo- 
 pere." — Ibid. Ixxx. 
 
 APPENDIX B. 
 
 I have contented myself with a minimum of citation from the 
 documents of the period before Emancipation. Their full effect 
 can only be gathered by such as are acquainted with, or will 
 take the trouble to refer largely to, the originals. It is worth 
 while, however, to cite the following passage from Bishop Doyle, 
 
■Ml 
 
 APPBXBICBB. 
 
 APPENDICES. 
 
 37 
 
 m it maj convey, through the indignation it expresses, an idea 
 of the amplitude of the assurances which had been (as I believe 
 Bost honestly and sincerely) given. 
 
 •* There is no justice, my Lord, in thus condemning us. Such 
 conduct on the part of our opponents creates in our bosoms a 
 sense of wrong being done to ua ; it exhausts our patience, it 
 provokes our indignation, and prevents us from reiterating our 
 eibrts to obtain a more impartial hearing. We are tempted, in 
 such cases as these, to attribute unfair motives to those who differ 
 irom lis, as we can not conceive how men gifted with intelligence 
 <mii fail to discover truths so plainly demonstrated as, 
 
 " That our faith or our allegiance is not regulated by any such 
 doctrines as those imputed to us; 
 
 " That our duties to the Government of our country are not 
 influenced nor affected by any Bulls or practices of Popes ; 
 
 " That these duties are to be learned by us, as by every other 
 class of His Majesty's subjects, from the Gospel, from the reason 
 mven to us by God, from that love of country which Nature ha« 
 implanted in our hearts, and from those constitutional maxims, 
 which are as well understood, and as highly appreciated, by Cath- 
 olics of the present day, as by their ancestors, who founded them 
 with Alfred, or secured them at Runnymede." — DoyUs ' Essaif 
 on the Catholic Claims,' London, 1826, p. H8. 
 
 The same ge^ieral tone, as in 1826, was maintained in the 
 answers of the witnesses from Maynooth College before the Com- 
 mission of 1855. See, for example, pp. 132, 161-4, 272-3, 275, 
 361. 310-5, 381-2, 394-6, 405. The Commission reported (p. 64), 
 " We see no reason to believe that there has been any disloyalty 
 in the teaching of the college, or any disposition to impair the ob- 
 ligations of an unreserved allegiance to your Majesty. ' 
 
 This is a remarkable disclosure. With whom could England 
 be brought into conflict by any disposition she might feel to keep 
 up the Italian kingdom ? Considered as States, both Austria and 
 Jrance are in complete harmony with Italy. But it is plain 
 that Italy has some enemy ; and the writers of the ' Month ap- 
 pear to know who it is. 
 
 APPENDIX D. 
 
 Notice has been taken, both in this country and abroad, of the 
 apparent inertness of public men, and of at least one British Ad- 
 ministration, with respect to the subject of these pages. See 
 Friedberg, ' Griinzen zwischen Staat und Kirche,' Abtheilung iii. 
 pp. 755-6 ; and the Preface to the Fifth Volume of Mr. Green- 
 wood's elaborate, able, and judicial work, entitled 'Cathedra 
 Petri,' p. iv. : 
 
 " If there be any chance of such a revival, it would become our 
 political leaders to look more closely into the peculiarities of a 
 system, which denies the right of the subject to freedom of 
 tnought and action upon matters most material to his civil and 
 religious welfare. There is no mode of ascertaining the spirit 
 and tendency of great institutions but in a careful study of their 
 history. The writer is profoundly impressed with the conviction 
 that our political instructors have wholly neglected this im- 
 portant duty : or, which is perhaps worse, left it in the hands of 
 a class of persons whose zeal has outrun their discretion, and who 
 have sought rather to engage the prejudices than the judgment 
 of their hearers in the cause they have, no doubt sincerely, at 
 heart." 
 
 'f ; 
 
 I 
 
 APPENDIX C. 
 
 Compare the recent and ominous forecasting of the future 
 European policy of the British Crown, in an Article from a Rom- 
 ish Periodical for the current month, which has direct relation 
 to these matters, and which has every appearance of proceeding 
 from authority : 
 
 " Surely, in any European complication, such as may any day 
 arise, nay, such as must ere long arise, from the natural gravita- 
 tion of the forces, which are for the moment kept in check and 
 truce by the necessity of preparation for their inevitable collis- 
 ion, it may very well be that the future prosperity of England 
 may be staked in the struggle, and that the siae which she may 
 take may be determined, not either by justice or interest, but by 
 n passionate resolve to keep up the Italian kingdom at any haz- 
 i,«|."_-The 'Month' for November, 1874: 'Mr. Gladstone's Dur- 
 ham Letter,' p. 265. 
 
PAGES 
 
 39 
 
\ 
 
 DR. NEWMAN'S LETTER 
 
 TO THE 
 
 DUKE OF NORFOLK, 
 IN REPLY TO GLADSTON 
 
 !• 
 
 My Dear Duke op Norfolk: 
 
 When I yielded to the earnest wish which you, together with 
 ' many others, urged upon me, that I should reply to Mr. Glad- 
 stone's recent Expostulation, a friend suggested that I ought to 
 ask your Grace's permission to address my remarks to you. Not 
 that for a moment he or I thought of implicating you, in any 
 sense or measure, in a responsibility which is solely and entirely 
 my own ; but on a very serious occasion, when such hcjavy 
 charges had been made against the Catholics of England bjjr so 
 powerful and so earnest an adversary, it seemed my dutj, in 
 meeting his challenge, to gain the support, if I could, of a uame 
 which is the special representative and the fitting sample of a 
 laity, as zealous for the Catholic relision as it is patriotic. 
 
 You consented with something of the reluctance which f had 
 felt myself when called upon to write ; for it was hard to be mm.- 
 moned at any age, early or late, from a peaceful course of life 
 and the duties of one's station, to a scene of war. Still, you con- 
 sented ; and, for myself, it is the compensation for a very un- 
 pleasant task, that 1, who belong to a generation that is fast flit- 
 ting away, am thus enabled, in what is likely to be my last pub- 
 lication, to associate myself with one, on many accounts so dear 
 to me, — so full of young promise — whose career is before him. 
 
 I deeplv grieve that Mr. Gladstone has felt it his duty to speak 
 with such extraordinary severity of our Religion and of our- 
 selves. I consider he has committed himself to a representation 
 of ecclesiastical documents which will not hold, and to a view of 
 our position in the country which we have neither deserved nor 
 can be patient under. None but the Schola Theologortim is com- 
 petent to determine the force of Papal and Synodal utterances, 
 and the exact interpretation of them is a work of time. But so 
 much may be safely said of the decrees which have lately been 
 promulgated, and of the faithful who have received them, that 
 Mr. Gladstone's account, both of them and of us, is neither trust- 
 worthy nor charitable. 
 
 Yet not a little may be said in explanation of a step, which so 
 
 (39) 
 
 J 1 
 
 / 
 
 / 
 
40' 
 
 IXTItODlJCTOBY REMARKS. 
 
 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 
 
 
 many of bis admirers and well-wishera deplore. I own to a deep 
 feeling, thai Catholics may in good measure thank themselves, and 
 
 r- no one else, for having alienated from them so religious a mind. 
 
 ^ There are those among us, as it must he confessed, who for years 
 past have conducted themselves as if no responsibility attached 
 to wild words and overbearing deeds ; who have stated truths in 
 the most paradoxical form, and stretched principles till they were 
 close upon snapping; and who at length, having done their beet 
 t€ set the house on fire, leave to others the task of pattine out 
 
 I the flame. The English people are sufficiently sensitive of the 
 eklma of the Pope, without having them, as if in defiance, 
 iourished in their faces. Those claims most certainly I am not 
 going to deny ; I have never denied them. I have no intention, 
 MOW liiat I have to write upon them, to conceal any part of them. 
 And I uphold them as heartily as I recognize my duty of loyalty 
 to the constitution, the laws, and the government of England. I 
 see no inconsistency in my being at once a good Catholic and a 
 good Englishman. Yet it is one thing to be able to satisfy my- 
 self as to my consistency, quite another to satisfy others ; and, 
 undisturbed as I am in my own conscience, I have great difficul- 
 ties in the task before me. I have one difficulty to overcome m 
 the present excitement of the public mind against our Religion, 
 caused partly by the chronic extravagances of knots of Catholics 
 here and there, partly by the vehement rhetoric which is the oc- 
 casion of my writing to you. A worse difficulty lies in getting 
 peovjle, as they are commonly found, to put off the modes ot 
 spetch and language which are usual with them, and to enter 
 into scientific distinctions and traditionary rules of interpreta- 
 tion, which, as being new to them, appear evasive and unnatural. 
 And a third difficulty, as I may call it, is this— that in so very 
 wide a subject, opening so great a variety of questions, and of 
 
 . opinions upon them, while it will be simply necessary to take the 
 objecliona made against us and our faith, one by one. readers 
 may think me trifling with their patience, because they do not 
 ind those points first dealt with, on which they lay most stress 
 
 themselves. _ . , 
 
 Bui I have said enough by way of preface ; and without more 
 delay turn to Mr Gladstone's pamphlet. 
 
 |1. Imtroductory Rbmarcs. 
 
 The main question which Mr. Gladstone Tias started I consider 
 to be this :— Can Catholics be trustworthy subjects of the State f 
 lilts not a foreign Power a hold over their consciences such, that 
 it may at any time be used to the serious perplexity and injury 
 of the civil government under which thej live? Not that Mr. 
 Ghidstone confines himself to these questions, for he goes out of 
 liis way, 1 am sorry to say. to taunt us with our loss of mental 
 and moral freedom, a vituperation which is not necessary for his 
 purpese at all. He informs us too that we have " repudiated an- 
 clitfthistory," and are rejecting " modern thought." and that our 
 
 Church has been " refurbishing her rusty tools," and has been 
 lately aggravating, and is likely still more to aggravate, our state 
 of bondage. 1 think it unworthy of Mr. Gladstone's high charac- 
 ter thus to have inveighed against ua; what intellectual manli- 
 ness is left to us, according to him ? yet his circle of acquaintiinco 
 is too wide, and his knowledge of his countrymen on the other 
 hand too accurate, for him not to know that he is bringing a great 
 amount of odium and bad feeling upon excellent men, whose only 
 offense is their religion. The more intense is the preiudice with 
 which we are regarded by whole classes of men, the less is there 
 of generosity in his pouring upon us superfluous reproaches. 
 The graver the charge, 'which is the direct occasion of his writ- 
 ing against us, the more careful should he be not to prejudice 
 judge and jury to our disadvantage. No rhetoric is needed m 
 England against an unfortunate Catholic at any time ; but so lit- 
 tle is Mr. Gladstone conscious of his treatment of us that in one 
 place of his Pamphlet, strange as it may seem, he makes it his 
 boast that he has been careful to " do nothing towards importing 
 passion into what is matter of pure argument," pp. 15, 16. I 
 venture to think he will one day be sorry for what he has said. 
 
 However, we must talfO things as we find them ; and what I 
 propose to do is this : to put aside, unless it comes directly in my 
 way, his accusation against us of repudiating ancient history, re- 
 jecting modern thought, and renouncing our mental freedom, and 
 to confine myself for the most part to what he principally insists 
 upon, that Catholics, if they act consistently with their princi- 
 ples, can not be loyal subjects. I shall not, however, omit notice 
 of his attack upon our moral uprightness. 
 
 The occasion and the grounds i)f Mr. Gladstone's impeachment 
 of US, if I understand him, are as follows : — He was alarmed, as 
 a statesman, ten years ago by the Pope's Encyclical of December 
 8, and by the Syllabus of Erroneous Propositions which, by the 
 Pope's authority, accompanied its transmission to the Bishops. 
 Then came the Definitions of the Vatican Council in 1870, upon 
 the universal jurisdiction and doctrinal infallibility of the Pope. 
 And, lastly, as the event which turned alarm into indignation, and ~\ 
 into the duty of public remonstrance, "the Roman Catholic 
 Prelacy of Ireland thought fit to procure the rejection of" the 
 Irish tTniversity Bill of February, 1873, "by the direct influence 
 which they exercised over a certain number of Irish Members of 
 Parliament," etc., p. 60. This step on the part of the Bishops ^ 
 showed, if I understand him, the new and mischievous force 
 which had been acquired at Rome by the late acts there, or at 
 least left him at liberty, by causing his loss of power, to denounce 
 it. " From that time forward the situation was changed," and an 
 
 the country had to be disposed ol. mat aeot, ii i am n^^n, 
 will be paid, if he can ascertain, on behalf of the country, that 
 there is nothing in the Catholic Religion to hinder its professors 
 from being as loyal as other subjects of the State, and that the 
 See of Rome can not interfere with their civil duties so as to give 
 
 [i 
 
48 
 
 lyTROOUOTOBY BBMAItlS. 
 
 fclie civil power trouble or alarm. The main ground on which he 
 relies fwr the necessity of aome such inquiry is, first, the text of 
 the authoritative documents of 18(54 and 1870; next, and still 
 more, the ammm which they breathe, and the sustained aggres- 
 sive spirit which they disclose; and, thirdly, the daring deed of 
 aggression in 1873, when the Pope, acting (m it is alleged) upon 
 the Irish Members of Parliament, succeeded in ousting from their 
 seats a ministry who, besides past benefits, were at that very time 
 doin^ for Irish Catholics, and therefore ousted for doing, a special 
 service. 
 
 Now, it would be preposterous and officious in me to put my- 
 self forward as champion for the Venerable Prelacy of Ireland, 
 or to take upon myself the part of advocate and representative 
 of the Holy See. " Non tali auxilio; " in neither character could 
 I come forward without great presumption ; not the least for this 
 feason, because I can not know the exact points which are really 
 the gisi of the affiront, which Mr. Gladstone conceives he has sus- 
 tained, whether from the one quarter or from the other; yet in a 
 question so nearly interesting myself as that February bill, 
 which he brought into the House, in great sincerity and kind- 
 ness, for the benefit of the Catholic Unrversity in Ireland, T may 
 be allowed to say thus much — that I, who now have no official 
 relation to the Irish Bishops, and am not in any sense . in tlie 
 councils of Rome, felt at once, when I first saw the outline of 
 that bill, the greatest astonishment on reading one of its pro- 
 visions, and a dread ^yhw.h painfully affected me, lest Mr. Glad- 
 stone perhaps was acting on an understtmding with the Catholic 
 Frelacy. 1 did nut see Iujw in honor they could accept it. It 
 was possible, did the question come over again, to decide in favor 
 of the Queen's Colleges, and to leave the project of a Catholic 
 University alone. The llolv 8ee^ might so have decided in 1847. 
 But at or about that date, three rescripts had come from Rome in 
 fever of a distinctively Catholic Institution ; a National Council 
 had decided in its favor ; large offers of the government had been 
 rejected; great commotions had been caused in the political 
 world ; munificent contributions had been made, all on the sole 
 principle that Catholic teaching was to be upheld in the country 
 inviolate. If, then, for the sake of a money grant, or other secu- 
 lar advantage, this gnmnd of principle was deserted, and Catho- 
 lic youths aHer all were allowed to attend the lectures of men of 
 BO religion, or of the Protestant, the contest of thirty years 
 would have been stultified, and the Pope and the Bishops would 
 seem to have been playinj^ a game, while putting forward the 
 plea of conscience and religious duty. I hoped that the clause 
 in the Bill, which gave me such uneasiness, could have been 
 CWiifcted from it; but, anyhow, it was an extreme relief to me 
 when the papers announced that the Bishops had expressed their 
 forsial dissatisfaction with it. 
 
 Thm determined to decline a gift laden with such a condition, 
 and who can blame them for so ooing ? who can be surprised that 
 they should now do what they did in 1847? what new move in 
 politics was it, if they so determined ? what was there in it of a 
 
 *M 
 
 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 
 
 43 
 
 factious character? Is the Catholic Irish interest the only one 
 which is not to be represented in the House of Commons ? Why 
 is not that interest as much a matter of right as any other ? I 
 fear to expose my own ignorance of Parliamentary rules and pro- 
 ceedings, but I had supposed that the railway interest, and what 
 is called the publican interest, were very powerful there; in 
 Scotland, too, I believe, a government has a formidable party to 
 deal with ; and, to revert to Ireland, there are the Home-rulers, 
 who have objects in view quite distinct from, or contrary to, those 
 of the Catholic hierarchy. As to the Pope, looking at the surface 
 of things, there is nothing to suggest that he interfered; there 
 was no necessity of interference on so plain a point ; and, when 
 an act can be sufficiently accounted for without introducing an 
 hypothetical cause, it is bad logic to introduce it. Speaking ac- 
 cording to my lights, I altogether disbelieve the interposition of 
 Rome in the matter. In the proceedings which they aidopted, the 
 Bishops were only usin^; civil rights, common to all, which 
 
 political oppori 
 
 I thought it was a received theory of our Reformed Constitution 
 that Members of Parliament were representatives, and in some 
 sort delegates, of their constituents, and that the strength of each 
 interest was shown, and the course of the nation determined, by 
 the divisions in the House of Commons. I recollect the Times 
 intimating its regret, after one general election, that there was no 
 English Catholic ih the new House, on the ground that every 
 class and party should be represented there. Surely the Catholic 
 Religion has not a small party in Ireland ; why, then, should it not 
 have a corresponding number of exponents and defenders at 
 Westminster? So clear does this seem to me, that I think there 
 must be some defect in my knowledge of facts to explain Mr. 
 Gladstone's surprise and displeasure at the conduct of the Irish 
 Prelacy in 1873 ; yet I suspect none ; and, if there be none, then 
 his unreasonableness in this instance of Ireland makes it not un- 
 likely that he is unreasonable also in his judgment of the Encyc- 
 lical, Syllabus, and Vatican Decrees. 
 
 However, the Bishops, I believe, not only opposed Mr. Glad- 
 stofie's bill, but, instead of it they asked for some money grant 
 towards the expenses of their University. If so, their obvious 
 argument was this — that Catholics formed the great majority of 
 the population of Ireland, and it was not fair that the Protestant 
 minority should have all that was bestowed in endowment or 
 otherwise upon Education. To this the reply, I suppose, would 
 be, that it was not Protestantism, but liberal education, that had 
 the money, and that, if the Bishops chose to give up their own 
 principles and act as Liberals, they might have the benefit of it 
 too. I am not concerned here with these arguments, but I wish 
 to notice the position which the Bishops would occupy in urging 
 such a request : — I must not say that they were Irishmen first 
 and Catholics afterwards ; but I do say that in such a demand 
 they spoke, not simply as Catholic Bishops, but as the Bishops of 
 
"I 
 
 14 
 
 S 9 
 
 INTBODUOTOBY REMARKS. 
 
 a Catholic nation. They did not speak from any promptings of 
 the Kncyclical, Syllabus, or Vatican Decrees. They claimed as 
 Irislimen a share in the endowments of the country; and has not 
 Ireland surely a right to speak in such a matter, and might not 
 her Bishops fairly represent her? It seems to me a great mis^ 
 take to think that every thing that is done b^ the Irish Bishops 
 •nd clergy is done on an ecclesiastical motive; why not on a 
 national? but if so, such acts have nothing to do witJi Rome. I 
 know well what simple firm faith the great bod^ of the Irish 
 people bavc, and how they put the Catholic Religion before any 
 thing else in the world. It is their comfort, tncir joy, their 
 Initrure, their boast, their compensation for a hundred worldly 
 disadvantaees ; but who can deny that in politics their conduct 
 at times-nay, more than at times-has had a flavor rather of 
 their nation than of their Church ? Only in the last general 
 election this was said, when they were so earnest for Home Rule. 
 Whj, then, must Mr. Gladstone come down upon the Catholic 
 Religion, because the Irish love dearly the Green Island and its 
 interests ? Ireland is not the only country in which politics,^ or 
 patriotism, or party has been so closely associated with religion 
 m the nation or a class, that it is difficult to say which of the va- 
 rious motive principles was uppermost. "The Puritan," says 
 Macaulaj, " prostrated himself in the dust before his Maker, but 
 he set his foot on the neck of his king." I am not accusing such 
 a man (*f hypocrisy on account of this ; having great wrongs, as 
 he considered, both in religious and temporal patters, and the 
 authors of these distinct wrongs being the same persons, he did 
 not nicely discriminate between the acts whicn he did as a 
 patriot and the acts which he did as a Purifcin. And so as re- 
 gards Irishmen, they do not, can not, distinguish between their 
 S)ve of Ireland and their love of religion ; their patriotism is re- 
 ligious, and their religion is strongly tinctured with patriotism ; 
 and it is hard to recognize the abstract and ideal Ultramontane, 
 pure and simple, in the concrete exhibition of fiim in flesh and 
 blood as found in the polling booth or in his chapel. I do not 
 see how the Pope can be made answenible for him in any of his 
 political acts during the last fi% years. 
 
 This leads me to a subject, of which Mr. Gladstone makes a 
 good deal in his Pamphlet I will say of a great man, whom he 
 quotes, and for whose memorj^j I have a great respect — I mean 
 Bishop Doyle — that there was just a little tinge of patriotism in 
 the way in which, on one occasion, he speaks of ttie Pope. I 
 dare say any of us would have done the same in the heat of a 
 great struggle for national liberty ; for he said nothing but what 
 was true and honest ; I only mean that the energetic language 
 which he used was not exactly such as would have suited the at- 
 Biosphare of Rome. Ho says to Lord Liverpool, "We are 
 taunted with the proceedings of Popes. What, my Lord, have 
 we Catholics to do with the proceedings of Popes, or why should 
 we be made accountable for them?" p. 27. Now, with some pro- 
 ceedings of Popes, we Catholics have very much to do indeed ; 
 imi, if the context of his words is consulted, I make no doubt it 
 
 IK1R0DU€T0RY REMARKS, 
 
 45 
 
 will b© found that he was referring to certain proceedings of 
 certain Popes when he said that Catholics had no part of their 
 responsibility. Assuredly, there are certain acts of Popes in*~> 
 which no one would like to have part. Then, again, his words J 
 require some pious interpretation when he says that " the alle- 
 giance due to the kins and the allegiance due to the Pope are as 
 distinct and as divided in their nature as any two things can pos- 
 sibly be," p. 30. Yes, in their nature, in the abstract, but ncA in 
 the particular case; for a heathen State might bid me throw in- 
 cense upon the altar of Jupiter, and the Pope would bid me not 
 to do 80. I venture to make the same remark on the Address 
 of the Irish Bishops to their clergy and lait^, quoted at p. 31, 
 and on the Declaration of the Vicars Apostolic in England, ibid. 
 
 But £ must not be supposed for an instant to mean, in what I 
 have said, that the venerable men, to whom I have referred, were 
 aware of any ambiguity either in such statements as the above, or 
 in others which were denials of the Pope's infallibility. Indeed, 
 one of them at an earlier date, 1793, Dr. Troy, Archbishop of 
 Dublin, had introduced into one of his Pastorals the subject 
 which Mr. Gladstone considers they so summarily disposed of. 
 The Archbishop says : — " Many Catholics contend that the Pope, 
 when teaching the universal Church, as their supreme visible 
 head and pastor, as successor to St Peter, and heir to the prom- 
 ises of special assistance made to him by Jesus Christ, is infalli- 
 ble; and that his decrees and decisions in that capacity are to be 
 respected as rules of faith, when they are dogmatical or confined 
 to Qoctrinal points of faith and morals. Others deny this, and re- 
 quire the expressed or tacit acquiescence of the Church, assembled 
 or dispersed, to stamp infallibility on his dogmatical decrees. Un- 
 til the Church shall decide upon this (]^ucstion of the Schools, 
 either opinion may be adopted by individual Catholics, without 
 any lireach of Catholic communion or j>eace. The Catholics of 
 Ireland have lately declared, that it is not an article of the Cath- 
 olic faith ; nor are they thereby required to believe or profess that 
 the Pope is infallible, without adopting or abjuring either of the 
 recited opinions which are open to discussion, while the Church 
 continues silent about them. ' The Archbishop thus addressed 
 his flock, at the time when he was informing them that the Pope 
 had altered the oath which was taken by the Catholic Bishops. 
 
 As to the language of the Bishops in 1826, we must recollect 
 that at that time the clergy, both of Ireland and England, were 
 educated in Galilean opinions. They took those opinions for 
 granted, and they thought, if they went so far as to ask them- 
 selves the question, that the definition of Papal Infallibility was 
 simply impossible. Even among those at the Vatican Council, 
 who themselves personally believed in it, I believe there were 
 Bishops who, until the actual definition had been passed, thought 
 that such a definition could not be made. Perhaps thev would 
 argue that, though the historical evidence was sufficient for their 
 own personal conviction, it was not sufficiently clear of difficulties 
 to make it safe to impose it on Catholics as a dogma. Much more 
 would this be the feeling of the Bishops in 1826. "How," they 
 
m 
 
 IXTRODrCTOmY REMARKS. 
 
 IXTRODUCTOHr REMARKS, 
 
 47 
 
 wouM mk, " cftn it ever come to pass that a majority of our order 
 ihould ind it their dutv to relinquish their prime prerogative, 
 and to make the Church take the shape of a pure monarchj ? " 
 They would think its definitioh as much out of the question as 
 that, in twenty-five years after their time, there would be a hier- 
 iMfehy of thirteen Bishops in England, with a Cardinal for Arch- 
 
 But, all this while, such modes of thinking were foreign alto- 
 gether to the minds of the eniouraf/e of the Holy See. Mr. Glad- 
 stone himself says, and the Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel 
 must have known it as well as he, " The Popes have kept up, with 
 compamtively little intermission, for well nigh a thousand years, 
 Iheir claim to dopiatic infallibility." p. 28. Then, if the Pope's 
 elaim to infallibihtv was so patent a fact, could they ever suppose 
 that he could he brought to admit that it was hopeless to turn 
 tha,t claim into a dogma? In truth, those ministers were very 
 Mtle interested in that question ; as was said in a Petition or 
 declaration, siped among others by Dr. Troy, it was "immate- 
 rial in a political light; '' but, even if they thought it material, 
 or if there were other questions they wanted to ask, why go to 
 Bishop Doyle? If they wanted to obtain some real information 
 about th© probabilities of the future, why did they not go to 
 headquarters? Why did they potter about the halls of Univer- 
 sities in this matter of Papal exorbitances, or rely upon the 
 mnnhlets or examinations of Bishops whom they never asked 
 
 li?*®*' credentials ? Why not go at once to Rome ? 
 
 Til© reason is plain: it was a most notable instance, with a 
 grave consequence, of what is a fixed tradition with us the Eng- 
 lieh people, and a great emljarrassment to every administration 
 in their dealings with Catholics. I recollect, years ago, Dr. Grif- 
 iths. Vicar Apostolic of the London District, giving me an ac- 
 count of an interview he had with the late Lord Derbv. then, I 
 ■ippose, Colonial Secretary. I understood him to say that Lord 
 iJerby was in perplexity at the time, on some West India matter, 
 in which Catholics were concerned, because h© could not find 
 their responsible representative. He wanted Dr. Griffiths to un- 
 dertake the office, and expressed something of disappointment 
 when the Bishop felt obliged to decline it. A chronic malady 
 has from time to time its paroxysms, and the history on which I 
 am now engaged is a serious instance of it I think it is impos- 
 sible that the British Government could have entered into formal 
 negotiations with the Pope, without its transpiring in the course 
 of them, and its becoming perfectly clear, that Rome could never 
 be a party to such a pledge as England wanted, and that no 
 pledge from Catholics was of any value to which Rome was not 
 a party. 
 
 But no; they persisted in an enterprise which was hopeless in 
 Its first principle, for they thought to break th© indissoluble tie 
 which bound toother the head and the members,— and doubtless 
 Rome felt the insult, though she might think it prudent not to 
 notic© it. France was not tlic keystone of the oecumenical power, 
 Ifcwigh her Church was so great and so famous; nor could th© 
 
 hierarchy of Ireland, in spite of its fidelity to the Catholic feith, 
 give any pledge of the future to the statesmen who required one; 
 there was but one See, whose word was worth any thing in th© 
 matter, " that church " (to use the language of the earliest of our 
 Doctors) " to which the faithful all round about are bound to have 
 recourse." Yet for three hundred years it has been the official 
 rule with England to ignore the existence of the Pope, and to 
 deal with Catholics in England, not as his children, but as sec- 
 taries of the Roman Catholic persuasion. Napoleon said to his 
 envoy, " Treat with the Pope as if he was master of 100,000 men." . 
 So clearly did he, from mere worldly sagacity, comprehend the 
 Pope's place in the then state of European affairs, as to say that, 
 **if the Pope had not existed, it would have been well to hav© 
 created him for that occasion, as the Roman Consuls created a 
 dictator in difficult circumstances." (Alison's Hist ch. 35.) But 
 we, in the instance of the greatest, the oldest power in Europe, a 
 Church whose grandeur in past history demanded, one would 
 think, some reverence in our treatment of her, the mother of 
 English Christianity, who, whether her subsequent conduct had 
 always been motherly or not, had been a true friend to us in th© 
 beginnings of our history, her we have not only renounced, but, 
 to use a fiimiliar word, we have absolutely cut. Time has gone 
 on and we have no relentings; to-day, as little as yesterday, do 
 we understand that pride was not made for man, nor the cud- 
 dling of resentments for a great people. I am entering into no 
 theological question : I am speaking all along of mere decent sec- 
 ular intercourse between England and Rome. A hundred griev- 
 ances would have been set right on their first uprising, had there 
 been a frank diplomatic understanding between the two great 
 powers; but, on the contrary, even within the last few weeks, the 
 present Ministry has destroyed anjr hope of a better state of 
 things V»y withdrawing from the Vatican the make-shift channel 
 of intercourse which had of late years been permitted there. 
 
 The world's politics has its laws; and such abnormal courses 
 as England has pursued have their Nettiesis. An event has taken 
 place which, alas ! already makes itself felt in issues, unfortunate 
 for English Catholics certainly, but also, as I think, for our coun- 
 try. A great council has been called; and, as England has for 
 80 long a time ignored Rome, Rome, 1 suppose, it must be said, 
 has in turn ignored England. I do not mean of set purpose ig- 
 nored, but as the natural consequence of our act Bishops 
 brought from the corners of the earth in 1870, what could they 
 know of English blue books and Parliamentary debates in the 
 years 1826 and 1829? It was an extraordinary gathering, and 
 Its possibility, its purpose, and its issue, were alike marvelous, as 
 depending on a coincidence of strange conditions, which, as 
 might be said beforehand, never could take place. Such was the 
 long reign of the Pope, in itself a marvel, as being the sole ex- 
 ception to a recognized ecclesiastical tradition. Only a Pontiff 
 so unfortunate, so revered, so largely loved, so popular even with 
 Protestants, with such a prestige of long sovereignty, with such 
 claims on the Bishops around him, both of age and of paternal 
 
48 
 
 'fHl ANOTENT CHURCH. 
 
 tMB JLKCIEKT CHVBOH. 
 
 40 
 
 gracious acts, only such a man could have harmonized and ^ided 
 to the conclusion, which he pointed out, an assembly so variously 
 edmposed. And, considering the state of theological opinion sev- 
 enty yean before, not less marvelous vras the concurrence of all 
 hut a few out of so many hundred Bishops in the theological 
 judgment, so long desirea at Rome ; the protest made by some 
 eighty or ninety, at the termination of the Council, against the 
 proceedings of the vast majority lying, not against the truth of 
 the doctrine then defined, but against its opportuneness. Nor less 
 to be noted is the neglect of the Catholic powers to send repre- 
 •enttttives to the Council, who might have laid before the Fatners 
 ite political bearings. For myself, I did not call it inopportune, 
 lor times and seasons are known to God alone, and persecution 
 maybe as opportune, though not so pleasant as peace; nor, in 
 accepting as a dogma what 1 had ever held as a truth, could I be 
 doini; violence to any theological view or conclusion of my own : 
 nor has the acceptance of it any logical or practical effect what- 
 ever, as I consider, in weakening my allegiance to Queen Victoria; 
 but there are few Catholics, I think, who will not deeply regret, 
 though no one be in fault, that the English and Irish Prelacies 
 of 1826 did not foresee the possibility of the Synodal determina- 
 tions of 1870, nor will they wonder that Statesmen should feel 
 Hieiiselves aggrieved, that stipulations, which they considered 
 necessary for Catholic emancipation, should have been, as they 
 may think, rudely cast to the winds. 
 
 And now I mutt pass from the mere accidents of the contro- 
 versy to its essential points, and 1 can not trea| them to the sat- 
 isfaction of Mr. Qladstone, unless I go back a peat way, and be 
 allowed to speak of the ancient Catholic Chnron. 
 
 {2. The Axcient Church. 
 
 When Mr. Gladstone accuses us of " repudiating ancient his- 
 toiy," he means the ancient history of the Church ; also, I under- 
 slimil him to be viewing that history under a particular aspect. 
 There are many aspects in which Christianity presents itself to 
 ns; for instance, the aspect of social usefulness, or of devotion, 
 or again of theology ; but, though he in one place glances at the 
 last of these aspects, his own view of it is its relation towards 
 the civil power. He writes " as one of the world at lar^e ; *' as a 
 *• layman who has spent most and the best years of his life in the 
 observation and practice of politics ; " p. 7, and, as a statesman, 
 he naturally looks at the Church on its political side. Accordingly, 
 in his title-page, in which he professes to be expostulating with 
 OS for accepting the Vatican Decrees, he does so, not for any rea- 
 son whatever, but because of their incompatibility with our civil 
 allegiance. This is the key-note of his impeachment of us. As 
 II mnolic man, he has only to do with the public action and effect 
 Of our Religion, its aspect upon national affairs, on our civil 
 duties, on our foreign interests; and he tells us that our Religion 
 has a bearing and behavior towards the State utterly unlike that 
 
 of ancient Christianity, so unlike that we wm.j he siud to repndi- 
 ate what Christianity was in its first centuries, so unlike to what 
 it was then, that we have actually forfeited the preud boast of 
 being "Ever one and the same; '^unlike, I say, in this, that our 
 action is so antagonistic to the State's action, and our claims so 
 menacing to civil peace and prosperity. Indeed! then I suppose 
 our Lord and His Apostles, that St. Ignatius of Antioch, and St 
 Polycarp of Smyrna,. and St Cyprian of Carthage, and St Lau- 
 rence or Rome, that St Alexander and St Paul of Constantino- 
 Sle, that St Ambrose of Milan, that Popes Leo, John, Sylverian, 
 Gregory, and Martin, all members of the "undivided Church," 
 cared supremely, and labored successfully, to cultivate peaceful 
 relations with the government of Rome. They had no doctrines 
 and precepts, no rules of life, no isolation and aggressiveness, 
 whicn caused them to be considered, in spite of themselves, the 
 enemies of the human race! May I not, without disrespect, sub- 
 mit to Mr. Gladstone that this is very paradoxical? Surely it is 
 our fidelity to the history of our forefathers, and not its repudia- 
 tion, whicn Mr. Gladstone dislikes in us. When, indeed, was it 
 in ancient times that the State did not show iealously of the 
 Church ? Was it when Decius and Dioclesian slaughtered their 
 thousands who had abjured the religion of old Rome? or, was it 
 when Athanasius was banished to Treves ? or when Basil, on the 
 Imperial Prefect's crying out, "Never before did any man make 
 so free with me," answered, "Perhaps you never before fell in 
 with a Bishop?" or when Chrysostom was sent off to Cuousus, to 
 be worried to death by an Empress ? Go through the long annals 
 of Church History, century after century, and say, was there ever 
 a time when her Bishops, and notably the Bishop of Rome, were 
 slow to give their testimony in behalf of the moral and revealed 
 law and to suffer for their obedience to it, or forgot that they had 
 a message to deliver to the world ? not the task merely of admin- 
 istering spiritual consolation, or of making the sick-bed easy, or 
 of training up good members of society, and of " serving tables," 
 (though all this was included in their range of duty) ; but specially 
 and directly to deliver a message to the world, a definite message 
 to high and low, from the world's Maker, whether men would 
 hear or whether tibey would forbear? The history surely of 
 the Church in all past times, ancient as well as medieval, is the 
 ▼err embodiment of that tradition of Apostolical independence 
 and freedom of speech which in the eyes of man is ner great 
 offense now. 
 
 Nay, that independence, I may iay, is even one of her notes 
 or credentials; for where shall we find it except in the Catholic 
 Church ? "I spoke of Thy testimonies," says the Psalmist " even 
 before kings, and I was not ashamed." This verse, I think Dr. 
 Arnold used to say, rose up in judgment against the Anglican 
 Chm-ch, in spite of its real excellences. As to the Oriental 
 Churches, every one knows in what bondage they lie, whether 
 they are under the rule of the Czar or of the Sultan. Such is the 
 actual fact that, whereas it is the very mission of Christianity to 
 bear witness to the Creed and Ten Commandments in a world 
 "5 
 
I 
 
 so 
 
 THl AXOIRNT CnVBUB* 
 
 TUB AXCIBNT OHUROM. 
 
 51 
 
 whkk ii mmm to iien, Ronio it now the one fiuthful repNMiit- 
 sUft, iad tbereby it heir mil m»emmm of thai froMpoken daunt- 
 Itote Charoh of old, whott liaditioiit Mr. Oladitono taja the said 
 Borne has repudiated. 
 
 I hare one thing more to say on the subject of the " semper 
 eadem." In Imth, this fidelity to the ancient Christian sjstem, 
 tew in modem Rome, was the Imninoiis fact which more than 
 any other turned men's minds at Oiford forty years ago to look 
 towards her with reverence, intorett, and love. It afi'ectod indi* 
 vidafel minds Tariously, of course; some it even brought on 
 evenlwiUy to oonversion, others ii only restrained from active op- 
 position to her claims; but no one could read the Fathers, and 
 determine to be their disoiple, without feeling that Borne, like a 
 faithful stoward, had kept in fullness and in vigor what his own 
 communion had let drop. The Tracts for the Times were founded 
 on a deadly antagonism to what in these last centuries has been 
 ealled Erastianism or Ciesarism. Their writers considered the 
 €huroh to be a divine creation, " not of men, neither by man, but 
 by Jesus Christ," the Ark of Halvation, the Oracle of Truth, the ' 
 llride of Christ, with a message to aU men every^where, and a 
 eUn on their love and obedience ; and, in relation to the civil 
 
 r)wer, the object of that promise of the Jewish prophets, " fiehold, 
 will lift up Mv Hand to the Gentiles, and will set up My stand- 
 ard to the iMMples ; kings and their queens shall bow down to thee 
 with their face toward the earth, and they shall lick up the dust 
 of thy feet." No Ultramontane (so called) could go beyond those 
 Wfiwrs in the account which thev gave of her from the Prophets, 
 and that hkh notion is recorded beyond mistake in a thousand 
 'pataagea of their writings. 
 
 There is a fine passage of Mr Keble's in the British Critic, in 
 animadversion upon a oontemporary reviewer Mr. Hurrell 
 Froude, speaking of the Church of Sngknd, had said that " she 
 was 'united' to the State as Israel to Egypt." This shocked the 
 reviewer in Question, who exclaimed in consequence, " The Church 
 is net nnitea to the State as Israel to Egypt ; it is united as a be- 
 lievin|| ipiftf to a husband who threaten di to apostatize; and as a 
 Chrislian wife so pkced would act . . clinging to the connection 
 . . so the Church must struggle even now, and save, not hersif, 
 but the State, from the crime of a divorce." On this Mr. Reble 
 tm, ** We had thought that the Spouse of the Church was a very 
 diibrenl Person from any or all States, and her relation to the 
 State Hwungh Him very unlike that of hers^ whose duties are 
 ' ftp in ' hm, service, eherishina^ and obedience.* And 
 
 liMe the one is exclusively of this world, the other essentially of 
 iw iiinial world, smh^n AUianee as the above sentence de- 
 ■eribet, would have seemed to us, not only fatal, but wtrnt 
 
 tiPMil"* And he quotes the lines, — 
 
 "Mortna quinetmm jungebat corpora vivis, 
 Cotnponens nianibuaque manus, atque oribus ora: 
 Tormenti genua*' 
 
 •Kevlew of Gladstone's *The State In its Belations with the 
 Church,' October, 1839. 
 
 It was this same conviction that the Church had rishte which 
 the State could not touch, and wbs prone to ignore, ana which in 
 consequence were the occasion of great troubles between the two, 
 that led Mr. Froude at the beginning of the movement to translate 
 the letters of Sfc. Thomas Bscket, and Mr. Bowden to write the 
 Life of Hildebrand. As to myself, I will but refer, as to one out 
 of many passages with the same drift, in the books and tracts 
 which I published at that time, to my Whit-Monday and Whit- 
 Tuesday Sermons. 
 
 I believe a large number of members of the Church of Eng- 
 land at this time are faithful to the doctrine which was proclaimed 
 within ite pale in 18^, and following years ; the main difference 
 between them and Catholics being, not as to the existence of cer- 
 tain high prerogatives and spiritual powers in the Christian Church, 
 but that the powers which we give ta the Holy See, they lodge in 
 her Bishop and Priests, whether as i^ body or individually. Of 
 course, this is a very important difference, but it does not enter 
 into my argument here. It does seem to me prei>osterous to 
 charge the Catholic Church of to^ay with repudiating ancient 
 history by certain political acts of hers, and thereby losing her 
 identity, when it was her very likeness in political action to the 
 Church of the first centuries, that has in our time attracted even 
 t3 her communion, or at least to her teaching, not a few educated 
 men, who made those first centuries their special model 
 
 But 1 have more to say on this subject, perhaps too much, when 
 I go on, as I now do, to contemplate the Christian Church, when 
 persecution was exchanged for establishment, and her enemies 
 necame her children. As she resisted and defied her persecutors, 
 BO she ruled her convert people. And surely this was but natu- 
 ral, and will startle those only to whom the subject is new. If 
 the Church is independent of the State, so far as she is a messen- 
 ger from God, therefore, should the State, with its high officials 
 and its subject masses, come into her communion, it is plain that 
 they must at once change hostility into submission. There was 
 no middle term; either they must deny her claim to divinity or 
 humble themselves before it, — that is, as far as the domain of re- 
 ligion extends, and that domain is a wide one. They could not 
 place God and man on one level. We see this principle carried 
 out among ourselves in all sects every day, though with greater 
 or less exactness of application, according to the supernatural 
 power which they ascribe to their ministers or clergy. It is a 
 sentiment of nature, which anticipates the inspirea command, 
 " Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves, 
 ibr they wateh for your souls." 
 
 As re^rds the Boman Emperors, immediately on their becom- 
 ing Christians, their exaltation of the hierarchy was in propor- 
 tion to ite abject condition in the heathen period. ^ Grateful con- 
 verts felt that they could not do too much in its honor and 
 service. Emperors bowed the head before the Bishops, kissed 
 their hands and asked their blessing. When Constantine 
 entered into the presence of the assembled Prelates at Nicaea, 
 his eyes fell, the color mounted up into his check, and his mien 
 
iif 
 
 S3 
 
 THE AXCIEXT CHURCH. 
 
 THX PAPAL CHURCH. 
 
 53 
 
 wMiiiat of a suppliant; he wotiM not sit till tlie Bithope bade 
 him, and he kiseecl the wowndi of the CJanfeeeors. He aet tiie •«- 
 ample for the Buoceeeofs of his power, nor did the Bishops de- 
 elifie sneh honors. Emprors* wives served them at table, when 
 thej did wronft, they did penance and asked forgiveness. When 
 Ihij quarreled with them, and would banish them, their hand 
 iwinWed when they came to sign the order, and refused to do its 
 ollce, and alter various attempts they gave up their purpose, 
 goldiers raised to sovereignty asked their recognition and were 
 leftesed it. Cities under imperial displeasure sought their inter- 
 vention, and the master of thirty legions found himself power- 
 less to withstand the feeblft voice of some aged Iravel-stained 
 
 Laws were passed in favor of the Church ; Bishopa could only 
 bo Judged by Bishops, and the causes of their clergy were with- 
 ^mwn mm the secular courts. Their sentence was inal, as if 
 it were the Emperor's own, and the governors of provinces were 
 bound to put it in execution. Litigants every-where were 
 allowed the liberty of referring their cause to the tribunal of the 
 Bishops, who, besides, became arbitrators on a large scale in pri- 
 vate quarrels; and the public, even heathens, wished it so. 8t 
 Ambrose was sometimes so taken up with business of this sort, 
 that he had time for nothing else. 8t Austin and Theodoret both 
 complain of the weight of such secular engagements, as forced upon 
 them by the importunity of the people. Nor was this all ; the 
 Emperors showed their belief in the divinity of the Church and 
 of its creed by acts of what we should now call persecution. 
 Jews were forbidden to proselytize a Christian; Christians were 
 fml>idden to become pi^ns; pagan ritee were abolished, the 
 books of heretics and inidels were burned wholesale; their 
 ehapb were raicd to the ground, and even their private meet- 
 ings were made illegal. ^ 
 
 These eharacteristics of the convert Empire were vm mme- 
 iiate, some of ^em the logical, consequences, of its new faith. 
 Bad not the Emperors honored Christianity in its ministers and 
 in its precepts, they would not properly have deserved the name 
 of converts. Nor was it unreasonable in litigants voluntarily to 
 frequent tiie episcopal tribunals, if they got justice done to them 
 there better than in the civil courts. As to the prohibition of 
 heretieal meetings, 1 can not eet myself quite to believe that 
 iPagans, Marclonites, and Manicnees had much tenderness of con- 
 science in ther religions profession, or were wounded seriously 
 by the Imperial rescript to their disadvantage. Many of these 
 ■eeti were of a most immoral character, whether in doctrine or 
 practice; others were formj of witoherall; often they were little 
 better than paganism. The Novatians certainly stand on higher 
 ground; but on the whole, it would be meet unjust to elass such 
 wild, impure, inhuman rites with even the most eitravagaiit and 
 grotesque of American sectaries now. They could entertain no 
 litter feeling that injustice was done them in their repression. 
 They did not make free thought orprivate judgment their waloli- 
 words. The populations of the Empire did not riii in pefoH 
 
 when its religion was changed. There were two broad conditions 
 which accompanied the grant of all this ecclesiastical power and 
 privilege, and made the exercise of it possible; first, that the peo- 
 ple consented to it, secondly, that it was enforced by the law of 
 the Empire. High and low opened the door to it. The Church 
 of course would say that such prerogatives were rightfully hers, 
 as being at least congruous grants made to her, on the part of 
 the State, in return for the benefits which she bestowed upon it. 
 It was her right to demand them, and the State's duty to concede 
 them. This seems to have been the basis of the new state of 
 society. And in fact these prerogatives were in force and in ex- 
 ercise all through those troublous ccnturiAS which followed the 
 break-up of the Imperial sway : and, though the handling of 
 them at length fell into the hands of one See exclusively (on 
 which I shaU remark presently), the See of Peter, yet the sub- 
 stance and character of these prerogatives, and the Church's 
 claim to possess them, remained untouched. The change in tlie 
 Internal allocation of power did not affect the existence and the 
 use of the power itself 
 
 Ranke, speaking of this development of ecclesiastical suprem- 
 acy upon the conversion of the Empire, remarks as follows : 
 
 " It appears to me that this was the result of an internal ne- 
 cessity. The rise of Christianity involved the liberation of re- 
 lieion from aJl political elements. From this followed the growth 
 of a distinct ecclesiastical class with a peculiar constitution. In 
 this separation of the Church from the State consists, perhaps, 
 the greatest, the most pervading and influential peculiarity of all 
 Christian times. The spiritusl and secular powers may come 
 into near contact, may even stand in the closest community ; but 
 they can be thorougnly incorporated only at rare conjunctures 
 and for a short period. Their mutual relations, their position 
 with regard to each other, form, from this time' forward, one of 
 the most important considerations in all history." — The Popes ^ 
 ToL i., p. 10, Transl. 
 
 » 
 
 83. Thb Papal Church. 
 
 Now we come to the distinctive doctrine of the Catholic Re- 
 ligion, the doctrine which separates us from all other denomina- 
 tions of Christians, however near they may approach to us in 
 other respects, the claims of the See of Rome, which have given 
 occasion to Mr. Gladstone's Pamphlet and to the remarks which 
 I am now making upon ii Of those rights, prerogatives, privi- 
 leges, and duties, wnich I liave been surveying in the ancient 
 Church, the Pope is the heir. I shaU dwell now upon this point 
 as far as it is to my purpose to do so, not treating it theologically 
 (else I must define and prove from Scripture and the Fathers 
 the " Primatus jure divino Romani Pontificis"), but historically, 
 because Mr. Gladstone appeals to history. Instead of treating it 
 theologically I wish to look with (as it were) secular, or even non- 
 Cathouc eyes at the powers claimed daring the last thousand 
 years by the Pope— that is, only as they lie in the nature of the 
 
54 
 
 TBB PAPAL CHURCH. 
 
 Mte, ind in tlie surflioe of the hcfa wliich come before m ii iis- 
 
 1. I say, then, the Pope is the heir of the Ecumenical Hicp- 
 iyrchy of the fourth century, as beio^, what I may call, heir by 
 iefauli No one else claims or exercises its rights or its duties. 
 It it poesihle to consider the Patriarch of Moscow or of Constan- 
 tinople, heir to the historical pretensions of St. Ambrose or St. 
 Martin t Does any Anglican Bishop for the last 300 years recall 
 to our minds the ima^e of St. Basil ? Well, then, has all that eo- 
 islesiistical power, which makes such a show in the Christian Em- 
 tti», simply fanished, or, if not, where is it to be found 7 I wish 
 Protestants would throw themselves into onr minds upon this 
 point; I am not holding an argument with them ; I am only wish- 
 ing them to understand where we stand and how we uyok at 
 iiiingi. There is this great diflbrence of belief between us and 
 them; they do not believe that Christ set up a visible society, or 
 I isther kingdom, for the propagation and maintenance of His re- 
 ^ligion, for a necessaij home and refuge of His peoj)le ; but we 
 do. We know the kingdom is still on earth : where is it ? If all 
 that mm found of it is what can be discerned at Constantinople 
 or Cbaterbury, I say, it has disappeared ; and either there was a 
 ladieal cormption of Christiani^ from the first, or Christianitr 
 eame to an end, in proportion as the type of the Nicene Church 
 lUM out of the world : for all that we know of Cliristianity, in 
 aneienl history, aa a concrete fiiot, is the Church of Athanasius 
 and his fellows: it is nothing else historically but that bundle of 
 phenomena, that combination of claims: prerogatives, and corre- 
 sponding acts, some of which I have recounted above. There is 
 no help for it; we can not take as much as we please, and no 
 more, of an institution which has a monadic existence. We must 
 either give up the belief in the Church as a divine institution al- 
 together, or we must recognise it in that communion of which 
 the Pope is the head. With him alone and round about him are 
 found the claims, the prerogatives, and duties which we identify 
 with the kingdom set up bv Chriiii We must take things as they^ 
 are ; to believe in a Church, is to believe in the Pope. And thus 
 this belief in the Pope and his attributes, which seems so mon- 
 strous to Pirotestants, is bound np with our being Catholics at aU; 
 as our Catholicism is with our Christianity. There is nothing, 
 then, of wanton opposition to the powers that be, no dinning of 
 novelties in their startled ears in what is often unjustly oalled Ul- 
 tramontane doctrine ; there is no pernicious servility to the Pope 
 in mt admission of his pretensions. I say, we can not help our- 
 selves — Parliament maT deal as harshly with us as it will ; we 
 should not believe in the Church at all, unless we believed in its 
 visible head. 
 
 So it is; the course of ages has fulfilled the propheor and 
 promise : " Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My 
 Church ; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound 
 in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be 
 loosed in heaven.'* That which in substance was possessed by 
 the Nicene Hierarchy, that the Pope claims now. Ido not wish 
 
 Vm PAPAL CHUBOH. 
 
 55 
 
 to pnt difficulties in «▼ way; but I can not conceal or smo*)th 
 over what I believe to be a simple truth, though the avowal of 
 it will be very unwelcome to Protestants, and, as I fear, to some 
 Catholics. However, I do not call upon another to believe all 
 that I believe on the subject myself. I declare it, as my own 
 judgment, that the prerogatives, such as, and, in the way in 
 which, I have described toem in substance, which the Church 
 had under the Roman Power, those she claims now, and never, 
 never will relinquish ; claims them, not as having received them 
 from a dead Empire, but partly by the direct endowment of her 
 Divine Master, and partly as being a legitimate outeome of that^ 
 endowment; claims them, but not except from Catholic popula- 
 tions, not as if accounting the more sublime of them to be of / 
 every-day use, but holding them as a protection or remedy in \ 
 great emergencies or on supreme occasions, when nothing else 
 will serve, as extraordinary and solemn acts of her religious sov- 
 ereignty. And our Lord, seeing what would be brought about 
 by human means, even had He not willed it, and recognizing, 
 from the laws which He Himself had imposed upon human so- 
 ciety, that no large community could be strong which had no 
 head, spoke the word in the beginning as he did to Judah, 
 ** Thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise," and then left it 
 to the course of events to fulfill it. 
 
 2. Mr. Gladstone ought to have chosen another issue for attack 
 upon us, than the Pope's power. His real difficulty lies deeper; 
 as little permission as he allows to the Pope, would he allow to 
 any ecclesiastic who would wield the weapons of St. Ambrose 
 and St. Augustine. That concentration of the Church's powers 
 which history brings before us should not be the object of his 
 special indignation. It is not the existence of a Pope, but of a 
 CTiurch, which is his aversion. It is the powers, and not their 
 distribution and allocation in the ecclesiastical body which he 
 writes against A triangle or parallelogram is the same in its 
 substance and nature, whichever side is made its base. "The 
 Pontiffs," says Mr. Bowden, who writes as an Anglican, "exalted 
 to the kingly throne of St. Peter, did not so much claim new 
 privileges for themselves, as deprive their episcopal brethren of 
 privileges originally common to the hierarchy. Even the titles by 
 which those autocratical prelates, in the plentitude of their 
 power, delighted to style themselves, * Summus Sacerdos,* * Ponti- 
 fexMaximus,' 'Vioarius Christi,' 'Papa' itself, had, nearer to the 
 primitive times, been the honorable appellations of every Bishop ; 
 as 'Sedes Apostolica' had been the description ©f every 
 Bishop's throne. The ascription of these titles, therefore, to the 
 Pope only gave to the terms new force, because that ascription 
 became exclusive ; because, that is, the bishops in general were 
 stripped of honors, to which their claims were as well founded 
 as tnose of their Roman brother, who became, hj the change, not 
 so strictly universal as sole Bishop." (Greg, vii., vol. i., p. 64.) 
 
 Say that the Christian polity remained, as history represents it 
 to us in the fourth century, or that now it was, if that was pos- 
 sible, to revert to such a state, would politicians have less trouble 
 
mi FAPJUi OBITBOII. 
 
 villi 1,800 eentera of power than they h«Te witli oneT Instead 
 of on©, with traditionary rules, the trammels of treaties and en- 
 g^ipiioals, public opinion to consult and manage, the responsi* 
 toiity of great interests, and the |?uarantce for his behavior m his 
 temporal possessions, there would be a legion of ecclesiastics, 
 emA bishop with his following, each independent of the others, 
 each with liis own viewi* weh with extraordinary powers, each 
 with the risk of misvaing them, mil OTcr Christendom. It wouM 
 lie the Aiigliean theory made real. It would be an ecclesiastical 
 eomniuiitin ; and. if it did not benefit religion, at least it would 
 not benefit the civil power. Take a small illustration:— what in- 
 termption at this time to Parliamentary proceedings, does a small 
 mIous party occasion, which its enemies call a " mere handful 
 ©f clerey ; " and why? Because its members are responsible for 
 what they do to God alone and to their conscience as His voice. 
 Iffifen suppose it was only her© or there that episcopal autonomy 
 was vigorous; yet oonsider what zeal it* kindled by local interest! 
 and national spirit. One John of Tuam, with a Pope's full apoe- 
 iiili© powers, would be a greater trial to successive ministries than 
 ftn Ecumenical Bishop at Kome. Parliament understands this 
 well, for it exclaims against the Sictrdota] principle. Here, for 
 A second reason, if our Divine Master has given those great 
 powers to the Church, which aneient Christianity testifies, we 
 ■ee whv His Providence has also provided that the exercise of 
 iiieiii should be concentrated in one Bee. 
 
 ^lfat» anyhow, the progress of concentration was not the work 
 of the Pope; it was brought about by the changes of times and 
 the vicissitudes of Nations. It was not his fault that the Van- 
 dais swept away the Afriean sees, and the Saracens those of Syria 
 ■mi Asia Minor, or that Constantinople and its dependencies be- 
 aime the creatures of Imperialism, or that France, England, and 
 doriiany would obey none but the author of their own Chris- 
 tlaiilty, or that clergy and people at a distance were obstinate in 
 ■lieltering themselves under the im^csty of Bome against their 
 own ieroe kings and nobles or inperious bishops, even to the 
 imposing forgeries on the world and on the Pope in justification 
 of their proceedings. All this will be fact, whether the Popes 
 -mm ambitious or not; and still it will be fact that the issue of 
 Mmt great chaipe was m great benefit to the whole of Europe. 
 Mo one but a llister, who was a thousand bishope in himself al 
 OBe©, could hatfi tuned and controlled, as the Pope did, the great 
 and little t/raiite of the middle age. 
 
 3. This IS generally confessed now, even by Protestant histor- 
 ians, vii., that the concentration of ecclesiastical power in those 
 eentiiriea was simply necessary for the civilization of Europe. 
 gi w»rie It does not foHow that the benefits rendered then to the 
 Saronean oommonwealth by the political sopremacy of the Pope, 
 would, if he was still supreme, be rendered in time to come. I 
 have no wish to make assumptions ; yet conclusions short of this 
 will be unfavorable to Mr. Gladstone's denunciation of him. We 
 
 leap the fruit tt this day of his services in the past. With the 
 iwfpoi© of allowing this I make a rather long extract from Bean 
 
 THS FAPAL CnOBCH. 
 
 57 
 
 Milman^s "Latin Christianity;" he is speaking of the era of 
 Gregory I., and he says, the Papacy " was the only power which 
 lay not entirely and absolutely prostrate before the disasters of 
 thi times— a power which had an inherent strength, and might 
 resume it» majesty. It was this power which was most imperar 
 tively required to preserve all which was to survive out of the 
 crumbing wreck of Roman civilization. To Western Chnsti- 
 anitv was absolutely necessary a center, standing alone, strong m 
 traditionary reverence, and in acknowledged claims to supremacy. 
 Even the perfect organization of the Christian hierarchy might in 
 all human probability have fallen to pieces m perpetual conflict: 
 it might have degenerated into a half secular feudal caste, with 
 hereditary benefices more and more entirely subservient to the 
 civil authority, a priesthood of each nation or each tribe, grad- 
 ually sinking to the intellectual or religious level of the nation 
 or tribe. On the rise of a power both controUing and conservar 
 tive hung, humanly speaking, the life and death of Christiani^— 
 of Christianity as a permanent, aggressive, expansive, and, to a 
 certain extent, uniform system. There must be a counterbalance 
 to barbaric force, to the unavoidable anarchy of Teutonism, with 
 its tribal, or at the utmost national independence, forming a host 
 of small, conflicting, antagonistic kingdoms. All Europe wou^d 
 have been what England was under the Octarchy, what Germany 
 was when her emperors were weak ; and even her emperors she 
 owed to Rome, to the Church, to Christianity Providence mi^ht 
 have otherwise ordained ; but it is impossible for a man to imagine 
 by what other organizing or consolidating force the common- 
 wealth of the Western nations could have grown up to a discord- 
 ant, indeed, and conflicting league, but still a league, with that 
 unity and conformity of manners, usages, laws, religion, which 
 have made their rivalries, oppugnancies, and even their long 
 ceaseless wars, on the whole to wsue in the noblest, highest, most 
 intellectual form of civilization known to ipan. . . . It is 
 impossible to conceive what had been the confusion, the lawless- 
 nessTthe chaotic state of the middle ages, without the medieval 
 Papacy; and of the medieval Papacy the real father is Gregory 
 the Great In all his predecessors there was much of the uncer- 
 tainty and indefiniteness of a new dominion . . . Gregory 10 
 the Roman altogether merged in the Christian Bishop. It la » 
 Christian dominion, of which he lays the foundations m the 
 Eternal City, not the old Rome, associating ^'^^Jni^^ influence 
 to her ancient title of sovereignty." (Vol. i., p. 401, 2.) 
 
 4. From Gregory I. to Innocent III. is six hundred years;—* 
 very fair portion of the world's history, to have passed in doing 
 Rood of primary importance to a whole continent, and that the 
 continent of Europe; good, by which all nations and their gov- 
 ernors, all statesmen and legislatures, are the gamers. Ana, 
 acain should it not occur to Mr. Gladstone that these services 
 were rendered to mankind by means of those very instruments 
 of power on which he thinks it proper to pour contempt as " rusty 
 tools?" The right to warn and punish powerful men, to «*«ffli- |^ 
 winioate kinfii. to preach aloud truth and justice to the inhabi- 
 
mi 
 
 WM PAPAL OBUBCB. 
 
 ( Imda ofiSIm Mffth, to denounce immoral doctrines, to strike at re- 
 \ Mlioii in tlie garb of heresy, were the very weafmns br which 
 J Europe was brought into a civilized condition ; yet he calls them 
 *• rusty tools " which need "refurbishing." Does he wish, then, 
 lliftt such hi^h expressions of ecclesiastical displeasure, such 
 sharp penalties, should bo of daily use? If they are rusty, 
 because they have been long without using, then have they ever 
 been rushr. Is a Council a rusty tool, because none have been 
 ioM, till 1870, since the sixteenth century ? or because there had 
 titon but nineteen in 1,900 years? How many times is it in the 
 lilatory of Christianity that the Pope has soIemnFf drawn and ex- 
 eroisiid his sword upon a king or an emperor ? If an extraordinary 
 weapn must be a rusty tool, I suppose Gregory Vil.'s sword was 
 not ketn mough for the German Henry; and the seventh Pius, 
 loo, naei • msty tool in his excommunication of Napoleon. How 
 eonH Mr. Gladstone ever " fondiv think that Rome had disused " 
 her weapons, and that they had hung up as antiquities and curi- 
 osities in her celestial armory, — or, in his own words, as " hideous 
 mummies," p. 46,— when the passage of arms between the great 
 Conqueror and the aged Pope was so oloee upon his memory t 
 Would he like to see a mummy come to life again ? That unex- 
 peeied miracle actually took place in the first years of this cen- 
 tury. Gregory was oonsidered to have done an astounding deed 
 in the middle ages, when he brought Henry, the German Bm- 
 ©eror, to do penance and shiver in the snows at Canossa ; but 
 Napolean had his snow-penance too, and that with an actual in?- 
 terpoaition of Providence in the infliction of ii I describe it in 
 ihe words of Alison : — 
 
 •'•What does the Pope mean,' said Napoleon to Eugene, in 
 July, 1807, ' by the threat of excommunicating me ? does he think 
 the world has gone back a thousand years ? Does he suppose the 
 arms will fall from the hands of my soldiers?' Within two 
 years after these remarkable words were written, the Pope did 
 ezoommunicate him, in return for the confiscation of his whole 
 imniiiionB, and in less than four years more, the arms did fall 
 firom the hands of his soldiers ; and the hosts, apparently invin- 
 eible, which he had collected were dispersed ana ruined by the 
 Uaili of winter. ' The weapons of the soldiers,' says Segur, in 
 doscribing the Bnssian retreat^ •appeared of an insupportable 
 weight to their stifiened arms. During their frequent falls they 
 fell from their hands, and destitute of the power of raising them 
 from the ground, they were left in the snow. They did not throw 
 Hioni away: Ikmine and cold tore them from their grasp.' ' The 
 soldiers could no longer hold their weapons,' says Salgues, ' they 
 fell from the hands even of the bravest and most robust. The 
 mekets dropped from the frozen armi of those who bore them.' '* 
 (Mist ch. Ix., 9th ed.) 
 
 Alison adds — " There is something in these marvelous coinci- 
 dences beyond the operations of chance, and which even a Pro- 
 t^tant historian feels himself bound to mark for the observation 
 of future a^es. The world has not gone back a thousand years, 
 but that Being existed with whom a thousand years are as one 
 
 THB PAPAL CHVItCH. 
 
 50 
 
 daT. and one day aa a tJiousand years.' As He wm with Greg- 
 ory in 1077, so He was with Pius in 1812, and He will be with 
 some future Pope again, when the necessity shall come. 
 
 5. In saying this, I am far from saying that Popes are never m 
 the wrong, and are never to be resisted, or that their excommuni- 
 cations always avail. I am not bound to defend the policy or 
 the acts of particular Popes, whether before or after the great 
 revolt from ttieir authority in the 16th century. There is no rea- 
 son that I should contend, and I do not contend, for instance, 
 that they at all times have understood our own people, our nar 
 tional character and resources, and our position m li^urope; or 
 that they have never suffered from bad counselors or misintor- 
 mation. I say this the more freely, because UrbanVIII., about 
 the year 1641 or 1642, blamed the policy of some Popes of tho 
 preceding century in their dealings with our countinr.* 
 
 But, whatever we are bound to allow to Mr. Gladstone on this 
 head, that does not warrant the passionate invective against the 
 Holy See and us individually, which he has earned on through 
 sixty-four pages. What we have a manifest right to expect from 
 him is lawyer-like exactness and logical consecutiveness m his 
 impeachment of us. The heavier that is, the less does it need the 
 exa^erations of a great orator. If the Pope s conduct toward us 
 thre? centuries ago has righteously wiped out the memory of hia 
 earlier benefits, yet he should have a fair trial. The ""ore intoxi- 
 cating was his solitary greatness, when it was m the zenith, tlie 
 creator consideration should be shovm towards him m his present 
 temporal humiliation, when concentration of ecclesiastical tunc- 
 tions in one man, does but make him, in the presence of thQ 
 haters of Catholicism, what a Roman Emperor contemplated, when 
 he wished all his subjects had but one neck that he might destroy 
 them by one blow. Surely, in the trial of so august a criminal, 
 one might have hoped, at least, to have found gravity and measure 
 in language, and calmness in tone— not a pamphlet written as it 
 on impulse, in defense of an incidental parenthesis m a previous 
 publication, and then, after having been multiplied in J-2,UW 
 copies, appealing to the lower classes in the shape of a sixpenny 
 tract, the lowness of the price indicating the width of the circuja- 
 tion. Surely Nana Sahib will have more justice done to him by 
 the English people, than has been shown to the Father of European 
 
 civilization. , . , . i .t. rr i- 
 
 6. 1 have been referring to the desolate state m which ttie Holy 
 
 See has been cast during the last years, such that the Pope, hu- 
 
 • "When he was urged to excommunicate the Kings of France 
 and Sweden, he made answer, 'We may declare them excomrauni- 
 CRte, as Pius V. declared Queen Elizabeth of England, and before hun 
 Clement VII. the King of England, Hf "^y VIII. • • }>^J ^ J^ 
 what success? The whole world can tell. We /«* ^^»^^lVCf 
 tears of blood. Wisdom does not teach us to imitate Pius V. or Clem- 
 ent VIL, but Paul V. who, in the beginning, being many times ur^ 
 by the Spaniards to excommunicate James King oj Eng'?^^ "®J^ 
 would consent to it' " (State Paper office Italy, ^^l^^^^m 
 Mr. Simpson's very able and careful hfe of Campion, 18W, p. *<a- 
 
60 
 
 THB PAPAL OBVltOH. 
 
 MMilj wpmimg, 11 St the meroy of Mm emiidm, and mordlT « 
 
 pmoDer ib liis palace. A etste of such eeculm? feeblen^Ji! 
 
 not last forever; sooner or later there will be, in the divine 
 
 mewjy a change for the better, and the Vicar of Christ will nn 
 
 W be a mark for insult and indignity. But one thing except 
 
 ^ an aljnoet miraculous mterposition, can not be- and Siat is a 
 
 J!f"»|? ™ nniversal religious sentiment, the public oninion nf 
 
 iht medieval time. The Fo^ himself calls t^e centuri^ " the 
 
 i«es of faitk" Such endemi<} fiiith maj oertainlv be decreed fop 
 
 some future time; but, m iir aa we haV^ the means of iud^h^rr S 
 
 l yen*^ ce nturies m«at run out firsi Even in the fourth centurv 
 
 tiM tMimiafltioal pnvileget, claimed on the one hand, irranted on 
 
 the othep, came into eibct more or less under twoTndlJTonTtC 
 
 i^nirfh ^^"^ ^J ?«bUe kw. and that thej had ZcoS* 
 
 JSTof hS i&tthfchlfv^^^^^^ *^^ l'^' /^'^' 
 
 iTaI 11*1. "^lilu . .'y^'°'''<* •"■" ■• » matter of course 
 !^.tL N^ u i ^2«« centunea ? If the whole worid wiU at on^ 
 !2!S1? P ' " '"fu^ wopportane to teunt ne with the acts rtf 
 Sf^m^T^lf V*"* ""' "^ ~5^° ?"»««• «•<> noble« when 
 
 ff^LuZ^Ti^iJ^^ ''"""i '" "i" ?"**•■■* ^'t M'- Gladstone ia 
 HI ewneat alarm, earnest with the eamestnees which dieting 
 
 fo«S^^ iL^ that "the fean are vieioiuuy ... that eithfr 
 «n.^5 h: » ^T.T*"> tre«K>n can, at the bidd^ of the Court 
 -i^!'„i"'»K'"'' »''*'' Pe^^fo" •horee;" he allo^ that "iB the 
 -rfiUei^M the Pope, contended, not by direct action of fleet. 
 5*T..''"'.?»™^y ""y interdicts,^' p. 35. Yet because 
 »M« tfaMk bdieved in inteidiote, thooch now they dont thVrefo™ 
 the «»a Power U to be roused agaSt thrpZ But hren?- 
 
 ZTk ..^i S ""^""^ ' ''S' *?? «»*'»«• «» Without matter to 
 work upon r Mere a»mi«, hke big words, bK»ta no bones. 
 &^ i. S"'"" J '*'5<*»tone by anticipation, and to allaj hi« 
 W ^? fc SI'"**.' ' *«^™tion three years ago on the sub- 
 {K^W^l^"^ *"."!?• *•'■ Gl-dstone qaot«i {IShout per<^iJ!: 
 Jttfral^»T!"^ th« very a,«„nen^ which he brings it to 
 W.^i^l'd^^f.h^Alf'^PiK'" *« P?Pe» ««*••«« goes. Tjoub*. 
 Sr™idl^« h J^ ^™ the pUce in the pditicaTworld which 
 
 ja4 IS oonduciTe to the highest mteresfa of mankind; but he dis^ 
 to«*lyteU. ». that he has not got it, and can not have it, tiS t 
 £nS^^- 'i ^- r*P*"* °^ "■''«•' we are as good jud^ «, 
 
 SL-^^'^"'^ ", *i}\ ^^'^ P""tical power, that of interl 
 ponng^ in tiie quarrel between a prince anfhis subieei. .n3 nf 
 
 SriTL"''^ •rjr'iKn ^'T. ♦^» "••»• '^^ *e Prince 
 AM or had not forfeited their aUenanoe. ThU power most 
 
 Mtuj ezmfsed, and on very eztraoidumrr oeeasiona and with. 
 
 out «v «d of infiUUbili^y ii the exero£7onr»y m„li!i 
 
 THB PAPAI. CHUHCH. 
 
 61 
 
 the civil power possesses that aid, it is not necessary for any 
 Catholic to believe; and I suppose, comparatively speaking, few 
 Catholics do believe it; to be honest, I must say. I do; that is, 
 under the conditions which the Pope himself lays down in the 
 declaration to which I have referred, his answer to the address of 
 the Academia. He speaks of his right " to depose sovereigns^-] 
 and release the people from the obligation of loyalty, a right 
 which had undoubtedly sometimes been exercised in oruomi cip- 
 cumstances." and he says, "This right (d/r<5«o) in those ages of 
 laith— (which discerned in the Pope, what he is, that is to say, tne ^ 
 Supreme Judge of Christianity, and recognized the advantages ot 
 his tribunal in the great contests of peoples and sovereigns)— was 
 freely extended— (aided indeed as a matter of duty bv the public 
 law (diritto) and by the common consent of peoples)- to the 
 most important {ipiu graoi) interests of states and their rulers. 
 (Guardian, Nov. 11, 1874.) , . * xt- 
 
 Now let us observe how the Pope restrains the exercise of this 
 piirht He calls it his right— that is, in the sense m which right 
 in one party is correlative with duty in the other, so that, when 
 the duty is not observed, the right can not be brought into exer- 
 cise; and this is precisely what he goes on to intimate ; for he lays 
 down the conditions of that exercise. First it can only be exer- 
 cised in rare and critical circumstances {supreme circanstanze, % 
 pa aravi mteressi). Next he refers to his bein^ the supreme 
 jud'^e of Christianity, and to his decision as commg from a tri- 
 bunal; his prerogative then is not a mere arbitrary power, but 
 must be exercised by a process of law and a formal examination 
 of the Ciise, and in the presence and the hearing of the two par- 
 ties interested in it Also, in this limitation is implied that the 
 Pope's definitive sentence involves an appeal to the supreme 
 standard of right and wrong, the moral law, as its basis and rule, 
 and must contain the definite reasons on which it decides in favor 
 of the one party or the other. Thirdly, the exercise of this ri^ht 
 is limited to the ages of faith ; ^es which, on the one hand, in- 
 scribed it among the provisions of the jus publicum, and on the 
 other so fully recognized the benefits it conferred, as to be able to 
 enforce it by the common consent of the peoples. These last 
 words should be dwelt on : it is no consent which is merely local, 
 m of one country, of Ireland or of Belgium, if th^ were proba- 
 ble ; but a united consent of various nations, of Eujope, for in- 
 ttanee, as a commonwealth, of which the Pope was the head. 
 Thirty years ago we heard much of the Pope being made the 
 head of an Italian confederation: no word came from England 
 against such an arrangement It was possible, because the mem- 
 bers of it were all of one religion; and in hke manner a Iku- 
 ropean commonwealth would be reasonable, if Europe were of 
 one religion. Lastly, the Pope declares with indignation that a 
 Pope is not infaUible in the exercise of this right; such a notion 
 is an invention of the enemy; he calls it " malicious. 
 
DnriDHi ALLiouifim 
 
 |4. DlTIDED AlLMUKCB. 
 
 But 0ii« »ttribate the Church has, and the Pope as the head of 
 w ^''wK**' 'T^^l^^^^^^^ ^ »? J^igh estete, as th^is world goee, or 
 not, whether he has temporal possessions or not, whether he is in 
 ijoor or dishonor whether he is at home or driven about 
 Viailier those special claims of whioh I have spoken are allowed 
 or notr-and that is, SoTereignljr. Am Qod "Lm sovereigntj. 
 SSSfrS TL^ fif'^'^lf^ ^' disowned, so has His Vicar upon 
 !!!lt'Jl!i K **' '**".»'? •'?*^ ^^°"^ populations are foind 
 
 I2ir.«ri^^' " ft* spreading aa the British; and'^all his 
 •all mm sure to be each as are in keeping with the position of 
 one who is thus supremely exalted. i^"i«b oi 
 
 ♦«L^«?!*K^ Jr mterrunted here, as many a reader will inter- 
 2t ZVl fK **"«^^ ' ^*'' ^ am using these words, not at ran- 
 fr2!« L«l? r*'Tr°*'^?®'*i of a long explanation, and. in* 
 oeflain sense limitation, of what 1 have hitherto been siyinir 
 ooneernmg the Church s and the Pope's power. To thiTtoSf 
 the remaining pages, which I have to addresVto your Grace will 
 
 ^L ^k: ^ * ! "^^^^ «*«*^J7 to «how what he does not claim. 
 JMow the key-note of Mr. Gladstone's Pamphlet is this* thai 
 
 ^ !^ 2^/"T '"^'"'*^i"J^ ^^^^*** an/morala. aid sin'c^ 
 toote are no departmente and functions of human life which do 
 
 TJ^k T"*"' f^^:?!**''; ***^ **«'"*^" of morals." p. 36, and 
 ■inee he claims lUso " the domain of aU that concerns the eov- 
 cmment and discipline of the Church/* and moreover, " claims 
 ^IT'^'f **^ determining the limits of those doma ns/' and 
 ^' does not sever them, bv any acknowledged or intelligible lino 
 
 of civfl duty and aUegiance," p. 45, therefore 
 
 SX]!!llr*'"' T ^T --V »- »"«gmoce. p. ^o, tneretoro 
 CJatholies are moral and mental slaves, and "every convert and 
 
 Srm\';p\'„o^^^^ P*^*^ ^^ ^^^'^'y '^'*<* '^'^^ duty at 
 
 I. J !l« i ^^' Gladstones premises, but I reject his conclusion; 
 And now I am going to show why I reject It 
 
 ¥»il' ^*"^ ^^'\^ **'*!J' Y*i*»„^«. P«* aside for the present the 
 ^??h«r^o72frK*'* ""^ mfallibUity in general en^inciations! 
 whether of faUh or morals, and confine myself to the considera^ 
 tXl ? authority (m respect to which he is not infallible) in 
 "t^!! ^ ***'*J «?»<1««*^, and of our duty of obedience to him. 
 
 df ;^« "^2' ^T**"**.*!*!*!* *^ '^^ *« an Abiolut. and entire Obe- 
 ior oSinS' ?!f.irK^/-^^ ^T '*«"*ltor to „>«. whether my Super- 
 TiLt ZL^?^ ' 'i'^Vo*^ m"« *" t** «/«^>^J«d to demand ind 
 exaoteontormity, p. 39. He speaks of a third province beini? 
 opened, * not Indeed to the abstract assertion of Infallihilitv huf 
 to the far more practical and decisivni^nd of Z& 
 dience p.41, '* the Absolute Obedience, at the peril of sa^v^ 
 tmn, of every member of his communion." p. 42. 
 
 DIYIBSD JlLLBQIANCfl. 
 
 63 
 
 Now, I proceed to examine this large, diroet, religious sover- 
 eignty of the Pope, both in its relation to his subjects, and to the 
 Civil Power; but first, I beg to be allowed to say just one word 
 on the principle of obedience itself, that is, by way of inquiry, 
 whether it is or is not now a religions duty. , . ^. , 
 
 Is there, then, such a duty at all as obedience to ecclesiastical 
 authority now ? or is it one of those obsolete ideas, which are 
 ■wept away, as unsightly cobwebs, by the New Civilization? 
 Scripture says, "Remember them which have the rii^c pver you, 
 who have spoken unto you the word of God, whose faith follow. 
 And, "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit your- 
 selves; for they wateh for your souls, as they that must give ac- 
 count, that they may do it with joy and not with grief; for thai 
 Is unprofitable for you." The margin in the Protestant Version 
 reads, "those who are your guides;" and the word may also be 
 translated " leaders." Well, as rulers, or guides and leaders, which- 
 ever word be right, they are to be obeyed. Now Mr. Gladstone 
 dislikes our way of fulfilling this precept, whether as re^rds our 
 choice of ruler and leader, or our "Absolute Obedience' to him; 
 but he does not give us his own. Is there any liberalistio read- 
 ing of the Scripture passage? Or are the words only for the 
 benefit of the poor and ignorant, not for the Schola {m jt may 
 be called) of political and periodical writers, not for individual 
 members of Parliament, not for statesmen and Cabinet minis- 
 ters, and people of Progress? Which party, then, is the more 
 " Scriptural," those who recognize and carry out in their conduct 
 texts like these, or those who don't? May not we Catholics 
 claim some mercy from Mr. Gladstone, though we be faulty in 
 the object and the manner of our obedience, since in a lawless 
 day an object and a manner of obedience we have ? Can we be 
 blamed, 1^ arguing from those texts which say that ecclesiastical 
 authority comes from above, we obey it in that one form in which 
 alone we find it on earth, in that only person who claims it of us, 
 among all the notabilities of this nineteenth century into which 
 we have been born? The Pope has no rival in his claim upon 
 us; nor is it our doing that his claim has been made and allowed 
 for centuries upon centuries ; and that it was he who made the 
 Vatican decrees, and not they him. If we give him up, to whom 
 shall we go ? Can we dress up any civil functionary in the vest- 
 ments of divine authority? Can 1, for instance, follow the faith, 
 can I put my soul into the hands, of our gracious Sovereign? or 
 of the Archbishop of Canterbury ? or of the Bishop of Lincoln, 
 albeit he is not broad and low, but high ? Catholics have " done 
 what they could," — all that any one could: and it should be Mr. 
 Gladstone's business, before telling us that we are slaves, because 
 we obey the Pope, first of all to tear away those texts from the 
 Bible. 
 
 With this preliminary remark, I proceed to consider whether 
 the Pope's authority is either a slavery to his subjects, or a men- 
 ace to the Civil Power; and first, as to his power over his flock! 
 
 1. Mr. Gladstone says that "the Pontiff declares to belong to 
 him the supreme direction of Catholics in respect to all dutyj 
 
m 
 
 WVnmi AILECUKCT. 
 
 DIVIDED ALLEQIAKCB. 
 
 65 
 
 p. 31 Siipme «i|i^ ; true, but "tuprome " is not " minute," 
 «►' <lo<» "iiwotion nnsan Buperviaion or " management." Take 
 Hi© paralle] of human law; the law ie ttiprme, and the Law di- 
 reck our conduct under the manifold circumstances in which we 
 mm to act^ and must be abeolutelv obeved ; but who therefore 
 Mjs llisl the law has the " supreme direction " of us ? The State, 
 ifl well as the Church, his the power at its will of imposing laws 
 iipon^ oi, laws boanng on our moral duties, our daily conduct. 
 •*c*iiig owf aetions in various ways, and circumscribing our lib- 
 «fii«i; y«l BO one would say that the Law, after all, with all its 
 power in the abstract and its executive vigor in fact, interferes 
 eitHer with our eomfort or our conscience. There are number- 
 !??if^'.,f**""* property, landed and personal, titles, tenures. 
 tMi»t% wills, covenants, contracts, partnerships, money transao- 
 tionii lifii-insurances, taxes, trade, navigation, education, sanitair 
 neasures. trespasses, nuisances, all in addition to the criminal law. 
 Law, to apply Mr. Gladstone's words, " is the shadow that cleaves to 
 us go where w© will." Moreover, it varies year after year, and 
 «»»M» to give any pledge of fixedness or finality. Nor can any 
 ©••toll what mtraintis to come next, perhaps painful personally 
 toJhiiiselC Nor are its enactments easy of interpretation ; for 
 Mtaia cases, with the speeches and opinions of counsel, and the 
 Jecisions of iudges, must prepare the raw material, as it proceeds 
 fraui the l^fUature, before it can be rightly understood ; so that 
 I*f ^S'*®"* uncertainty of the Law '^ has become a proverb. 
 And, after all, no one is sure of escaping its penalties without 
 the aasistance of lawyers, and that in such private and personal 
 natters that the lawyers are, as by an imperative duty, bound to 
 » i^crecv which even oourte of justice respect. And then, 
 wwilet the Statute Law, there is the common and traditional; 
 •?** Mow this, usage. Is not all this enough to try the temper 
 JT s liwi-born Enclishman, and to make him cry out with Mr. 
 Ohidstoa«, "Three-fourths of my life are handed over to the Law; 
 1 irnre not to ask if there be dregs or tetters of human life, such 
 as can escape from the description and boundary of Parliamentary 
 granny? Yet, though we may dislike it, though we may at 
 twica iiiier from it ever so much, who does not see that the 
 ttratldom and irksomeness are nothing compared with the great 
 "T!*?'^.*'*f '^ ^ Constitution and Legiskture secure to us? 
 WW 1* i ® jiriidiction which the law exereises over us. 
 Whal rule does the Pop claim which can be compared to ito 
 Btron|r and its long arm f What interference with our liberty of 
 JlligiDp and acting in our daily work, in our course of life, comes 
 to m fiom him? Really, at first sight, I have not known where 
 to took tor instances of his actual interposition in our private 
 wmim, mm it is our routine of personal duties about which I am 
 
 ''^'w*^*^*"^* -^^ ^ ^®® ^*^^ ^'® ®^"*^ »" *^^8 matter. 
 
 We are guided in our ordinary duties by the books of moral 
 tfctology, which are drawn up by theologians of authority and expe- 
 rience, as au instruction for our Confessors. These books are 
 bawsd on the three Christian foundations of Faith, Hope and 
 fjHanty, on the Ten Coiiiiiiiuidiiieiito, and on the six Precepte of 
 
 the Church which relate to the observance of Sunday, of fast 
 davs of ^nflwion and communion, and. in one shape or other 
 t mvinflTthheT A great number of possible cases are noted 
 
 UTIEL t:Ss, and^in difficult ^ TThr^H^^^^^^^^^ 
 m ffiven with plain directions, when it is that private ^atholica 
 Te Slibi^ to choose for themselves whatever answer they like 
 best and Xn they are bound to follow some one of them m 
 mrlicXr Ke^^^^^ as these directions in detail are to the 
 Few and simple heads which I have mentioned, they are little 
 mL than rXctions and memoranda of our moral sense unhke 
 
 Z positive enactments of the ^^^^l'^^^*' ^ /f^f ' ^1'^,%^^^^^ 
 present to us no difficulty-though now and *j^^^ ««,"^^^f ^^^^^^ 
 Question may arise, and some answer may be given gust as Dy 
 SrpHvate Conscience) which it is difficult to us or P^^^)^ ^ ^- 
 cept And again, cases may occur now ^^-^^ ^J,^;J^^^^^^^^ 
 vate iudirment diffijrs from what is set down m theological works, 
 but iven then it does not follow at once that our P"vate judg- 
 ment mSst give way, for those books are no utterance of Papal 
 
 ^'"Anf&is is the point to which I am coming. .So little does 
 thfpope come into this whole system of moral theolo^ by 
 which ?as by our conscience) our lives are regulated that the 
 weght oThiJhanduponus. as private men. is absolutely u^^^^^ 
 nreciable I have had a difficulty where to find a measure or 
 Suge of his in^^^^ At length I have looked through Bu- 
 
 Sum's "Medulla," to ascertain what light such a book would 
 ?hro™n the question. It is a book of casuistry for the use 
 of Sssoi, running to tSo pages, and is a .la^gY/CSce 
 answers madi by various theologians on pomte ^^^^""^'^^^^ 
 and generally of duty. It was first published in 1545— my own 
 Sitiin of 1844--and in the latter are marked those proposi- 
 &::rfn3 on subjects .t-ted in it, which^^^^^^ 
 demned by Popes in the intermediate 200 y«^"-^^y" *%> 
 over the pies I find they are in aU between 50 and 60. Ihis 
 n includl matters sacramental, "^^^S «^«\«rnf to ^he dt 
 tic, and disciplinarian, as well »«, °^<>':*^^^>Vr^„i^/^; Jt^ 
 tie; of ecclesiastics and regulars,, of parish F'^^ts^f -^f P^^. 
 fessional men. as well as of private Catholics And^^^^^^^^^^ 
 demnations relate for the most part to mere «P,^««^^"^^^^ 
 duty, and are in reprobation of the lax or wild motions of spec- 
 
 ulatiVe casuists, so that they are rather ff *f JP^^^nrare sot^ 
 Kians than upon laymen. For instance, tbe following are Bome 
 ?f?he proportions condemned: *;The ecclesiastic, who ^n a cer^ 
 tein day is^indered from saying Latins and Lauds, «^^^^^^ 
 to say, if he can, the remaining hours; ^here there is go^ 
 cause, it is lawful to swear without the P«n)0«e,of swearin^^^ 
 whether the matter is of light or grave moment; f «^^^^^^^^ 
 Biay steal from their masters, in .<^^mpen8ation for the^^^Bcrv^^^^ 
 which they think greater than their wages ; "It is lawful tor a 
 public man to kill an opponent, who tries to fasten a , calumny 
 Spon him. if he can not otherwise escape the^g'^ommy I ha^ 
 Xen the^e instances, at random. It must be granted, I think. 
 6 
 
61 
 
 
 that in the long course of 200 years the amonnl of the Pope's 
 authoritatiTe enunciations has not been such as to press heavily 
 on the back of the private Catholie. He leaves us surely far 
 more than that "one-fourth of the department of conduct," 
 which Mr. Ghidstone allows us. Indeed, if my account and 
 fpeeimens of his sway over us in morals be correct, I do not see 
 what he takes away at all from our private consciences. 
 
 Mf, Glailstone says that the Pop virtually claims to himself 
 the wide domain of conduct, and therefore that we are his slaves. 
 Let US see if another illustration or parallel will not show this 
 to bo a noil sequihtr. Suppose a man, who is in the midst of 
 various and important lines of business, has a medical adviser, in 
 whom he has full confidence, as knowing well his constitution. 
 This adviser keeps a careful and anxious eye upon him ; and, as 
 an honest man, says to him, " You must not go off on a journey 
 to-day," or " vou must take some days' rest," or "you must attend 
 to your diet. Now, this is not a fair parallel to the Pope's hold 
 upon us ; for he does not speak to us personally but to all, and 
 in speaking definitely on ethical subjects, what he propounds 
 must relate to things good and bad in themselves, not to things 
 accidental, changeable, and of mere expedience; so that the ar- 
 gument which I am drawine from the case of a medical adviser is 
 iyorlfoW in its character. However, I say that, though a medical 
 man exercises a " supreme direction" of those who put themselves 
 under him, yet we do not therefore say, even of him, that he inter- 
 feres with our daily conduct, and that we are his slaves. He oer- 
 tainlv does thwart many of our wishes and purposes ; in a true sense 
 we are at his mercy ; he may interfere anj day, suddenly ; he wUl 
 not, he can not, draw any line between his action and our action. 
 The same journey, the same press of business, the same induK 
 eence at table, wnich he passes over one year, he sternly forbids 
 lie next. If Mr. Gladstone's argument is good, he has a finger 
 in all the commercial transactions of the great merchant or finan- 
 cier who has chosen him. But surely there is a simple fallacy 
 here. Mr. Gladstone asks us whether our political and civil life 
 is not at the Pope's mercy ; every act, he says, of at least three- 
 quarters of the day, is under his control. No, not etJ«ry, but 
 njif , and this is all the difference — ^that is, we have no piarantee 
 given us that there will never be a ca«e, when tlie Pope s general 
 mtteianees may come to have a bearing upon some personal act 
 of ours. In tne same way we are all of us in this age under the 
 control of public opinion and the public prints ; nay, much 
 more intimately so. Journalism can be and is very personal ; 
 and, when it is in the right, more powerful just now than any 
 Pope; yet we do not go into fits, as ir we were slaves, because we 
 are under a snrmillance much more like tyranny than any sway, 
 so indirect, so praistically limited, so gentle, as his is. 
 
 But it seems the cardinal point of our slavery lies, not simply 
 in the domain of morals, but in the Pope's |];eneral authority 
 over us in all things whatsoever. This count in his indictment 
 Mr. Gladstone founds on a passage in the third chapter of the 
 Fmtor miemus, in which the Pope, speaking of the Pontifical 
 
 DIVIDED ALLBOIANOB. 
 
 67 
 
 jurisdiction, says: "Towards it (crga quam) pastors and Deople 
 ^f whatsoever rite or dignity, each and *i». *«;?. ^"''^ ^^^ 
 duty of hierarchal subordination and true obedience, not only 
 in matters which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those 
 which pertain to tfie disciplme and the regimen of the Church 
 spread throughout the world; so that unity ^^^^ **»« f ^^^^^J 
 Antiff (both of communion and of profession of the saine faith) 
 being pJeserved. the Church of Christ may be one flock under 
 one fupreme Shepherd. This is the doctrine of Catholic teutK 
 from wlLich no one can deviate without loss of faith and salva- 
 
 On Mr. Gladstone's use of this passage I observe fijj*. **>»* ^^ 
 leaves out a portion of it which hw much to do with the due 
 understandiniof it (ita ut custodita, etc.) Next, he sneaks of 
 " absolute obedience ^ so often, that any reader who had not the 
 passage before him. would think that the ^^rd "absolute was 
 the Pope's word, not his. Thirdly, three times (at PP- 38, 41, 
 and 42) does he make the Pope say that no one can duobey him 
 without risking his salvation, whereas what the Pope does say is, 
 that no one can disbelieve the dniy of obedience and unity with- 
 out such risk. And fourthly, in order to carry out this felse 
 sense, or rather to hinder its being evidently impossible he mi^ 
 translates p. 38, "doctrina" (Hsec est doctrina) by the word 
 
 But his chief attack is directed to the words " disciplina and 
 *• regimen." " Thus," he says, " are swept into the Papal net 
 whole multitudes of facts, whole systems of government, prevail- 
 ing, though in different degrees, in every country of the wor d, 
 B 41 That is, disciplina and regimen are words of such lax, 
 vagiie. indeterminate meaning, that under them any matters can 
 be slipped in which may be required for the Pope s purpose in 
 this or that country, such as, to take Mr. Gladstone s instances, 
 blasphemy, poor-relief, incorporation and mortmain; as it no 
 definitions were contained in our theological and ecclesiastical 
 works of words in such common use, and as if m consequence 
 the Pope was at liberty to give them any sense of his own. As 
 to discrpline, Fr. Perrone says " Discinline comprises the exterior 
 worship of God. the liturgy, sacred rites, psalmody, the sdminis- 
 tration of the sacraments, the canonical form of sacred elections 
 and the institution of ministers, vows, feast^ays, and the like; 
 all of them (observe) matters internal to the Church, and without 
 anv relation to the Civil Power and civil affairs. Perrone adds, 
 "iScclesiastical discipline is a practical and external rule, pre- 
 scribed by the Church, in order to retain the faithful m their 
 faith, and the more easily lead them on to eternal happiness, 
 yrml Theol t. 2. p. 381. 2d ed. 1841. Thus discipline is i n no 
 sense a political instrument, except as the profession of our faith 
 mav accidentally become political. In the same sense Zallinger : 
 " the Roman Pontiff has by divine right the power of passing 
 universal laws pertaining to the discipline of the Church; for 
 instance, to divine worship, sacred rite.s, the ordination and 
 manner of life of the clergy, the order of the ecclesiastical regi- 
 
m 
 
 DIVIDBD AILEOIANGB. 
 
 mill, and ilie right Kiministration of the temporal possesiions 
 of the Church."— /Mr. Eccles. lib. i., i 2, 1 121. 
 
 So, too, the woid "regimen" has a definite meaning, relating 
 to a matter strictly internal to the Church; it means govern- 
 ment, or the mode or form of government, or the course of gov- 
 ernment, and, as, in the intercourse of nation with nation, the 
 nature of a nation's government, whether monarchical or repuh- 
 liQan, does not come into question, so the constitution of the 
 Church simplv belongs to its nature, not to its external action. 
 Thmm are indeed aspects of the Church which involve relations 
 toward secular powers and to nations, as, for instance, its mis- 
 wmart office ; but regimen has relation to one of its internal 
 liiiMMtaristics, viz., its form of government, whether we call it a 
 pure monarchy or with others a monarchy tempered by aristoo- 
 lacy. Thus Tournely says, " Three kinds of regimen or gov- 
 ernment are set down by philosophers, monarchy, aristocracy, 
 and democracy," Theol, t. 2, p. 100. Bellarmine savs the 
 same, i2oi». Font I 2; and Perrone takes it for granted, ibid, 
 
 pp. 70, 71. . . , ,. 
 
 Now, why does the Pope speak at this time of regimen and dis- 
 eipline? He tells us, in that portion of the sentence, which, 
 thinking it of no account, Mr. Gladstone has omitted. The Pone 
 toPs us that all Catholics should recollect their duty of obedi- 
 ence to him, not only in faith and morals, but in such matters 
 of regimen and discipline as belonged te the universal Church, 
 " so that unity wiUi the Roman Pontiff; both of communion and 
 ©f profession of the same faith being preserved, the Church of 
 Christ may be one flock under one supreme Shepherd." I con- 
 sider this passage to he especially aimed at Nationalism : " Rec- 
 ollect," the Pope seems to say, " the Church is one, and that, not 
 only in faith and morals, for schismatics may profess as much as 
 iiis, but one, wherever it is, all over the world ; and not only one, 
 hut one and the same, bound together by its one regimen and 
 iisei^ine, and by the same regimen and discipline,— the same 
 tiles, the same sacraments, the same usages, and the same one 
 PiMtor; and in these bad times it is necessary for all Catholics to 
 recollect, that this doctrine of the Church's individuality and, as 
 it were, personality, is not a mere received opinion or under- 
 ■iMiding, which may be entertained or not, as we please, but is 
 ft faidamental necessary truth." This being, sneaking under 
 MSiMtion, the drift of the passage, I observe that the words 
 •'■■Itead throughout the world" or "universal" are so far from 
 turning " discipline and regimen" into what Mr. Gladstone calls 
 a " net," that they contract the range of both of them, not in- 
 cluding, as he would have it, "marriage" here, "blasphemy" 
 there, and "poor-relief" in a third oountrv, but noting and speci- 
 fying that one and the same structure of laws, rites, rules ofgov- 
 emment, independency, every-where, of which the Pope himself 
 is the center and life. And surely this is what every one of us 
 will say with the Pope, who is not an Erastian, and who believes 
 that the Gospel is no mere philosophy thrown upon the world 
 at large, no mere quality of mind and thought, no mere beautiful 
 
 PITIPBII ALLBOUNOB. 
 
 and deep sentiment or subjective opinion, but a substantive mee- 
 aage from above, guarded and preserved in a visible polity. 
 
 2. And now I am naturally led on to speak of the Poi>e'8 su- 
 preme authority, such as I have described it, in its bearing to- 
 wards the Civil Power all over the world,— various, as the Church 
 is invariable, — a power which as truly comes from God, as his 
 
 own does. 
 
 That collisions can take place between the Holy See and na- 
 tional governments, the history of fifteen hundred years teacheo 
 us; also, that on both sides there may occur grievous mistakes. 
 But my question all along lies, not with "quicquid delirant re- 
 ges," but with what, under the circumstance of such a collision, 
 m the duty of those who are both children of the Pojje and sub- 
 jects of the Civil Power. As to the duty of the Civil Power, I 
 have already intimated in my first section, that it should treat 
 the Holy See as an independent sovereign, and if this rule had 
 been observed, the difficulty to Catholics in a country not Catho- 
 lic, would be most materially lightened. Great Britain recog- 
 niies and is recognized by the United States ; the two^ powers 
 have ministers at each other's courts ; here is one standing pre- 
 vention of serious quarrels. Misunderstandings between the two 
 co-ordinate powers may arise ; but there follow explanations, re- 
 movals of the causes of offense, acts of restitution. In actual 
 collisions, there are conferences, compromises, arbitrations. Now 
 the point to observe here is, that in such cases neither party gives 
 up its abstract rights, but neither party practicallv insists on 
 them. And each party thinks itself in the right in the particular 
 case, protests .against any other view, but still concedes. Neither 
 party says, "I will not make it up with you, till you draw an in- 
 telligible line between your domain and mine.' I suppose in 
 the Geneva arbitration, though we gave way, we still thought 
 that, in our conduct in the American civil war, we had acted 
 within our rights. 1 say all this in answer to Mr. Gladstone's 
 challenge to us to draw the line between the Pope's domain and 
 the State's domain in civil or political questions. Many a pri- 
 vate American, 1 suppose, lived in London and Liverpool, all 
 through the corresponaence between our Foreign Office and the 
 
 government of the United States, and Mr. Gladstone never ad- 
 ressed any expostulation to them, or told them they had lost 
 their moral fre^om because they took part with their own gov- 
 ernment. The French, when their late war began, did sweep 
 their German sojourners out of France, (the number, as J recol- 
 lect, was very great,) but they were not considered to have done 
 themselves much credit by such an act. When we went to war 
 with Russia, the English in St Petersburg made an address, I 
 think, to the Emperor, asking for his protection, and he gave it; — 
 I do n't suppose they pledged themselves to the Russian view of 
 the war, nor would he have called them slaves instead of patriots, 
 if they had refused to do so. Suppose England were to send her 
 ironclads to support Italy against the Pope and his allies, 
 English Catholics would be very indignant; they would take paH 
 with tiie Pope before the war began ; they would use all constitu- 
 
TO 
 
 PIfim ALLMIUICCI. 
 
 iional meuis to hindoT it; but who belieTea tliat, when they were 
 Moe in the war, their action would be any thing eke than 
 prayers and exertions for a termination of it? What reason is 
 there for saying that they would commit themselves to any stop 
 of a treasonable nature, any more than loyal Germans, had they 
 ioea allowed to remain in France? Yet, because those Germans 
 wwild not relinquish their allegiance to their country, Mr. Glad- 
 stone, were he consistent, would at once send them adrift. 
 
 Of course it will be said that in these cases, there is no double 
 aiegiance, and again that the German Government did not call 
 upon them, as the Pope mi^ht call upon English Catholics, nay, 
 eommand them, to take a side; but mj argument at least shows 
 this, that till there comes to us a special, direct command from 
 the Pope to oppose our country, we need not be said to have 
 " placed our loyaltv and civil duty at the mercy of another," p, 
 45. It is strange tnat a great statesman, versed in the new and 
 inie philosophy of compromise, instead of taking a practical view 
 of the actual situation, should proceed a^inst us, like a Professor 
 in the sehools, with the "parade" of his "relentless" (and may 
 I add '•rusiy"?) "logic," p. 23. 
 
 I say, till the Pope told us to eiert ourselves for his cause in a 
 quarrel with this country, as in the time of the Armada, we need 
 not attend to an abstract and hypothetical difficulty:^ — ^then, and 
 not till then. I add, as before, that if the Holy See were frankly 
 leeognized by Encjland, as other Sovereign Powers are, direct 
 quariehi between the two powers would in this age of the world 
 be rare indeed ; and still rarer, their becoming so energetic and 
 uripsnt as to descend into the heart of the community, and to dis- 
 tarb the consciences and the family unity of private Catholics. 
 
 But now, lastly, let us suppose one of these extraordinary cases 
 of direct and open hostility between the two powers actually to 
 mmr; — here, first, we must bring befbre us the state of the case. 
 Of course, we must recollect, on the one hand, that Catholics are 
 not only bound to allegiance to the British Crown, but have spe- 
 cial privileges as citisena, can meet together, speak and pass reso- 
 lutions, can vote for members of Parliament, and sit in Parlia- 
 ment, and can hold office, all which are denied to foreigners 
 sojourning among us; while, on the other hand, there is the 
 authority of the Pope, which, though not "absolute" even in re- 
 ligious matters, as Mr. Gladstone would have it to be, has a call, 
 a supreme call, on our obedience. Certainly in the event of such 
 a ooilision of jurisdictions, there are cases in which we should 
 ob^ the Pope and disobey the State. Suppose, for instance, an 
 Aet was passed in Parliament, bidding Catnolics to attend Pro- 
 testant service every week, and the Pope distinctly told us not to 
 d0 BO, for it was to violate our duty to our faith:— T should obey 
 the Pope and not the Law. It will be said by Mr. Gladstone, that 
 sueh a case is impossible. I know it is; but why ask me for what 
 I should do in extreme and utterly improbable cases such as this, 
 if my answer can not help bearing the character of an axiom? 
 It is not my fault that I must deal m truisms. The circumferen- 
 m§ of State jnriedictioD and of Papal are for the most part quite 
 
 DUnnBD ALLfiOUNOK. 
 
 71 
 
 apart ftom each other ; there are just some few degrees out of the 
 360 in which they intersect, and Mr. Gladstone, instead of letting 
 these cases of intersection alone, till they occur actually, asks me 
 what I should do if I found myself placed in the space intersected. 
 If I must answer then, I should say distinctly that did the State 
 tell me in a question of worship to do what the Pope told me not 
 to do, I should obey the Pope, and should think it no sin if I used 
 all the power and the influence I possessed as a citizen to prevent 
 such a Bill passing the Legislature, and to effect its repeal if it 
 
 ^at now, on the other ha™,. cooM the case eve, occur, in which 
 I should act with the Civil Power, and not with the Pope? Now, 
 here again, when I begin to imagine instances. Catholics will cry 
 out (as Mr. Gladstone in the case I supposed, cried out in the inter- 
 est of the other side), that instances never can occur. I know they 
 can not ; I kndw the Pope never can do what I am going to sup- 
 pose ; but then, since it can not possibly happen in fact, there is 
 no harm in just saying what I should (hypothetically) do, if it 
 did happen. I say then in certain (impossible) cases I should 
 side, not with the Pope, but with the Civil Power. For instance, 
 I believe members of Parliament, or of the Privy Council, take an 
 oath that they would not acknowledge the right of succession of 
 a Prince of Wales, if he became a Catholic. I should not con- 
 sider the Pope could release me^from that oath had I bound my- 
 self by it. Of course, I might exert myself to the utmost to get 
 the act repealed which bound me ; f^n, if I could not, I might 
 retire from Parliament or office, and so rid myself of the engage- 
 ment I had made ; but I should be clear that, though the Pope 
 liade all Catholics to stand firm in one phalanx for the Catholic 
 Succession, still, while I remained in my office, or in my place in 
 Parliament, I could not do as he bade me. 
 
 Again, were I actually a soldier or salior in Her Majesty's serv- 
 ice, and sent to take part in a war which I could not in mjr con- 
 science see to be unjust, and should the Pope suddenly bid all 
 Catholic soldiers and sailors to retire from the service, here 
 
 Xin, taking the advice of others, as best I could, I should not 
 V him. 
 
 What is the use of forming impossible cases ? One can find 
 plenty of them in books of casuistry, with the answers attached 
 m respect to them. In an actual case, a Catholic would, of 
 course, not act simply on his own judgment; at the same time, 
 there are supposable cases in which he would be obliged to go by 
 it solely — vis., when his conscience could not be reconciled to any 
 of the courses of action proposed to him by others. 
 
 In support of what I have been saying, I refer to one or two 
 weighty authorities : — 
 
 Cardinal Turrecremata says: — "Although it clearly follows 
 from the circumstance that the Pope can err at times, and com- 
 mand things which must not be done, that we are not to be sim- 
 ply obedient to him in all things, that does not show that he 
 must not be obeyed by all when his commands are good. To 
 know in what cases he is to be obeyed and in what not . . . 
 
73 
 
 BITIIIID AMMiUMm. 
 
 OOKSCUBKCE. 
 
 73 
 
 II is iMd in the Acta of tb« Apostlea, 'One ought to obey God 
 rttther than man ; ' therefore, were the Pope to command any 
 tiling against Holy Scripture, or the articles of faith, or the 
 truth of the Sacraments, or the commands of the natural or dl- 
 Tine laws, he ought not to be obeyed, but in such commands to be 
 passed over (despiciendus)," Summ, de EccL, pp. 47, 8. 
 
 Bellarmine, speaking of resisting the Pope, says :— " In order 
 to resist and defend oneself no authority is req^uired. . . . 
 Shiiraim, as it is lawful to resist the Pope, if he assaulted a 
 man's person, so it is lawful to resist him if he assaulted souls, 
 m troubled the state (turbanti rempublicam), and much more if 
 he strove to destroy the Church. It is lawlul, I say, to resist 
 him, bv not doing what he commands, and hindering ^e execu- 
 tion of his will," de Mom. Pont., ii. 29. 
 
 Archbishop Kenrick says:— "His power was given for edifica- 
 tion, not for destruction. If he uses it from, the love of domina- 
 tion (quod absit) scarcely will he meet with obedient popular 
 Uon."-^Theol. Moral, t i., p. 158. 
 
 When, then, Mr. Gladstone asks Catholics how they can obey 
 the Queen and yet obey the Pope, since it may happen that the 
 commands of the two authorities may clash, I answer, that it is 
 my mh, both to obey the one and to obey the other, but that 
 there is no rule in this world without exceptions, and if either 
 the Pope or the Queen demanded of me an "Absolute Obedience," 
 he or sne would be transgressing the laws of human nature and 
 huilian society. I give an absolute obedience to neither. Fur- 
 ther, if ever this double allegiance pulled me in contrary ways, 
 which in this age of the world I think it never will, then I 
 ■hiMld decide according to the particular case, which is beyond 
 all rule, and must be decided on its own merits. 1 should look 
 to see what theologians could do for me, what the Bishops and 
 dtwy ■fwind me, what my confessor ; what friends whom I re- 
 TerSi ; and if, aller all. I could not take their view of the matter, 
 then I must rule myself by my own judgment and my own con- 
 Mience. But all this is hypothetical and unreal. 
 
 Here, of course, it will be objected to me, that I am, after all, 
 having recourse to the Protestant doctrine of Private Judgment; 
 not so; it is the Protestant doctrine that Private Judgment is our 
 ordinary guide in religious matters, but I use it, in the case in 
 question, in very extraordinary and rare, nay, impossible emer- 
 gencies. Do not the highest Tories thus defend the substitution 
 of William for James U. ? It is a great mistake to suppose our 
 ■tale in the Catholic Church is so entirely subjected to rule and 
 qptem, that we are never thrown upon what is called by divines 
 "ii© Providence of God." The teaching and assistance of the 
 Church does not supply all conceivable needs, but those which 
 are ordinary; thus, for instance, the sacraments are necessary 
 for dying in the grace of God and hope of heaven, yet, when 
 thej can not be got, acts of hope, faith, and contrition, with the 
 dtnre for those aids which the dyin^ man has not, will convey 
 in, taiitance what those aids ordinarily convey. And so a Cat- 
 echumen, not yet baptized, may be saved by liis purpose and 
 
 nrmiaration to receive the rite. And so, again, though " Out of 
 the Church there is no salvation," this does not hold in the case 
 of good men who are in invincible iterance. And so it is also 
 in ttie case of our ordinations; ChiUingworth and Macaulay say 
 that it is morally impossible that we should have kept up for 
 1 800 years an Apostolical succession of ministers without some 
 separation of the chain ; and we in answer say that however true 
 this may be humanly speaking, there has been a special Provi- 
 dence over the Church to secure it. Once more, how else could 
 private Catholics save their souls when there was a Pope and 
 Anti-popes, each severally claiming their allegiance? 
 
 {5. CONSOIEirOE. 
 
 It seems, then, that there are extreme cases in which Con- 
 science may come into collision with the word of a Pope, and is 
 to be followed in spite of that word. Now I wish to place this 
 proposition on a broader basis, acknowledged by all Catholics, 
 an<f in order to do this satisfactorily, as I began with the proph- 
 ecies of Scripture and the primitive Church, when I spoke of the 
 Pope*s prerogatives, so now I must begin with the Creator and 
 His creature, when I would draw out the prerogatives and the su- 
 preme authority of Conscience. 
 
 I say, then, that the Supreme Being is of a certain character, 
 which, expressed in human lan^age, we call ethical. He has the 
 attributes of justice, truth, wisdom, sanctity, benevolence, and 
 mercy, as eternal characteristics in His Nature, the very Law of 
 His being, identical with Himself; and next, when He became 
 Creator, He implanted this Law, which is Himself, in the intelli- 
 gence of all His rational creatures. The Divine Law, then, is the 
 rule of ethical truth, the standard of right and wrong, a sover- 
 eign, irreversible, absolute authority in the presence of men and 
 Angels. " The eternal law," says St. Augustine, " is the Divine 
 Reason or Will of God, commanding the observance, forbidding 
 the disturbance, of the natural order of things." "The natural 
 law," says St. Thomas, " is an impression of the Divine Light in 
 us, a participation of the eternal law in the rational creature." 
 (Gousset, Theol Moral, t, 1, pp. 24, etc ) This law, a^ appre- 
 hended in the minds of individual men, is called " conscience ; " 
 and, though it may suffer refraction in passing into the intellect- 
 ual medium of each, it is not tiiereby so affected as to lose its 
 character of being the Divine Law, but still has, as such, the pre- 
 rogative of commanding obedience. "The Divine I^aw," says 
 Cardinal Gousset, " is the supreme rule of actions; our thoughts, 
 desires, words, acts, all that man is, is subject to the domain of 
 the law of God ; and this law is the rule of our conduct by means 
 of our conscience. Hence it is never lawful to go against our 
 eonscience; as the Fourth Lateran Council says, 'Quidquid fit 
 contra conscientiam, aedificat ad gehennam.' " 
 
 This, I know, is very different from the view ordinarilj tiflwn 
 of it, both by the science and literature, and by the public opm- 
 ' 7 
 
74 
 
 CaXflCIB^*CB. 
 
 OONSGIEKCB. 
 
 75 
 
 Ion, of this day. II It founded on tlie doctrino that oonsoience k 
 Iha Toioe of Qod, whoiMUi it is fiishionable on all hands now to 
 oonttdoT it in one way or another a creation of man. Of oouree, 
 there are great and broad exceptions to this statement It is not 
 true of many or moat religious bodies of men ; especially not of 
 ihair teachers and ministers. When Anglloans, Wesleyans, the 
 Yirions Presbyterian sects in Scotland, and other denominations 
 among ns, speftk of conscience, they mean what we mean, the 
 ▼oice of Ood in the nature and heart of man, is distinct from the 
 Toioe of Bevelation. They si>eak of a principle planted within na 
 before we have had any training, though sucn training and ezpe- 
 nance is necessary for its strength, growth, and due formation. 
 They consider it a constituent element of the mind, as our per- 
 ception of other ideas may be, as our powers of reasoning, as our 
 sense of order and the beautiliil, and our other intellectual en- 
 dowments. They consider it, as Catholics consider it, to be the 
 internal witness of both the existence and the law of Qod. They 
 HiiiilL it holds of God, and not of man, as an Angel walking on 
 the earth would be no citizen or dependent of the Civil Power. 
 They wouM not allow, any more than we do, that it could be re- 
 ■olfM Into any eombination of principles in our nature, more ele- 
 moitary than itself; nay, though It may be called, and is, a law 
 of the mind, they would not grant that it was nothing more ; I 
 mean, that it was not a dictate, nor conveyed the notion of re- 
 sponsibility, of doty, of a threat and a promise, with a vividness 
 which discriminated it from all other constituents of our nature. 
 
 This, at least, is how I read the doctrine of Protestants as well 
 as of Citholics. The rule and measure of duty is not utility, nor 
 expedience, nor the happiness of the greatest number, nor Stato 
 convenience, nor fitness, order, and the pulchrum. Conscience is 
 not a longsighted selfishness, nor a desire to be consistent with 
 onewlC but it is a messenger from Him, who, in nature and in 
 moo, speaks to us behind a veil, and teaches and rules us by 
 Mit renresentatives. Conscience is the aboriginal Vicar of Christ, 
 a propnet in its informations, a monarch in its peremptoriness, 
 a priest in Its blessings and anathemas, and, even though the 
 eternal priesthood throughout the Church could cease to be, in 
 It tho aaoerdotal principle would remain and would have a swav. 
 
 Words such as these are idle empty verbiage to the great world 
 of philosophy now. All thronsh my day there has been a reso- 
 liiie wwiupe, I had almost said conspiracy, against the rights of 
 conscience, as I have described ii Xjiterature and science have 
 been embodied in great institutions in order to put it down. 
 Hoble bulMini^ have been reared as fortresses against that spirit- 
 ual, invisible influence which is too subtle for science ana too 
 prelbund for literature. ' Chairs in Universities have been made 
 the seats of an antagonist tradition. Public writers, day aller day, 
 have indoctrinated the minds of innumerable readers with theories 
 subversive of its claims. As in Roman times, and in the middle 
 age, its supremacy vras assailed by the arm of physical force, so 
 BOW the intellect is put in operation to sap the foundations of a 
 power which the sword coula not destroy. We are told that con* 
 
 science is but a twist in prhnitiTe and untutored man; that its 
 dictate is an imagination; that the very notion of guiltiness, 
 which that dictate enforces, is simply irrational, for how can 
 there possibly be freedom of will, how can there be consequent 
 responsibility, in that infinite eternal network of cause and effect, 
 in which we helplessly lie ? and what retribution have we to 
 fear, when we have had no real choice to do good or evil ? ^ 
 
 So much for philosophers ; n6w let us see what is the notion of 
 conscience in this day in the popular mind. There, no more 
 than in the intellectual world, does "conscience" retain the oM, 
 true, Catholic meaning of the word. There, too, the idea, the 
 presence, of a Moral Ofovemor is far awayfrom the use of it, fire- 
 mient and emphatic as that use of it is. When men advocate the 
 rights of conscience, they in no sense mean the rights of the 
 Creator, nor tie duty to Him, in thought and deed, of the 
 creature; but the right of thinking, sneaking, writing, and act- 
 ing, accordinjz to their judgment or their humor, without any 
 thought of God at all. They do not even pretend to go by 
 any poral rule, but they demand, what they think is an English- 
 man's prerogative, to be his own master in all things, and to 
 profess what he pleases, asking no one's leave, and accounting 
 priest or preacher, speaker or writer, unutterably impertinent, 
 who dares to say a word against his goin^ to perdition,^ if he 
 like it, in his own way. Conscience has rights oecause it has 
 duties ; but in this age, with a large portion of the public, it is 
 the very right and freedom of conscience to dispense with con- 
 science, to Ignore a Lawgiver and Judge, to be independent of 
 unseen obligations. It becomes a license to take up any or no 
 religion, to take up this or that and let it go again, to go to 
 Church, to go to chapel, to boast of being above all reli^ons, and 
 to be an impartial critic of each of them. Conscience is a stem 
 monitor, but in this century it has been superseded by a coun- 
 terfeit, which the eighteen centuries prior to it never heard of, 
 and could not have mistaken for it, if they had. It is the right 
 of self-will. 
 
 And now I shall turn aside for a moment to show how it is 
 that the Popes of our century have been misunderstood by Eng- 
 lish people, as if they really were speaking against conscience in 
 the true sense of the word, when in fact they were speaking against 
 it in the various false senses, philosophical or popular, which in this 
 day are put upon the word. The present Pope, in his Encyclical of 
 1864, Quanta curd, speaks, (as will come before us in the next 
 section,) against "liberty of conscience," and he refers to his 
 predecessor, Gregory XVI., who, in his Mir art t?o«, calls it a 
 " deliramentum." It is a rule in formal ecclesiastical proceed- 
 ings, as I shall have occasion to notice lower down, when books 
 or authors are condemned, to use the very words of the book or 
 author, and to condemn the words in that particular sense which 
 they have in their context and their drift, not in the literal, not 
 in the religious sense, such as the Pope might recognize, were 
 they in another book or author. To take a familiar parallel, 
 among many which occur daily: Protestants speak of the 
 
•I( 
 
 CXIXtOII!f<nL 
 
 " BtteMd Relbnnttioii ; " CWhoHiw too tdk of " ilie BefomaHodT 
 thoagii Hiaydo not e»ll it blmsed. T«t mmj " wfomii^oii •• 
 might, from the veiy meftniiig of the word, to 06 good, not bad; 
 80 that Cfttholice seem to be implying a eiilo|^ on an e?ent which, 
 at the same time, they oonaider a aarpossing evil. Here, then, 
 they are taking the word and nsinx it m the popular sense of it, 
 not in the Catholic. They would" say, if they expressed their 
 fuU meaning, "the to-col/ed refonnation." In like manner, if 
 the Pope condemned "the refonnation," it would be utterly so- 
 phlatioal to say in conseqnenee that he had declared himself 
 agpunsl all reforms; yet diis is how Mr. Qladstone treats Mm, 
 beemse he speaka of (so-called) liberty of consoknce. lb make 
 this distinction dear, m, between the CSatholio sense of the word 
 "conscience," and that sense in which the Pope condemns it, 
 we find in the Btcueit dea AlhmHmu, ete., the words accompan- 
 ied with Quotatlon-niarka, both in Pope Gregory's and Pope Pnis's 
 Bnqyelicals. thus:— Oregory's, "Bx hoc putidis simo *indiiferw 
 entismi* fonte," (mind. " indifferentismi '^ is under onotation- 
 marks, because the Pope wOl not make himself answerable for so 
 unelassical a word) "absurda ilia fluit ac erronea sententia, sen 
 potiua deliramentum, aisetendam esse ac yindicandam enilibel 
 • libertatem conscienti^r' " And that of Pius, " hand timent er- 
 roneam illam fovere opinlonem a Qregorio XVI. delirammitum 
 ftnpellatam. nimirum ' libertatem oonscientin' esse proprium cuiu^ 
 ctnqne hominis ins." Both Popes certainly scoff at the " so-ealled 
 liberty of conscience," but there is no scoffini of any Pope, in 
 formal dmniBentB addressed to the faithful atlar^, at that most 
 ieiiipa doctrine, the right and the duty of following that Divine 
 Authority, the voice of oonaoicnce, on which in truth the Church 
 
 Ijlill'lUll m I'fl iltlllfc 
 
 80 indeed it is ; did the Pope speak against Conscience in the 
 true sense of the word, he would commit a suicidal act. He 
 would be cutting the ground from under his feet. His very mis- 
 sion is to prockim the moral law, and to protect and strengthen 
 that " Light which enlighteneth every man that cometh into the 
 WOtJd." On tha law of coiscience and its sacrcdness arefounded 
 boA his authority in theory and his power in fiici Whether 
 this or that particular Pope in this bad world always kept this 
 ffmM truth in view in all he did, it is for history .to tell. I am 
 considetiMe here the Papacy in its office and its duties, and in re^ 
 erence to those who acknowledge its claims. They are not bound 
 Iq^ ft Pope'spersonal character or private acts, but by his forsMl 
 teaialting. Tlius viewing his position, we shall find tha* it is by 
 «ha mniversal sense of right and wrong, the consciousness of 
 transgression, the pangs ofguilt, and the dread of retribution, as 
 first principles, deeply lodged in the hearts of men, thus and only 
 thus, that he has gained his footing in the worid and achieved 
 his success. It is nis claim to come from the Divine Lawriver, 
 in order to elicit, protect, and enforce those tmths which AeXaw- 
 givar has sown in our very nature — it is this and this only — thai 
 18 the explanation of his length of life more than antediluvian. 
 The championship of the Moral Law and of conscience is his 
 
 OOHSODESrOE. 
 
 77 
 
 raCMm £i$re. The fiwst of his mission is the answer to the oom- 
 nlaints of those who feel the insufficiency of the Mjoral li^t; 
 •nd the insufficiency of that light is the justification of his mission. 
 
 All sciences, except the science of Religion, have their cer- 
 tainty in themselves; as far as thej are sciences, they consist of 
 necessary conclusions fifom undeniable premises, or of phenom- 
 ena manipulated into general truths by an irresistible induction. 
 But the s'ense of right and wrong, which is the first element in 
 reHinon, is so delloate. so fitful, so easily pujzled, obscured, per- 
 Terted so subtle in its argumentative metoods, so impressible by 
 education, so biased by pride and passion, w unsteady m its 
 fliirht, that, in ib» strug^e for existence amid various exercises 
 and triumphs of the human intellect, this sense is at once the 
 highest of aU teaohers, yet the least luminous; and the Church, 
 the Pope, the Hierarchy are, in the Divine purpose, the supply of 
 ftn urgent demand. Natural ReUgion, certain as are its grounds 
 and i£ doctrines as addressed to thoughtful, serious minds, needs, 
 in order that it may speak to mankind with effect and subdue the 
 world, to be sustained and completed by Revelation. . ^ , 
 
 In saying all of this, of course I must not be supposed to be 
 Emiting the Revelation of which the Church is tbe keeper to a 
 mere republication of the Natural Law; but sUU it is true, that, 
 though Revelation is so distinct from the teaching of nature and 
 beyond it, yet it is not independent of it, nor without relations 
 towards it, but is its complement, re-assertion, issue, embodiment, 
 and interpretation. The Pope, who comes of Revelation, has no 
 jurisdiction over Nature. If; under the plea of his revealed pre- 
 Foeatives, he neglected his mission of preaching truth, justice, 
 mercy and peace, much more, if he trampled on the consciences 
 of his subjects— if he had done so all along, as Protestants say, 
 then he could not have lasted all these many centuries Wl iiow, 
 io as to be made the mark of their reprobation. Dean Milman 
 has told us above, how foithful he was to his duty m the medieval 
 time, and how successfiiL Afterwards, for a while the P^^ 
 chair was filled by men. who gave themselves up to luxury, se- 
 curity, and a Pagan kind of Christianity; and we all know what 
 a moral earthquake was the consequence, and how the Church 
 lost, thereby, and hw lost to this day, one-half of Europe. The 
 Popes oould not have recovered from so tornble a cataetrophe, as 
 they have done, had they not returned to their first and better 
 ways, and the grave lesson of the past is in itself the guarantee 
 
 of the future. , , 
 
 Such is the relation of the ecclesiaatical power to the human 
 oonscience :— however, another view may be taken of it. It may 
 l)e said that no one doubts that the Pope^s power reste on those 
 weaknesses of human nature, that religious sense, which in an- 
 cient days Lucretius noted as the cause of the worst ills of our 
 race; that he uses it dexterously, forming under shelter of it a 
 folse code of morals for his own aggrandizement and tvrannv; 
 and that thus oonscience becomes his creature and his slava, do- 
 ing, aa if on a divine sanction, his will ; so tiial in the absteaet. 
 kkimd, and in idea it it free, but never free in foot, never M» to 
 
iito ft iight of its own, indeponient of him, ftny more than 
 biida whose wings are clipped ;— moreover, that, if it were able 
 to exert a will of its own, then there would ensue a collision 
 more unmanageable than that between the Church and the State, 
 as being in one and 4lie same subject matter— viz., religion; for 
 what would become of the Pope s "absolute authority," as Mr. 
 Gladstone calls i% if the private conscience had an absolute au- 
 thoritr also 7 
 1 wish to answer this important objection distinc%. 
 
 1. First, I am using the word ''consoienoe " in the high sense 
 in which I have alrei% ezniained it; not as a fancy or an opin- 
 ion, but as a dutiful obedienee to what claims to be a divine 
 voice, speaking within us. 
 
 2. Secondly, I observe that conscience is not a judgment upon, 
 any speouktive truth, any abstract doctrine, but bears imme- 
 diately on conduct, on something to be done or not done. " Con- 
 silience," says St. Thomas, " is the practical judgment or dictate 
 el reason, by which we judge what Ate ei nunc is to be done as 
 beii^ good, or to be avoided as evil." Hence conscience can not 
 come into direct collision with the Church's or the Pope's in- 
 faUibiliiy ; which is enga^ only on general propositions, or the 
 eondenination of propositions simply particular. 
 
 3. Wext, 1 observe that, conscience being a practical dictate, ft 
 eoiisiiin is possible between it and the Pope's authority only 
 when the Po^ legislates, or gives particular orders, and the like. 
 But a Pope is not infallible in his laws, nor in his commands, 
 nor in his acts of state, nor in his administration, nor in his 
 publio policy. Let it be observed that the Vatican Council has 
 fell him just as it found him here. Mr. Qladstone's language on 
 this point is to me quite unintelligible. Why, instead of using 
 vague terms, does he not point out precisely the very words by 
 whieh the Council has made the Pope in his acte infallible 7 In- 
 
 then 
 
 come acts of excommunication, as if the Pope could not make 
 mistakes in this field of action. He says, p. 35, "It may be 
 sought to plead that the Pope does not propose to invade the 
 country, to seize Woolwich, or bum Portsmouth. He vrill only, 
 at the worst, excommunicate opponents. ... Is this a good 
 answer 7 Alter all, even in the Middle Ages it was not by the 
 direct action of fleets and armies of their own that the Popes 
 contended with kings who were relhustory; it was mainly by in- 
 terdicts," etc. What have excommunication and interdict to do 
 with Infiinibility7 Was St. Peter infallible on that occasion at 
 Antloch when St Paul withstood him 7 vras Si Victor inMlible 
 when he separated Irom his communion the Asiatic Churches 7 
 or liiberius when in like manner he excommunicated Athanasius 7 
 And. to come to later times, was Gregory XIII., when he had a 
 medal struck in honor of the Bartholomew massacre 7 or Paul 
 IV. in his conduct towards Elizabeth 7 or Sextus V. when he 
 Milled the Armada? or Urban YIII. when he peneeuted Qal- 
 
 OONSGIENCB. 
 
 n 
 
 ileo7 No Catholic ever pretends that these Popes were inlallible 
 in these acts. Since then infellibility alone could block the ex- 
 ercise of conscience, and ttee Pope is not infaUible in that sub- 
 ject-matter in which conscience is of supreme authority, no dead- 
 lock, such as is implied in the objection which I am answering, 
 ^san take place between conscience and the Pope. 
 
 4. But, of course, I have to say again, lest I should be mis- 
 understood, that when I speak of Conscience, I mean conscience 
 truly so called. When it has the right of opposing the supreme, 
 though notinfeUible Authority of the Pope, it must be something 
 more than that miserable counterfeit which, as I have said above, 
 now goes by the name< If in a particular case it is to be taken 
 as a sacred and sovereign monitor, its dictate, in order to prevail 
 ■gainst the voice of the Pope, must follow upon serious thought, 
 prayer, and all available means of arriving at a right judgment 
 on the matter in question. And further, obedience to the Pope 
 is what is called "in possession; " that is, the onus prohandi of 
 establishing a case against him lies, as in all cases of exception, 
 on the side of conscience. Unless a man is able to say to him- 
 self, as in the presence of God, that he must not, and dare not, 
 act upon the Papal injunction, he is bound to obey it, and would 
 commit a great sin in disobeying it. PHmA fade it is his 
 bounden duty, even from a sentiment of loyalty, to believe the 
 Pope right and to act accordingly. He must vanquish that mean, 
 ungenerous, selfish, vulgar spirit of his nature, which, at the 
 very first rumor of a command, places itself in opposition to the 
 Superior who gives it, asks itself whether he is not exceeding his 
 right, and rejoices, in a moral and practical matter, to commence 
 with skepticism. He must have no willful determination to ex- 
 ercise a right of thinking, saying, doing just what he pleases, the 
 question of truth and folsehood, right and wrong, the duty if 
 possible of obedience, the love of speaking as his Head speaks, 
 and of standing in all cases on his Head's side, bein^ simply dw- 
 caided. If this necessary rule were observed, collisions between 
 the Pope's authority and the authority of conscience would be 
 very rare. On the other hand, in the feet that, after all, in ex- 
 traordinary cases, the conscience of each individual is free, we 
 have a safeguard and security, were security necessary (which is 
 a most gratuitous supposition), that no Pope ever will be able, 
 18 the objection supposes, to create a fiJse conscience for his ovm 
 
 Now, I shall end this part of the subject, for I have not done 
 with it altogether, by appealing to various of our theologians in 
 evidence that, in what I have been saying, I have not misrepre- 
 sented Catholic doctrine on these important points. 
 
 That is, on the duty of obeying our conscience at all hazards. 
 
 I have already quoted the words which Cardinal Gousset has 
 adduced from me Fourth Lateran: that "He who acts against 
 his conscience loses his soul." This dictum is brought out with 
 lingular fullness and force in the moral treatises of theologians. 
 The celebrated school known as the Sahnanticenses, or Carmel- 
 ites of Salamanca, lays down the broad proposition, that con- 
 
m 
 
 MitipM is CTer to be obeyed whether it tells truly or erroneously, 
 ftni Hmt, whether the error is the &ult of the ^rsun thus erring 
 or not* They say that this opinion is certain, and refer, as 
 agreeing with them, to St Thomas, St. BonaTentura, Caietan, 
 Yasques, Burandas, K&Tarrus, Corduba, Layman, Escobar, and 
 fMurieen others. Two of them even say this opinion is dc fide* 
 Of course if he is culpable in being in error, which he would 
 liave escaped, had he been more in earnest, for that error he it 
 aniwerable to Qod, but still he must act aooording to that error, 
 while he is in it, because he in full sincerity thiola the errof to 
 bO' truth. 
 
 Thus, if the Pope told the Endish Bishops to order their 
 priests to stir themselTes energetically in faTor of teetotalism, and 
 a particular priest was fully persuaded that abstinence from 
 win% etc., was practicailr a Gnostic error, and therefore felt he 
 colli not so exert himself without sin ; or sunpose there was a 
 FajNd Older to hold lotteries in each mission tor some religious 
 oljieet, and a priest could say in God's si^ht that he belicTea lot- 
 itnes to be morally wrong, that priest in either of these cases 
 wouM commit a sin hie et nunc it be obeyed the Pope, whether 
 he was right or wrong in his opinion, an(f, if wrong, although he 
 had not taken proper pains to get at the truth of the matter. 
 
 Busenbaum, of the Society of Jesus, whose work 1 have already 
 had occasion to notice, writes thus : — "A heretic, as long as he 
 judges his sect to be more or equally deserving of belief, has no 
 obluation to believe [in the Church.j" And he continues* 
 " When men who have been brought up in heresy, are persuaded 
 from bo^^hood that we impugn and attack the word of God, that 
 we are idolaters, pestilent aeceivers, and therefore are to be 
 ihianed as pestilences, they can not, while this persuasion lasts, 
 with a sale conscience, hear us."-! 1, p. 54. 
 » Antonio Corduba, a Spanish Franciscan, states the doctrine 
 with still more point, because he makes mention of Superiors : 
 "In no manner is it lawful to act against conscience, even though 
 a Law, or a Superior commands it.' — De ComHmL, p. 138. 
 
 And the French Dominican, Natalls Alexander: — "If, in the 
 judgment of conscience, though a miitaken conscience, a man is 
 persuaded that what his Superior commands is displeasing to 
 God, he is bound not to obey. — Theol. t 2, p. 32. 
 
 The word "Superior" certainly includes the Pope; but, to 
 bring out this point clearly, Cardinal Jacobatius in his authorita- 
 Hm work on Councils, which is contained in Labbe's CoHection of 
 them, introduces the Pope by name : — ** If it were doubdnl," he 
 says, " whether a precept [of the Pope] be a sin or not, we must 
 determine thus :— 4h«t, if he to whom the precept is addressed has 
 A conscientious sense that it Is a sin and ii^ustice, first it his duly 
 
 fHB ENCYCLICAL OF 1864. 
 
 SI 
 
 *** Aliqui opinantur quod conscientla erronea non oMIgat; Se- 
 enndam sententiam, et cerlam. asserentem esse peccatum d»oordare 
 4 ouBSeientiA erronel, invlndbili ant vindbili, tenet D. Thomas ; 
 
 ?uem sequuntur omnea Scholastld."— 7^heo<. MomL U y., p. 12, id. 
 118. 
 
 to put off that sense ; but, if he can not, nor conform himsdif to 
 the judgment of the Pope, in that case it is his dufr^ to follow 
 his own private conscience, and patiently to bear it, if the Pope 
 punishes him." — lib, iv., p. 241. ^ 
 
 Would it not be well for Mr. Gladstone to bring passages from 
 our recognized authors as confirmatory of his view of our teach' 
 ing, as those which I have quoted are destructive of it? and they 
 must be passages declaring, not only that the Pope is ever to be 
 obeyed, but that there are no exceptions to the rule, for exceptions 
 must be in all concrete matters. \ 
 
 I add one remark. Certainly, if I am obliged to bring reli^on 
 into after-dinner toasts, (which indeed does not seem quite th6 
 thing) I shall drink,— to the Pope, if you please,— still, to Con- 
 science first, and to the Pope afterwards. 
 
 2 6. The Enotcligal of 1864. 
 
 The subject of Conscience leads us to the Encyclical, which is 
 one of the special objects of Mr. Gladstone's attack j and to do 
 justice to it, I must, as in other sections, begin from an earlier 
 
 date than 1864. , , ,. . 
 
 Modern Rome, then, is not the only place where the traditions 
 of the old Empire, its principles, provisions, and practices, have 
 been held in honor; they have been retained, tney have been 
 maintained in substance, as the basis of European civilisation 
 down to this day, and notobly among ourselves. In the Anglican 
 establishment the king took the place of the Pope ; but the Pope's 
 principles kept possession. When the Pope was ignored, the re- 
 btions between Pope and king were ignored too, and therefore 
 we had nothing to do any more with the old Imperial laws which 
 shaped those rehbtions ; but the old idea of a Christian Polity was 
 still in force. It was a first principle with England that there 
 was one true religion, that it was inherited from on earlier time, 
 that it came of direct Revelation, that it was to be supported to 
 the disadvantage, to say the least, of other religions, of private 
 judgment, of personal conscience. The Puritans held these prin- 
 ciples as firmly as the school of Laud. As to the Scotch Presby- 
 terians, we read enough about them in the pages of Mr. Buckle. 
 The Stuarts went, but still their principles suffered no dethrone- 
 ment; their action was restrained, but they were still in foroe, 
 when this century opened. 
 
 It is curious to see now strikingly in this matter the proverb has 
 been fulfilled, "Out of sight, out of mind." Men of the present 
 
 Sneration, born in the new civilisation, are shocked to witness m 
 e abiding Papal system the words, ways, and works of their 
 grandfiithers. In my own lifetime has that old world been alive, 
 and has gone its way. Who will say that the plea of conscienoe 
 was as effectual, sixty years ago, as it is now in Endand, for the 
 toleration of every sort of fancy religion ? Had the Press alwaji 
 that wonderful elbow-room which it has now? Might puUio 
 .gatherings be held, and speeches made, and republicanism avowed 
 
 .t*ir,— ■*rtaiii''E''iifftf'Uti»iiff€Lirtili»i.Ji'KJirf»n»i^^ 
 
IBB mmimMMs m 1864 
 
 in lh« ^atm ei Hm lig^nej, as m possible now ? Were ibe thor- 
 oughfiures oi>eii to monster processions at that date, and the squares 
 and parks at the meroy of Sunday manifestations ? Ck>iild savanU 
 li tiat day insinuate what their hearers mistook for atheism in 
 ■eientiio aesemblies» and artisans practice it in the centers of po- 
 itioal action T CJonM public prints, day after day, or week alter 
 week, carry on a war a^nst religion, natural and revealed, as now 
 ii Wm case? No; law or public opinion would not suffer it; we 
 may be wiser or better now, but we were then m the wake of the 
 Helf Koman Church, and had been so from the time of the Ke- 
 Ibrmaiion. We were faithful to the tradition of fifteen hundred 
 years. AH this was called Toryism, and men gloried in the name ; 
 now it is ealled Popery and reviled. 
 
 When I was young the State had a conscience, and the Chief 
 Jiallee of the day pronounced, not as a point of obsolete law, but 
 as an ener^ic, liTing truth, that Christianity was the law of the 
 luMi And by Christianity was meant pretty much what Bentham 
 ^ ealls Church-of-Englandism, its cry being the dinner toast, " Church 
 and kine." Bkclratone, though ne wrote a hundred years apo, 
 was heMt I believe, as an authority, on the state of the law in this 
 matter, up to the beginninjr of this century. On the supremacy 
 of Religion he writes as foUows, that is, as I have abridged him 
 for my purpose. 
 
 •'Tme beuef of a ftitnre slate of rewards and punishments, eto., 
 eto., . . . these are the mnd foundation of all judicial oaths. 
 AM m|oral evidence, all confidence in human veracity^ust be 
 weakened by irreligion, and overthrown by infideli^. Wherefore 
 1^ alfronts to Christiani^, or endeavors to depreciate its efficacy, 
 are highly deserving of nnman punishmeni It was enacted by 
 l^e statute of William III. that if an^ person educated in, and 
 hminff made profession of, the Christian religion, shall by wriV 
 in^ printing, teaching, or advised speaking, deny the Christian 
 iwaon to be true, or the Holy Scriptures to be of divine author- 
 ■%^'' or again in like manner, " iiany person educated in the 
 Cwistten religion shall by writing, etc., deny any one of the Per- 
 sons of the Holy Trinity to be God, or maintain that there are 
 more floii than one, he shall on the first offense be rendered in- 
 eapabto to hold any office or place of trust; and for the second, 
 be rendend incapable of bringing any action, being guardian, 
 executor, lecatee, or purchaser of lands, and shall suffisr three 
 jmm* impnsonment without bail. To give room, however, for 
 
 aientance, if, within four months after the first conviction, the 
 inqnent will in open court publicly renounce his error, he is 
 iisoliarged for that once from all disabilities." 
 
 Again: "Those who absent themselves from the divine worship 
 in the Established Church, through total irreliffion, and attend the 
 service of no other persuasion, forfeit one snilling to the poor 
 ttery Lord's day they so absent tiiemselves, and £») to the king, 
 if lliey continue such a default for a month together. And if they 
 keen any inmate, thus irreligiously disposed, in their houses, they 
 fiirleil »10 per month." 
 
 IMiior, ne lays down that "xeviling the otdinanoes of the 
 
 83 
 
 nm wsroYCLicAL o» 1864. 
 
 Chnrch is a crime of a much grosser nature than the other of 
 conformity; since it carries with it the utmost indeeency, arro- 
 ffance, and ingratitude;— indecency, by setting up private judgment 
 in opposition to public ; arrogance, by treating with contempt and 
 rudeness what has at least a better chance to be ri^ht than the 
 sinjgular notions of any particular man ; and ingratitude, by de- 
 nyug that indulgence and liberty of conscience to the members 
 of the national Church, which the retainers to every petty con- 
 venticle enjoy." 
 
 Once more : " In order to secure the Established Church a^i<^ 
 perils from nonconformists of all denominations, infidels, Turks, 
 Jews, heretics, papists, and sectaries, there are two bulwarks 
 erected, called the Corporation and Test Acts; by Ae former, no 
 person can be le^ly elected to any office relating to the govern- 
 ment of any city or corporation, unless, within a twelvemonth be- 
 fore, he has received the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, accord- 
 ing to the rites of the Church of England; . . the other, caUed 
 the Test Act, directs all officers, civil and military, to make the 
 declaration against transubstantiation within six months after ikeir 
 admission, and also within the same time to receive the sacrament 
 according to the usage of the Church of England." The same 
 test being undergone by all persons who desire to be naturalised, 
 the Jews also were excluded from the privileges of Protestant 
 churchmen. , 
 
 Laws, such as these, of course gave a tone to society, to aH 
 classes, high and low, and to the publications, periodical or other, 
 which represented public opinion. Dr. Watson, who was the lib- 
 eral prelate of his day, in his answer to Paine, calls him (unless 
 my memory betrays me) " a child of the devil and an enem^ of 
 all righteousness." Cumberland, a man of the world, (here again I 
 must trust to the memory of many past years) reproaches a Jewisir 
 writer for ingratitude in assailing, as ne seems to have done, a 
 tolerant reliSous establishment; and .Gibbon, an unbeliever, feels 
 himself at Bberty to look down on Priestly, whose "Sooinian 
 shield," he says, "has been repeatedly pierced by the mighty 
 spear of Horsley, and whose trumpet of sedition may at length 
 awake the magistrates of a free country." ^ ^ ^ 
 
 Such was the position of free opinion and dissenting worship m 
 England till ouite a recent era, when one after another the various 
 disabilities wnich I have been recounting, and many others be- 
 sides, melted away, like snow at spring-tide ; and we all wonder 
 how they could ever have been in force. The cause of this great 
 revolution is obvious, and its effect inevitable. Though I profess 
 to be an admirer of the principles now superseded, in theinselves, 
 mixed up as tiiey were wiUi the imperfections and evils incident 
 to every thing human, neverthele%8 I say frankly I do not see how 
 they could possibly be maintained in the ascendant. When the 
 intellect is cultivated, it is as certain that it will develop into a 
 thousand various shapes, as that infinite hues and tints and shades 
 of color will be reflected from the earth's surface, when the sun- 
 light touches it; and in matters of religion the more, by reason 
 of the extreme subtlety and abstruseness of the mental action 
 
""IW 
 
 moTOUOAL or 1864. 
 
 % wliiili iiij asA dtlwiliMi. Dmtng Oie ImI eeventy yms, 
 iiil one olftM of the ooBUBimltj, Hien aaotlier, lias Awakened up 
 U ikmght uid opinion. Their nmltifonn views on Musred enb- 
 jeeti neoemacily aftnted and found expression in the flOTeming 
 Older. The state in past time had a oonseience; George the 
 niiid hsd a eooseienee; bat there were other men at the head 
 nf affurs besides him with consciences, and thej spoke for f^n 
 besidfls thiiMilfes; and what was to be done, if he could not 
 work without them, and they oould not work with him, as itf 
 as leligioos qosstiiwi tame up at the Council-board? This 
 brought on a dsad4osk in the time of his suoosssor. The min- 
 istry of the day could not agree together in the policy or justice 
 •f keeping up the state of thinn which Blaekstone describes. 
 Tha Slate ou#it to hare a oonseienoe; but what if it happen to 
 hsTe half a dosen, or a score, or a hundred, in religious matters, 
 each diierent from each. I think Mr. Gladstone has brought out 
 the difficulties of the situation himself in his Autobiography. 
 Ho garerninent could be formed, if religious unanimity was a stfis 
 fiHi iMM. What then was to be done? As a necessary conse- 
 iiiiance, the whole theory of Toryiim, hitherto acted on, came to 
 pieees and west the way of ail ilesh. This was in the nature of 
 things. Not m hundred Popes could have hindered it. unlMS 
 Proridenee interoosed by an eiusion of divine grace on the 
 hearts of men, wMoh would amount to a miracle, and perhaps 
 would intorfero with humaa responsibiUty. The Pope has de- 
 mmmmi. Hm fltnJm—f that he ought to come to terms with 
 '* progress, liberaism, and the new eivilization.'* I have no 
 thou^t at an of disputing his words. I leave the great prob- 
 lem to the futnro. God will guide other Popes to act when Pius 
 goes, as He ss guided him. l^o one can dislike the democratic 
 prinoiide moro wan I do. No one mourns, for instance, moro 
 than C over the state of Oxford, given up, alas! to "liberalism 
 and progress," to the forfeiture of her great medieval motto, 
 ^'Bominus illuminatio mea," and with a consequent call on her 
 to go to Parliament or the Heralds Collegs lor a new one; but 
 what can we do? AU I know is, that Toryism, that is, loyaltf to 
 persons, " springs immortal in the human breast; " that Keli«ion 
 m a spiritual loyalty ; and that Catholieity is the only divine form 
 of B^igion. And thus, in centuries to come, there msy be found 
 out some way of uniting what is free in the new siruoturo of so- 
 eiaty with what is authoritative in the old, wiiiout any base com- 
 .mromise with "Progress" and " Iiiberali.sm. ' 
 
 But to return :— I have noticed the great revolution in the state 
 of tha Law which has taken plaoe since 1S28 for this reason:— 
 la aimest that Englishmen, who within ifty vears kept up the 
 Pope's system, aie not exactly the parties to throw stones at the 
 Pope for keeping it up still. 
 
 But I go further :— in fact the Pope has not said on this snbiect 
 of oonseience (for that is the main subject in question) what Mr. 
 mwialone makes him say. On this point I desiderate that fair^ 
 iMsa in his Pamphlet which we have a right to expect fr«m him ; 
 ftiid in tnth hw ualaifiiiss is wondsriul. He says pp. 16, 10, 
 
 TBM EXCTCLIOAL OP 1864. 
 
 85 
 
 te* the Holy See has condemned ^le maintainen of " the Lfberfy 
 of the Press, of conscience, and of worship." Again, that the 
 "Pontiflf has condemned free speech, free writing, a free press, 
 toleration of nonconformity, liberty of. conscience, p. 42. Now, 
 is not this accusation of a very wholesale character? Who 
 wouM not understand it to mean that the Pope had pronounced a 
 universal anathema against all these liberties in toto, and that 
 Bnglish law, on the contrary, allowed those liberties in ioto, 
 which the Pope had condemned? But the Pope has done no 
 such thing. The real question is in what respect, in what meas- 
 nro, has he spoken against liberty: the grant of liberty admits 
 of degrees. Blaekstone is careful to show how much more liberty 
 the law allowed to the subject in his day, how much less severo 
 It was in its safeguards against abuse, than it had used to be ; but 
 he never pretends that it is conceivable tiiat liberty should have 
 no boundary at all. The very idea of political society is based 
 upon the principle that each member of it gives up a portion 
 of his natural liberty for advantages which are ^eater than that 
 liberty; and the question is, whether the Pope, m any act of his 
 which touches us Catholics, in any ecclesiastical or theolo^cal 
 statement of his, has propounded any principle, doctrine, or vie^ 
 which is not carried out in foct at this time in British courts of 
 law, and would not be conceded by Blaekstone. I repeat, the 
 very notion of human society is a relinquishment, to a certain 
 point, of the liberty of its members individuallv, for the sake off 
 a common security. Would it be fair on that account t6 say 
 that the British Constitution condemns all liberty of conscience in 
 
 word and in deed? , . , ,.^ . i. v • 
 
 We Catholics, on our part, are denied liberty of our religion 
 by English law in various ways, but we do not complain, because 
 a limit must be put to even innocent liberties, and we acquiesce 
 in it for the socml compensations which we gain on the whole. 
 Our school boys can not play cricket on Sunday, not even in coun- 
 try places, for fear of beine taken before a magistrate and fined. 
 In Scotland we can not pky the piano on Sundays, much less 
 the fiddle, even in our own rooms. I have had before now a 
 lawyer's authority for saying that a religious procession is illegal 
 even within our own premises. Till the last year or two we 
 could not call our Bishops by the titles which our Religion gave 
 them. A mandate from the Home Secretary obliged us to put 
 off our cassocks when we went out of doors. We are forced to 
 pay rates for the establishment of secuUir schools which we can 
 not use, and then we have to find means over again for building 
 schools of our own. Why, is not all this as much an outrage on 
 our conscience as the prohibition upon Protestants at Rome, 
 Naples, and Malaga, before the late political chan^—not to 
 hold their services in a private, or in the ambassador s house, or 
 outside the walls,— but to flaunt them in public and thereby to 
 irritate the natives ? Mr. Gladstone seems to think it is monstrous 
 for the Holy See to sanction such a prohibition. If so, may we 
 ^»* ^^\\ ..»^» k^m f/t «m\w% fni> iifl in KiFminfi^ham " the free exer* 
 
 not call 
 obe 
 
 »all upon him to gain for us in Birmingham " the 
 of our religion," in making a circuit of the 8tr< 
 
 free exer- 
 streets in our 
 
86 
 
 fHB BKOTCLIOAL OP 1864. 
 
 Its, and oliaiittng tlie *' Pange lAmim^" tad the prote«lioii 
 ^fUm poHoe aounst the mob whioh would be aiiro to fgmm rooiid 
 ii%— pirtioukrlj since we are English born; bat the P^rotestants 
 St llalai^ or Napleis' were foreigners.* But we have the good 
 ■ense neither to feel it a hardship, nor to protest against it as a 
 grieTanoe. 
 
 But now for the present state of Bnglish Law :— I say seriously 
 Mr. Gladstone's aocasation of us aiails quite as maoh against 
 Blaekstone's four Tolunies, against kwa in general, against the 
 social oontraotk as against the Pope. What the Pope has said, I 
 nil show presently: first let us see what the statute book has to 
 leH na about the present state of English liberfy of speech, of 
 the press, and of worship. 
 
 First, as to public s|M>aking and meetings r-nio we allow of 
 fsditions lansiiage, or of insult to the soveieign, or his repre- 
 ientatiTes? Blackstone says, that a misprision is committed 
 against him 1^ speaking or writing a^pnst him, cursing or wish- 
 ii^ him ill, giving out scandalous stories concerning him, or doing 
 any thing that may tend to lessen him in the esteem of his su^ 
 jects, may weaken his government, or may raise jealousies be- 
 tween him and his people." Also he says, that "threatening 
 and reproachful words to any judge sitting in the Courts " involve 
 "a high misprision, and have been punished with large fines, im- 
 prisonment, and corporal punishment." And we may recollect 
 quite ktely the judges of the Queen's Bench prohibited public 
 meetiiigs and speeches which had for their object the issue of a 
 ease then proceeding in Court 
 
 Then, again, as to the Press, there are two modes of bridling 
 ii one before the printed matter is published, the other alter. 
 The former is the method of censorship, the latter that of the 
 hiw of libel. Each is a restriction on the liberty of the Press. 
 We prefer the latter. I never heard it said that the law of libel 
 was of a mild character; and I never heard that the Pope, in any 
 Brief or Rescript, had insisted on a censorship. 
 
 Ijas%, liberty of worship; as to the Enghsh restriction of it, 
 we have had a notable example of it In the last session of Par- 
 liament, and we shall have still more edifying illustrations of it 
 in the next, though not certainly from Mr. Gladstone. The rit- 
 ualistic party, in the free exercise of their rights, under the 
 shelter of the Anglican rubrics, of certain of the Anglican officcR, 
 of the teaching of their great divines, and of their conscientious 
 interpretation of their Articles, have, at their own expense, built 
 churches for worship after their own way; and, on the other 
 hand. Parliament and the newspapers are attempting to put them 
 down, not so much because they are acting against the tradition 
 and the law of the Establishment, but because of the national 
 dislike and dread of the principles and doctrines which their 
 w ofsh ip embodies. 
 
 When Mr. Gladstone has a right to say broadly, by reason of 
 
 • ** Homlnibus illuc immigrantibus. " These words Mr. Gladstone 
 mdta, also he translates " publicum " " free," pp. 17, 1«. 
 
 THE BNCYCUCAL Of 1864. 
 
 87 
 
 theM restrictions, that British law and the British people con- 
 demn the maintaincrs of Uberty of conscience, of the press, and 
 of worship, in ioto, then may he sav so of the Encyclical, or ac- 
 count of tJaose words which to him have so frightful a meaning. 
 Now then let us see, on the other hand, what the proposition 
 is. the condemnation of which leads him to say, that the Pope 
 has unrestrictedly " condemned those who maintain the liber^ 
 of the Press, the liberty of conscience and of worship, ajid the 
 Uberty of speech,'' P- 16,— has "condemned free speech, free 
 writing, and a free press." p. 42. The condemned proposition 
 
 iinAAks AS follows l'^^ 
 
 •ML Liberty of conscience and worship, is the inherent right of 
 all men. 2. It ought to be proclaimed in every rightly constituted 
 society. 3. It is a right to all sorts of liberty f omnimodam hb- 
 ertatem) such, that it ought not to be restrained by any author- 
 iW. ecclesiastical or civil, as far ss public speaking, printing, or 
 any other public manifestation of opinions is concerned. 
 
 Now is there any government on earth that could stand the strain 
 of such a doctrine as this? It starts by taking for granted that 
 there are certain Rights of man ; Mr. Gladstone so considers, 1 
 believe ; but other deep thinkers of the day are quite of another 
 opinion; however, if the doctrine of the proposition is teue, then 
 the right of conscience, of which it speaks, being inherent in 
 man. is of universal force— that is, all over the world— also, says 
 
 states? The proposition tells us: It is the liberty of every 
 one to givej?ttO/ic utterance, in ever^ possible shape, by every 
 possible channel, without any let or hinderance from God or man, 
 to all his notions whatsoever,* 
 
 Which of the two in this matter is peremptorv and sweeping 
 in his utterance, the author of this thesis himself;' or the Pope 
 who has condemned what he has uttered? Who is it who 
 would force upon the world a universal? All that the Pope has 
 done is to deny a universal, and what a universal 1 a universal 
 liberty to all men to say out whatever doctrines they may hold 
 by preaching, or by the press, uncurbed by church or civil power. 
 Does not this bear out what I said in the foregoing section of the 
 sense in which Pope Gregory denied a " liberty of conscience? 
 It is a liberty of self-will. What if a man's conscience embraces 
 the duty of regicide ? or infanticide ? or free love? You may say 
 that in England the good sense of the nation would stifle and ex- 
 tinguish such atrocities. True, but the proposition says that it 
 is the very right of every one, by nature, in every well consti- 
 tuted society. If so, why have we gagged the press in Ireland 
 on the ground of its being seditious ? Why is not India brought 
 
 • " Jus civibus inesse ad ommnwdam libertatem, nuM vel ecclesias- 
 ticft vel civili auctoritate coarctandam, quo suos conceptus quoscunr 
 que sive voce, sive typis, sive aliA ratione, paktmpubliceque manif estare 
 •c declarare valeant/' 
 
I 
 
 88 
 
 
 wiiUii «li« BrilM MMMliMllon f It weaf a Hglit ftfiiliiM for ^ 
 Pope to use, wfeen lie emlli smcli a doctrine of ooneoience delirth 
 niMlitifi: of all oonoeifmble abeordities it i« the wildest and most 
 itapld. Hat Mr. Gladstone really no better complaint to make 
 aounat iSk% Pope's condennalions than this? 
 
 Perhaps he will say, Why should the Pope take the trouble to 
 eondemn what is so wild T But he does : and to say that he oon- 
 iilliis somethiniE which he doet not condemn, and then to inTeigh 
 a^nst him on 3ie ground of that something else, is neither josl 
 nor logical. 
 
 Vim I come lo the Syllabus of "Errors," the publication of 
 vMA has been exclaimed a^iinst In Bng^d as such singular 
 enormity, and especially by Mr. Gladstone. The condemnation 
 of theological statements which militate against the Gatholio 
 Faith is of long usage in the Church. Such was the condemna- 
 Im of the heresies of Wickliffe in the Council of Constance; 
 Buch those of Hubs, of Luther, of Baius, of Jansenius; such the 
 ooniMnMilions which were published by Sextus IV., Innocent 
 Xl, aement XI., Benedict XIV., and other Popes. Such con- 
 demnations are no invention of Pius IX. The Syllabus is a col- 
 lection of such erroneouf propositions, as h« has condemned 
 during his Pontificate; there are 80 of them. 
 
 The word "Syllabus" means a collection; the French translar 
 tion calls it a " Bimmi; " a ooUection of what? I have already 
 •aid, of propoeitiona,— piopoiitionswiiich the Pope in his various 
 Alocutions, Encyclicals, and like documents, since he has been 
 Pope, has pronounced to be Errors. Who gathered the proposi- 
 tions out of these Papal documents, and put them together in 
 one? We do not know; all we know is that, by the Pope's com- 
 mand, this collection of Errors was sent by his Foreign Minister 
 to the Bishops. He, Cardinal Antonelli. sent to them at the same 
 lime the Encyclical of December, 1864, which is a document of dog- 
 matie anthority. The Cardinal says, in his circuhir to them, 
 that the Pope ordered him to do so. The Pope thought, he says, 
 that perhaps the Bishops had not seen some of his Allocutions, 
 and other authoritative letters and speeches of past years; in 
 consequence the Pope had had the Errors which, at one time or 
 other he had therein condemned, brougbt t<^ther into one, and 
 Uml for the use of the Bishops. 
 
 Such is the Syllabus and its object There is not a word in it 
 of the Pope's own writing; there is nothing in it at all but the 
 Erroneous Propositions memselves— that is, except the heading, 
 "A Syllabus, oontahaing the principal Errors of our times, which 
 are noted in the Conslstorial Allocutions, in the Bncvclicals, and 
 In other Apostolical Letters of our most Holy Lord, Pope Pius 
 IX." There is one other addition— vif., after each proposition 
 a reference is eiven to the Allocution, Encyclical, or other docu- 
 ment In which it is condemned. 
 The Syllabus, then, is to be received with profound submission, 
 
 THE 8TLLAB!». 
 
 89 
 
 as having been sent by the Pope's authority to theBishops of the 
 world It certainly has indirectly his extrinsic sanction ; but m- 
 trinsicallv, and viewed in itself, it is nothing more than a digest 
 of certain Errors made by an anonymous writer. There would 
 be nothing on the face of it, to show that the Pope had ever seen 
 it pace by page, unless the "Imprimatur implied in the Car- 
 dinal's letter had been an evidence of this. It has no mark or 
 seal put upon it which gives it a direct relation to the Pone. 
 Who 18 its author? Some select theologian or high official doubt- 
 less ; can it be Cardinal Antonelli himself? No surely : anyhow ^ 
 it is not the Pope, and I do not see my way to accept it for what 
 it is not I do not speak as if I had any difficulty m recognizing 
 and condemning the Errors which it catalogues, did the Pope 
 himself bid me ; but he has not as yet done so, and he can not 
 delegate his Magistenum to another. I wish with St. Jerome to 
 " speak with the Successor of the Fisherman and the Disciple 
 of the Cross." I assent to that which the Pope propounds in 
 faith and morals, but it must be he speaking officially, personaUy, 
 and immediately, and not any one else, who has a hold over me. 
 The Syllabus is not an official act, because it is not signed, for 
 instance, with " Datum Romae, Pius P. P. IX.," or " sub annulo 
 Piscatoris," or in some other way; it is not a personaJ, for ho 
 does not address his "Venerabiles Fratres, or "Dilecto FiUo, 
 or speak as " Pius Bpiscopus ; " it is not an immediate, for it 
 comes to the Bishops only through the Cardinal Minister of 
 
 State. , , 
 
 If, indeed, the Pope should ever make that anonymous compi- 
 lation directly his own, then of course I should bow to it and ac- 
 cept it as strictly his. He might have done so ; he might do so 
 still • again, he might issue a fresh list of Propositions in addition, 
 and 'pronounce them to be Errors, and I should take that con- 
 demnation to be of dogmatic authority, because I believe him ap- 
 pointed by his Divine Master to determine in the detail of faith 
 and morals what is true and what is false But such an act of 
 his he would formally authenticate ; he would speak m his own 
 name, as Leo X. or Innocent XI. did, by Bull or Letter Apostolic. 
 Or if he wished to speak less authoritatively, he would speak 
 through a Sacred Congregation ; but the Svllabus makes no claim 
 to be acknowledged as the word of the Pope. Moreover, if the 
 Pope drew up that catalogue, as it may be called, he would dis- 
 criminate the errors one from another, for they greatly diffisr m 
 gravity, and he would guard against seeming to say that all mtel^ 
 lectual faults are equal. What gives cogency to this remark is, 
 that a certain number of Bishops and theologians, when a Sylla- 
 bus was in contemplation, did wish for such a formal act on the 
 part of the Pope, and in consequence they drew up for his con- 
 sideration the sort of document on which, if he so willed, ho 
 might suitably stamja his infallible sanction ; but he did not acc^o 
 to meir prayer. This composition is contained in the "Recueil des 
 Allocumns*' etc., and is far more than a mere " collection of 
 errors." It is headed, "Theses ad Apostolicam Sedem delat» 
 cum censuris" etc., and each error from first to last has the ground 
 8 
 
 i 
 
I 
 
 90 
 
 no SfLLABVS. 
 
 of ita condemnation mftrked upon it TIi«w ire sixty-one of 
 mmk. The irat is " impia. iiyuriosa leligloni," etc. ; the second 
 IS " oompleiif 6 snmpta. falsa," etc. ; the thiid ilie same; the fourth 
 •rhutitifla," and so on, the epithets affixed hafii^ a distinct meanr 
 iii|r aad denoting various degrees of error, mch a document, 
 wSkk» the Syllabus, has a suhetantiTe character. 
 
 Here I am led to interpoee a romark;— it M phun, then, that 
 there are those near, or with access, to the Hohr Father, who 
 would, if they could, go much further in the way of assertion and 
 oommaad, than the IiTine A»si9tenUa, which overshadows him. 
 wills or permits: so that his acts and his words on doctrinal sub- 
 lets must he carefuUy serutiniied and weighed, before we can be 
 sure what really he has said. Utterances which must be received 
 as coming from an Infallible Voice are not made every day, mdeed 
 they are very rare ; and those which are by some persons affirmed 
 or assumed to be such, do not always turn out what they are said 
 to be; nay. even such as are really dogmatic must be read by 
 dtinite rules and by traditional principles of interpretation, which 
 are as cogent and unchangeable as the Pope s own decisions 
 themselves. What I have to say presenUy will illostrate this 
 truth; meanwhile I use the circumstance which has led to my 
 mentioning it, for another purpose here. When intelligence 
 which we receive from Rome startles and pains us f^om its seem- 
 ingly harsh or extreme character, let us learn to have some little 
 iith and patience, and not take for granted that all that is re- 
 r-i)orted is the truth. There are those who wish and try to cany 
 ^ measures, and declare they have carried, when they have not car- 
 ried them. How many strong things, for instance, have been re- 
 I ported with a sort of triumph on one side and with imtiibon 
 ^ and despondency on the other, of what the Vatican Cou^il has 
 done; whereas, the very next year after it, Bishop Fessler, 
 the Secretary General (»f the Council, bnngs out his work on 
 •• True and False Infallibility,"* reducing what wm said to be so 
 monstsoiBi to its true dimensions. When I see all this going on 
 those gitnd lines in the Greek Tragedy always rise to my lips: 
 
 And still more the consolation given us by the Divine SpeiOcer. 
 that though the swelling sea is so threatening to look at, yet there 
 is One who rules it and says: "Hitherto shalt thou come and no 
 further; and here shaU thy proud waves be stayed. But to re- 
 turn: the Syllabus, then, has no dogmatic force. It addresses us 
 not in its separate portions, but as a whole, and is to be received 
 from the Pope by an act of obedience, not of faith, that obedience 
 being shown by Uving recourse to ^e original and authonto^ve 
 dociments, (Allocutions and the like.) to which the Syllabus 
 pointedly refers. Moreover, when we turn to those documents 
 which are authoritative, we find the SyUabus can not .even be 
 
 ■" ^ an ceho of the Apostolic Voice; for, in matters in which 
 
 ♦ Thia History of tlie Council will soon be publijilied by Bums, 
 
 OateS' » 'iiO» 
 
 THE STLLABITS. 
 
 91 
 
 wording is so important,, it is not an exact transcript of 
 the words of the Pope, in its account of the errors con- 
 demned,— just as would be natural in what is an index for ref- 
 erence. , c* tt t »_ A -m 
 
 Mr. Gladstone indeed wishes to unite the Syllabus to that En- 
 cyclical which so moved him in December, 1864, and says thafe 
 tbe Errors noted in the Syllabus are all brought under the infall- 
 ible judgment pronounced on certain errors specified in the En- 
 cyclical. This is an untenable assertion. He says of the Pope 
 and of the Syllabus, p. 20 : " These are not mere opinions of the 
 Pope himself, nor even are they opinions which he might pator- 
 naUy recommend to the pious consideration of the faithful. 
 With the promulgation of his opinions is unhappily combined, in 
 the Encyclical Letter which virtually, though not expressly, iw 
 eludes the whole, a command to all his spiritual children (from 
 which command we, the disobedient children, are in no way 
 excluded) to hold them" and he appeals in proof of this to the 
 language of the Encyclical ; but let us see what that language is. 
 The Pope speaks thus, as Mr, Gladstone himself quotes him: 
 "All and each of the wrong opinions and doctrines specially 
 mentioned in these letters We, by our Apostolic Authority, repro- 
 bate, proscribe, and condemn ; and it is our will and command 
 that the same be in like manner held reprobated, proscribed, and 
 condemned by all the children of the Catholic Church."— Bncyc, 
 Dec. 8, 1854. He says as plainly as words can speak that the 
 wrong opinions, which in this passage he condemns, are speci- 
 fied m the Encyclical and not outside of it; and when we look 
 into the earlier part, there are about ten of them. There is not 
 a single word m the Encyclical to show the Pope in it was 
 alluding to the Syllabus. The Syllabus does not exist so far as 
 the language of the Encyclical is concerned. This gratuitous as- 
 sumption IS marvelously unfair, and the only connections be- 
 tween the Syllabus and the Encyclical are external to both— 
 connections of time and organ — Cardinal Antonelli sending them 
 both to the Bishops with the introduction of one and the same 
 letter. In that letter he speaks to the Bishops thus, as I para- 
 phrase his words : ♦—The Holy Father sends you by me a list, 
 which he has caused to be drawn up and printed, of the errors 
 which he has in various formal documents, in the course of the 
 last eighteen years, condemned. At the same time, and with tiiat 
 list of errors,, he is sending you a new Encyclical, which he has 
 
 * His actual words (abridged) are these :— " Notre T. 8. 8. Pius IX. 
 n'a jamais cess6 de proscrire 1«8 principales erreursde notre tres-mal- 
 
 youlu que Ton r^digeat un Syllabus de ces monies erreurs, destin^ k 
 fttre envoys k tou.s les Kvdques, ete. II m'a ensuite ordonn6 de 
 veiller k ce que ce Syllabus impriin^ filfc envoys a V. B. R. dans ce 
 temps oil le m5me Sbuverain Pontife a jug6 \ propos d'^crire un 
 autre Lettre Encyclique. Ainsi, je m'empresse d'envoyer a V. E. ce 
 Byllabus avcc ces Lettres." 
 
 
n 
 
 ■■laMMHI Mian' tt A'l'tm 
 
 t TBS 8TLLABI7S. 
 
 93 
 
 f 
 
 I send 
 
 judged it apropoB to write to the Catholic Biihops:- 
 
 vou both at ono©. , , , • .• » i 
 
 The SyUabu8, then, is ft Ust. or mther an index, of the Pope ■ 
 Enofclical or Allocutional condemnations, an index rawoftw*,— 
 mot^lphftbetioal, afl is found, for instance, in Bellannines or 
 liinibertinri works— drawn up hj the Pope s ordure, out of hja 
 paternal care for the flock of Christ, and conveyed to the BiBH- 
 ops through his Minister of Stake. But we can no more accent 
 it as de fidey as a dogmatic document, than other index or table 
 of contents. Tiike a paraUel case, mutatis mu tofidw ; Counsel s 
 opinion being asked on a point of kw, he goes to his law-boolw. 
 wites down his answer, and, as authority, refers his cUen* to 23 
 eeoige m.. c. 5, s. 11 ; 11 Victoria, c. 12, s. 19, and to Thomas 
 ». Smith, Attorney-General u. Roberts, and Jones v. Owen. Who 
 imSA say that that sheet of foolscap had force of law, when it 
 was nothing more than a list of references to the Statutes of 
 the Realm, or Judges' decisions, in which the Law's voice really 
 
 was found? .... <. «. x * 
 
 The value of the Syllabus, then, lies m its references ; but of 
 these Mr. Gladstone has certainly availed himself very little. 
 Yet in order to see the nature and extent of the condemnation 
 passed on any proposition of the SyUabus, it is absolutely neces- 
 «ary to turn out the passage of the Allocution, Ifinoyclicai, or 
 other document, in which the condemnation is found; for the 
 wording of the errors which the S? llabos contains is to be inter- 
 Iir«ted by its references. Instead of this Mr. Gladstone uses 
 forms of speech about the Syllabus which only excite m ino 
 ftesh wonder. Indeed, he speaks upon these ecclesiastical sub- 
 jects generally in a style in which priests and parsons are ac- 
 cused by their enemies of speaking concerning geology. For m- 
 stanee, the Syllabus, as we have seen, is a list or index ; but he 
 calls it " extraordinary declarations," p. 21. How can a lost ot 
 Errors be a series of Pontifical " Declarations ? . „ ^ , 
 
 However, perhaps he would say that, m speaking of 1^0*^^ 
 tions," he was referring to the au^ritative gtatements which I 
 hftve accused him of neglecting. With all my heart ; but then 
 lit us see how those statements Mill the character he gives ot 
 iiem. He calls them " Extfimiinary declarations on ijersonal 
 and private duty." p. 21, and " stringent condemnations, p. 19. 
 Now, I cenriily must grant that some are stnngent, but onlj 
 tume. One of the most severe that I have found among them is 
 that in the Apostolic Letter of June 10, 1851, against some here- 
 tli uriflst out at Lima, whose elaborate work in six volumes 
 aipiigt the Curia Romana, is pronounced to be m its various 
 Stents scandalous, rash, false, sehismatwMil, injurious to tho 
 BiMliftn Pontifih and Ecumeniotl Councils, impious and hereti- 
 cal." It well deserved to be i^led by these names, which are 
 pot terms of abuse, but each witli its definite meaning; and. if 
 Mr. Gladstone, in speaking of the condemoiions, had confined 
 his epithet "stringent" to it, no one would have complained of 
 him. And another severe condemnation is that of the works of 
 Professor Noytz. But let us turn to some other of the so-caUed 
 
 condemnations, in order to ascertain whether they answer to Ms 
 
 ^TtrlSS^^^^^^ 16th (the 7m of f •; --- 
 
 Propositions") that. "It is no longer expedient that ^^ Ca*o; 
 Ho fteligion should be established to Ije exclusion of «f .o^J^w. 
 When we turn to the Allocution, which is the gf oujid of its ^ing 
 put into the SyUabus, what do we find there ? First, that the Pope 
 Was speaking, not of States universaUy. but of ^'^^X'^'^f^^^^ 
 Spain, definitely Spain ; secondly, he was not speaking of the prop- 
 oiitio; in question directiy , or dogmatically, or fV^^}l;}^J^ 
 protesting against the breach in many ways ^[^^^'"'^'^^ 
 the part of tlie Spanish government; further that he was not re- 
 ferrme to any theological work containing it, nor contempUtong 
 any proposition ; nor, on the other hand, using any word of con- 
 demnatiSa at all. nor using any harsher terms of tjie Government 
 in question than those of " his wonder and bitterness. And 
 agafn, taking, the Pope's remonstrance as it stands is it any 
 CTeat cause of complaint to Endishmen, who so lately were se- 
 vere in their legislation upon IJnitenans, Catholics, unbelievers, 
 and others, that the Pope does merely not think it expedient for 
 ererv state from this time forth to tolerate every sort of feligwn 
 on its territory, and to disestablish the Church at once ? for this 
 is all that he denies. As in the instance in the foregoing section, 
 he does but deny a universal, which the "erroneous proposi- 
 tion" asserts without any explanation. „ 
 
 2. Another of Mr. Gladstone's " strineent Condemnations (hw 
 18th) is that of the Pope's denial of the proposition that the 
 Roman Pontiff can and ought to come to terms ^«^ .^.^g^"®^^ 
 Liberalism, and the new (Sivilisation " I turn to the Allocution 
 of March 18, 1861, and find there no formal condemnation of this 
 Proposition at all. The Allocution is a long arsfumeni to the ef- 
 fect that the moving parties in that Prowess, Liberalism, and 
 new Civilization, make use of it so seriously to the injury of the 
 Faith and the Church, that it is both out of the power, and con- 
 trary to the duty, of the Pope to come to terns with them. INor 
 would those prime movers themselves differ from him here] cer- 
 tainly in this country it is the common cry that Liberalism is and 
 will be the Pope's destruction, and they wish and mean it so to be. 
 This Allocution on the subject is at once beautiful, dignified, and 
 touching : and I can not conceive how Mr. Gladstone should make 
 stringency his one characteristic of these condemnations, espe- 
 cially when after all there is here no condemnation at wL 
 
 3. Take, again, Mr. Gladstone's 15th— "That the abolition of 
 Temporal Power of the Popedom would be highly advantageous 
 to the Church." Neither can I find in the Pope's AUocutaon any 
 formal condemnation whatever of this proposition, much less a 
 "stringent" one. Even the Syllabus does no more m the case 
 of any one of the eighty, than to call it an " error; " and ^at the 
 Pope himself says of this particular^error is only this :— >;^ can 
 not but in particular warn and reprove (monere et redarguere) those 
 who applaud the decree by which the Roman Pontiff has been 
 despofled of all the honor and dignity of his civil rule, and assert 
 
fwii . STIXABirB. • 
 
 / 
 
 Utt l the said decree, more than any tl|ing else,, conduces to the 
 llwf^ and prosperity of the Church itsell"— ^^^., April 20. 1849. 
 
 4. %ke another of his instances, the 17th, the " error ' that 
 " in conntries called Catholic the public exercise of other religions 
 »aj laudably he allowed." I have had occasion to mention 
 •IftMij his mode of handling the Latin text of this proposition— 
 Til., rn^i whereas the men who were forbidden the public exer- 
 cise of their religion were foreigners, who had no right to be in n 
 country not theur own at all, and might fairly have conditions 
 impoied upon them during their stay there; neyertheless Mr. 
 CUadtlone (apparenUy through haste) has left out the worda 
 *' hominibus lUuc immigrantibns," on which so much turns. 
 Hexl, as 1 have observed above, it was only the sufferance of their 
 public worship, and again of all worships whatsoever, however 
 many and various, which the Pope blamed; further, the Popes 
 words did not apnly to all States, but specially, and, aa fiur as tho 
 Allocution goes, deinitely, to New Oranada. 
 
 However, the point I wish to insist u^n here is, that there 
 vas in this case no condemned proposition at all, but it was 
 mtiily, as in the ease of Spain, an act of the Government which 
 the Pope protested agpunst The Pope merely told that govern- 
 ment that that aot, and other acts which tliev had committed, gave 
 him very great pain ; that he had expected better thinss of them ; 
 that the way they went on was all of a piece; ana they had 
 his best prayers. Somehow, it seems to me strange for any 
 one to em an expostulation like this one, a set of " extraordinary 
 declarations" " stringent condemnations." 
 
 I am ©onvinotd that the more the proj^tions and the refer- 
 mum mMmtd in the SyUabus are exammed, the more signaUy 
 will iio oiafg* break doirn, brought aeamst the Pope on acca- 
 Kion of it: as to thoae Propositions which Mr. Gladstone specially 
 selects, some of them I have already taken in hand, and but few 
 of them present any difficulty. ^ 
 
 5. As to those on Marriage, I can not follow Mr. Gladstone • 
 meaning here, which seems to me verjr confused, and it would 
 be going out of the line of remark which I have traced out for 
 myself, (and which already is more extended than I could wish), 
 were I to treat of them. 
 
 6. His fourth Error, (taken from the Encyclical) that "Papal 
 judgments and decrees may, without sin, be disobeyed or differed 
 from." is a denial of the principle of Hooker's celebrated work 
 on Ecclesiastical Polity, and would be condemned bv him as well 
 as by the Pope. And it is plain to common sense that no society 
 can stand if its rules are disobeyed. What club or union would 
 not expel members who refused so to be bound 7 
 
 T. And the 5th,* 8th, and 9th propositions are necessarily 
 
 ♦Father Coleridge, in his sermon on "The Abomination of Deso- 
 lation," observes that, whereas Proposition 6th speaks of "jura," 
 Mr. Gladstone translate *' fW jura?* VId. that Sermon, and the 
 "Month" lor December, for remarks on various of these Proposi- 
 tions; but above all Mgr. Dupanloupe's woria on the subjecti 
 Messrs. Bums and Oates^ 1865. 
 
 TBS SYLLABUS. 
 
 95 
 
 «noi«, if the Sketch of Church Politer drawn out in former sec- 
 tions is true, and are necessarily considered as such by those, as 
 the Pope, who maintain that Poliiy. . , , 
 
 a The l(Hh Error, as others which I have noticed above, is atinl- 
 eersal (that " in the conflict of laws, civil and ecclesiastical, the civil 
 kw should prevail"), and the Pope does but deny a universal. ^ 
 
 9. Mr. Gladstones llth, which I do not quite understand in 
 his wording of it, runs thus :— " CathoUcs can approve of that 
 system of Mucation for youth which is separated from the Cath- 
 olic faith and the Church's power, and which regards the science 
 only of physical things, and the outlines (fines) of earthly social 
 life alone or at least primarily." How is this not an "Error?" 
 Surely there are Englishmen enough who protest against the 
 elimination of religion from our schools; is such a protest so dire 
 an offense to Mr. Gladstone? 
 
 10. And the 12th Error is this:— That "the science of philoso- 
 phy and of morals^ also the laws of the State, can and should 
 Keep dear of divine and ecclesiastical authority." This too will 
 not DC any thing short of an error in the judgment of great num- 
 bers of our own people. Is Benthamism so absolutely the Truth, 
 that the Pope is to be denounced because he has not yet become 
 a convert to it? 
 
 11. There are only two of the condemnations which really re- 
 quire a word of explanation; I have already referred to them. 
 One is that of Mr. Gladstone's sixth Proposition, "Roman Pon- 
 tiff's and Ecumenicid Councils, have departed from the limits of 
 their power, have usurped the rights of Princes, and even in de- 
 fining matters of faith and morals have erred." These words are 
 taken from the Lima Priest's book. We have to see, then, what 
 he means by "the Rights of Princes," for the proposition is con- 
 demned in kU sense of the word. It is a rule or the Church in 
 the condemnation of a book to state the proposition condemned 
 in the words of the book itself, without the Church being answer- 
 able for the words employed.* I have already referred to this 
 rule in my 5th section. Now this Priest included among the 
 rights of Catholic princes that of deposing Bishops from their 
 sacred Ministry, of determining the impediments to marriage, of 
 forming Episcopal sees, and of being free from Episcopal au- 
 thority in spiritual matters. When, then, the Proposition is 
 condemned *• that Popes had usurped the rights of Princes ; " what 
 is meant is, " the so^alled rights of Princes," which were really 
 
 *Propositione8, de quibus Ecclesia judicium sunm pronnnciat, 
 doubus i^rsesertim modis spectari possunt, vel absolute ac in se ipsis, 
 vel relative ad sensum libri et auctoris. In censurA propositionis 
 alicujus auctoris vel libri, Ecclesia attendit ad sensum ab eo intentum, 
 qui quidem ex verbis^ ex tot& doctrinse ipsius serie, libri textura et 
 confirmatione, consiho, institutoaue elicitur. l^ropositio libri vel 
 auctoris seguivoca esse potest, duplicemque habere sensum, rectum 
 nnum et altenim malum. Vbi cmitingit Ecclesiam propotUumes hujug- 
 modi aequivocas absque prssvia distinctione settsuum mtiigertj censttra unice 
 eadii in tettsum perversum librivel auctoris. — Tournely, t. 2, p. 170, ed. 
 1752. 
 
 1 '::A 
 
 I 
 
TSB iTLLABUS. 
 
 «li0 ririite of ilie Clmfcli, In Mromiag wUek Hiero waa no nrarpA- 
 
 tfen m "dL 
 
 12. Tlio other propoaition, Mr. Gladstone's seventh, the con- 
 demnation of which requires a remark, is this : " The Church 
 has not the power to employ force (vis inferend») nor an^ tem- 
 poral power direct or indirect." This is one of a series of Prop- 
 ositions found in the work of Professor Nuyti. entitled " Juris 
 Bodottastioi Institutiones," all of which are condemned in the 
 BipO'a Apostolic Letter of August 22, 1851. Now here "em- 
 ploying force " is not the Pope's phrase but Professor Nujti s, 
 ana the condemnation is meant to run thus, " It is an error to say, 
 with Profoswjr Noyti, that what he calls * employing force' is not 
 allowable to the Clinrch." That this is the right interpretation 
 of the " error " depends of course on a knowledge of the Profes- 
 sor's work, which 1 have never had an opportunifrjr of seeing; 
 but here I will set down what the received doctrine of the Church 
 is on ecclesiastical punishments, as stated in a work of the high- 
 est authority, since it comes to us with letters of approval from 
 Gregory XVI. and Pius IX. 
 
 "The opinion," says Cardinal Soglia, "that the coercive power 
 divinely bestowed upon the Church consists in the infliction of 
 spiritual punishments alone, and not in corporal or temporal, 
 ■eems more in harmony with the gentleness of the Church. 
 Accordingly 1 follow their judgment, who withdraw from the 
 Church the corporal sword, by which the bodv is destroyed or 
 blood is shed. Pope Nicholas thus writes : • The Church has no 
 ■word but the spiritual She does not kill, but gives life, hence 
 that well-known saying, " Ecclesia abhorret a sanguine." But 
 Ihe Bitter punishments, though temporal and corporal, such as 
 shutting up in a monastery, prison, flogging, and others of the 
 same kmd, short of effusion oF blood, the Churoh jure suo can 
 inflict' "--(Institut Jur., pp. 161, 9, Paris.) 
 
 And the Cardinal quotes the words of Pleury, " The Churoh 
 has enjoined on penitent sinners almsgivings, fastings, and other 
 corpoml inflictions. . . Aucustine speaks of beating with 
 ■tacfes, as sanctioned by the Bishops, after the manner of masters 
 in the case of servants, parents in the case of children, and 
 schoolmasters of schokrs. Abbots flogged monks in the vray of 
 paternal and domestic chastisement. . . Imjorisonment for 
 mm% time or for life is mentioned among canonical {>enances; 
 priests and other clerics, who had been 'deposed for their crimes, 
 being committed to prison in order that they might pass the time 
 to come in penance for their crime, which thereby was with- 
 drawn from the memory of the public." ,^ ^ . , . , 
 
 But now 1 have to answer one question. If what I have said 
 is Bubstentially the right explanation to give to the drift and con- 
 tento of the Syllabus, have not I to account for its making so 
 much noise, and giving such deep and wide oifonse on its appear^ 
 mmf It has ahready been reprobated by the voice of the world. 
 It there not, then, some reason at the bottom of the aversion felt 
 by educated Europe towaidf it, which I hare not mentioned? 
 
 THE SYLLABUS. 
 
 97 
 
 This is a very large question to entertain, too large for this 
 place; but 1 will say one word upon it. 
 
 Doubtless one of the reasons of the excitement and displeas- 
 ure which the Syllabus caused and causes so widely, is the num- 
 ber and variety of the propositions marked as errors, and the 
 ■ystematic arrangement to which they were subjected. So large 
 and elaborate a work struck the public mind as a new law, moral, 
 social, and ecclesiastical, which was to be the foundation of a 
 European code, and the beginning of a new world, in opposition 
 to the social principles of the 19th century; and there certainly 
 were persons in high stations who encouraged this idea. When 
 this belief was once received, it became the interpretation of the 
 whole Syllabus through the eighty Propositions, of which it re- 
 corded the erroneousness; as if they were all portions of one 
 great scheme of aggression. Then, when the public was 
 definitely directed to the examination of these Theses damnatcc, 
 their drift and the meaning of their condemnation was sure to 
 be mfsunderstood, from the ignorance, in the case of all but ec- 
 clesiastics, of the nature and force of ecclesiastical language. 
 The condemnations had been published in the Pope's Encyclicals 
 and Allocutions in the course of the preceding eighteen years, 
 and no one had fciken any notice of them ; now, when they were 
 brought all together, they on that very account made a great sen- 
 sation. Next, that same fact seemed in itself a justification, 
 with minds already prejudiced, for exjjecting in each of them 
 something extraordinary, and even hostile, to society ; and then, 
 again, when thev were examined one by one, certainly their real 
 sense was often*not obvious, and could not be, to the intelligence 
 of laymen, high and low, educated and simple. 
 
 Another circumstance, which I am not theologian enough to 
 account for, is this— that the wording of many of the erroneous 
 propositions, as they are drawn up in the Syllabus, gives an ap- 
 parent breadth to the matter condemned which is not found in 
 the Pope's own words in his Allocutions and Encyclicals. Not 
 that really there is any difference between the Pope's words and 
 Cardinal Antonelli's, for (as I have shown in various instances) 
 what the former says in the concrete, the latter does but repeat 
 in the abstract; or, to speak logically, when the Pope enunciates 
 as true the particular affirmative, " New Granada ought to keep 
 up the establishment of the Catholic Religion," then (since its 
 contradictory is necessarily false) the Cardinal declares, " To say 
 that no State should keep up the establishment of the Catholic 
 Religion is an error." But there is a dignity and beauty in the 
 Popos own language which the Cardinal s abstract Syllabus can 
 not have, and this gave to opponents an opportunity to declaim 
 against the Pope, which opportunity was in no sense afforded by 
 what he said himself. 
 
 Then, again, it must be recollected, in connection with what I 
 have said, that theology is a science, and a science of a special 
 kind; its reasoning, its method, its modes of expression, and its 
 language are all its own. Every science must be in the hands of 
 a comparatively few persons — that is, of those who have made it 
 9 
 
 p i 
 
 'H 
 
 If 
 

 'INK sTuanra. 
 
 THE SYLLABUS. 
 
 d9 
 
 ft stady. The courts of l«w have a great number of rules m 
 mod measure traditional ; io has the House of Commons, and, 
 judging by what one reads in the public prints, men must have 
 a noviceship there before tliey can be at perfect ease m their po- 
 sition. In like manner young theologians, and still more those 
 who are none, are sure to mistake in matters of detail; indeed a 
 nally irst-rate theologian is rarely to be found. At Kome the 
 rules of interofeting authoritative documents are known with a 
 perfection which at this time is scarcely to be found elsewhere. 
 «ome of those rules, indeed, are known to all priests; but even 
 this general knowledge is not possessed by laymen, much less by 
 Protestants, however able and eiperienced m their own several 
 lines of study or profession. One of those rules 1 have had sev- - 
 eral times occasion to mention. In the censure of books, which 
 offend against doctrine or discipline, it is a common rule to take 
 ■entences out of them in the author's own words, whether those 
 words are in themselves gtxid or bad, and to affix some note of 
 eondemnation to them in the sense in which they occur in the 
 book in question. Thus it may happen that even what seems at 
 irst sight a true statement, is condemned for being made the 
 shelter of an error; for instance: "Faith justifies when it 
 works." or " There is no religion where there is no charity," 
 may be taken in a good sense; but each proposition is con- 
 demned in Quesnell, because it is false as he uses it. 
 
 A further illustration of the necessity of a scientific education 
 in order to understand the value of Propositions, is afforded bjr a 
 controversy which has lately gone on among us as to the validity 
 of Abyssinian Orders. In reply to a document urged on one 
 side of the question, it was allowed on the other, that, ''if that 
 document was to be read in the same wajr as we should read any 
 ordinary judgment, the interpretation which had been given to it 
 was the most obvious and natural." " But it was well known/' 
 it was said, " to those who are familiar with the practical work- 
 ing of such decisions, that they are only interpreted with safety 
 in the light of certain rules, which arise out of what is called 
 the si^im mrim.'* And then some of these rules were given; 
 irstk *' that to understand the real meaning of a decision, no 
 matter how clearly set forth, we should know the nature of the 
 diilculty or dubium, as it was understood by the tribunal that 
 had to decide upon it Next, nothing but the direct proposition, 
 in its nudest and severest sense, as distinguiMhed from indirect 
 propositions, the gr»)unds of the decision, or implied statements, 
 u ruled by the iudguient. Also, if tlierc is any thing in the 
 wording of a decision which appears inconsistent with the teach- 
 ing of an improved body of theologians, etc., the decision is to 
 be interpreted so as to leave such teaching intact;" and so on.* 
 It is plain that the \icw thus opened upn us has further bear- 
 inn than that for which 1 make use of it here. 
 
 These remarks on scientific theology apply also of course to its 
 language. I have employed myself in illustration in framing a 
 
 •Month, Nov. and Dec, 1873. 
 
 ■entence, which would be plain enough to any priest, but I think 
 would perplex any Protestant. I hope it is not of too light a char- 
 acter to iritroduce here. We will suppose, then, a theologian to 
 write as follows : "Holding, as we do, tbat there ib only materml 
 sin in those who, being invincibly ignorant, reject the truth 
 therefore in charity we hope that they have the future portion of 
 formal believers, as considering that by virtue of their good faith, 
 iough not of the body of the faithful, they implicitly and tnter- 
 pretatively believe what they seem to deny.' 
 
 What sense would this statement convey to the mind of a mem- 
 ber of some Reformation Society or Protestant League / Ho 
 would read it as foUows, and consider it all the more insidious 
 and dangerous for its being so very unintelligible: "Holding, as 
 we do, that there is only a very considerable sm in those who re- 
 ject the truth out o£ contumacious ignorance, therefore in chanty 
 we hope that they have the future portion of nominal Christians, as 
 considering, that by the excellence of their living faith, though 
 not in the number of believers, they believe without any hesita- 
 tion, as interpreters [of Scripture ?] what they seem to deny. 
 
 Now, consMiering that the Syllabus was intended for 4,he Kish- 
 ops who would be the interpreters of it, as the need arose, to 
 their people, and it got bodily into Endish newspapers even before 
 it was received at many an episcopal residence, we shall not be 
 surprised at the commotion which accompanied its publication. 
 
 1 have spoken of the causes intrinsic to the Syllabus, which 
 have led to misunderstandings about it. As to external, I can be 
 no judge myself as to what Catholics who have means of know- 
 ing are very decided in declaring, the tremendous power of the 
 Secret Societies. It is enough to have suggested here, how a 
 wide-spread organization like theirs might malign and frustrate 
 the most beneficial acts of the Pope. One matter I had mformar 
 tion of myself from Rome at the time when the SyUabus had just 
 been published, before there was yet time to ascertoin how it _ 
 would be taken by the world at large. Now, the Rock ot bt. j 
 Peter on its summit enjoys a pure and serene atmosphere, but 
 there is a great deal of Roman malaria at the foot of it. While I 
 ' the Holy Father was in great earnestness and charity addressing ^ 
 the Catholic world by his Cardinal Minister, there were circles of 
 light-minded men in his city who were laying bets with each other 
 whether the Syllabus would " make a row in Europe or not. 
 Of course it was the interest of those who betted on the affirma- 
 tive side to represent the Pope's act to the greatest ^»^a<^^*"**l?®J 
 and it was very easy to kindle a flame in the mass of English and 
 other visiters at Rome which, with a very little nursing, was soon 
 strong enough to take care of itself. 
 
 g 8. The Vatican Council. 
 
 In beginning to speak of the Vatican Council, T am obliged 
 from circumstances to begin by speaking of myself. The m^t 
 unfounded and erroneous assertions have publicly been made 
 
 
101) 
 
 THE VATICAN COUNCIL. 
 
 •liMit my seotimeiits towards it, and as conldently aa they are 
 imfouiiilaii. Only a few weeks nj^o it was stated categoricafly by 
 ■01110 mtoiiyiiious correspondent of a Liverpool paper, with refer- 
 %mm to tlic prospect of my undertaking the taul on which 1 am 
 now employed, that it was, " in fact, understood that at one time 
 Br. Newman was on the point of uniting with Dr. Bollinger and 
 his party, and that it required the earnest persuasion of several 
 members of the Roman Catholic Episcopate to prevent him from 
 taking that step," — an unmitigated and most ridiculous untruth 
 in every word of it, nor would it be worth while to notice it here, 
 except for its connection with the subject on which I am entering. 
 But the explanation of such reports about me is easy. They 
 arise from forgetfulness on the part of those who spread them, 
 that there are two sides of ecclesiastical acts, that right ends are 
 often prosecuted by very unworthy means, andithat in consequence 
 those who, like myself, oppose a mode of action, are not necessar 
 lilt opposed to the issue tor which it has been adopted. Jacob 
 cainea by wrong means his destined blessing. "AH are not 
 Israelites who are of Israel," and there are partisans of Bome 
 who have not the sancity and wisdom of Rome herself 
 
 I am not referring to any thing which took place within the 
 walls of the Council chambers ; of that of course we know noth- 
 ing; but even though things occurred there which it is nol 
 tj^asant to dwell upon, that would not at all affect, not by an 
 hair's breadth, the validity of the resulting definition, as I shall 
 
 {iresently show. What 1 felt deeply, and ever shall feel, while 
 lie laats, is the violence and cruelty of journals and other pub- 
 lications, which, taking as they professed to do the Catholic side, 
 employed themselves bv their rash language (though of course, 
 they did not mean it so), in unsettling the weak in faith, thn.w- 
 ing back inquirers, and shocking the Protestant mind. Nor do I 
 ■seak of publications only ; a feeling was too prevalent in many 
 
 E laces that no one could be true to God and His Church, who 
 ad any pity on troubled souls, or an^ scruple of "scandalizing 
 those little ones who believe in " Christ, and of " despising and 
 destroying him for whom He died." 
 
 II was Siis most keen feeling which made me say, as I did con- 
 tinually, "I will not believe tnat the Pope's InfaUibility will be 
 ieined, till defined it is." 
 
 Moreover, a private letter of mine became public property. 
 That letter, to wliich Mr. Gladstone has referred with a compli- 
 ment to mo which I have not merited, waa one of the most con- 
 fidential I ever wrote in my life. I wrote it to my own Bishop, 
 under a deep sense of the responsibilitv I should incur, were I 
 mot to speak out to him my wnole mind. I put the matter from 
 me when I had said my say, and kept no proper copy of the 
 letter. To my dismay 1 saw it in the public prints : to this day 
 I do not know, nor suspect, how it |5ot tnere. 1 can not withdraw 
 it, for I never put it rorward, so it will remain on the columns 
 of newspapers whether 1 will or not ; but I withdraw it as far 
 Bs I can, by declaring that it was never meant for the public eye, 
 
 1. So much as to my posture of mind before the Befinition: 
 
 THB VATICAN COUNCIL. 
 
 101 
 
 now I will set down how I felt after it. On July 24, 1870, I 
 
 wrote as follows: i j x v 
 
 " I saw the new definition yesterday, and am pleased at its 
 moderation— that is, if the doctrine in question is to be defined 
 at all The terms are vague and comprehensive ; and, personally, 
 I have no difliculty in admitting it. The question is, Boes it com© 
 to me with the authority of an Ecumenical Council ? 
 
 "Now the privid facie argument is in favor of its having that 
 authority. The Council was legitimately called ; it was more 
 largely attended than any Council before it; and innumerable 
 pr^ers from the whole of Christendom, have preceded and at- 
 tended it, and merited a happy issue of its proceedings. 
 
 " Were it not, then, for certain circumstances, under which the 
 Council made the definition, 1 should receive that definition at 
 once. Even as it is, if I were called upon to profess it, I »^^^l^ 
 be unable, considering it came from the Holy Father and the 
 competent local authorities, at once to refuse to do so. On the 
 other hand, it can not be denied that there are reasons for a 
 Catholic, till better informed, to suspend his judgment on its var 
 
 " We all know that ever since the opening of the Council, 
 there has been a strenuous opposition to the definition of the 
 doctrine ; and that, at the time when it was actually passed, 
 more than eighty Fathers absented themselves from the Council, 
 and would have nothing to do with its act. But, if the fact be 
 so, that the Fathers were not unanimous, is the definition valid . 
 This depends on the question whether unanimity, at least moral, 
 is or is not necessary for its validity? As at present advised I 
 think it is; certainly Pius IV. lays great stress on the unanimity 
 of the Fathers in the Council of Trent: 'Qaibus rebus per- 
 fectis,' he savS in his Bull of Promulgation, 'concilium tant& 07n^ 
 nium qui Uli interfaerunt Concordia peractum fuit, ut consensum 
 plane a Domino effectum esse constiterit; idque in nostris atque 
 omnium oculis valdc mirabile fuerit' , , r^ •! • 
 
 " Far different has been the case now,— though the Council is 
 not yet finished. But, if I must now at once decide what to 
 think of it, I should consider that all turned on what the dissen- 
 tient Bishops now do. , u j •<? 
 *' If they separate and go home without acting as a body, it 
 they act only individually, or as individuals, and each in his own 
 way, then I should not recognize in their opposition to the ma- 
 jority that force, firmness, and unity of view, which creates a 
 real case of want of moral unanimity in the Council. ^ 
 
 " Again, if the Council continues to sit, if the dissentient Bish- 
 ops more or less take part in it, and concur in its acts ; if there 
 is a new Pope, and he continues the policy of the present; and 
 if the Council terminates without any reversal or modification of 
 the definition, or any effective movement against it on the part 
 of the dissentients, then again there will be good reason for say- 
 ing that the want of a moral unanimity has not been made out. 
 "And further, if the definition is consistently received by the 
 whole body of the feithful, as valid, or as the expression of a 
 
 i 
 
Ite 
 
 nil TATKJAif cocxca. 
 
 i 
 
 •* 
 
 i 
 
 il 
 
 •« 
 
 trtitli, then too it will claim our assent l)jr th© fore© of the great 
 dietam: 'Securus judicat orbis terramin. 
 
 "This indeed ib a broad principle bj which all acts of the 
 rulers of the Chorch are ratified. Bat for it we might reason- 
 •bly question some of the past Councils or their acts. 
 
 llao 1 wrote as follows to a friend, who was troubled at the 
 way in which the dogma was passed, in ortler to place before him 
 
 iu various points of view the duty of receiving it:— 
 
 *^ "July 27,1870. 
 
 ••I have been thinkini; over the subject which just now gives 
 you and me with thousands of others, who care for religion, so 
 mueh concern. 
 
 ••Krst, till better advised, nothing shall make me say that a 
 mere majority in a Council, as op[50sed to a moral unanimity, m 
 itself creates an obligation to receive its dogmatic decrees. This 
 Is a point of history and precedent; and ofcoursc on further ex- 
 amination I may find myself wrong in the view which 1 take of 
 history and precedent; but 1 do not, can not see, that a majority 
 in the present Council can of itself rti/e its own sufficiency, with- 
 out sucli external testimony. 
 
 " But there are other means by which I can he brought under 
 the obligation of receiving a doctrine as a dogma. If I am clear 
 that there is a primitive and uninterrupted tradition, as of the 
 divinity of our Lortl : or where a high probability drawn from 
 Scripture or Tradition is partially or probably confirmed by the 
 Church. Thus a particular Catholic might be so nearly sure that 
 thejpromise to Peter in Scripture proves that the infallibility 
 of Ptter is a necessary dogma, as only to be kept from holding 
 it as such by the absence of any judgment on the part of the 
 Church, so that the present unanimity of the Pope and 5C0 Bish- 
 ops, even though not sufficient U) constitute a formal Synodal act, 
 would at once put him in the position, and lay him under the 
 obligntion, of receiving the doctrine as a dogma, that is, to re- 
 ceive it with its anathema. 
 
 " Or again, if nothing definitely sufficient from Scripture or 
 Tfudition can be brought to contradict a definition, the fact of a 
 legitimate Superior having defined it, may be an obHgation in 
 QduieiiMe io receive it with an internal assent. For m^yself, 
 •fer riuce 1 was a Catholic, I have held the Pope's infallibility as 
 II imatter of theological opinion ; at least, 1 see nothing in the 
 Definition which necessarily contradicts Scripture, Tradition, or 
 Hittory ; and the * Doctor lisclesiie,' (as the Pope is styled by the 
 Council of Florence) bids me accept it In this case, 1 do not 
 reeeiv© it on the word of the Council, but on the Pope's self- 
 'fl'Stvrtion. 
 
 ••And T confess, the fact that all along for so many centuries 
 the Head of the Church and Teacher of the faithful and Vicar 
 of Christ has been allowed by God to assert virtually his infalli- 
 bility, is a great argument in favor of the validity of his claim. 
 
 "Another grcmnd for receiving the dogma, still not upon the 
 direct authority of the Council, or with acceptance of the valid- 
 ity of its act per #«, is the consideration that our Merciful Lord 
 
 THE VATICAN COUNCIIi. 
 
 103 
 
 would not care so little for His elect oeople, the multitude of the 
 Taithful as to allow their visible HeaS an<l J-ch a l^r^ -^^er 
 of BishoDS to lead them into error, and an error so serious, it an 
 error TiTconsideration leads me to accept the doctrine a^ a 
 dogma indirectly indeed from the Council, but not so much from 
 aXuncU, as lorn the Pope and a very large number o^^^ 
 Bishops. The question is not whether they had a right to im- 
 pose or even w2re right in imposing the dogma on the faithful 
 gut ;hether%aving lone so, I We not an obligation to accept 
 
 raccording to the'maxim. 'Fieri non 4f^»J^^'/*<^^r/«wnv in 
 ^This letter, written before the minority had melted away, in- 
 siste on this principle, that a Council's definition would have a 
 vfrUi^ claim on our reception, even though it were not passed 
 conciliariter, but in some indirect way; as, for instance, to use a 
 prrlilrenS^ expression, in general committee, the great objec 
 of a clncilbeing in some way or other to declare the judgment 
 of Sie Church. 1 think the thfrd Ecumenical wiU furnish an m- 
 s tance of what I mean. There the question m dispute was sc^ 
 tied and defined, even before certain constituent portions of the 
 Episcopal body luul made their appearance; and this, with a pr^ 
 test of 08 of the Bishops then present against 82 When the 
 remaining 43 arrived, t^ese did more than protest against the 
 
 deSonwhl^ had been carried; ^h^y ^^-^^1^ rfc'sto^ 
 the Fathers who carried it, whose number seems to have sUyod 
 alto-ether at 124 against 111; and in this state of disunion the 
 Council ended. How, then, was its definition valid? By after 
 event^ wh"ch I suppose must be considered complements, and 
 inte-ml P^^^^^ ofthe Council. The heads of the various par- 
 tLs eXred into correspondence with each other, and at the end 
 of twryears their differences with each other were arranged. 
 Thew are those who have no belief in the authority of Councils 
 at alTand fee no call upon them to discriminate between one 
 C^^uncU and another; but Anglicans, who are so fierce against 
 the Vatican, and so respectfultowards the Ephesine «^ouia ^^^^^ 
 aider what good reason they have for swallowing the third Coun- 
 cil, while they strain out the nineteenth. „„^.t,„, remark 
 
 The Council of Ephesus furnishes us with another remark 
 bearing upon the Vafican. It, was naturul for men who were m 
 the minority at Ephesus to think that the faith of th^e Church 
 had been brought'into the utmost peril by the I>^fi";tion ^^^^^ 
 Council which they had unsuccessfully opposed. Thejji^ d^"« 
 so from their conviction that that definition g^ve great encour- 
 acemcnt to religious errors in the opposite extreme to those 
 S it condemned; and in fact. I think tH^^ ^^^^^^^y/P^^^ 
 ing, the peril was extreme. The event proved it to be so. when 
 twenty years afterwards another Council was held under the suc- 
 cesso^ of the maiority at Ephesus '^^^^'f "1 *""TiP^^^^^ 
 those very errors whose eventual success had been PJf^^^^Jf ^ ^ 
 the minority. But Providence is never wanting *« ^;« ^^.^^^^^^ 
 St. Leo, the Pope of the day, interfered with this heretical Conn 
 oil, and the innovating party was stopped in its career its acts 
 were cancelled at the grcit Counclf of Chaleedon, the Fourth 
 
 ^ 
 
 11 
 
} 
 
 TUB JATKJkSt COUNCIL. 
 
 Bcuinenioal, which was heM iiii<ier the Pope's ^idance, tnd, 
 wilhoiit of course totichiiifr the dcitiition of the Third, which had 
 hmm settled once for all, trimmed the balance of doctrine by com- 
 pleting It, and excluded forever from the Church those errors 
 wliioh seemed to have received some sanction at Ephesus. 
 There is nothing of course that can be reversed in the Vatican 
 deinitions; but, should the need arise (which is not likely), to 
 ■el riglil a false interpretation, another Leo will be given us for 
 Urn occasion ; " in monte Dominns videbit." 
 
 In this remark, made for the benefit of those who need it, as I 
 do not myself, 1 shelter myself under the following jpassajre of 
 llolinai which a friend has pointed out to me : — " Though the 
 Holy Ohost has always been present to the Church, to Binder 
 error in her deinitions, and in consequence they are all most true 
 and consistent, yet it is not therefore to be denied, that God, 
 when any matters have to be defined, requires of the Church n 
 oo-ojieration and in\'estigation of those matters, and that, in pro- 
 portion to the quality of the men who meet together in Councils, 
 tn the investigtition and diligence which is applied, and the 
 greater or less experience and knowledge which is possessed moro 
 at one time tlian at other times, definitions more or less perspic- 
 uous are drawn up and matters are defined more exactly and 
 completely at one time tlian at other times. . . . And, 
 whereie by disputations, persevering reading, meditation, and in- 
 ▼estlgation of matters, there is wc»nt to be increased in course of 
 time the knowledge and understanding of the same, and the 
 Fathers of the later Councils are assisted by the investi^ition 
 and definitions of the former, hence it arises that the definitions 
 of later Councils are wont to be more luminoas, fuller, more ae^ 
 curate and exact than those of the earlier. Moreover, it belongs 
 to the later Councils to interpret and to define more exactly and 
 fully what in earlier Councils have been defined less clearly, fully, 
 and exactly." {De Concord. Lib. Arbit, etc., xiii. 15, p. 59.) 
 
 2. The other main objection to the Vatican Council is founded 
 Qfun its supposed neglect of history in the decision which its 
 Ileinition embodies. This objection is touched upon by Mr. 
 Clladstone in the beginning of his Pamphlet, where he speaks of 
 its '* ri>|iudiation of ancient history," and I have an opportunity 
 given me of noticing it here. 
 
 He asserts that, during the last forty years, " more and more 
 ]»¥« the assertions of continuous uniformity of doctrine" in the 
 Ckiiiolio Church "receded into scarcely penetrable shadow. 
 More and more have another series of assertions, of a living au- 
 thofitT, ever read^ to open, ado|at, and shape Chrptian doctrine 
 aeeording to the times, taken their place." Accordingly, he con- 
 siders that a dangerous opening has been made in the authorita- 
 tive teaching of the Church for the repudiation of ancient truth 
 md the rejection of new. However, as I understand him, he 
 wi|hif»ws this charge from the controversy he has initiated 
 (though not from his Pamphlet) as far as it is aimed at the pure 
 theology of the Church. It "belongs," he says, "to the theologi- 
 mX domain," and " is a matter unfit for him to discusa, as it is a 
 
 THK VATICAN COUNCIL. 
 
 105 
 
 question of divinity." It has been, then, no duty of mine to 
 consider it, except as it relates to matters ecclesiastical; but 1 
 am unwilling, when a charge has been made against our theol- 
 oev thout'h unsupported, yet unretracted, to leave it altogether 
 without r°eply; and that the more, because after renouncing 
 "questions of divinity" at p. 14, nevertheless Mr. Gladstone 
 brings them forward again at p. 15, speaking, as he does, of the 
 "dewlly blows of 1854 and 1870 at the old, historic, scientific, 
 and moderate school" by the definitions of the Immaculate Con- 
 ception and Papal Infallibility. . ^ • • ♦u^ 
 kr. Ghidstone. then insists on the duty of mamtammg the 
 truth and authority of history, and the inestimable value of the 
 historic spirit;" and so far of course I have the pleasure of 
 heartily agreeing with him. As the Church is a sacred and di- 
 vine creation, so in like manner her history, with its wondertul 
 evolution of events, the throng of ^reat actors who have a part m 
 it and its multiform literature, stained though its annals are witH 
 human sin and error, and recorded on no system, and by un- 
 inspired authors, still is a sacred work also ; and those who make 
 li«'ht of it, or distrust its lessons, incur a grave responsibility. 
 But it is not every one who can read its pages rightly; and cer- 
 tjiinly 1 can not follow Mr. Gladstone's reading of it. He is too 
 well informed indeed, too large in his knowledge, too acute and 
 comprehensive in his views, not to have an acquaintance with 
 history far beyond the run of even highly educated men; still, 
 when he accuses us of deficient attention to history, one can not 
 help asking, whether he does not, as a matter of course^ teke for 
 granted as true the principles for using it familiar with Protest- 
 ant divines, and denied by our own, and in consequence whether 
 his impeachment of us does not resolve itself into the fact that he 
 is Protestant and we are Catholics. Nay, has it occurred to him 
 that perhaps it is the fact, that we have views on the relation of 
 History to Dogma different from those which Protestants maii^ 
 tain? And is he so certain of the facts of History in detail, of 
 their relevancy, and of their drift, as to have a right, I do nol 
 say to have an opinion of his own, but to publish to the world, 
 on his own warrant, that we have "repudiated ancient historjr { 
 He publicly charges us, not merely with having " neglected it, 
 or "garbled" its evidence, or with having contradicted certain 
 ancient usages or doctrines to which it bears witness, but he 
 says " repudiated." He could not have used a stronger term, sup- 
 posing the Vatican Council had, by a formal act, cut itself off 
 from early times, instead of professing, as it does (hypocriticallv. 
 If you will, but still professing) to speak " supported by Holy 
 Scripture and the decrees both of preceding Popes and General 
 Councils," and " faithfully adhering to the aboriginal tradition of 
 the Church." Ought any one but an oculatus testis, a man whose 
 profession was to aquaint himself with the details of history, to 
 claim to himself the right of bringing, on his own authority, so 
 extreme a charge against so august a power, so inflexible and 
 rooted in its traditions through the long past, as Mr. Gladstone 
 would admit the Koman Church to be ? 
 
 I 
 
 m 
 
 I 
 
10§ 
 
 fHB TATICAH OOUNCIL. 
 
 THB VATICAN OOUXCIL. 
 
 107 
 
 Of oouroe I sliaU be reminded thai, though Mr. Gladstone can 
 not be expected to speak on so large a department of knowledge 
 with the confidence decorous in one who has made a personal 
 study of it, there are others who have a right to do so; and that 
 by those others he is corroborated and sanctioned. There are 
 aitlhors. it mm be said, of so commanding an authority for their 
 iMniliig and their hoBeety, that, for the purpose of diseusHion or 
 of oontPOTersy, what they say may be said bjf any one else with- 
 out presumption or risk of confutation. I will never say a word 
 of nnf own against those learned and distinguished men to whom 
 I nnr. No: their present whereabout, wherever it is, is to me 
 n llioiigiit full of melancholy. It is a tragical event, both fur 
 theiu and for us, that they have left us. It robs us of a great 
 prmH^e : they have left none to take their place. I think them 
 utterly wrong in what they have done and are doin|i; ; and, more- 
 over, 1 agree as little in their view of history as m their acts. 
 Sxtenslve as may be their historical knowledge, I have no 
 reasfin to think that they, more than Mr. Gladstone, would accept 
 the position which History holds among the Loci Theuhgici, as 
 Catiolie theologians determine it; and I am denying not their 
 report of facts, but their use of the facts thev report, und that, be- 
 cause of that special stand-point from which they view the rela- 
 tions existing between the records of History and the enuncia- 
 tions of Popes and Councils. They seem to me to expect from 
 History more than History can furnish, and to have too little con- 
 fidence in the Divine Promise and Providence as guiding and de- 
 termining those enunciations. 
 
 Why should Ecclesiastical History, any more than the text of 
 Scripture, contain in it "the whole counsel of God?" Why 
 should private judgment be unlawful in interpreting Scripture 
 against the voice ofauthority, and yet be lawful in the interpre- 
 tation of History? There are those who make short work of 
 2uestions such as these bjr denying authoritative interpretation 
 ttOgether; that is their private concern, and no one has a right 
 to inquire into their reason for so doing; but the case would be 
 iiibfftnt were such a man to come forward publicly, and to ar- 
 fttign others, without first confuting their theological* j;ra;ain&ii/a, 
 for repudiating history, or for repudiating the Bible. 
 
 For myself, I would simply confess that no doctrine of the 
 Church can be rigorouslv proved by historical evidence; but at 
 the same time that no <loctrino can be simply disproved by it 
 Historical evidence reaches a certain way, more or less, toward a 
 proof of the Catholic doctrines; often nearly the whole way; 
 sometimes it goes only so far as to point in their direction ; some- 
 times there is only an absence of evidence for a conclusion con- 
 trary to them; nay, sometimes there is an apparent leaning of the 
 Of ilence to a contrary conclusion, which has to be explained ; — 
 In 111 Mses there is a margin left for the exercise of faith in the 
 word of the Church. He who belives the dogmas of the Church 
 only because he has reasoned them out of History, is scarcely a 
 CJniiolic. It is the Church's use of History in which the Catholic 
 believes ; and she uses other informants also, Scripture, Tradition, 
 
 the ecclesiastical sense, or fpoyTjfia, and a subtle ratiocinative 
 power which in its origin is a divine gift. There is nothing of 
 bonda«re or "renunciation of mental freedom" in this view, any 
 more than in . the converts of the Apostles believing what the 
 Apostles might preach to them or teach them out of Scripture. 
 
 What has been said of History in relation to the formal Defini- 
 tions of the Church, applies also to the exercises of Ratiocination. 
 Our logical powers, too, being a gift from God, may claim to have 
 their informations respected; and Protestants sometimes accuse 
 our theologians, for instance, the medieval schoolmen, of having 
 used them in divine matters a little too freely. But it has ever 
 been our teaching and our protest that, as there are doctrines 
 which lie beyond the direct evidence of history, so there are doc- 
 trines which transcend the discoveries of reason: and, after all, 
 whether they are more or less recommended to us by the one in- 
 formant or the other, in all oases the immediate motive in the 
 mind of a Catholic for his reception of them is, not that they are 
 proved to him by Reason or by History, but because Revelation 
 Lis declared them by means of that high ecclesiastical Magiste- 
 rium, which is their legitimate exponent. 
 
 What has been said also applies to those other truths, with 
 which Ratiocination has more to do than History, which are 
 sometimes called developments of Christian doctrine, truths 
 which are not upon the surface of the Apostolic depositum — 
 that is, the legacy of Revelation,— but which from time to time 
 are brought into form by Theologians, and sometimes have been 
 
 Proposed to the faithful by the Church, as direct objects of faith. 
 lo Catholic would hold that they ought to be logically deduced in 
 their fullness and exactness from the belief of the first centuries, 
 but only this,— that, on the assumption of the Infallibility of the 
 Church (which will overcome every objection except a contra- 
 diction in thought), there is nothing greatly to try -the reason in 
 such diflBculties as occur in reconciling those evolved doctrines 
 with the teaching of the ancient Fathers; such development 
 being evidently the new form, explanation, transformation, or 
 carrying out of what in substance was held from the first, what 
 the Apostles said, but have not recorded in writing, or would 
 necessarily have said under our circumstances, or if they had 
 been asked, or in view of certain uprisings of error, and in that 
 sense really portions of the legacy of truth, of which the Church, 
 in all her members, but especially in her, hierarchy, is the di- 
 vinely appointed trustee. 
 
 Such an evolution of doctrine has been, as I would maintain, a 
 law of the Church's teaching from the earliest times, and in nothing 
 is her title of "semper eadem" more remarkably illustrated than 
 in the correspondence of her ancient and modern exhibition of 
 it. As to the ecclesiastical Acts of 1854 and 1870, I think with 
 Mr. Gladstone that the principle of doctrinal development, and 
 that of authority, have never m the proceedings of the Church 
 been so freely and largely used as in the Definitions then promul- 
 gated to the faithful ; but I deny that at either time the testimony 
 of history was repudiated or perverted. The utmost that can bo 
 
 R' 
 
 i 
 
itnl 
 
 TBB JATmAH OOUKOII.. 
 
 lurljiftM by an op|>oneiit against the theological decisions of tlios« 
 fmm is, thiit antecedently to the event, it might appear that then) 
 wife no snfficient historical grounds in behalf of either of them— 
 I do not mean for a i>er8onal belief in either, butr-for the purpose 
 ©f converting a doctrine long existing in the Church into a dogma^ 
 and making it a portion of the Catholic Creed. This adverse an- 
 ticipation was proved to be a mistake by the fact of the definition 
 Minciiiade. 
 
 I. Here I will iay just a few words on the case of Pope Hono- 
 rius, whoee condemnation by anathema in the 6th Ecumenical 
 CSomncil, is certainly a strong primd facie argument against the 
 Pope's doctrinal infyiibllity. His ease is this :— Sergius, Patri- 
 arch _of Constantinople, favored, or rather did not condemn, a 
 doctrine concerning our liord's Person which afterward the Sixth 
 Conncil pronounced to be heresv. He consulted Pope Honorius 
 upon the subject, who in two formal letters declared his entire 
 concurrence with Sergins's oi)inion. Honorius died in peace, bat, 
 ■ore than forty years after him, the 6th Ecumenical Council waa 
 held, which condemned him as a heretic on the score of those two 
 letters. The simple question is, whether the heretical documents 
 priMeeded from him m an infhllible authority or as a private 
 .IiitliO|i. 
 
 ll<iw I observe that whereas the Yatioan Council has deter- 
 miadl tiiat the Pope is infallible only when he speaks ex caihe- 
 ilr4, and that, in order to speak ex caihedrd, he must at least 
 e|Mak " as exercising the office of Pastor and Doctor of all Chris- 
 tians, defining, by virtue of his Apostolical authority, a doctrine 
 whether of faith or of morals for the acceptance of the universal 
 Cliurch" (though Mr. Gladstone strangely says, p. 34, "There is 
 110 established or accepted definition of the phrase ex caihedrd"), 
 from this Pontifical and dogmatic explanation of the phrase it fol- 
 lows, that, whatever Honorius said in answer to Sergius, and what- 
 ever he held, his words were not ex caihedrd, and therefore did 
 not proceed from his infallibility. 
 
 I say so first, because he could not fulfill the above conditions 
 of an ex caihedrd utterance, if he did not actually mean to fulfill 
 them. The question is unlike the Question about the Sacra- 
 ments; external and positive acts, whether material actions or 
 formal words, speak for themselves. Teaching, on the other hand, 
 lias ^no sacnimental visible signs ; it is mainly a question of in- 
 tention. Who would sav that the architriclinus at the wedding 
 ftttsi who said, "Thou hast kept the good wine until now," was 
 teaching the Christian world, though the words have a great cth- 
 ioal and evangelical sense? What is the worth of a signature, 
 if a nan does not consider he is signing ? The Pope can not 
 address his people, East and WesC North and South, without 
 liisning it, as if his very voice, the sounds from his lips, could 
 lllemlly be heard from pole to pole ; nor can he exert his "Apos- 
 tolical authority" without knowing he is doing so; nor can he 
 draw up a form of words and use care and make an effort in do- 
 ing so aeiwratelijr, without intention to do so ; and, therefore, no 
 — '^-*- wf Hononus proceeded from his prerogative of infallible 
 
 THE VATICAN C017NCIL. 
 
 109 
 
 teaching which were not accompanied with the intention of ex- 
 ercising that prerogative ; and who wiU dream of saying, be he 
 Anglican Protestant, unbeliever, or on the other hand Catholic, 
 that Honorius in the 7th century did actually intend to exert that 
 infallible teaching voice which has been dogmatically recognized 
 
 in the nineteenth ? ^ , . ... i i. 
 
 What resemblance do these letters of his, written almost as 
 private instructions, bear to the "Pius Episcopus, Servus Ser- 
 Torum Dei, Sacro approbante Concilio, ad perpetnam ret memor- 
 iam" with the " Si quis huic nostrae definitioni contradicere (quod 
 Deus avertat), praesumpsorit anathema sit" of the Pastor jEier- 
 «ii«t What to the " Venerabilibus fratribus» Patriarchis, prim- 
 atibus, Archiepiscopis, et Episcopis universis," etc., and with the 
 date and signature, " Datum Roma apud Sanctum Petrum, Die 
 8 Dec. anno 1864, etc. Pius P. P. IX." of the Quantd cvrd f 
 
 Secondly, it is no part of our doctrine, as 1 shall say m my 
 next section, that the discussions previous to a Council s defini- 
 tion, or to an ex caihedrd utterance of a Pope, are infallible; and 
 these letters of Honorius on their very face are nothing more 
 than portions of a discussion with a view to some final decision. 
 
 For these two reasons the condemnation of Honorius by tjj? 
 Council in no sense compromises the doctrine of Papal Infalli- 
 bility. At the utmost, it only decides that Honorius m his own 
 person was a heretic, which is inconsistent with no Catholic doc- 
 trine; but we may rather hope and believe that the anathema 
 fell, not upon him, but upon his letters in their objective sense, 
 he not intending personally what his letters legitimately ex- 
 pressed. . 
 
 4. I have one more remark to make upon the argumentative 
 method by which the Vatican Council was carried on to its defi- 
 nition. The Pastor JStemus refers to various witnesses as con- 
 tributing their evidence towards the determination of the con- 
 tents of the deposiium, such as Tradition, the Fathers and Coiin- 
 cils, History, and especially Scripture. For instance, the Bull 
 speaks of the Gospel (" juxta Evangelii testimonia,^ c. 1) and ot 
 Scripture ("manifesta S. S. Scripturarum doctrina, c. 1 : ' aper- 
 
 tis 8. S. Literarum testimoniis,''^ c. 3. "S. S. Scripturis consen- 
 
 ♦Feed My sheep," etc., John xxi. 15-17. Now I wish all ob- 
 jectors to our method of reasoning from Scripture would view it 
 in the light of the following passage in the great philosophical 
 work of Butler, Bishop of Durham. , , , , , ^ 
 
 He writes as follows— "As it is owned the whole scheme ot 
 Scripture is not yet understood, so, if it ever comes to be under- 
 stood, before the • restitution of all things,' and without miracu- 
 lous interpositions, it must He in the same way as natural knowl- 
 edge is come at, by the continuance and progress of learning and 
 of liberty, and by particular persons attending to, comparing, 
 and pursuing intimations scattered up and down it, which are 
 overlooked, and disregarded by the generality of the world. 
 
 lilt 
 "1! 
 
 
 
 i-** aiiLa.MMiu.JBi«^JiMi 
 
110 
 
 TMIS Y.ATlli<AA iMMSwlXlTIOSft 
 
 For tliis is tlie waj in which til improTements are made by 
 thoughtful men tracing on obncure hints, as it were, droi)pod us 
 W Bfttnre accidentally, or which seem to come into our minds by 
 chanca Nor is it <il all incredible that a book, which has been 
 ■o long in the possession of mankind, should contain many 
 Imtha as yet undiscovered. For all the same phenomena, and 
 llio laiiie faculties of investigation, from which such great din* 
 coTeries in natural knowledge have been ma4e in the present 
 and last age, were equally in the possession of mankind several 
 thousand years before. And possibly it might be intended that 
 «Tiiiiii aa they come to pass, should open and ascertain the 
 ffliMming of several parts of Scripture," ii. 3, vide also ii. 4, fin. 
 What has the long history of tne contest for and against the 
 Fope'i infallibility been, but a growing insight through centuries 
 into the meaning of those three texts, to which I just now re- 
 ferred, ending at length by the Church's definitive recognition 
 of the doctrine tha. g™duully manifested to her? 
 
 J 9. The Vatican Definitiojc. 
 
 Now I am to speak of the Vatican definition, by which the 
 iMtrine of the Pope's infallibility has become de j^de, that is, 
 m tenth necessary to be believed, as being included in the origi- 
 Bftl iivine revelation, for those terms, revelation, depositum, 
 4mmK and defdt, are correlatives; and I begin with a remark 
 wFich suggests the dria of all 1 have to sav about it It is this: 
 Chat so difficult a virtue is faith, even with the snecial grace of 
 Hod, in proportion as the reason is exercised, so aifficult is it to 
 ftasent inwardly to propositions, verified to us neither by reason 
 nor experience, but depending for their reception on the word 
 of the Church as God's oracle, that she has ever shown the ut- 
 most care to contract, aa far as possible, the range of truths 3tnd 
 the sense of propositions, of which she demands this absolute 
 reception. " The Church," mjn Pallavicini, " as far as may be, 
 has ever abstained from imposing upon the minds of men that 
 Qommandment, the most arduous of the Christian Law — viz., to 
 believe obscure matters without doubting." * To co-<iperate in 
 this charitable duty has been one special work of her theologians, 
 and rules are laid down by herselr, by tradition, and by custom, 
 to assist them in the tJisk. She only speaks when it is necessary 
 to speak; but hardly has she spoken out magisterially some great 
 general principle, when she sets her theologians to work to ex- 
 phiin her meauincr in the concrete, by strict interpretation of its 
 wording, by the illustration of its circumstances, and by the reo* 
 ognition of exceptions, in order to make it as tolerable as possi- 
 U«. and the least of a toniptation, to 8elf-willcd, independe!!t, or 
 wrongly educated minds, A few years ago it was the fashion 
 ong us to call writers, who conformed to this rule of the 
 
 * Quoted by Father Ryder, (to whorii I am indebted for other 
 of my references,) in his ''Idealism in Theology," p. 25. 
 
 THE VATICAN DKFINITIOK. 
 
 Ill 
 
 Church, by the name of " Minimizers ; " that day of tvrannons 
 ipsedixits, I trust, is over: Bishop Fessler, a man of high author- 
 ity, for he was Secrettiry General of the Vatican Council, and 
 of higher authority still m his work, for it has the approbation 
 of the Sovereign Pontiff, clearly proves to us that a moderation 
 of doctrine, dictated by charitjr, is not inconsistent with sound- 
 ness in the faith. Such a sanction, I suppose, will be considered 
 sufficient for the character of the remarks which I am about to 
 make upon definitions in general, and upon the Vatican in par- 
 ticular. 
 
 The Vatican definition, which comes to us in the shape of the 
 Pope's Encyclical Bull called the Pastor jEiernus, declares that 
 "the Pope has that same hifallibility which the Church has: "* to 
 determine therefore what is meant by the infallibility of the Pope 
 we must turn first to consider the infallibility of the Church. 
 And again, to determine the character of the Church's infalli- 
 bility, we must consider what is the characteristic of Christianity, 
 considered as a revelation of God's will. 
 
 Our Divine Master might have communicated to us heavenly 
 truths without telling us that they came from Him, as it is com- 
 monly thought He has done in the case of heathen nations ; but 
 He willed the Gospel to be a revelation acknowledged and authen- 
 ticated, to be public, fixed, and permanent; and, accordingly, as 
 Catholics hold. He framed a society of men to be its home, its in- 
 strument, and its guarantee. The rulers of that Association are 
 the legal trustees, so to say, of the sacred truths which he spoke 
 to the Apostles by word or mouth. As he was leaving them, He 
 gave them their great commission, and bade them " teach " their 
 converts all over the earth, "to observe all things whatever He 
 had commanded them : " and then he added, "Lo, I am with you 
 alwjiy«, even to the end of the world." 
 
 Here, first, He told them to " teach" His revealed Truth; next, 
 •• to the consummation of all things : " thirdly, for their encour- 
 agement. He said that He would be with them " all days," all 
 along on every emergency or occasion, until that consummation. 
 They had a duty put upon them of teaching their Master's words, 
 a duty which they could not fulfill in the perfection which fidelity 
 required, without His help ; therefore came His promise to be 
 with them in their performance of it. Nor did that promise of 
 supernatural help end with the Apostles personally, for He adds, 
 " to the consummation of the world," implying that the Apostles 
 would have successors, and engaging that He would be with those 
 successors, as He had been with them. 
 
 The same safeguard of the Revelation— viz., an authoritative, 
 permanent tradition of teaching is insisted on bv an informant 
 of equal authority with St. Matthew, but altogether independent 
 of him, I mean St. Paul. He calls the Church " the pillar and 
 ground of the Truth ; " and he bids his convert Timothy, when 
 
 ♦Romanura Poiitificem eft infallibilitate ijoUcre, quA divinusRe- 
 deniptf>r Ecclesiani suam in definienda doctrinft de nde vel moribus 
 iustructaui esse voluit. 
 
 1)1 
 
 W 
 
i 
 
 112 
 
 TIIK VATICAN DKFISITIOX. 
 
 Im bid become a foler in that Church, to "take heed unto his 
 ioctrine," to " keep the depoeit" of the faith, and to " commit 
 the thin|5ii which he had heaid from himself " lo faithful men 
 who should be fit to teach others." 
 
 This is how CSatholics understand the Scripture record, nor 
 does it appear how it can otherwise be understood; but, when we 
 ha¥e got as far as this, and look back, we find that we have by 
 implication made profession of a further doctrine. For, if the 
 Church, initiated by the Apostles and continued in their succes- 
 sors, has been set up for the direct object of protecting, preserv- 
 inii and declaring the Revelation, and that by means of the 
 QiMvdianship and Providence of its Divine Autlior, we are led 
 on to perceive that, in asserting this, we are in other words as- 
 Mrting. that, so far as the revealed messa^ is concerned, the 
 Cihiiich is infallible ; for what is meant bj infallibility m teach- 
 ing Irnt that the teacher in his teaching is secured from error ? 
 wm how can fallible man be thus secured except by a supernal 
 ural infallible guidance? And what can have been the object of 
 the words. *'I am. with you all along to the end," but to give 
 thereby an answer by anticiption to the spontaneous silent 
 aiinp of the feeble company of fiRhermen and laborers, to whom 
 th«f were addressed, on their finding themselves laden with su- 
 ffflrlnman duties and responsibilities? ^ „., .,. ^ .^ 
 
 Such, then, being, in its simple outline, the infallibility of the 
 Church, such too will be the Pope's infallibility, as the Vatican 
 Fathers have defined it. And if we find that by means of this 
 CMtliae we are able to fill out in all imnortant respects the idea 
 of a Council's inHUlibility, we shall thereby be ascertaining in de- 
 tail what has been defined in 1870 about the infallibility of the 
 Pope. With an attempt to do this I shall conclude. 
 
 1. The Church has the office of teaching, and the matter of 
 that teaching is the body of doctrine, which the Apostles left be- 
 hind them as her perpetual possession. If a question arises as to 
 what the Apostolic doctrine is on a particular point, she has in- 
 fallibili^ promised to her to eioable her to answer correcdv. 
 And, as by the teaching of the Church is understood, not the teach- 
 ing of this or that Bishop, but tlieir united voice, and a Council 
 is the form the Church must take, in order that all men may rec- 
 HfpiM that in fact she is teaching on any point in dispute so in 
 like manner the Pope must come before us in some special form 
 or posture, if he is to be understood to be exercising his teaching 
 office, and that form is called ex cathedrd. This term is most 
 appropriate, as being on one occasion used by our Lord Himself. 
 When the Jewish doctors taught, they nlaced themselves in Mo- 
 ses* seat, and spoke ex caihedrd; and then, as He tells us, thp;r 
 were to be obeyed by their people, and that, whatever were their 
 nrifate lives or characters. "The Scribes and Pharisees," He 
 says, "are seated on the chair of Moses: all thin|^ therefore what- 
 soever they shall say to you. observe and do; Ijut according to 
 their works do you not, for they say and do not." 
 
 2. The forms by which a General Council is identified as repre- 
 senting the Church herself, are too clear to need drawing out; 
 
 THE VATICAN DEFINITIOlf. 
 
 113 
 
 I 
 
 but what is to be that moral cathedra, or teaching chair, in which 
 the Pope sits, when he is to be recognized as in the exercise of 
 his infallible teaching? The new definition answers this ques- 
 tion. He speaks ex cathedrd, or infallibly, when he speaks, first, 
 as the Universal Teacher; secondly, in the name and with the 
 authority of the Apostles; thirdly, on a point of faith and morals; 
 fourthly, with the purpose of binding every member of the Church 
 to accept and believe his decision. ^ . - „. 
 
 3. These conditions of course contract the range of his mfallF 
 bility most materially. Hence Billuart speaking of the Pope 
 gays, " Neither in conversation, nor in discussion, nor in mteiv 
 preting Scripture or the Fathers, nor in consulting, nor in giving 
 his reasons lor the point which he has defined, nor in answering 
 letters, nor in private deliberations, supposing he is setting forth 
 his own opinion, is the Pope infallil)le,^ t. ii. p. 110* And for 
 this simple reason, because, on these various occasions of speak- 
 ing his mind, he is not in the chair of the universal doctor. 
 
 4. Nor is this all: the greater prt of Billuart's negatives refer 
 to the Pope's utterances when he is out of the Cathedra Petri, but 
 even; when he is in it, his words do not necessarily proceed from his 
 infallibility. He has no wider prerogative than a Council, and 
 of a Council Pcrrone says, " Councils are not infallible m the 
 reasons by which they are led, or on which they rely, in making 
 their definition, nor in matters which relate to persons, nor to 
 physical matters which have no necessary connection with 
 dogma."— Proj^. Theol t. ii. p. 492. Thus, if a Council has con- 
 demned a work of Origen or Theodoret, it did not m so condemn- 
 ing go beyond the work itself; it did not touch the persons of 
 either. Since this holds of a Council, it also holds in the case 
 of the Pope ; therefore, supposing a Pope has quoted the so-called 
 works of the Areopagite as if really genuine, there is no c^ on 
 us to believe him; nor again, when he condepned Galileo's Coper- 
 nicanism, unless the earth's immobility has a " necessary con^ 
 nection with some dogmatic truth," which the present bearing of 
 the Holy See towards that philosophy virtually denies. 
 
 5. Nor is a Council infallible, even in the prefaces and intro- 
 ductions to its definitions. There are theologians of name, aa 
 Tournely and Amort,t who contend that even those most instruct- 
 ive capitala passed in the Tridcntine Council, from which the 
 Canons with anathemas are drawn up, are not portions of the 
 Church's infallible teaching; and the parallel introductions pre- 
 fixed to the Vatican anathemas have an authority not greate* nor 
 less than that of those capitula. 
 
 6. Such passages, however, as these are too closely connectol 
 with the definitions themselves, not to be what is sometimes called, 
 by a catachresis, "proximum fidei"; still, on the other hand, it 
 
 ♦And so Fessler: "The Pope is not infallible as a man, or a 
 theologian, or a priest, or a bishop, or a temporal prince, or a judge, 
 or a legislator, or in his poUtical views, or even in his government 
 of the Church." — Introd. ,, . ., -rr — 
 
 tnu Amort. Deni. Or., pp. 205-6. This appUes to the Unam 
 Sanctam. Vid. Fessler. 
 10 
 
 If 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 ii 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
114 
 
 VATICAN DEFINITION. 
 
 THE VATICAN DEFINITION. 
 
 115 
 
 is tree also that, in those circumstances and surroundings of for* 
 mal deinitions, which I have been speaking of, whether of » 
 Council or a Pope, there may be not onlv no exercise of an infal- 
 lible foice, but actual error. Thus, in the Third Council, a pas- 
 •aao of an heretical author was quoted in defense of the doctrine 
 deined. under the »>elief he wa« Fope Julius, and narratives not 
 trustworthy, are introduced into the Seventh. ^ 
 
 This remark and several before it wiU become intelligible if 
 we consider that neither Pope nor Council are on a level with the 
 Apottlea* To the Apostles the whole revelation was given, by 
 the &mmh it is transmitted; no simply new truth has been j^iven 
 to us sinoe St John's death; the one office of the Church is to 
 guard " that noble deposit "of truth, as St. Paul speaks to Timothy. 
 which the Apostles beuueathed to her, in its fullness and integ- 
 rity. Hence the infallibility of the Apostles was of a far more 
 poeitive and wide character than that needed by and granted to 
 the Church We call it, in the case of the Apostles, inspiration; 
 in the case of the Church, assutentim. . ,. „ . . . , 
 
 Of course there is a sense of the word " inspiration m which 
 it is common to all members of the Church, and therefore espec- 
 ially to its Bishops, and still more directly to its rulers, when 
 ■olenmly called together in Council after much ijraver throughout 
 Christendom, and in a frame of mind especially serious and 
 earnest by reason of the work they have in hand. Th6 Paraclete 
 certainly is ever with them, and more effectively in a Council* as 
 being " in Spiritu Simcto congregata; " but I speak of the soecial 
 and promised aid necessary for their fidelity to apostohc teaching; 
 ami, in order to secure this fidelity, no inward gift of infallibility 
 is aeeded, such as the AposUes had. no direct suggestion of divme 
 truth, but simply an external guardianship, keeping them off 
 from error (as a man's Guardian Angel, witliout enaWinir him to 
 walk, might, on a night journey, keep him from pitfalls m hia 
 way), a guardianship saving them, as far as their ultimate decis- 
 ions are concerned, from the effects of their inherent inhrmities, 
 from any chance of extravagance, of confusion of thought, of col- 
 Jiiicm with former decisions, or with Scripture, which in seasons 
 ofexcitement might reasonably be feared. , .*. r 
 
 '• Never," says Perrone, " have Catholics taught that the gift of 
 iaiiiliibiHty is given by God to the Church after the manner of in- 
 spinAm."— i 2, p. 253. Again: " [Human] media of amving 
 at the truth are excluded neither by a Council a nor by a rope s 
 infallibility, for God has promised it, not by wajjr of an mfused 
 or habitual "gift, but by the way of mauUniia. — tfrtrf. p. 541. 
 
 But since the process of defining truth is human, it is open to 
 Iheilhance of error: what Providence has guaranteed is only this, 
 that there should be no error in the final step, in the resulting 
 
 definition or dogma. , „ .,^ . .. t> • • 
 
 7. Accordingly, all that a Council, and all that the Pope, is in- 
 fallible in, is the direct answer to the special question which he 
 happens to be considering ; his prerogative does not extend be- 
 yond a power, when in his Cathedra, of giving that very answer 
 truly. "Nothing," says Porrone, "but the objecU of dogmatic 
 
 definitions of Councils are immutable, for in these are Councils 
 infallible, not in their reasons," etc. — ibid. 
 
 8. This rule is so strictly to be observed that, though dogmatic 
 statements are found from time to time in a Pope's Apostolic Let- 
 ters, etc., yet they are not accounted to be exercises of his infalli- 
 bility if they are said only obiter— hy the way, and without direct 
 intention to define. A striking instance of this sine qua won con- 
 dition is afforded by Nicholas I., who, in a letter to the Bulgarians, 
 spoke as if baptism were valid, when administered simply in our 
 Lord's Name, without distinct mention of the Three Persons ; but 
 he is not teaching and speaking ex cathedrd^ because no question 
 on this matter was in any sense the occasion of his writing. The 
 question asked of him was concerning the minister of baptism — 
 viz., whether a Jew or Pagjin could validly baptize; in answering 
 in the affirmative, he added obiter, as a private doctor, says Bellar- 
 mine, "that the baptism was valid, whether administered in the 
 name of the Three Persons or in the name of Christ only." • {de 
 Mom. Pont, iv. 12.) _. , " 
 
 9. Another limitation is given in Pope Pius s own conditions 
 set down in the Pastor JEternns, for the exercise of infallibility: 
 viz., the proposition defined will be without anv claim to be con- 
 sidered binding on the belief of Catholics, unless it is referable 
 to the Apostolic depositum, through the channel either of Scrip- 
 ture or Tradition ; and, though the Pope is the judge whether it 
 is so referable or not, yet the necessity of his professing to abide 
 by this reference is in itself a certain limitation of his dogmatic 
 action. A Protestant will object indeed that, after his distinctly 
 asserting that the Immaculate Conception and the Papal Infallibil- 
 ity are in Scripture and Tradition, this safeguard against errone- 
 ous definitions is not worth much, nor do 1 say that it is one of the 
 most effective; but anyhow, in consequence of it, no Pope any more 
 than a Council could, for instance, introduce Ignatius' s Epistles 
 into the Canon of Scripture ;— and as to his dogmatic condemnar 
 tion of particular books, which, of course, are foreign to the de- 
 positnm, I would say, that, as to their false doctrine there can be 
 no difficulty in condemning that by means of that Apostolic de- 
 posit; nor surely in his condemning the very wording, in which 
 they convey it, when the subject is carefully considered. For the 
 Pope's condemning the language, for instance, of Jansenius is a 
 parallel act to the Church's receiving the word " Consubstantial," 
 and if a Council and the Pope were not infallible so far in their 
 judgment of language, neither the Pope nor Council could draw- 
 up a dogmatic definition at all, for the right exercise of words is 
 involved in the right exercise of thought. 
 
 10. And in like manner, as regards the precepts concerning 
 moral duties, it is not in every such precept that the Pope is in- 
 fallible. As a definition of faith must be drawn from the Apos- 
 tolic depositum of doctrine, in order that it may be considered an 
 exercise of infallibility, whether in the Pope or a Council, so too 
 a precept of morals, if it is to be accepted as dogmatic, must be 
 drawn from the Moral law, that primary revelation to us from 
 God. 
 
 ti 
 
 ^1 
 
116 
 
 IHB VATICAN DEFIKITION. 
 
 THB VATICAN DEFINITION. 
 
 117 
 
 ill 
 
 That in, in the first place, it must relate to thingp in thciii»elve« 
 good or evil If the Pope prescribed lying or revenge, hw com- 
 muid would simply go for nothing, as if he had not issued it, be- 
 Minse be has no power over the Moral Law. If he forbade hia 
 ioek to eat any but vegetable food, or to drcsa in a particular 
 iishion (questions of decency or modesty not coming into the 
 question), he would in like manner be going beyond his province, 
 because such a rule does not relate to a matter in itself good or 
 UA, If he gave a precept all over the world for the adoption of 
 lotteries instead of tithes or offerings, certainly it would be very 
 bard to prove that he was contradicting the Moral Law, or rubng 
 a practice to be in itself good which was in itself evil. There are 
 few persons but would allow that it is at least doubtful whether 
 lotteries are abstractedly evil, and in a doubtful matter the Pope 
 is to believed and obeyed. . , . . r 
 
 Hiiwever, there are other conditions besides this, necessary for 
 tbe eiewise of Papal infallibility in moral subjects :— for instance, 
 bis deinition must relate to things necessary for salvation. No 
 one would so speiik of lotteries, nor of a particular dress, or of a 
 particular kind of food ;— such precepts, then, did he make them, 
 would be simply external to the range of his prerogative. 
 
 And again, his infallibility in consequence is not called into 
 emeiuise, unless he speaks to the. whole viorld; for, if his precepts, 
 in order to be dogmatic, must enjoin what is necessary to salvar 
 tion, they must be necessary for all men. Accordingly orders 
 which issue from him for the observance of particular countries, 
 ©r political or religioaa claases, have no claim to be the utterances 
 of bis infallibility. If be enjoins upon the hierarchv of Ifeland 
 to withstand mixed education, this is no exercise of his inlalli- 
 bilitv 
 
 It mav be added that the field of morals contains so little that 
 Is unknown and unexplored, in contrast with revelation and doc- 
 trinal fact, which form the domain of faith, that it is difficult to 
 say what portions of moral teachinje in the course of 1800 years 
 autnolly have proceeded from the Pope, or from the Church, or 
 whef© to look for such. Nearly all that either oracle has done 
 in this respect, has been to condemn such propositions as in a 
 moral point of view are fabe, of dangerous, or rash ; and these 
 Dondemnations, besides being such as in fact, will be found to 
 mmiiuid the assent of most men, as soon as heard, do not neces- 
 earilj go so far as to present any positive statements for univer- 
 sal acceptance. . . x v ui. 
 11. With the mention of condemned propositions I am brought 
 to another and large consideration, which is one of the best il- 
 Instnitions that I can give of that principle of minimizing so 
 n^oassttiy, as I think, tor a wise and cautious theolo^ ; at the 
 saine time I can not insist upon it in the connection into which 
 I am going to introduce it, without submitting myself to the cor- 
 rection of divines more learned than I can pretend to be myself 
 The infallibility, whether of the Church or of the Pope, acts 
 pianipally or solely in two channels, in direct sfaitements of 
 taith, and in the condemnation of error. The former takes the 
 
 shape of doctrinal definitions, the latter stigmatises propositions 
 as heretical, next to heresy, erroneous, and the like. In each 
 case the Church, as guided W her Divine Master, has made pro- 
 vision for weighing as lightly as possible on the faith and con- 
 science of her children. 
 
 As to the condemnation of propositions all she tells us is, that 
 the thesis condemned when taken as a whole, or, apin, when 
 viewed in its context, is heretical, or blasphemous, or impious, or 
 whatever other epithet she affixes to it We have only to trust 
 her so far as to allow ourselves to be warned against the thesis, 
 or the work containing it. Theologians employ themselves in 
 determining what precisely it is that is condemned in that thesis, 
 or treatise; and doubtless in most cases thev do so with success; 
 but that determination is not de jide ; all that is of faith is that 
 there is in that thesis itself, which is noted, heresy or error, or 
 other peccant matter, as the case ma^ be, such, that the censure 
 is a peremptory command to theologians, preachers, students, and 
 all other whom it concerns, to keep clear of it. But so light is 
 this obligation, that instances frequently occur, when it is suc- 
 cessfully maintained by some new writer, that the Pope's act 
 does not imply what it has seemed to imply, and questions which 
 seemed to be closed, are after a course of years re-opened. In 
 discussions such as these, there is a real exercise of private judg- 
 ment, and an allowable one ; the act of faith, which can not be 
 superseded or trifled with, being, I repeat,^ the unreserved W3- 
 ceptance that the thesis in question is heretical, or erroneous in 
 faith, etc., as the Pope or the Church has spoken of it. 
 
 In these cases, which in a true sense may be called the Pope's 
 negatioe enunciations, the opportunity of a legitimate minimis- 
 ing lies in the intensely concrete character of the matters con- 
 demned ; in his affirmative enunciations a like opportunity is af- 
 forded by their being more or less abstract. Indeed, excepting 
 such as relate to persons, that is, to the Trinity in Unity, the 
 Blessed Virgin, the Saints, and the like, all the dogmas of Pope 
 or of Council are but general, and so far, in consequence, admit 
 of exceptions in their actual application, — ^these exceptions being 
 determined either by other authoritative utterances, or by the 
 scrutinizing vigilance, acuteness, and subtlety of the Schola 
 T heologorum. 
 
 One of the most remarkable instances of what I am insisting 
 on is found in a dogma, which no Catholic can ever think of 
 disputing, viz., that "Out of the Church, and out of the faith, 
 is no salvation." Not to go to Scripture, it is the doctrine of St. 
 Ignatius, St. Irenaeus, St. Cyprian m the first three centuries, as 
 of St. Augustine and his contemporaries in the fourth and fifth. 
 It can never be other than an elementary truth of Christianity ; 
 and the present Pope has proclaimed it as all Popes, doctors, and 
 bishops before him. But that truth has two aspects, according 
 as the force of the negative falls upon the "Church" or upon 
 the " salvation." The main sense is, that there is no other com- 
 munion or so-called Church, but the Catholic, in which are stored 
 the promises, the sacraments, and other means of salvation: th6 
 
118 
 
 TMi vAimm mmmmm. 
 
 4i 
 
 other and derived sense is, thai no one can be mved who is not 
 in that one and only Church. But it does not follow, because 
 there is no Church but one which has the Evangelical gifts and 
 privileges to bestow, that therefore no* one can be saved without 
 the intervention of that one Church. Anglicans quite under- 
 stood this distinction ; for, on the one hand, their Article says, 
 "They are to be had accursed (anathematizandi) that presume to 
 say, that every man shall be saved by (in) the law or sect which 
 lie profesj«eth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to 
 Unit law and the light of nature ; " while on the other hand iXiej 
 wprn^ of and hold flie doctrine of the *' uncovenanted mercies of 
 (fid/' The latter doctrine in its Catholic form is the doctrine of 
 invincible ignorance— or, that it is possible to belong to the soul 
 of th© Church without belonging to the bod^ ; and, at the end of 
 1,800 years, it has been formally and authoritatively put forward 
 by the present Pope (the first Popje, I suppose, who has done so), 
 on the very same occasion on which he has repeated the funda- 
 mental principle of exclusive salvation itself It is to the pur- 
 pose here to auote his words; they occur in the course of his 
 Encyclical, addressed to the Bishops of Italy, under date of 
 August 10, 18t>3 : ^ , 
 
 *• We and you hwWt that those who lie under invincible ignor- 
 ance as regards our most Holy Religion, and who, diligently ob- 
 serving the natural law, and its precepts, which are engraven by 
 God on the hearts of all, and prepared to obey God, lead a good 
 and upright life, are able, by the operation of the power of 
 divine light and grace, to obtain eternal life." * 
 
 Who would at first sight gather from the wording of so forci- 
 bl© a universal, that an exception to its operation, such as this, 
 ■o distinct, and. for what we know, so very wide, was consistent 
 with holding it? 
 
 Another instance of ft similar kind is the general acceptance 
 in the Latin Church, since the time of St. Augustine, of the doc- 
 trine of absolute predestination, as instanced m the teaching of 
 other great saints beside him, such as St. Fulgentius, St. Prosner, 
 8t Gregory, St. Thomaa, and St. Buonaventure. Yet in the last 
 centuries a great explanation and modification of this doctrine 
 has been effected by the efforts of the Jesuit School, which have 
 issued in the reception of a distinction between predestination to 
 gnee ftnd predestination to glory ; and a consequent admission 
 of Hie principle that, though our own works do not avail for 
 bringing us into a state of salvation on earth, they do ftvail, when 
 in that state of salvation or grace, for our attainment of eternal 
 rfery in heaven. Two saints of late centuries, St. Francis de 
 Me© and St Alfonso, seem to have professed this less rigid 
 opinion, which is now the more oommon doctrine of the day. 
 
 ♦ Th© Pope speaks more forcibly still in an earlier Allocution. 
 After mentioning invincible Ignorance, he adds : " Quis tantum sibi 
 arroget, nt hujusmodi ignorantiae designare Umites queat, juxta pop- 
 uloram, regionuni, ingeniorum, aliarumque rerum tam multarum 
 rationem et varietatem ? ^'—Jke, 9, 1854. 
 
 THE VATICAN DEFINITION. 
 
 119 
 
 Another instance is supplied by the Papal decisions concern- 
 ing Usury. Pope Clement v., in the Council of Vienne, declares, 
 •' ft any one shall have fallen into the error of pertinaciously 
 presuming to afl&rm that usury is no sin, we determine that he is 
 to be punished as a heretic." However, in the year 1831 the Sa- 
 cred rcenitentiaria answered an inquiry on the subject, to the 
 effect that the Holy See suspended its decision on the point, and 
 that a confessor who allowed of usury was not to be disturbed, 
 *• non esse inquietandum." Here again a double aspect seems to 
 have been remixed of the idea intended by the word usury. 
 
 To show how natural this process of partial and gradually de- 
 veloped teaching is, we may refer to the apparent contradiction 
 of Bellarmine, who says " the Pope, whether he can err or not, 
 is to be obeyed by all the faithful," (Rom. Pont. iv. 2), yet, as I 
 have quoted him above, p. 52-53, sets down (ii. 29) cases in 
 which he is not to be obeyed. An illustration may be given in 
 political history in the discussions which took place years ago as 
 to the force of the Sovereign's Coronation Oath to uphold the Es- 
 tablished Church. The words were large and general, and 
 seemed to preclude any act on his part to the prejudice of the 
 Establishment; but lawyers succeeded at length m making a dis- 
 tinction between the legislative and executive action of the 
 Crown, which is now generally accepted. 
 
 These instances out of many similar are sufficient to show 
 what caution is to be observed, on the part of private and unau- 
 thorized persons, in imposing upon tne consciences of others 
 any interpretation of dogmatic enunciations which is beyond the 
 legitimate sense of the words, inconsistent with the principle 
 that all general rules have exceptions, and unrecognized by the 
 Theological Schola. 
 
 12. From these various considerations it follows, that Papal 
 and Synodal definitions, obligatory on our faith, are of rare oc- 
 currence ; and this is confessed by all sober theologians. Father 
 O'Reilly, for instance, of Dublin, one of the first theologians of 
 the day, says: — 
 
 " The Papal Infallibility is comparatively seldom brought into 
 action. I am very far from denving that the Vicar of Christ is 
 largely assisted by God in the fulfillment of his sublime office, 
 that he receives great light and strength to do well^ the great 
 work entrusted to him and imposed on him, that he is continu- 
 ally guided from above in the government of the Catholic 
 Church. But this is not the meaninj^ of Infallibility. . . What 
 is the use of dragging in the Infallibility in connection with Pa- 
 pal acts with which it has nothing to do ? Papal acts, which 
 are very good and very holy, and entitled to all respect and obe- 
 dience, acts in which the Pontiff is commonly not mistaken, but 
 in which he could be mistaken and still remain infallible in the 
 only sense in which he has been declared to be so." (The Irish 
 Monthly, vol. ii. No. 10, 1874.)* 
 
 This great authority goes on to disclaim any desire to minimize, 
 
 •Vid. Fessler also ; and I hclicvc Father Perrone says the same. 
 
 H 
 
120 
 
 €0IIOL€8KHr. 
 
 bilk there i% I hope, no real difference betneen ne here. He, I 
 am sure, would sanction me in my repugnance to impose upon 
 the faith of others mure than what the Church distinctly claims 
 of them : and I should follow him in thinkine it a more scriptu- 
 ral, Christian, dutiful, happy frame of mind to be easy, than to 
 bo diUcult, of belief. I hate already spoken of that uncatholic 
 spirit, which starts with a grudgini faith in the word of the 
 Church, and determines to hold nothing but what it is, as if by 
 draionstration, compelled to believe. To be a true Catholic a man 
 nmst have a senerous loyalty towards ecclesiastical authority, and 
 aeoept what is taught him with what is called the pietat fidei, 
 and only luch a tone of mind has a claim, and it certainly, has m 
 jilaim. , to be met and to be handled with a wise and gentle wttil- 
 mifiii. Still the fact remains, that there has been of late years 
 a ierce and intolerant temper abroad, which seoms and virtually 
 trainplet on the little ones of Christ. 
 
 I and with an extract from the Pastoral of the Swiss Bishops, 
 a Fastoiml which has received the Pope's approbation : 
 
 **lt in no way depends upon the caprice of the Pope, or upon 
 his good pleasure, to make 80ch and such a doctrine the object of 
 a dogmalic definition.^ He is tied up and limited to the divine 
 revcESon, and to the truths which that revelation contains. Ho 
 is tied up and limited by the Creeds, alreadv in existence, and by 
 Ihi preoeding deinitions of the Church. He is tied up and lim- 
 ited by the divine law, and by the constitution of the Church. 
 Lastly, he is tied up and limited by that doctrine, divinely re- 
 ¥«iled, which affirms that alongside relidous society there is civil 
 aCMitif , that alonuEside the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, there is the 
 power of temporal magistrates, invested in their own domain 
 with a full sovereignty, and to whom we owe obedience in con- 
 ieieae®, and respect in all things morally permitted, and belong- 
 ing to the domain of civil society." • 
 
 { 10. CONCLUSIOK. 
 
 I have now said all that I consider necessary in order to liilfill 
 tii# task which I have undertaken, a task very painful to me and 
 ungracious. I account it a great misfortune, that my last words, 
 as they are likely to be, should be devoted to a controversy with 
 mm whom I have always so much respected and admired. But I 
 ■houM not have been satisfied with myself, if I had not responded 
 to the oill made upon me from such various quarters, to the op- 
 portunity at last given me of breaking a long silence on subjects 
 daeply intoresting to me, and to the demands of my own honor. 
 
 The main point of Mr. Gladstone's charge against us is that 
 in 1870, after a series of nreparatory acts, a great change and 
 itwversible was effected in the political attitude of the Church by 
 the third and fourth chapters of the Vatican Pastor jEtemtis, a 
 change which no state or statesmnn can afford to pass over. Of 
 this iSardinal assertion I consider he has given no proof at all; 
 and my object throughout the foregoing pages has been to make 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 121 
 
 this clear. The Pope's infallibility indeed, and his supreme au- 
 thority, have in the Vatican capita been declared matters of faith ; 
 but his preroj2;ative of infallibility lies in matters speculative, and 
 his prerogative of authority is no infallibility, in laws, com- 
 mands, or measures. His infallibility bears upon the domain of 
 thouffht, not directly of action, and while it may fairly exercise 
 the theologian, philosopher, or man of science, it scarcely con- 
 cerns the politician. Moreover, whether the recognition of his 
 infallibility in doctrine will increase his actual power over the 
 faith of Catholics, remains to be seen, and must be determined by 
 the event; for there are gifts too large and too fearful to be 
 handled freely. Mr. Gladstone seems to feel this, and therefore 
 insists upon the increase made by the Vatican definition in the 
 Pope's authority. But there is no real increase ; he has for cen- 
 turies upon centuries had and used that authority, which the 
 Definition now declares ever to have belonged to him. Before 
 the Council there was the rule of obedience, and there were ex- 
 ceptions to the rule ; and since the Council the rule remains, and 
 with it the possibility of exceptions. 
 
 It may be objected that a representation such as this, is nega- 
 tived by the universal sentiment which testifies to the formidable 
 effectiveness of the Vatican decrees, and to the Pope's intention 
 that they should be effective; that it is the boast of some Cath- 
 olics and the reproach levelled against us by all Protestants, that 
 the Catholic Church has now become beyond mistake a despotic 
 aggressive Papacy, in which freedom of thought and action is 
 utterly extinguished. But I do not allow this alleged unanimous 
 testimony to exist. Of course Prince Bismarck and other states- 
 men such as Mr. Gladstone, rest their opposition to Pope Pius 
 on the political ground ; but the old Catholic movement is based, 
 not upon politics, but upon theology, and Dr. Dollinger has more 
 than once, I believe, declared his disapprobation of the Prussian 
 acts against the Pope, while Father Hyacinth has quarreled with 
 the unti-CathoIic politics of Geneva The French indeed have 
 shown their sense of the political support which the Holy Father's 
 name and influence would bring to their country ; but does any 
 one suppose that they expect to derive support definitely from the 
 Vatican decrees, and not rather from the prestige of that venerable 
 Authority, which those decrees have rather lowered than other- 
 wise in the eyes of the world ? So again the Legitimists and ('ar- 
 lists in France and Spain doubtless wish to associate themselves 
 with Rome ; but where and how have they signified that they can 
 turn to proiSt the special dogma of the Pope's infallibility, and 
 would not have been better pleased to be rid of the controversy 
 which it has occasioned ? In fact, instead of there beinj; a uni- 
 versal impression that the proclamation of his infallibility and 
 supreme authority has strengthened the Pope's secular position 
 in £urope, there is room for suspecting that some of the politi- 
 cians or the day, (I do not mean Mr. Gladstone) were not sorry 
 that the Ultramontane party was successful at the Council in 
 their prosecution of an object which those politicians considered 
 to be favorable to the interests of the Civil power. There is cer- 
 
 i 
 
122 
 
 a>N€L'USIO!f. 
 
 CONCLUSION, 
 
 123 
 
 toinly «ome Blansibility in the view, that it is not the "Curia R^ 
 mum:* as Mr. Gladntone considers, or the Jesuits, who are the 
 ••ijitiitii" party, but that rather they are themselves vicUms ot 
 lliitt asliitoiiess of secular statesmen. ^u^^r..^ 
 
 The recognition, which 1 am here implying, of the existenc© 
 of parties iS the Church reminds me of what, while I have been 
 wrUinc these pages, I have all along felt would be at once the 
 prima fmie and also the most telling criticism upon me. It will 
 be said that there are very considerable differences in argument 
 and opinion between me and others who have replied to Mr. 
 Gladstone, and 1 shall be taunted with the evident break-down, 
 thereby made manifest, of that topic of glorification so com- 
 monly in the mouths of Catholics, that they arc aU of one way 
 of thinkinff, while Protestants are all at variance with each other, 
 and by that very variation of opinion can have no ground of cer- 
 tainty severally in their <»wn. ^ . 
 This is a showy and serviceable retort m controversy ; 'J^J^ " 
 is nothing more. First, as regards the areuments which Cath- 
 olics use, it has to be considered whether they are really mcom- 
 matihle with eaich other; if they are not, then surely it w gener- 
 Illy granted by Protestants as well as Cathohcs, that two distinct 
 arfiiSients for the same conclusion, instead of invalidating that 
 conclusion, actually strengthen it. And next, suiiposing the dif- 
 ference to be one of conclusions themselves, then it must De con- 
 sidered whether the difference relates to a matter of faith or to a 
 matter of opinion. If a matter of faith is in question I grant 
 there ought to be absolute agreement, or rather I maintain that 
 there is; I mean to say that only one out of the »^fe"*««*« P"* 
 forth can l>e true, and that- the other statements will be at once 
 withdrawn by their authors, by virtue of their being Catholics, 
 as soon as they learn on good authority that they are erroneous. 
 But if the differences which I have supposed are only in theo- 
 logical opinion, they do but show that a^r all private J»%ment 
 is not so utterly unknown among Catholics and in Catholic 
 Schools, as Protestants are desirous to establish, ^ 
 
 I have written on this subject at some length m Lectures 
 which I published many years ago, but, it would appear, wiUi 
 little practical effect upon those for whom they were intended. 
 •* Left to himself," I say. " each Catholic likes and would main- 
 fciin his own opinion and his private judgment just as much as a 
 Protestant; and he has it and he maintains it. just so far as the 
 Church does not, liy the authority of Revelation, supersede it^ 
 The very moment the Church ceases to speak, at the very point 
 at which she. that is, God who speaks by her, circumscribes her 
 range of teaching, then private judgment of necessity starts up: 
 the?e is nothing to hinder it. . . A Catholic sacrifices his opinion 
 to the Word of God. declared through His Church ; but from «ie 
 nature of the case, there is nothing to hinder him having ms 
 cwn OBinion and expressing it, whenever, and so far as, the 
 Church, the oracle of Revelation, docs not speak. 
 
 *'VMe " Difficulties felt by AngUcama." IiCctnre X. 
 
 In saying this, it must not be supposed that I am denying 
 what is called the pietas Jideiy that is, a sense of the great prob- 
 ability of the truth of enunciations made by the Church, which 
 are not formally and actually to be considered as the "Word of 
 God." Doubtless it is our duty to check many a speculation, « or 
 at least many an utterance, even though we are not bound to con- 
 demn it as contrary to religious truth. But, after all, the field of 
 religious thought which the duty of faith occupies, is small in- 
 deed compared with that which is open to our free, though of 
 course to our reverent and conscientious speculation. 
 
 I draw from these remarks two conclusions : first, as regards 
 Protestants, — Mr. Gladstone should not on the one hand declaim 
 against us as having "no mental freedom," if the periodical 
 press on the other hand is to mock us as admitting a liberty of 
 private judgment, purely Protestant. We surely are not open to 
 contradictory imputations. Every note of triumph over the dif- 
 ferences which mark our answers to Mr. Gladstone is a distinct 
 admission that we do not deserve his injurious reproach that we 
 are captives and slaves of the Pope. 
 
 Secondly, for the benefit of some Catholics, I would observe 
 that, while I acknowledged one Pope, jure divino, I acknowledge 
 no other, and that I think it a usurpation, too wicked to be com- 
 fortably dwelt upon, when individuals use their own private judg- 
 ment, m the discussion of religious questions, not simply "abun- 
 dare in suo sensu," but for the purpose of anathematizing the 
 private judgment of others. 
 
 I say there is only one Oracle of God, the Holy Catholic 
 Church and the Pope as her head. To her teaching 1 have ever 
 desired all my thoughts, all my words to be conformed; to her 
 judgment I submit what I have now written, what I have ever 
 written, not only as regards its truth, but as to its prudence, its 
 suitableness, and its expedience. I think I have not pursued any 
 end of my own in any thing that I have published, but I know 
 well, that, in matters not of faith, I may have spoken when I 
 ought to have been silent. 
 
 And now, my dear Duke, I release you from this long discus- 
 sion, and, in concluding, beg you to accept the best Christmas 
 wishes and prayers for your present and future from 
 Tour affectionate Friend and Servant, 
 
 JOHN HENRY NEWMAN. 
 The Oratory, December 27, 1874. 
 
u 
 
 ARCHBISHOP MAMING'S REPLY. 
 
PKEFAOK 
 
 A finK both difficalt and unlooked for lias eaddenly Men to 
 my lotT that is, to gain a fair hearing on subjects about which 
 m opiiions, and still more the feeling«. of so many men are not 
 unly idverse, but even hostile. 1 must, therefore, ask for patience 
 imm those who may read these pages. 
 
 The tonics here treated have not been chosen by me. mey 
 haire bee^ raised by Mr. Gladstone, and perhaps, ma 1 the range 
 f»f Religion and Politics, none can be found more delicato more 
 beset with misconceptions, or more prejudged by old trad itionaijf 
 beliefs and antipathies. Some of them t(>o. are of an odious 
 lund; others revive memories we would flvm forget And yet, 
 if Mr. Gladstone's appeal to me is to be answered, treated they 
 must be. My replj to the argument of the Expc^tulation on tl^e 
 Vatican CouncU will be founf in the first, second, and fifth chaiH 
 ters: but as Mr. Gladstone has brought into his impeachment the 
 present conflict in Germany, and has reviewed his own conduct 
 L respect to the RevoUition in Ibily, I have felt myself obliged 
 to follow him. ^rhis 1 have done in the third and fourth chapters. 
 Apart from this reason. I felt myself bound to do so by the terms 
 of the two letters printed at the opening of the allowing p»gc8. 
 I hold myself pledged to justify their contents. Moreover these 
 two topics fall witlin the outline of the *iubjcct treated by Mr. 
 Gladstone, which is. the relation of the Supreme ^P";^^;^^^^^^ 
 of the Head of the Christian Church to the Civil Powers of all 
 countries. So much for the^mattor of these Ff«- , . 
 
 As for the manner, if it be faulty, the fault is mine : and yG% 
 iiere ought to be no fault imputed where ^^^^'^.^l?*!. ^^"^^ "*^, 'Z 
 tention to wound or to offend. I ct^n say with truth that, to 
 »TOid offense. I have weighed my words, and if *J«f . ^ .^°«/;" 
 found which ought not to have been written. 1 wish it to be 
 blotted out. The subject-mattor is beyond my control. 1 can 
 blot out words, but I can not blot out truths. What I believe to 
 be truth, that I have said in the clearest words and calmest that 
 1 could find to give to it adequato expression. 
 
 (126) 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone, in his Expostulation with the Catholics of the 
 British Empire on the Decrees of the Vatican Council, writes 
 
 as follows : — , , . . ^^ .u i. j* 
 
 "England is entitled to ask and to know in what way the obedi- 
 ence required l>v the Pope and the Council of the Vatican is to 
 be reconciled with the integrity of Civil Allegiance."* ^ 
 
 When I read these words, I at once recognized the ri^ht of 
 the English people, speaking by its legitimate authorities, to 
 know from me what I believe and what I teach; but in recog- 
 nizing this right I am compelled to decline to answer before any 
 other tribunal, or to any other interrogator. If, therefore. I take 
 the occasion of any such interrogation, I do not iiddress myself 
 to those who make it. but to the justice and to the good sense of 
 
 the Christian people of this country. y^. ,^ .. ^' t- ^ 
 
 Mr. Gladstone followed up this demand upon his Catholic tcl- 
 low-countrymen by an elaborate argument to prove that it is im- 
 possible for Catholics, since the Vatican Council, to be loyal 
 except at the cost of their fidelity to the Council, or faithful to 
 the Council except at the cost of their loyalty to their country. 
 I therefore considered it to be my duty to lose no time m making 
 the subjoined declaration in all our principal journals; 
 
 «'giR ^The gravity of the subject on which I address you, 
 
 affecting, as it must, every Catholic in the British Empire will, 
 
 Vatican liecrees m ineir oeuruij^ im v'i*ii^xac.^.c.»v.v,. -. -— -- 
 it a direct appeal to myself, both for the office 1 hold and for the 
 writings I have published. I gladly acknowledge the duty that 
 lies upon me for both those reasons. I am bound by the office 1 
 bear not to suffer a day to pass without repelling from the Cath- 
 olics of this country the lightest imputiition upon their loyalty ; 
 and, for my teaching, I am ready to show that the principles 1 
 have ever taught are beyond impeachment upon that score. 
 
 "It is true, indeed, that in page 57 of the pamphlet Mr. Giad- 
 Btone expresses his belief ' that many of his Roman Catholio 
 friends and fellow-countrymen are. to say the least of it, as good 
 citizens as himself' But as the whole pamphlet is an elaborate 
 
 « *The Vatican Decrees in their Bearing on Civil Allegiance/ By 
 the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone. P. 43. 
 
 (127) 
 
128 
 
 mtmBvmim, 
 
 rNTRODUCTION'. 
 
 129 
 
 argumeni to prove that the teaching of the Vatican Coancil rcn* 
 iera it impossible for them to bo so, I can not accept this f^rate- 
 fnl acknowledgment, which implies that they are good citizens 
 because thev are at variance with the Catholic Church. 
 
 " 1 should be wanting in duty to the Catholics of this country 
 and to myself if I did not give a prompt contradiction to this 
 Btatcment, and if I did not with equal pnmptness affirm that the 
 loysdtv of our civil allegiance is, not in spite of the teaching of the 
 €atho1ic Church, hut because of it 
 
 ** The sum of the argument in th© pamphlet just published to 
 the world is this : — ^That by the Vatican Decrees such a change 
 liiis been made in the relations of Catholics to the civil power of 
 States, ^at it is no longer possible for them to render tlie same 
 undivided civil allegiance as it was poasible for Catholics to render 
 before the promulgation of thow! Decrees. 
 
 " In answer to this it is for the present sufficient to affirm — 
 
 " 1. That the Vatican Decrees have in no jot or tittle changed 
 Hither the obligations or the conditions of civil allegiance. 
 
 **2. That the civil allegiance of Catholics is as undivided as that 
 iif all Christians, and of all men w^ho recognize a Divine or natural 
 moral law. 
 
 **3. That the civil allegiance of no man is unlimited ; and there- 
 fore the civil allegiance of all men who believe in God, or are 
 jjoverned bv conscience, is in that sense divided. 
 
 *' 4. In tnis sense, and in no other, can it be said with truth that 
 Ihe civil alle||iance of Cathcjlics is divided. The civil allegiance 
 of every Christian man in England is limited by conscience and 
 the law of Ood; and the civil allegiance of CSatholics is limited 
 neither less nor more. 
 
 *'5. The public peace of the British Empire has been consoli- 
 dated in the liist half century by the elimination of religous oon* 
 iicts and inequalities from our kws. The Empire of Germany 
 might have been equally peaceful and stable if its statesmen had 
 not been tempted in an evil hour to rake up the old fires of relig- 
 ious disunion. The hand of one man, more than anv other, threw 
 this torch of discord into the German Empire. Tne history of 
 Germany will recc»rd the nam© of Dr. Ignatius von Dtillinger as the 
 author of this national evil. I lament, not only to read the name, 
 but to trace the arguments of Dr. von Dollingojr in the pamphlet 
 before me. May God preserve these kingdoms from the public 
 and private calamities which are visibljr impending over Ger- 
 many. The author of the pamphlet, in his first line, assures us 
 that his ' purpose is not polemical but pacific' ^ I am sorry that so 
 good an intention should have so widely erred in the selection of 
 the means. 
 
 *• But my purpose is neither to criticise nor to controvert. My 
 desire and my dxitj as an Englishman, as a Catholic, and as a pas- 
 tor, is to claim for my flock and for myself a civil allepance as 
 pure, as true, and as loyal as is rendered by the distinguished 
 author of the pamphlet, or by any subject of ttie British Empire. 
 
 "JViwemftcr 7, 1874." 
 
 Subsequently, in reply to questions proposed to me, I further 
 wrote as follows: — 
 
 "lb ihe Editor of the New York Herald:" 
 
 " Dear Sir, — ^In answer to your question as to my statement 
 about the Vatican Council, I reply as follows : 
 
 "I asserted that the Vatican Decrees have not changed by a jot 
 or a tittle the obligations or conditions of the civil obedience of 
 Catholics towards the Civil Powers. The whole of Mr. Glad- 
 stone's pamphlet hangs on the contrary assertion ; and falls with 
 it. In proof of my assertion I add : — 
 
 " 1. That the Infallibility of the Pope was a doctrine of Divine 
 Faith before the Vatican Council was held. In the second and 
 third parts of a book called ' Petri Privilegium,' (Longmans, 1"871), 
 I have given more than sufficient evidence of this assertion. 
 
 "2. That the Vatican Council simply declared an old truth, and 
 made no new dogma. , ^ . .• 
 
 '• 3. That the position of Catholics therefore m respect to civil 
 allegiance, since the Vatican Council, is precisely what it waa 
 
 before it. 
 
 " 4. That the Civil Powers of the Christian world have hitherto 
 stood in peaceful relation with an Infallible Church, and tliat rela- 
 tion has been often recognized and declared by the Church in all 
 its Councils. The Vatican Council had, therefore, no new matter 
 to treat in this point. 
 
 "5. That the Vatican Council has made no decree whatever on 
 the subject of the Civil Powers, nor on civil allegiance. 
 
 " This subject was not so much as proposed. The civil obedi- 
 ence of Catholics rests upon the natural law, and the revealed law 
 of God. Society is founded in nature, and subjects are bound in 
 all things lawful to obey their rulers. Society, when Christian, 
 has higher sanctions, and subjects are bound to obey rulers for con- 
 science sake, and because thp Powers that be are ordained of God. 
 Of all these things the Vatican Decrees can have changed nothing 
 because they have touched nothing. Mr. Gladstone's whole argu- 
 ment hangs upon an erroneous assertion, into which I can only 
 suppose he has been misled by his misplaced trust in Dr. Dollin- 
 ger and some of his friends. 
 
 "On public and private grounds I deeply lament this act of im- 
 prudence, and but for my belief in Mr. Gladstone's sincerity I 
 should say this act of injustice. I lament it, as an act out of all 
 harmony and proportion to a great statesman's life, and as the first 
 event that has overcast a friendship of forty-five years. His whole 
 public life has hitherto consolidated the Christian and cml peace 
 of these kingdoms. This act, unless -the good providence of God 
 and the good sense of Englishmen avert it, may wreck more than 
 the work of Mr. Gladstone's public career, and at the end of a 
 long life may tarnish a great name. 
 
 (EC. ViVm 
 
 •' Westminster, ^i?. 10, 1874." 
 
130 
 
 INTBODUCnOir. 
 
 THt: VATICAN DECREES. 
 
 131 
 
 Having thus directly contradicted the main error of Mr. Glad- 
 stone's argument, I thought it my duty to wait. I was certain that 
 two things would foUow: the one, that for better answers than any 
 that I could make would be promptly made ; the other, that cer- 
 tain nominal Catholics, who upon other occasions have done the 
 same, would write letters to the newspapers. 
 
 Both events have come to pass. r. .^ * t ^. 
 
 The Bishops of Birmingham, Clifton, and Salford have abun- 
 dantly pointed out the mistakes into which Mr. Gladstone has 
 fallen on the subject of the Vatican Council; and have fully vm- 
 dieated the lovalty of Catholics. 
 
 The handful of nominal Catholics have done their work; and 
 those who hoped to find or to make a division among Catholics 
 have been disappointed. It is now seen that those who r^ect the 
 ¥atican Council may be told on our fingers, and the Catholic 
 Church has openly passed sentence on them. 
 
 Having made these declarations, I might have remained silent ; 
 but as in my first letter I implied that I was prepared to juwtify 
 what I had asserted, I gave notice that I would do so. Having 
 passed my word, I will keep it; and in keeping it I will endeavor 
 to deserve again the acknowledgment Mr. Gladstone has already 
 made. H© says that, whatever comes, so far as I am concerned, 
 it will not be " without due notice." I will be equally outspoken 
 now; not because he has challenged it, but because, so far as I 
 know, I have always tried to speak out. In all these years of 
 strife I have never consciously kept back, or explained away, any 
 doctrine of the Catholic Church. I will not begin to do so now. 
 when my time is nearly run. I am afraid that in these pages I 
 shall seem to obtrude myself too often, and too much. If any 
 think so, I would ask them to remember that Mr. Gladstone has 
 laid me under this necessity in these three ways : — 
 
 1. He has made me the representative of the Catholic doctrine 
 since 1870, as Bishop Doyle, he says, was in better days. 
 
 2. He has quoted my writings four times in censure. 
 
 3. He has appealed to me as " Head of the Papal Church in 
 England;" I may also add as "The Oracle." My words, how- 
 ever, shall not be ambiguous. 
 
 The two letters given above contain four assertions ; 
 
 First, that the Decrees of the Vatican Council have changed 
 nothing in respect to the civil obedience of Catholics. 
 
 Secondly, that their civil obedience is neither more nor less di- 
 vided than that of other men. 
 
 Thirdly, that the relations of the Spiritual and Civil Powers 
 have been fixed from time immemorial, and are therefore after 
 the Vatican Council what they were before. 
 
 Fourthly, that the contest now waging abroad began in a malevo- 
 lent and mischievous intrigOe to instigate the Civil powers to op- 
 press and persecute the Catliolic Church. 
 
 The t%o first propositions shall be treated in the first chapter, 
 the third in the second chapter, and the last in the third. 
 
 I will therefore endeavor to prove the following propositions, 
 which cover all the assertions I have made:^- 
 
 1 That the Vatican Decrees have in no jot or tittle changed 
 either the obligations or the conditions of Civil Allegiance. 
 
 2 That the relations of the Catholic Church to the Civil Powers 
 of the world have been immutably fixed from the beginning, inas- 
 much as they arise out of the Divine Constitution of the Church, 
 and out of the Civil Society of the natural order. 
 
 3 That any collisions now existing have been brought on by 
 changes, not on the part of the Catholic Church, much less of the 
 Vatican Council, but on the part of the Civil Powers, and that by 
 reason of a systematic conspiracy against the Holy See. 
 
 4. That by these changes and collisions the civil Powers ot JliU- 
 rope are destroying their own stability. .,.,«, ., , 
 
 5 That the motive of the Vatican Council in defining the In- 
 fallibility of the Roman Pontiff was not any temporal policy, nor 
 was it for any temporal end ; but that it defined that truth in the 
 face of all temporal dangers, in order to guard the Divine deposit 
 of Christianity, and to vindicate the divine certainty of faith. 
 
 I. Meaning and Effect of the Vatican Decrees. 
 
 I. In setting out to prove my first proposition—namely, " that 
 the Vatican Decrees have in no jot or tittle changed either the olj 
 ligations or the conditions of Civil Allegiance —I fand myself 
 undertaking to prove a negative. The omis of proving that the 
 Vatican Decrees have made a change in our civil allegiance rests 
 upon those who affirm it. Till they offer proof we might remain 
 silent. It would be enough for us to answer that the Vatican 
 Council in its Dogmatic Constitution on the Church has simply 
 affirmed the revealed doctrine of the Spiritual Primacy, and of 
 the Infallibility of the Visible Head of the Christian Church; 
 that the relations of this Primacy to the Civil Powers are in no 
 wav treated; and that the civil obedience of subjects is lett pre- 
 ciselv as and where it was before the Vatican Council was con- 
 vened 
 
 (1) However I will first examine what proofs have been offered 
 to show that- the Vatican Council has made the alleged change; 
 and 1 will then give positive evidence to show what the Vatican 
 Council has done. From these things it will be seen that it has 
 neither changed, or added to, nor taken away any thing from the 
 doctrine and discipline of the Church, but has only defined what 
 has been believed and practiced from the beginning. 
 
 The arguments to prove a change are two: 
 
 First, Mr. Gladstone has argued from the third chapter ot the 
 Constitution on the Roman Pontiff, that his powers have received 
 a great extension. Mr. Gladstone, so far as I am aware, is the 
 first and only person who has ever ventured on this statement. 
 
 His argument is as follows: ,, . . j i„« 
 
 He dwells with no little amplification upon the mtroductioii 
 of the remarkable phrase," " ad disciplinam et regimen Ecclesiae, 
 into the third chapter ; that is, " non solum in rebus quae ad Mem 
 et mores pertinent, sed etiam in iis quae ad disciplinam et regimen 
 
132 
 
 MBANmO AHB EFFBOT Ot 
 
 TUB VATICAN DECREES. 
 
 133 
 
 ficclesifls fer totiim orbem diiiieii» pertinent" He sayp, " Abso- 
 liito obidienoe, il 10 boldl;^ declarea, is due to the Pope, at the 
 peril of salvation, nol only in faith and in morals, but in all thin;;s 
 which concern the discipline and government of the Church " (p. 
 41). Submission in failh and morals is "abject" enough, but 
 •• in discipline and government" too, is intolerable. '' Why did 
 the astute contrivers of this tangled scheme," etc. ... (p. 39). 
 "The work is now truly complete" (p. 40). This he calls "the 
 new itwion of the printiples of the Papal Church." When I 
 litid this, I asked, " Is it possible that Mr. Gladstone should think 
 tbis to be any thing new? What does he conceive the Primacy 
 of Borne to mean ? With what eyes has he read history ? Can 
 he have read the tradition of the Catholic Church? As one of 
 *' tho Mtiite contrivers," I will answer that these words were in* 
 irodiiMd because the Pontiffs and Councils of the Church have 
 alwavB so used them. They may be "remarkable" and "new" 
 to Mr. Gladstone, but they are old as the Catholic Church. I 
 give the first proofs which come to hand : 
 
 MIcholas I., in the year 863, in a Council at Rome, enacted: 
 '*Si quis dogmata, mandata, interdicts, sanctiones vel decretii pro 
 Catholica fide, pro ecclesiasticadisciplina, pro correctione fidclium, 
 pro emendatione sceIeratorum« vel interdictione immincntium vel 
 futuroruni malorum, a Sedis Apostolicss Praeside salubriter pro- 
 muteatii contempserit : Anathema sit." ♦ This was an " iron grip *' 
 not less " formidable" than the third chapter of the Vatican Con- 
 :etitiition. 
 
 It may be said, perhaps, that this was only a Pontiff in his own 
 atnse ; or only a Roman Council. 
 
 But this Canon was recognized in the Eighth General Council 
 held at Constantinople in 869. f 
 
 Innocent III. may be no authority with Mr. Gladstone ; but he 
 says, what every Pontiff before him and after him has said, " Nos 
 qui sumus ad regimm Universalis Ecclesise, superna dispositione 
 ▼ocati."t 
 
 Ag^in.Sixtu8 IV., in 1471. writes: "Ad Universalis BcdesiaB 
 refimeii divina disponente dementia vocatis,"§ ete. 
 
 If this be not enough, we have the Council of Florence, in 
 1442, defining of the Roman Pontiff that " Ipsi in Beato Petro 
 pascendi, regendi a© ffubernandi Universalem Ecclesiam a' Do- 
 Biino nostro Jesu Christo plenam potestam traditam es8e."|| 
 
 Finally Uie Council of Trent says : — " Unde mcrito Pontifices 
 Mazimi pro Suprema potestato sibi in Ecclesia universa tra- 
 dita."f etc. 
 
 I refrain from <]^uoting Canonists and Theologians who use this 
 as to regimen and discipline. It needed no astutenesi 
 
 ♦Labbe, (hndl torn. x. p. 238, ed. Ven. 1730. 
 
 t Ibid. torn. x. p. 633. See Fefri Primiefftum^ 2d ]>art, p. 81. 
 
 : Corpus Juris Canon. Decret. Greg. lib. ii. cap. xili. Novit. 
 
 'Corpus Juris Canon. Extmm. Cotmth* lib. i. tit. ix. cap. i. 
 
 Labbe, OmcU, torn, xviii. p. 527, ed. Ven. 1732. 
 
 'Seas. xiv. cap. vii. 
 
 to transcribe the well-known traditional language of the Catholic 
 Church It is as universal in our law books as the forms of the 
 Courts at Westminster. The Vatican Council has left the au- 
 thority of the Pontiff precisely where it found it. Ihe whole, 
 therefore, of Mr. Gladstone's argument faUs with the misappre- 
 hension on which it was based. ., o titu * • * 
 
 What, then, is there new in the Vatican Council? What is to 
 be thought of the rhetorical description of "Merovingian mon- 
 archs and Cariovingian mayors," but that the distinguished au- 
 thor is out of his depth ? The Pop had at all times the power 
 to rule the whole Church not onlv in faith and morals, but «^8o in 
 all things which pertain to discipline and government, and that 
 
 whether infallibly or not. , , »r m j x i.^ 
 
 Such is literally the only attempt made by Mr. Gladstone to 
 justify his assertions. But what has this to do with Civd Alle- 
 eiance? There is not a syllable on the subject, there is not a 
 proposition which can be twisted or tortured into such a mean- 
 ine The government of the Church, as here spoken of, is 
 Durely and strictly the Spiritual government of souls, both pash 
 tors and people, as it was exercised in the first three hundred 
 years before any Christian State existed. . ^r, n- -i 
 
 But next, if the Vatican Council has not spoken of the CivU 
 Powers, nevertheless it has defined that the Pope, speakin^r ex 
 cathedra, is infallible: this definition, by retrospective action, 
 makes all Pontifical acts infallible, the Bull Unam Sanciam in- 
 cluded ; and, by prospective action, will make all similar acts 
 in future binding upon the conscience. , 
 
 Certainly this is true. But what is there new m ^iis?^ The 
 Vatican Council did not make the Pope infallible. Was he not 
 infallible before the Council? He is, therefore, not more infal- 
 lible after it than before. If a handful of writers, here and there 
 denied his infallibility, the whole Church affirmed it Proof of 
 this shall be given in its place. For the present, I affirm that all 
 acts ex cathedra such as the Bull Unam Sanctam, the Bull Urn- 
 qenitus, the Bull Auctorem Fidei, and the hke, were held to be 
 infallible as fully before the Vatican Council as now. 
 
 To this it will be said, "Be it so; but nobody was bound under 
 Anathema to believe them." I answer that it is not the Ana 
 thema that generates faith. The infallibility of the Head of the 
 Church was a doctrine of Divine Faith before it was defined m 
 1870, and to deny it wa« held by grave authorities to be at least 
 proximate to heresy, if not actually heretical.* The Vatican 
 Council has put this beyond question; but it was never lawtui 
 to Catholics to deny the infallibility of a Pontifical act ex cathe- 
 dra. It is from simple want of knowledge that men suppose 
 every doctrine not defined to be an open question. The doctrine 
 of the Infallibility of the Church has never been defined to this 
 da? Will any man pretend that this is an open question among 
 Catholics? The infaUibility of the Pope was likewise never de- 
 fined, but it was never an open question. Even the Jausenists 
 
 ♦Ptetri Privilegium^ part i. pp. 61-66,and notes. 
 
 U 
 
134 
 
 JIEAMINO AND KFFl-Xrr OP 
 
 iid not venture to deny it, and the eviwion of some of them, who 
 gpiT© "obeequious silence" instead of internal assent to Pontifical 
 nets, was condemned by Clement XI. The definition of the Vat- 
 iean Council has made no change whatsoever except in the case 
 of those who denied or doubted of this doctrine. Wo diflTerence, 
 therefore, whatsoever has been made in the state of those who be- 
 lieved it If the integrity of their civil allegiance was unim- 
 peded befoie 1870, it is unimpeded now. But Mr. Gladstone 
 wliiiili that it was unimpeded before. His contention is that it is 
 imiieded now. But this is self-contradictory, for they believed 
 the same doctrine of infallibility both then and now. If Mr. Glad- 
 stone means that the Vatican Council has made a difference for 
 the few who denied the doctrine, and for the authors of Janus 
 and Quirmm, and the professors of " obsequious silence," his 
 contention is most true. But then he must change his whole posi- 
 tion. The title of his pamphlet must be amended and stand, 
 *' The Vatican Decrees in their Bearing on the Civil Allegiance 
 of those who before 1870 denied the Infallibility of the Pope." 
 But this would ruin his case ; for he would have admitted the 
 loyalty of Catholics who always believed it before the definition 
 
 was mMe. 
 
 We aie next told that there are some twelve theories of what 
 is an act ex cathedra. We have been also told that there are 
 twenty. But how is it that Mr. Gladstone did not see that by this 
 the whole force of his argument is shaken ? If the definition has 
 left it so uncertain what acts are, and what acts are not, ex cath- 
 edra, who shall hold himself bound to obedience? Are the 
 eighty condemnations indicated in the Syllabus ex cathedra f 
 By this showing it is 12 to 1 that they may not be. It is an 
 axiom in morals ** Lex dubia turn obligai.'' But if it be doubt- 
 ful whether the Syllabus is ex cathedra, I am not bound to re- 
 ceive it with interior assent Again, Mr. Gkdstone thinks to ag- 
 gravate the case by adding that the Pope is to be the ultimate 
 judge of what acts are ex cathedra. And who else should be ? 
 Ejus est inierpretari cttjm est condere is a principle of all law. 
 Mr. Gladstone has been acting upon it all his life. But, perhaps 
 it may be said, why did not the Council put beyond doubt what 
 acts are ex cathedra f Well the Council nas done so, as I hope 
 to show; and has done it with as great precision as the subject 
 matter will admit It has given fiye tests, or conditions, by which 
 an act ex cathedra may be distinguished. 
 
 But it may be said that doubts may still exist, and that doubts 
 may still be raised as to this or that Pontifical act whether it be 
 €X cathedra or not Surely common sense would say, consult the 
 authority which made the law ; the legislator is always at hand, 
 always ready to explain his own meaninfi^ and to define the 
 limits of his intention. If there be any thing unreasonable in 
 this, all jurisprudence, including the British Constitution, labors 
 under the same uncertainty, or rather the same inevitable imper- 
 fection. 
 
 I am surprised that Mr. Gladstone should have quoted the 
 ■Mond pragraph of the chapter in the Vatican Constitution; 
 
 THE VATICAN DBCREKS. 
 
 135 
 
 and that he should have passed over the fourth paragraph, in 
 which there are indeed the words " potestatis saecularis placito." 
 This is the only recognition of secular powers in the whole Con- 
 stitution. In that paragraph two things are afiirmed: the one 
 that the free exercise of the supreme Spiritual power of the 
 Head of the Christian Church may neither be intercepted, nor 
 hindered, nor excluded from any part of the Church by any hu- 
 man authority ; and, secondly, that all such acts of his Spiritual 
 power are valid and complete in themselves, and need, for that 
 end, no confirmation or placitttm of any other authority. This 
 independence is claimed for Christianity by every one who be- 
 lieves in a revelation. Here is indeed a reference to Civil 
 Powers ; but, lest the Vatican Council should be held guilty of such 
 innovations, I will add that such was the contention of St 
 Thomas of Canterbury against Henry II. in the case of the Con- 
 stitutions of Clarendon, which were not " cursed," as Mr. Glad- 
 stone delicately expresses it but condemned by' Alexander III. in 
 the year 1164. This, then, has not changed the Civil Allegiance 
 of Catholics since 1870. 
 
 But I am not undertaking to prove a negative. I hope that I 
 have shown that the evidence offered to prove that the Council has 
 made the alleged change is nil. I affirm, then, once more that 
 the Vatican Council has not touched the question of Civil Alle- 
 giance, that it has not by a jot or a tittle changed the relations 
 in which the Church has ever stood to the Civil Powers; and 
 that, therefore, the Civil Allegiance of Catholics is as full, per^ 
 feet and complete since the Council as it was before. These are 
 affirmations capable of truth, and before I have done I hope to 
 prove them. For the present it will be enough to give the 
 reason why the Vatican Council did not touch the question of 
 the relations of the Church to the Civil Powers. The reason is 
 simple. It intended not to touch them, until it could treat them 
 fully and as a whole. And it has carefully adhered to its inten- 
 tion. I will also give the reason why it has been so confidently 
 asserted that the Council did touch the Civil Powers. It is 
 because certain persons, a year before the Council met resolved 
 to say so. They wrote the book Janus to prove it; they published 
 circulars and pamphlets before and during the Council to re-as- 
 sert it They first prophesied that the Council would interfere 
 with the Civil Powers, and now they write scientific history to 
 prove that it has done so. I am not writing at random ; I care- 
 fully collected at the time their books, pamphlets, and articles. 
 1 read them punctually, and bound them up into volumes, which 
 are now before me. Mr. Gladstone has reproduced their argu- 
 ments. But for this systematic agitation before the Council, no 
 one, I am convinced, would have found a shadow of cause for it 
 in its Decrees. Now, that I may not seem to write this as 
 prompted by the events of the present moment, I will repeat 
 what I published in the year 1869, before the Council assembled, 
 and in the year 1870, after the Council was suspended. 
 
136 
 
 MEANING AND EFFECT OF 
 
 Befmm llie Council mel I published these words : *— 
 
 "Whilst I was ^Titing these lines a document has appeared 
 imrporting to be the answers of the Theological Faculty of 
 Munich to the questions of the Bavarian Government. 
 
 "The questions and the answers are so evidently concerted, if 
 not written by the same hand, and the animus of the document 
 BO evidently hostile to th© Holy 8ee, and so visibly intended to 
 create embarrassments for the supreme authority of the Church, 
 htA in respect to its past acts and also in respect to the future 
 action of the Ecumenical Council, that I can not pass it over. 
 But, in speaking of it, I am comnelled, for the first time, to break 
 silence on a danger which has tor some years been growing in 
 its proportions, and I fear I must add, in its attitude of menace. 
 The answers of the University of Munich are visibly intended to 
 excite fear and alarm in th© Civil Powers of Europe, and 
 thereby to obstruct the action of the Ecumenical Council if it 
 should judge it to be opportune to define the infallibility of th© 
 Pope. The answers are also intended to create an impression 
 that the theological proofs of the doctrine are inadequate, and its 
 definition beset with uncertainty and obscurity. In a word, the 
 whole correspondence is a transparent effort to obstruct the free- 
 dom of the Ecumenical Council on the subject of the Infalli- 
 bility of the Pontiff; or, if that doctrine be defined, to instigate 
 th© Civil Governments to assume a hostile attitude towards the 
 Holy See. And this comes in the name of liberty, and from those 
 who tell us that the Council will not be free. 
 
 "I shall take the liberty, without further word.^, of dismissing 
 the Bavarian Govern ment*^from our thoughts. But I must declare, 
 with much regret, that this Munich document appears to me to 
 Iw seditious. 
 
 " Facto like these give a certain warrant to the assertion and 
 propheeies of politicians and Protestants. They prove that in 
 the Ckitholic Church there is a school at variance with the doc- 
 trinal teaching of the Holy See in matters which are not of 
 faith. But they do not reveal how small that school is. Its 
 center would seem to be at Munich. It has, both in France and 
 Enghmd, a small number of adherents. They are active, they 
 correroond, and for the m'ost part write anonymously. It would 
 be difficult to describe its tenets, for none of its followers seem to 
 he agreed in all points. Some hold the Infallibility of the Pope, 
 and som© defend the Temporal Power. Nothing appears to be 
 common to all, except an nuimuM of opposition to the acts of the 
 Holy See in matters out»ide the faith. 
 
 "In this country, about a year ago, an attempt was made to 
 render impossible, as it was confidently but vainly thought, the 
 definition of the Infallibility of the Pontiff by revivinjj the mo- 
 notonous controversy about Pope Honorius. Later, we were told 
 of I know not what combination of exalted personages in France 
 for th© same end. It is certain that these symptoms are not spor- 
 
 •**The Ecumenical Council and the InfallibiHty of the Roman 
 Pontiff/* Ptiri iVi«%iii»i, i»art ii. pp. iai-5. (Longiuans, 1871). 
 
 THB VATICAN DECREES. 
 
 137 
 
 adic and disconnected, but in mutual understanding and with a 
 common purpose. The anti-Catholic press has eagerly encou^ 
 aged this school of thought. If a Catholic can be found out of 
 tune with authority by half a note, he is at once extolled for un- 
 cqualed learning and irrefragable logic. The anti-Catholic jour- 
 nals are at his service, and he vents his opposition to the com- 
 mon opinions of the Church by writing against them anonymously. 
 Sad as this is, it is not formidable. It has effect almost alone upon 
 those who are not Catholic. Upon Catholics its effect is hardly ap- 
 preciable ; on the Theological Schools of the Church it will have 
 little influence; upon the Ecumenical Council it can have none. 
 •' I can hardly persuade myself to believe tliat the University of 
 Munich does not know that the relations between the Pope, even 
 supposed to be inftillible, and the Civil Powers have been long 
 since precisely defined in the same acts which defined the rela- 
 tions between the Church, known to be infallible, and the Civil 
 Authority. Twelve Synods or Councils, two of them Ecumen- 
 ical have long ago laid down these relations of the .Spiritual 
 and Civil Powers.* If the Pope were declared to be infallible 
 to-morrow, it would in no way affect those relations. ^ 
 
 •• We may be sure . . . that this intellectual disaffection, 
 of which, in these last days, we have had in France a new and 
 mournful example, will have no influence upon either the Ecu- 
 menical CouncU or the policy of the Great Powers of Europe. 
 They will not meddle with speculations of theological or histor- 
 ical critics. They know too well that they can not do in the 
 nineteenth century what was done in the sixteenth and the sev- 
 enteenth, t n 1 ri •! 'P 
 *' The attempt to put a pressure upon the General i^ouncii, it 
 it have any effect upon those who are subject to certain govern- 
 ments, would have no effect but to rouse a just indignation in the 
 Episcopate of the Church throughout the world. They hold their 
 jurisdiction from a higher fountain, and they recognize no supe- 
 rior in their office of Judges of Doctrine, save only the Vicar ot 
 Jesus Christ. This preliminary meddling has already awakened 
 a sense of profound responsibility and an inflexible resolution to 
 allow no pressure or influence, or menace or intrigue, to cast so 
 much as a shadow across their fidelity to the Divine Head of the 
 Church and to his Vicar upon earth. ^j ., . j 
 " Moreover, we live in days when the ' Kegium Placitum ana 
 •Exequaturs' and * Arrets' of Parliament in Spiritual things are 
 simply dead. It may have been possible to hinder the promul- 
 gation of the Council of Trent; it is impossible to hinder the 
 promulgation of the Council of the Vatican. The verv liberty 
 of which men are proud will publish it. Ten thousand presses 
 in all lands will promulgate every act of the Church and of the 
 Pontiff, in the face of all Civil Powers. Once published these 
 acts enter the domain of faith and conscience, and no human 
 legislation, no civil authority, can effiice them. The two hundred 
 millions of Catholics will know the Decrees of the Vatican Ooun- 
 
 « Bellarm. Opusctda adv. Barclaium, p. 845, ed. Col. 161Y. 
 12 
 
138 
 
 MSANIHG AND EFFECT Of 
 
 eil ; and to know them is to obey. The 9?*^°SJ1 ^.l ^^ ^^ 
 civil enforcement, and it will need no cml aid. The Great Fow- 
 em of Europe have long declared that the conscience of men la 
 ftm from civil constraint They will not stultify their own dec- 
 larations by attempting to restnun the acts of the Vatican Coun- 
 cil. The jmardians and defenders of the principles of 1789 ought 
 to rise as one man against all who should so violate the base of 
 the political society in France.^ What attitude lesser Governments 
 may take is of lesser moment" m i. j « i 
 
 (2) I will not state positively what the Council has defined on 
 the subject of the Roman Pontiff. The history, then, of the Defi- 
 nition of the Infallibility is as follows :-- 
 
 L Two Schemata, as they were called, or treatises, had been 
 prepared: the one on the nature of the Church; the other on its 
 relations to the Civil State. 
 
 The first alone came before the Council; the seconil has ncrer 
 yet been so much as discussed. ^ , ^, ^ . _ . „...,.. 
 
 In the schema on the nature of the Church, its Infallibility was 
 tnsnted; but the Infallibility of its Head was not so much as 
 mentioned. His Primacv and authority alone were treated. In 
 the end, the chapter relating to the Primacy and authority vvaa 
 taken out, and subdivided into four. The subject of the Infalli- 
 bility of the Roman Pontiff was then introduced. . - ^-^ 
 
 The reasons for this change of order were given in 1870, as 
 
 if '111 llHIBirH * 
 
 In ail theological treatises, excepting indeed one or two of 
 jrreat authority, it htid been usual to treat of the Body of the 
 Church before treating of its Head. The reason of this would 
 mppear to be that in the exposition of doctrine the logical order 
 wiis the more obvious; and to the faithful, in the first formation 
 of the Church, the Rody of the Church was known before its 
 Head. We might have expected that the Council would have 
 foiowcd the same method. It is, therefore, all the more remark- 
 able that the Council inverted that order, and defined the preroga- 
 tive of the Head before it treated of the constitution and endow- 
 ments of the Body. And this, which was brought about by the 
 pressure (»f special events, is not without signihcance. Ihe 
 schools of the Church have followed the logical order; but the 
 Church in Council, when for the first time it began to treat of 
 its own constitution and authority, changed tlie method and 
 like the Divine Architect of the Church, began in the histor- 
 ical order, with the foundation and Head of the Church. Our 
 Diyine Lord first chose Cephas, and invested him with the pri- 
 macv over the Apostles. Upon this rock all were built, and from 
 him" the whole unity and authority of the Church .t<K>k its rise. 
 To Peter alone first was given the plentitude of J""8diction and 
 of infallible authority. Afterwards, the gift of the Holy Ghost 
 was shared with him by all the Apostles. From him and through 
 him therefore all began. For v^^iieh cause a clear and precise 
 conception of his Primacy and privilege is necessary to a clear 
 and precise conception of the Church. Unless it be first distinctly 
 •pprthended, the doctrine of the Church will be always propor- 
 
 THB YATICAK DECREES. 
 
 130 
 
 tionately obscure. The doctrine of the Church does not detor- 
 mine the doctrine of the Primacy, but the doctrine of the Primacy 
 does precisely determine the doctrine of the Church. In be- 
 ginning, therefore, with the Head, the Council has followed our 
 Lord's example, both in teaching and in fact; and in this will be 
 found one of the causes of the singular and luminous precision 
 with which the Council of the Vatican has, in one brief Constitu- 
 tion, excluded the well-known errors on the Primacy and Infalli- 
 bility of the Roman Pontiff. 
 
 The reasons which prevailed to bring about this change of 
 method were not only those which demonstrated generally the 
 opportuneness of defining the doctrine, but those also which 
 showed specially the necessity of bringing on the question while 
 as yet the Council was in the fullness of its numbers. It was 
 obvious that the length of time consumed in the discussion, re- 
 formation, and voting of the Schemata was such that, unless the 
 Constitution De Romano Pontijice were brought on immediately 
 after Easter, it could not be finished before the setting in of 
 summer should compel the bishops to disperse. Once dispersed, 
 it was obvious they could never again re-assemble in so large a 
 number. Many who with great earnestness desired to share the 
 blessing and the grace of. extinguishing the most dangerous error 
 which for two centuries had disturbed and harassed the faithful, 
 would have been compelled to go back to their distant sees and 
 missions, never to return. It was obviously of the first moment 
 that such a question should be discussed and decided, not, as we 
 should have been told, in holes and corners, or by a handful of 
 bishops, or by a faction, or by a clique, but by the largest possi- 
 ble assembly of the Catholic Episcopate. AH other Questions, 
 on which little divergence of opinion existed, might well be left 
 to a smaller number of bishops ; but a doctrine vrhich for so 
 long had vexed both pastors and people, the defining, not the 
 truth, of which was contested by a numerous and organized op- 
 position, needed to be treated and aflSrmed by the most extensive 
 deliberation of the bishops of the Catholic Church. Add to this 
 the many perils which hung over the continuance of the Council, 
 of which 1 need but give one example. The outbreak of a war 
 might have rendered the definition impossible. And in fact 
 the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff was defined on the eight- 
 eenth of July, and war was officially declared on the following 
 
 day. 
 
 With these an^ many other contingencies fully before them, 
 those who believed that the definition was, not only opportune, 
 but necessary for the unity of the Church and of the Faith, 
 urged its immediate discussion. Events justified their foresight 
 The debate was prolonged into the heats of July, when, by mu- 
 tual consent, the opposing sides withdrew from a further prolong- 
 ing of the contest, and closed the discussion. If it had not been 
 already protracted beyond all limits of reasonable debate—for 
 not less than a hundred fathers in the general and special dis- 
 cussions had spoken chiefly, if not alone, of Infallibility— it 
 
140 
 
 ■mUfWO AKD EFFECT OF 
 
 could nol 80 have ended. Both sidea were convinced that the 
 
 matter was exhausted.* , « ^i xi. ^ 
 
 2. In ortler to demonstrate, if poesible, more abundantly that 
 the Vatican Council ba« not 80 much as touched the relations of 
 the Church to the Civil Power, I will give a brief analysis of its 
 Beinltions in what is called the First Dogmatic Constitution on 
 tiie Church of Christ 
 
 It is, as 1 have said, a portion of the Schema or treatise on 
 iie Church, taken out and enlarged into a Constitution by iteelt 
 Th«r© would have been only one Constitution treating of both 
 iie Body and the Head of the Church. Now there are two. 
 The first, treating of the Head, has been completed ; the second, 
 treating of the Body, yet remains. 
 
 Now of the First Constitution there are four chapters. 
 
 The first treats of the Institution of the Apostolic Primacy in 
 Sunt Peter. The sum of it is that Our Lord appointed Peter to 
 he Head of the whole Church, and ^ve him immediately a 
 Primacy, not of honor only, but of jurisdiction. There is here 
 not a word of any thing but the Pastoral or Spiritual power. 
 
 The second declares the Primacy to be perpetual. It affirms 
 two things: the one that Peter has a perpetual line of succes- 
 sors, and that the Eoman Pontiff is the successor of Peter m 
 
 that Primacy. . « , ^ ^ ^-n. x i 
 
 The third affirms the jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff to be 
 full and supreme in all things of faith and morals, and also in 
 discipline and government of the Church; and that this jurisdic- 
 tion is ordinary and immediate over all Churches and persons. 
 
 The fourth chapter treats of the Infallibility of the Magu- 
 lirtnin, or the teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff. This 
 chapter affirms that a Divine assistance was given to Peter, and 
 in Peter to his successors for the discharge of their supreme 
 office. It affirms also that this is a tradition received from the 
 beginning of the Christian Faith. They, therefore, who tell us 
 that the Vatican Council has brou|;ht in a new doctrine shovj 
 that they do not know what the \ atican Council has said, and 
 what it IS that they must refute before their charge of innovation 
 oan be listened to. 
 Now it is to be observed: 
 
 1. That the Council declares that the Roman Pontiff, speaking 
 «r mihedra, has a Divine assistance which preserves him from 
 
 2. That he speaks ex cathedra when he speaks under these five 
 conditions: (1) as Supreme Teacher (2) tothe whole Church. 
 (3) Defining a doctrine (4) to be held by the whole Church (5) 
 in faith and morals. 
 
 If disputants and controversialists had read and mastered 
 ii«M fiv® conditions, we should have been spared much senseless 
 Ckmor. ^ ^ . 
 
 3. Laatly, it is to be observed that the Council has not defined 
 the limit of the phrase "faith and morals." This well-known 
 
 *Fe^ Frwilegiumf part iii. pp. 51-54. 
 
 tfl 
 
 THB VATICAN DECREES. 
 
 141 
 
 formuk IS plain and intelligible. The deposit committed to the 
 Church is the Revelation of Divine Truth, and of the Divine 
 Law The Church is the guardian and witness, the mterppeter 
 and the expositor of the Truth and of the Law of God. Such 
 is the meaning of "faith and morals." It is a formula well 
 known, perfectly clear, sufficiently precise for our spiritual and 
 moral life. If questions may be raised about the limits ot taith 
 and morals, it is because questions may be raised about any 
 thins; and questions will tilways be raised by those who love 
 contention against the Catholic Church more than they love eiAer 
 faith or morals. All argument against the Vatican Council as 
 to the Umits or extent of this formula is so much labor lost. It 
 has Aot so much as touched the extent or the limits. „ _ , . 
 
 Such, then, is the whole of the first Constitution De EccUsia 
 Christi. It does not contain a syllable of the relation of this 
 Primacy to the Civil or Political State, except to say that no hu- 
 man authority is needed for the validity of its acts, nor may any 
 human power hinder their exercise. But these are truths as old 
 as the day when St. Petor said before the council m Jerusalem, 
 " If it be just, in the sight of God, to hear you rather than Uod, 
 judge ye.'' * I hope, then, I have justified my assertion that the 
 Vatican Council has not changed by a jot or a tittle the civU al- 
 legiance of Catholics. It is m free and perfect now as it was be- 
 
 ^As I have affirmed that the doctrine of the InfallibiliW of the 
 Head of the Church was a doctrine of Divine Faith before the 
 Council, and that the denial of it was confined to a small school 
 of writers, I might be expected here to offer the historical proof 
 of this assertion. .« n 
 
 But I have already done so in the year 1869, before the Coun- 
 cil assembled. I would therefore refer to the second part of 
 "Petri Privilegium " t for, as I believe, a sufficient proof. 1 
 will, however, in a few words give the outline of what was then 
 
 It is acknowledged by the adversaries of the doctrine that 
 from the Council of ConsUnce in 1414 to this day the doctrine 
 has been the predominant belief of the Church. I gave evidence 
 of its existence from the Council of Constance upwards to the 
 Council of Chalcedon in 445. , ^ .t • • j 
 
 Next I traced the history of the growth of the opinions ad- 
 verse to the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff from the Council 
 of Constance to the year 1682, when it was, for the first time, re- 
 duced to formula by an assembly of French ecclesiastics under 
 the influence of Louis XIV. 
 
 Lastly, I showed how this formula was no sooner published 
 than it was condemned in every Catholic country by bishops 
 and universities, and by the Holy See. The sum of the evidence 
 for the first period was then given as follows :-- 
 
 Gallicanism is no more than a transient and modern opinion, 
 which arose in France, without warrant or antecedents in the 
 
 ♦Acts iv. 19. 
 
 fPartii. pp. 63-107. 
 
 i 
 
 I? 
 
 liia 
 
112 
 
 MEAHINO AKD IFFIOT OF 
 
 THB VATICAN DECREES 
 
 143 
 
 ancient theological schools of the French Charch; a royal 
 tlioologjr, as suddenly developed and as parenthetical as the 
 lliirty-nine Articlea, affirmed only by a small number out of the 
 numerous Episcopate of France, indignantly rejected by many 
 of them ; condemned in succession by three Pontiffs ; declared 
 by the Universities of Louvain and iJouai to be erroneous; re- 
 tracted by the bishops of France ; condemned by Spain, Hun- 
 O, and other countries ; and condemned over again in the 
 AMctm-em Mdei, 
 From this evidence it is certain : — 
 
 1. That Gallicanism has no warrant in the doctrinal practice 
 or tradition of the Church, either in France or at large, in the 
 thousand years preceding the Council of Constance. 
 
 2. That the first traces of Gallicanism are to be found about the 
 time of that Council. 
 
 3. That after tlie Council of Constance they were rapidly and 
 •hiost altogether effaced from the theology of the Church in 
 France, until their revival in 1682. 
 
 4. That the Articles of 1682 were conceived by Jansenists, and 
 DUrried through by political and oppressive means contrary to 
 the sense of the Church in France. 
 
 5. That ttie theological faculties of the Sorbonne, and of France 
 generally, nobly resisted and refused to teach them.* 
 
 But Gallicanism was the only formal interruption of the uni- 
 yeital belief of the Church in tne Infallibility of its Head. The 
 Vatican Council extinguished this modern error. 
 
 M. Bmvlng thus far offered proof of the first proposition in my 
 first letter, I will now go on to the second. 
 
 I there affirmed that the Civil Allegiance of Catholics is as un- 
 divided as that of all Christians, and of all men who recognize • 
 divine or natural moral law. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone requires of us "solid and undivided alle- 
 
 gianee. f 
 
 I must confess to some surprise at this demand. The allegiance 
 of every moral being is " divided," that is, twofold ; not, indeed, 
 in the same matter nor on the same plane, but in two spheres, and 
 on a higher and a lower level, so that no collision is possible, 
 except by some deviation or excess. Every moral being is under 
 two authorities — human and divine. The child is under the au- 
 thority of parents, and the authority of God; the subject is under 
 the authority of the Civil State, and the Divine authority of nat- 
 ural or revealed religion. Unless we claim Infallibility for the 
 State, its acts must be liable to revision, and to resistance by nat- 
 ural conscience. An unlimited obedience to parents or to States 
 would generate a race of unlimited monsters. Surely these are 
 Inilfima. Our Lord Himself taught this division when He said, 
 !'ll«iiier therefore to Caesar the things that are CsDsar's, and to 
 God the things that are God's." Hut this all men admit when 
 they tihink Unfortunately, when they attack the Catholic Church 
 or the Tatican Council they seldom think much. 
 
 •i»«tr* Prrnkgrnm^ part li. p* 56. 
 
 Jt ■ '^nkm 
 
 Put the objection in this form : " We non-Catholics acknowl- 
 edge two authorities as you Catholics do. Our allegiance to the 
 civil law is revised and checked by our consciences, guided by 
 the light of nature and by the li^ht of revelation. We refuse to 
 receive religious doctrine or discipline from the State. We allow 
 the Society of Friends, for conscience' sake, to refuse to take an 
 oath of allegiance, and even to fight for their country, for con- 
 science' sake; and yet these two are among the natural duties of 
 subjects which the civil authority may most justly both require 
 and enforce. We therefore leave every man free to refuse obe- 
 dience to civil laws if his conscience so demands of him. But 
 you Catholics put your conscience into the hands of the Pope. 
 You are bound to follow his interpretation of the civil law ; and 
 he tells you when your conscience ou^ht to refuse obedience 
 whether you see it or not; worse than this, the Pope may wrongly 
 interpret our civil laws, or he may even so interpret them as to 
 serve his own interests ; and then your moral and mental free- 
 dom is at the mercy of another. You must choose between your 
 religion and your country." I think I have not understated the 
 argument of our adversaries. 
 
 To this the answer is twofold: First, that the non-Catholic 
 doctrine is more dangerous to the Civil State than the Catholi.c. 
 If any individual conscience may dispense itself from civil obe- 
 dience, then almost all men will obey only " for wrath" and not 
 for "conscience' sake."* And such, in fact, is the condition of 
 millions of men. I could wish that the mental state of the masses 
 were better known. I wish it were possible to ascertain, by let- 
 ting down a thermometer into the deep sea of our population, 
 what notions remain of loyalty or allegiance. No doubt, in an 
 insular population like ours, the traditional custom of enert con- 
 formity with law maintains a passive compliance which passes 
 for Civil Allegiance. But take the population of countries where 
 the so-called rights of the political conscience of individuals have 
 had their legitimate development. A law is a law so far as it is 
 accepted ; a man is bound by the law so far as he had a hand in 
 making it If you once admit that the ultimate decision as to civil 
 obedience is in the individual, each political conscience is a law- 
 giver and a law to itself You can not fly principles with a string 
 as boys fly kites. Once enunciated they have nothing to control 
 them. If every man has the ultimate right of refusing obedience 
 to the law upon the dictates of his own conscience, then we are 
 in a state ofunlimited license, which is potentially a state of un- 
 limited revolution. And such, in truth, since 1789 has been the 
 state of the west of Europe. It is in a state of chronic instability 
 and continuous change. More than forty revolutions have sprung 
 from this essential lawlessness. 
 
 Secondly, according to the doctrine of the Catholic Church, the 
 rights of individual conscience are secured not only against ex- 
 ternal coercion, bu* against its own aberrations. The obedience 
 of .Catholic subjects to their Civil Kulers is a positive precept of 
 
 *Roni. xiii. 6. 
 
 t 
 
TBfl VATICAN DBCRBE8. 
 
 145 
 
 Alt™ 
 
 li'EASlKO A3fl> EFFICT OF 
 
 religion. The rising against legitimate authority is forbidden ns the 
 ■in of rebellion. The Syllabus has condemned the propositions :-- 
 
 "Authority is nothing else but the result of numencal superi- 
 ority and material force."— Prop. 60. ^ , . . . _ . , 
 
 "It is allowable to refuse obedience to legitimate Fnnees, ana 
 ftlso to rebel against them." — Prop. 63. , -. ^ ^i - j. • j i 
 
 The political conscience of Catholics is not left to the individual 
 judgment alone. It is guided by the whole Christian morality, 
 by the greatest system of ethical legisktion the world bmeyer 
 mm, the Canon Law and the Moral Theology of the Cathoic 
 
 Church Not only all capricious and willful resistances ol tlie 
 Civil Law, but all unreasonable and contentious disobedience is 
 condemned by its authority. It is a doctrine of faith that legiti- 
 mate uovereignty exists not only in the unity of the l.hurch, but 
 o«tBide of the same ; and not only amon^ Christian nations, but 
 mlso among the nations that are not Christian.* Moreover, that 
 to all such legitimate sovereips subjects are bound by the Divine 
 Lawf to render obedience in all lawful thinm. It is certain, 
 therefore, that Catholics are bound U) Civil Allegiance b;jr every 
 bond, natural and supernatural, as absolutely as their non-Lathoiic 
 fellow-countrymen; and, 1 must add more explicitly. And 
 farther that they can hardly be reduced to the necessity oi using 
 their private judgment as to the lawfulness of obeying anv law. 
 In all matters of ordinary civil and political life, the duty of Cath- 
 olics is already defined by a whole code which enforces obedience 
 for conscience' sake. In the rare case of doubt which may arise 
 in times of religious persecution, political revolution, civil wars, 
 or wars of succession, Catholic and non-Catholic subjects are 
 iHke in this,— they are both compelled to choose their side. 
 Hot the non-Cathohc subject has hardly law or judjre to aid his 
 conscience : the Catholic has both. He has the whole traditional 
 moral law of Christendom, which has formed and perpetuated the 
 eif il and political order of the modern world, and he has a multi- 
 iado of principles, maxims, and precedents on which to lorm his 
 mm Judgment, Finally, if he be unable so to do. he can seek for 
 miiibnce from an authority which the whole Christian world 
 onee believed to be the highest judicial tribuna and the source 
 of it» civil order and stabihty. And is this to place his mental 
 and moral freedom at the mercy of another? As much as and 
 mo more than we place ourselves "at the mercy of the Christian 
 Church for our salvation. Let us take an example : It is certain, 
 by the natural and Divine Law, that every man may defend himself, 
 and that every people has the right of self-defense. On this all 
 defensive wara are justifiable. But if the Sovereign levy war 
 upon his people, have they the right of self-dtfense? Beyond all 
 doubt But at what point may they take up arms? and what 
 amount of oppression justifies recourse to resistance 7 * or the 
 non^Jotholics there can only be these answers : 1' **,® /"'"f ^^P 
 the light of his own conscience, or he must be guided by thejudjj- 
 ment of the greater number, or by the wiser heads of his nation. 
 
 •Horn. xiii. 1-4. t St. Peter li 13-15. 
 
 But the greater number may not be the wiser; and to judge who 
 are the wiser throws the judgment once more upon himself. The 
 Catholic subject would use his own judgment, and the judgment 
 of his countrymen, but he would not hold himself at liberty to 
 take up arms unless the Christian law confirmed the justice of 
 his judgment. But from whom is this judgment to be sought? 
 He would ask it of all those of whom he asks council for the sal- 
 vation of his soul. If this is to be at the. mercy of another, we 
 are all at the mercy of those whom we believe to be wiser than 
 
 Let US take an example: The Italian neople have been for 
 twenty years spectators of a revolution which has overthrown the 
 Sovereigns of Naples and Tuscany. I will ask two questions : 
 First, would any Italian place himself at the mercy of another, if 
 he should ask of the head of his religion what course as a Chrig- 
 tian he ought to pursue? «, « . ia 
 
 And, secondly, what has been the action of the Pope m respect to 
 the Italian revolution ? He has said that to coK)perate in the Italian 
 revolution is not lawful. Surely, if Italians are free to form their 
 conscience on the doctrines of the revolution, they are equally 
 free to form their conscience on the doctrines of their religwn. 
 To deny this is to have two weights and two measures. The 
 non-Catholic theory tells us that the conscience of subjects is the 
 ultimate test. Be it so ; my conscience tells me that it is right 
 to obey mv religion rather than the revolution. If this be a di- 
 vided allegiance, then it is Christianity which has introduced it, 
 and not the Church. It was Our Lord himself who, by mstitu^ 
 ing His Church, separated for ever the two powers. Civil and 
 Spiritual, thereby redeeming the conscience and the religion of 
 men from the dominion of princes^ and conferring upon the Cml 
 Power the consecration by which it is confirmed, and the higher 
 law by which its sphere is defined. It is all this, and not* "our 
 old friend the deposing power alone," which I have described as 
 teaching obedience to subjects and moderation to princes.t 1; 
 all conflicts between the (!jivil and Spiritual, the consciences of 
 Christians will be decided by the Christian law. 
 
 I conclude, therefore, this part of the subject by re-assertmg: 
 
 1. That the relations of the Church to the State were never so 
 much as proposed for discussion in the Vatican Council. 
 
 2. That in its Constitutions or Definitions it has m no way 
 
 touched the subject. ,. j % ^ » r 
 
 3 That the Definitions of the Council are declaratory of 
 doctrine already of Divine Faith, and that no new " enactment 
 
 whatsoever was made. , «. ., r» i ft. 
 
 4 That the relations of the Church to the Civil Power were left 
 by the Vatican Council as thej were known and declared by the 
 C\)uncil of Trent and all previous Councils. ^ , 
 
 I will therefore answer Mr. Gladstone's questions in page 44 of 
 his " Expostulation." He tells us that " what is not wanted is 
 
 * ExMuiuiaHont p. 52. ^. .« j «i loco 
 
 fl^mpmd F&wer of the Pope, pp. 44-46, second ed. 186,2. 
 
 13 
 
 1. 
 
]l§ 
 
 spmrrrAL axb citil fowbbs. 
 
 taime and general aggertion of whatever kind, and howsoever siiH 
 mm. What is wanted, and that in the most 8j>eoific form and in 
 the clearest terms, I take to be one of two things, that is to say, 
 
 wtoeF""" 
 
 " 1. A demonstration that neither in the name of faith, nor in 
 the name of morals, nor in the name of the government or discip- 
 Wm of the Church, is the Pope of Rome able, by virtue of the 
 powers asserted for him by the Vatican decree, to make any 
 claim upon tiiose who adhere to his communion of snch a nature 
 as can impair the inte^ity of their Civil Allegiance ; or else, 
 
 ** Z That if, and when such ekim is made, it will even, al- 
 thoogh resting on the definitions of the Vatican, be repelled and 
 Miiectcd "^ 
 
 1 have shown that the Pope is not able, by the Vatican Council, 
 to make any claim in the name of faith, nor in the name of mor- 
 als, nor in the name of the government or discipline of the Church, 
 which he was not able to make before^ the Vatican Council ex- 
 isted. 
 
 To Mr. Gladstone's first question, therefore, I answer, that 
 neither in virtue of the Vatican Decrees, nor of any other de- 
 erees, nor of his supreme authority as Head of the Christian 
 CSmrch, can the Pope make any claim uj)on those who adhere to 
 hia eommnnion of such a nature as can impair the integrity of 
 their Civil Allegiance. 
 
 To his second question, therefore, the answer is already given. 
 I have no need to declare myself ready to repel and reject that 
 wiich the Pope can not do. He can not do an act contrary to 
 the Divine Ijaw; but to impair my Civil Allegiance would be con- 
 trary to the Law of G»>d. 
 
 It is strange to me that so acute a reasoner should have begged 
 the question, which is this : By whom are the limits of Civil Al- 
 legiance to be determined? If Mr. Gladstone should say by the 
 Btate, I would ask : Does Me mean that the State is infallible in 
 morals? or that subjects have no conscience, or that the State may 
 coerce their conscience, or that the State can create a morality 
 which all consciences must obey? Some of these postulates are 
 inevitably assumed in his question, if it has any^ meaning. 
 
 My reasons for saying this will be seen in the following 
 Dhapter. 
 
 II. Thb Rblatioks of the Spiritual and Civil Powers. 
 
 We will now go on to my second proposition, that the relations 
 of the Catholic Church to the Civil Powers have been fixed im- 
 mutably from the beginning, because they arise out of the Divine 
 constitution of the Church and out of the Civil Society of the 
 
 natural order. . , , i. 
 
 I. Inasmuch as the natural and civil society existed before the 
 foundation of the Christian Church, we will begin with it; and 
 
 ♦ The Vatican J^eowJ, p. ^. 
 
 SPIRITUAL AND CIVIL POWERS. 
 
 147 
 
 here my concessions, or rather my assertions, will, I hope, satisfy 
 all but Caesarists. 
 
 1. The civil society of men has God for its Founder. It was 
 created potentially in the creation of man ; and from him has 
 been unfolded into actual existence. The human family con- 
 tains the first principles and laws of authority, obedience, and 
 order. These three conditions of society are of Divine origin ; 
 and they are the constructive laws of all civil or political society. 
 
 2. To the Civil Society of mankind supreme authority is given 
 immediately by God ; for a society does not signify mere number, 
 but number organized by the laws and principles which its Divine 
 Founder implanted in the human family. Sovereignty, therefore, 
 is given by God immediately to human society ; and mediately, or 
 wudiante soeietate, to the person or persons to whom society may 
 commit its custody and its exercise. When once the supreme 
 power or sovereignty has been committed by any society to a 
 king, or to consuls, or to a council, as the case may be — for God 
 has given no special form of Civil Government— though it be not 
 held by those who receive it by any Divine right, as against the 
 society which gave it, nevertheless it has both a Divine sanction 
 and a Divine authority. For instance, it has the power^ of life 
 and death. God alone could give to man this power over man. 
 God gave it to man for self-defense. It passes to society at large, 
 which likewise has the right of self-defense. It is committed by 
 society to its chief executive. But, inasmuch as the supreme 
 power is still given by God to the Civil Ruler, even though it be 
 mediately, it has a Divine sanction; and so long as the Civil Ruler 
 does not deviate from the end of his existence, the society has no 
 
 Sower to revoke its act. For example : the Civil Ruler is for the 
 efense of the people; but if he should make war upon the peo- 
 ple, the right of self-defense would justify resistance. I ain not 
 now engaged in saying when or how; but the right is undeniable. 
 Manslaughter is not murder, if it be in self-defense; wars of de- 
 fense are lawful ; and just resistance to an unjust prince is not 
 rebellion. All this is founded upon the Divine sanctions of the 
 civil and political society of man. even in the order of nature. It 
 has, then, God for its Founder, for its Legislator, and by His 
 divine Providence for its Supreme Ruler. , 
 
 3. The laws of such society are the laws of nature, it is 
 bound by the natural morality written on the conscience and on 
 the heart. The ethics which govern men become politics m the 
 government of States. Politics are but the collective morals of 
 society. The Civil Ruler or Sovereign is bound by the laws : the 
 subject within the sphere of these laws owes to him a civil aUc- 
 ffiance. The Civil Ruler may bind aU subjects bv an oath of al- 
 legiance. He may call on all to bear arms for the safety of the 
 
 4 The State has for its end, not only the safety of person and 
 property, but. in its fullest sense, the temporal happiness of man. 
 Within the sphere of natural morality, and in order to its end, 
 the State is supreme : and its power is from God. This is tn© 
 meaning of St. Paul's words : — 
 
148 
 
 BKLATIOXS OF THE 
 
 . **JM evciT wml be subject to bigber powfere: for tbere is »o 
 power but from God ; and fchose thai are, arc ordained of God. 
 TlieTefore be tbat resisteth the power, resistetb the ordinance 
 of God; and they that resist, parobase to themselves damna- 
 tion. . . . For he is God's minister to thee for good. But 
 if thou do that which is evil, fear; for he beareth not the sword 
 itt lain : for be is God's minister, an avenger to execote wrath 
 upon him that doetb evil. Wherefore be subject of necessity, 
 not orabf lor wrath, but also for conscience' sake." *^ 
 Hie State, then, is a perfect society, supreme within its own 
 
 tere, and in order to its own end : but as that end is not the 
 best end of man, so the State is not the highest society among 
 men; nor is it, beyond its own sphere and end, supreme. I have 
 drawn this out in greater fullness to show tbat the Church is in 
 the highest degree conservative of all the natural authority of 
 nlors, and of the natural allegiance of subjects. It is mere 
 ibaMowness to say that between the Civil authority, as Divinely 
 iwinded in nature, and the spiritual authority of the Church there 
 wii be opposition. 
 
 Now, as to the Divine institution of the Civil Society of the 
 world and of its independence in all things of the natural order, 
 what I have alread? said is enough. The laws of the order 
 of nature are from God. So lon|r as a father exercises his do- 
 mestic authority according to the law of God, no other authority 
 Mu Intervene to control or to hinder his government. So like- 
 wise of the Prince or Sovereign power, be it lodged in one or in 
 maiiy. There is no authority upon earth which can depose a 
 jiMitiiivereign or release such suojects from their obedience.f 
 
 H. There is, however, another society, the end of whioh is the 
 eternal happiness of mankind. This also has God for its Founder, 
 and that immediately ; and it has received from God its form and 
 eonslilution, and its rulers receive their authority immediately, | 
 with a special Divine sanction and authority, from God. 
 
 Two tnings follow at once from this : — 
 
 1. That the society which has for its end the eternal happiness 
 of man is of an order higher than the society which aims only at 
 the natural happiness of man. 
 
 2. That as tne temporal and the eternal happiness of man are 
 both ordered by Divine laws, these two societies are, of necessity, 
 in essential conformity and harmony with each other. Collision 
 between them can only he if either deviates from its respective laws. 
 
 The natural society of man aims directly at the temfjoral hap- 
 piness of its sul]jcct8, but indirectly it aims also at their eternal 
 happiness : the supernatural socie^ aims directly at their eter- 
 nal iiappiness, Mki indirectly at their temporal happiness, but al- 
 «i|s in so far only as their temporal happiness is oonducire to 
 their eternal end. 
 
 *]tomaiis xiii. 1-5. 
 
 f **Btiam nocentiuni potestas non est nisi a Deo."— St Augustine, 
 Ik JfulMm Bom contra Mmnckf cap. xxxii. 
 { Suarez, Defetmo Fidei, lib. iii. cap. ii. sect. 5. 15, 16. 
 
 BpmrniAL akd civil powers. 
 
 149 
 
 From thii again two other corollaries follow : — 
 
 1. That the nigher or supernatural society is supreme because 
 it has no other society, above it or beyond it, with an end higher 
 
 than its own. . .,.,,. ^ 
 
 2. That the office of the supernatural society is to aid, direct, 
 and perfect the natural society ; that its action upon it is always 
 cedificadonem non in destructionem, inasmuch as it is governed 
 by the same Divine Lawgiver, and it is directed to an end which 
 inoludes and insures the end of the natural society aisa 
 
 To put this briefly: The State has for its end the temporal 
 happiness of its subjects ; the Church has for its end their eter- 
 nal happiness. In aiming directly at temporal happiness, the 
 State aims also indirectly at the eternal; for these things are 
 promoted by the same laws. In aiming at eternal happiness, 
 the Church also indirectly aims at the temporal happiness of 
 
 III. The Divine Founder of the Christian Church said: "To 
 thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And what- 
 soever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound also in heaven; 
 and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed also in 
 heaven."* And again: "All power is given to me^ in heaven 
 and in earth. Going therefore, teach all nations," . . . 
 •' teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have com- 
 manded you." t „ .V /^. . ^• 
 
 If these two commissions do not confer upon the Christian 
 Church a supreme doctrinal authority, and a supreme j«»cial 
 office, in respect to the moral law, over all nations, and over all 
 persons, both governors and governed, 1 know not what words 
 could suffice to do so. 
 
 That authority and that office are directive and preceptive, so 
 long as Princes and their laws are in conformity with the Chris- 
 tian law; and judicial, ratione peccati, by reason of sin, whenso- 
 ever they deviate from it. «. , t. • 
 
 If any man deny this, he would thereby affirm that Princes 
 have no superior upon earth; which is the doctrine of the 
 heathen Caesarism. , . 
 
 But no man will say that Princes have no superior. It is un- 
 meaning to say that they have no superior but the law of God : 
 for that is to play with words. A law is no superior without an 
 authority to judge and to apply it , 
 
 To say that God is the sole Lawgiver of Princes is a doctrine 
 unknown, not only to the Catholic Church, but to the Constitu- 
 tion of England. When we say, as our old Jurists do, Non Rex 
 faeii legem, but Lex facit Begem, we mean that there is a will 
 above the King; and that will is the Civil Society, who judges 
 if and when the King deviates from the law. But this doctrine, 
 unless it be tempered by vigorous restraint, is chronic revolution. 
 What adequate restraint is there but in a Divine authority 
 higher than the natural society of man? . ,. i- 
 
 The Supreme Judicial Power of the Church has no jurisdiction 
 
 •St Matthew xn. 19. 
 
 flbid. xxviii. 18,19. 
 
150 
 
 1EI.4TI0XS OF TBB 
 
 over those that are not Christian ; and the entire weight of its 
 iiuthority, if it were applied at all to such a state, would be ap- 
 fliod to confirm the natural rights of sovereignty and to enforce 
 me natural duty of allegiance : and that, upon the principle that 
 the supernatural power of the Church is for edification, not for 
 destruction; that is, to build uj> and to perfect the order of na- 
 ture, not to pull down a stone m the symmetry of the natural so- 
 ciety of man. St. Thomas says : 
 
 "Power and authority are established by hnman right ; the 
 distinction between the mithful and those who do not believe is 
 Mtablished by Divine right But the Difine right, which comes 
 by grace, does not destroy the human right, which is in the 
 oi^der of nature." * 
 
 Let us suppose that the Sovereign Power of a heathen people 
 wet© to make laws contrary to the law of God, would the Church 
 intervene to depose such a sovereign ? Certainly not» on the 
 
 Srinciple laid down by the Apostle, ** What have I to do to judge 
 lose that are without ? '* f 
 
 Such a people is both individually and socially outside the 
 Divine jurisdiction of the Church. The Church has, therefore, 
 in this respect, no commission to discharge towards it except to 
 convert it to Christianity. 
 
 But if it be the office of the Church to teach subjects to obey 
 even Heathen Rulers, as the Apostle did, how much more, in 
 i^Q^se of Christian Princes and their laws, is it the office of 
 tlAkiurch to confirm, consecrate, and enforce the sanctions of 
 relkion and of conscience, of doctrine and of discipline, the 
 whole code of natural and political morality, and all laws that 
 are made in conformity with the same. 
 
 If Christian Princes and their laws deviate from the law of 
 Ood, the Church has authority from God to judge of that devia- 
 tion, and by all its powers to enforce the correction of that de- 
 parture from justice. 1 do not see how any man who believes 
 in the Revelation of Christianity can dispute this assertion; and 
 to Bueh alone I am at present speaking. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone has quoted a paesa|;e from an "Essny on Caesar- 
 ism and Ultramontanism," in which 1 have claimed for the 
 Church a supremacy in spiritual things over the State, and have 
 made this statement : 
 
 "Any power which is independent and can alone fix the limits 
 of its own jurisdiction, and can thereby fix the limits of all other 
 Jurisdictions, is, ipso facio, supreme. But the Church of Jesus 
 Christ, within the sphere of revelation— of faith and morals — is 
 an this, or is nothing or worse than nothing, an imposture and 
 an usurpation ; that is, it is Christ or Antichrist." X 
 
 It is hardly loyal to take the conclusion of a syllogism without 
 
 e premises. In the very pace before this quotation I had 
 
 the premises. 
 
 mid: 
 
 *St. Thomas, 2da 2dm, qiuxsi. x. art. 10. 
 
 II Cor. V. 12. 
 €kn»rism aiid Ulimmtmimmm^ p. 3& 
 
 SPIRITUAL AXD CIVIL POWERS. 
 
 151 
 
 "In any question as to the competence of the two powers, 
 either thew must be some judge to decide what does and what 
 does not fall within their respective spheres or tJiey are de- 
 Uvered over to perpetual doubt and to perpetual conflict. But 
 who can define *what is or is not within the jurisdiction of he 
 Church in faith and morals, except a judge who knows what the 
 Buhere of faith and morals contains, and how far it extends? 
 Ld surely it is not enough that such a judge «»»?;?ld g»^f « ;/ 
 oSne. or pronounce uponloubtful evidence, or with an uncer- 
 Zn knowledge- Such a sentence would be, not an end of con- 
 tention, but a beginning and a renewal of strife. ^ ^ ^ ., 
 
 "It is clear tfat the"" Civil Power can not define how far the 
 circumference of faith and morals extends. If it could it would 
 be invested with one of the supernatural endowmente of the 
 Church To do this it must know the whole deposit of explicit 
 and hnnlicit faith ; or, in other words, it must be the guardian 
 of theThrist an rivektion. Now, no Christian, nor any man of 
 sound mind, claims this for the Civil Power. fA^^? 
 
 Civil Power be not competent to decide the limits of the Spirit- 
 nil Power and if the Spiritual Power can define with a Diyme 
 ^rtTrnTy its own limits^ it is evidently supreme. Or m other 
 words, the Spiritual Power knows vvith Dmne certainty the 
 limits of its own jurisdiction; and it knows therefore the limits 
 a^d the competence of the Civil Power. It is thereby in matters 
 of religion and conscience supreme. * ^ .,..,. .. *i ^„ 
 If tfe Church can not fix the limits of ite jurisdiction, then 
 eitiier nobody can or the State must But the State can not un- 
 less it claim to be the depository and expositor of the Christian 
 Revelation. Therefore itTs the Church or nobody This last 
 fupposition leads to chaos. Now if this be '«f ^^teMhe^^^^^ 
 Ilone can- and if the Church can fix the limits of its own juris- 
 dJcSon Tt'can fix the limits of all other jurisdietion ; at least, so 
 forTti) warn it off it« own domain. 6ut this was my conclu- 
 sionT andTJhough I have seen it held up to odium, I have not yet 
 
 ^^Tui're'chufch being the highest society, and independ^^^^^^^^ 
 aU others, is supreme over them, in so far as Oie eternal happiness 
 
 of man is involved. 
 
 From this, again, two consequences tollow: — 
 
 1 First, that in aU things which are PJ^eJy temporal and he 
 extra finem EcchsicE, outside of the end of the Church, it neither 
 
 'ts:ZdU. K^ arthings which promote, or hinder, the 
 eternal Cpm^^^^ of men, the Church has a power to judge and 
 
 ^^^IV^^'s^ch propositions are no sooner enunciated than we are 
 met by a tumult of voices, such as those of Janus, Q^I^^^JT- 
 Zl r lament to detoct the t«nes of a voice hitherto heard m 
 behalf of the authority of Chnstianitv and of the^^^"»tian 
 Chui^hAlS^i^^ that^t^e Church o/ Rome and its Pontiffs 
 
 ♦ Cksarism and UUramontanisnif pp. 24, 35. 
 
MS 
 
 BEIJITI05S OF TBI 
 
 elaiin supreme temporal * power, and iliftt direct, over mil Tem- 
 Bonil Princes and tnings ; to be ueed at their discretion even to 
 ih^ deposing of Kings, to tlie absolution of subjects from alle- 
 gimice, to the employment of foroe, imprii»onment, torture, and 
 
 iMtk » 
 
 If sueh be the state of our highest minds, we oan not regret 
 that this discussion has been forc^ upon us. It has come not by 
 our act It has arisen in its time appointed. It will for awhile 
 ffiise alarm and suspicion; it will kindle animosity and encour- 
 age bigotry : but it will manifest the truth with a wider light 
 than England has seen for three hundred years. I will therefore 
 H^eely and frmaldly enter uoon this debate, and, in order to be 
 clear, I will treat the subject under the foUowing proposi- 
 tions : — 
 
 1. The authority of Frinoes and the allegiance. of subjects in 
 the Civil State of nature is of Divine ordinance; and, therefore, 
 BO long as Princes and their laws are in conformity to the law of 
 Dod, the Church has no power or jurisdiction against them, nor 
 over them. 
 
 2. If Princes and their laws deviate Ihim the law of Ood, the 
 Church has authority from God to judge of that deviation, and to 
 oblige to its correction. 
 
 3. The authority which the Chareh has from God for this end 
 is not temporal, but spiritual. 
 
 4. This spiritual authority is not direct in its incidence on tem- 
 poral things, but only indirect: that is to say, it directly promotes 
 ]1» own spiritual end ; it indirectly condemns and declares not 
 binding on the conscience such tetnpwal laws as deviate from the 
 law of 'God, and therefore impede or render impossible the attain- 
 ment of the eternal happiness of man. 
 
 5. This spiritual authority is inherent in tlie Divine constitution 
 and commission of the Church ; but its exercise in the world 
 depends on certain moral and material conditions, by which alone 
 ito ozeraise is rendered either {)0S8ibIe or just. 
 
 I have affirmed that the relations of the Catholic Church to the 
 Civil powers are fixed primarily by the Divine constitution of the 
 Church and of the Civil Bocie^ of men. But it is also true that 
 tfiese relations have been declared by the Church in acts and 
 decrees which are of infallible. authority. Such, for instance, is 
 the Bull of Boniface YIII., Vimm Sanctam, As this has become 
 the text and center of the whole controversy at this moment, we 
 will fully treat of it. This Boll, then, was beyond all doubt an 
 act m cathedra. It was also confirmed by Leo X. in the Fifth 
 Jjalemn £cnmenical Council Whatever definition, therefore, is 
 to be found in this Bull is to be received as of laith. Let it be 
 noted that the Unam Sanctam does not depend upon the Vatican 
 Council for its infallible authority. It was from the date of its 
 publication an infallible act« obliging all Catholics to receive it 
 with interior assent. I>octrineB identical with those of the Unam 
 Stmcimm had been deolared in two Ecumenical Councils—namely, 
 
 * ExpottMlaJUmif p. 27. 
 
 SPIRITUAL AXD CIVIL POWERS. 
 
 153 
 
 in the Fourth Itateran in 1215, and the First of Lyons in 1245.* 
 On this ground, therefore, I have affirmed that the relations of the 
 Spiritual and Civil Powers were immutably fixed before the Vati- 
 can Council met, and that they have been in no way changed by 
 
 it 
 
 V. We will now examine, (1) the complete text of the Uimm 
 Sanctam ; (2) the interpretations of its assailants and its defend- 
 ers ; (3) the interpretation which is of obligation on all Catholics. 
 
 1. The Bull was published bv Boniface VUI., in 1302, during 
 the contest with Philip le Bel of France. 
 
 Before the BuU was published, the Regalists or partisans of the 
 King declared that the Pope had claimed, as Mr. Gladstone also 
 supposes, to be supreme over the King, both in spiritual and in 
 temporal things. The Chancellor Flotte made this assertion in 
 the year 1301, at Paris, in the Church of Notre Dame. The car- 
 dinals sent by Boniface declared that the Pope made no such 
 claim ; that he claimed no temporal, but only a spiritual power.f 
 Nevertheless this prejudice, once created, before the publication 
 of the Unam Sanctam, ensured its being misinterpreted when 
 it was issued. Boniface, by the Bull Auscidta Fili, had promptly 
 exposed this misinterpretation. But the prejudice was already 
 
 established.! 
 I will now give the whole text of the Bull, before commenting 
 
 upon it It runs as follows : — 
 
 " We are bound to believe and to hold, by the obligation of 
 faith, one Holy Church, Catholic and also Apostolic; and this 
 (Church) we firmly believe and in simplicity confess: out of 
 which there is neither salvation nor remission of sins. As the 
 Bridegroom declares in the Canticles, ' One is my dove, my per- 
 fect one, she is the only one of her mother, the chosen of her that 
 bore her ; ' § who represents the one mystical Body, the Head of 
 which is Christ; and the Head of Christ is God. In which (the 
 one Church) there is one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism. || For in 
 the time of the Flood the ark of Noe was one, prefiguring the one 
 Church, which was finished in one cubit, f and had one governor 
 and ruler, that is Noe ; outside of which we read that all things 
 subsisting upon earth were destroyed. This also we venerate as 
 one, as the Lord says in the Prophet, ' Deliver, O God, my soul 
 from the sword : my only one from the hand of the dog.' ** 
 
 " For He prayed for the soul, that is, for Himself; for the 
 Head together with the Body : by which Body he designated the 
 one only Church, because of the unity of the Bridegroom, of the 
 Faith, of the Sacraments, and of the charity of the Church. 
 This is that coat of the Lord without seam,ft which was not rent, 
 but went by lots. Therefore of that one and only Church there 
 is one body and one Head, not two heads as of a monster; 
 
 ♦Bellarmin. De PMest. Papse. in praef. p. 844, Cologne, 1617. 
 t DoUinger's Church Blstorif, vol. iv. p. 90. 
 i Ibid, p! 91. § Cant. vi. 8. | F^phesians iv. 5. 
 
 \ Genesis vi. 16. »* P»alm xxi. 21. t1 St. John xix. 23, 24. 
 
m 
 
 UiATlOHS or THB 
 
 1 1 
 
 i III 
 
 namely, Christ and Christ's Vicar, Peter and Peter's successor; 
 for the Lord Himself said to Peter, * Feed mv sheep.* * Mine, 
 lio Mja genorallj; and not, in jjarticolar, these or those: by 
 wliioli He is known to have committed all to him. If, therefore, 
 Greeks or others say that they were not committed to Peter and 
 Ik successors, they must necessarily oonfess that they are not 
 of the sheep of Christ, for the Lord said (in the Gospel) by John, 
 that there is 'One fold, and one only shepherd.' f. % ^^ 
 wmM of the Gospel we are instructed that in this his (that is 
 Peter's) power there are two swords, the spiritual and the tem- 
 poral. ¥qt when the Apostles say, 'Behold, here are two 
 ■words,' that is,! in the Church, the Lord did not saj, ' It is too 
 much,* but * it is enough.' Assuredly, he who denies that the 
 teniBonil sword is in the power of Peter, gives ill heed to the 
 word of the Lord, saying, 'Pnt up again thy sword into its 
 
 place.' I 
 
 " Both, therefore, the spiritual sword and the material sword 
 are in the power of tne Church. But the latter (the ma- 
 terial sword) is to be wielded on behalf op the Church; the for- 
 mer (the spiritual) is to be wielded by the Church; the one by 
 the hand of the priest; the other by the hand of kings and sol- 
 diers, but at the suggestion and sufferance of the priest The 
 one sword ought to be subject to the other, and the temporal au- 
 thority ought to be subject to the spiritual power. For whereas 
 the Apostle says, 'There is no power but from God; and those 
 that are, are ordained of God ; ' |[ thej would not be ordained (or 
 ordered) if one sword were not subject to the other, and as the 
 inferior directed by the other to the highest end. For, accord- 
 ing to the blessed Dionysius, it is the law of the Divine order 
 that the lowest should be guided to the highest by those that are 
 intermediate. Therefore, according to the order of the universe, 
 all things are not in equal and immediate subordination; but 
 the lowest things are set in order by things intermediate, and 
 titinfm inferior by things superior. We ought, therefore, as 
 islMirij to oonfess that the spiritual power, both in dignitjr and 
 ezeellence, exceeds any eartbly power, in proportion as spiritual 
 thinge are better than things temporal. This we see clearly from 
 the giving, and blessing, and sanctifying of tithes, from the re- 
 OtptMin of the power itself, and from the government of the same 
 things. For, as the truth bears witness, the spiritual power has 
 to instruct, and judge the earthly power, if it be not gr»od; and 
 thus the prophecy of Jeremias is verified of the Church and the 
 eeeksiasticaf power : • Lo, I have set thee this day over the na- 
 tions and over kin^oms,' etc.f If, tlierefore, the earthly power 
 deviates (from its end), it will be judged bv the spiritual ; but if 
 m lesser spiritual power transgresses, it will be judged by its su- 
 perior; but if the supreme (deviates), it can be judged, not by 
 ■wn, but bf God alone, according to the words of the Apostle : 
 •fhe spiritual man judges all things; he himself is judged by no 
 
 ♦ Bt John xxi. 17. t St. John x. 16. t St. Luke xxii. 38. 
 }SL Matthew xxvi. 62. | Romans xiii. 1. 1 Jeremiah i. 10. 
 
 SPIRITUAL AND CIVIL POWERS. 
 
 155 
 
 one,** Thiff authority, though given to man and exercised 
 through man, is not human, but rather Divine — ^iven by the Di- 
 vine voice to Peter, and confirmed to him and his successors in 
 Him whom Peter confessed, the Rock, for the Lord said to Peter: 
 * Whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also 
 in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be 
 loosed also in heaven.' f 
 
 " Whosoever therefore resists this power that is so ordered by 
 God, resists the ordinance of God, J: unless, as Manichaeus did, he 
 feign to himself two principles, which we condemn as false and 
 heretical; for, as Moses witnesses, 'God created heaven and 
 earth not in the beginnings, but in the beginning.' § Moreover, 
 we declare, affirm, define, and pronounce it to be necessary to 
 salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Boman 
 Pontiff." 
 
 2. We will next take the interpretations. They may be put 
 into three classes : — 
 
 (1) First, of those who assailed it at the time. 
 
 The theologians and doctors of the school at Paris had always 
 taught by a constant tradition that the Popes possessed a spirit- 
 ual and indirect power over temporal things. John Gerson may 
 be taken as the representative of them all. He says the ecclesi- 
 astical power does not possess the dominion and the rights of 
 earthly and of heavenly empire, so that it mav dispose at will of 
 the goods of the clergy, and much less of the laity ; though it 
 must be conceded that it has in these things an authority {domin- 
 ium^ to rule, to direct, to regulate, and to ordain. || Such was 
 the doctrine of Almain, Alliacus, John of Paris, and of the old 
 Sorbonne. It was also the doctrine of the theologians of the 
 Council of Constance; who are always quoted as opponents of 
 the Infallibility of the Pope, because they held that, though the 
 See of Rome could not err, he that sat in it might err. They 
 likewise held the deposing power, which alone is enough to show 
 how little the definition of the Infallibility has to do with the 
 deposition of Kings. 
 
 When the Unam Sanctam was published, Egidius Romanus, 
 the Archbishop of Bourges, wrote against it, being deceived into 
 a belief that Boniface claimed a direct temporal power over the 
 King of France, over and above that power which had always 
 been admitted in France according to the Bull Notdi of Innocent 
 in. — ^vii,, an indirect spiritual power in temporal matters when 
 involving sin.Tf The same course was taken by other French 
 writers 
 
 Boniface had already declared in a Consistory in 1302 that he 
 had never assumed any jurisdiction which belonged to the King; 
 
 ♦ 1 Corinthians ii. 15. t St. Matthew xvi. 19. 
 
 t Romans xiii. 2. g Genesis i.l. 
 
 fjoann. Gerson, De Potest Eccles. Consid. xu. Bianchi, IMIMI 
 Fotegtd et della Politia ddla Chiemy torn. i. lib. i. cap. xi. 
 \ Bianchi, lib. i. cap, x. 
 
 
 I 
 
IM 
 
 BBUkflONfl OF TBI 
 
 SPIRITUAL AXD CITIL POWERS. 
 
 157 
 
 but liiat he had declared the King to be, like any other Chris* 
 tian, subject to him only in regard to sin.* 
 
 (2) Secondly, the Be^iliats once more assailed the Unam 
 'tmeiaM in the reign of Lonis XIY. 
 
 Bianohi says that there is not to be found a writer in France, 
 before Calvin, who denied this indirect spiritual power; that the 
 denial was introduced by the Huguenots about the year 1626 ; that 
 the Sorbonne began to adhere to it, and reduced it to a formula 
 in 1662.t Bossuet endeavors to fasten on the Unam Sanctam 
 the old Begalist interpretation, and affirms that it was withdrawn 
 by Clement V.: which statement is contrary to the fact. Clem- 
 ent v., on the contrary, interprets the Bull in the true sense, as 
 Bonilice had done, declaring that Boniface did not thereby sub- 
 ject the King, or the Kingdom of France, in any greater degree 
 to the authority of the Pontiff than they had been before, that is, 
 iiocordina; to the Bull of Innocent III. Novii, and the doctrines 
 iif the old Sorbonne. ll 
 
 fhe history of the Four Gallican Articles, and of the writers 
 who defended them, is too well known to need repetition. 
 
 (3) We come, lastly, to those who have assailed it at this time, 
 it is not a little wearisome to read the same old stories over 
 
 affain; and to be told as "scientific history" that Boniface VIII. 
 ewimed to have received both swords as his own, to be held in 
 his own hand, and wielded by him in direct temporal jurisdiction 
 over temporal princes.. We nave all this raked up again in Janua, 
 From Jmm it goes to newspapers, magazines, and pamphlets. 
 Any body can interpret a Pope's Ball. There is no need of a 
 knowledge of contemporary facts, or of the terminology of the 
 Civil or Canon Law, or of Pontifical Acts, or of the technical 
 meaning of words. A dictionary, and a stout heart to attack the 
 Pope, is enough. Such men would have ns believe, against all 
 ihe Popes, that thev have claimed temporal power, properly so 
 oalled, over temporal Princes. 
 
 VI I will, therefore, now give what may be aflirmed to be the 
 true and legitimate interpretation of the Unam Sanctam. 
 
 It can not be better stated than in the words of Dr. Dollinger.J 
 
 ri"#l IMnriEtf^H Liltlft * ■■■ III! 
 
 "Boniface opened the council, at which there were present 
 §mm. France four archbishops, thirty-five bishops, and six abbots, 
 in November, 1302. One consequence of this council appears to 
 have been the celebrated decretal Unam Sanctam, which was 
 made public on the 18th of November, and which contains an 
 •iposition of the relations between the spiritual and teniporal 
 powers. In the Church, it says, there are two jiowers, a tem- 
 poral and spiritual, and as far as they are both in the Church, 
 they have both the same end ; the temporal power, the inferior, 
 
 •Bollinger's HM&ry of Churehf vol. iv. p. 91. 
 
 t Lib. i. cap. xiii. . „ ,, ^ ^ * x, ^i 
 
 i In the Appendix A will he found in full the Text of the three 
 Pontifical Acts, JVofK, Unmn Samctam, MeruU, 
 I Hiii, iv. p. 91. 
 
 is subject to the spiritual, the higher and morO noble; the former 
 must be guided and directed by the latter, as the body is by tho 
 soul ; it receives from the spiritual its consecration and its direc- 
 tion to its highest object, and must therefore, should it ever dc- 
 fart from its destined path, be corrected by the spiritual power* 
 fc is a truth of faith that all men, even kings, are subject to the 
 Pope; if, therefore, they should be guilty of grievous sins, in 
 peace or in war, or in the government of their kin^oms, and the 
 treatment of their subjects, and should thus lose sight of the ob- 
 ject to which the power of a Christian Prince should be directed, 
 and should give public scandal to the people, the Pope can admon- 
 ish them, since m regard to sin they are subject to the spiritual 
 power; he can correct them; and, if necessity should require it, 
 compel them by censures to remove such scandals. For if they 
 were not subject to the censures of the Church, whenever they 
 might sin in the exercise of the power entrusted to them, it would 
 follow that as kings they were out of the Church; that the two 
 powers would be totally distinct from each other; and that ther 
 were descended from distinct and even opposed principles, which 
 would be an error approaching to the heresy of the Manichees. 
 It was therefore the indirect power of the Church over the tem- 
 poral power of kings which tiie Pope defended in these Bulls ; 
 and he had designedly extracted the strongest passages of them 
 from the writings of two French theologians, St. Bernard and 
 Hugo of St. Victor." 
 
 The interpretation given here by l>r. Bollinger is undoubtedly 
 correct. All Catholics are bound to assent to the doctrines here! 
 declared; for though they are not here defined, yet they are cer-( 
 tainly true. The only definition, properly so called, in the Bull is 
 contained in the last sentence. 
 
 Now, upon the doctrines declared by the Bull it is to be ob- 
 served !*~~' 
 
 1 . That it does not say that the two swords were given by our 
 Lord to the Church ; but that the two swords are in poiesiate Ee- 
 clesicB, " in the power of the Church." 
 
 2. That it at once goes on to distinguish " Both (swords) are in 
 the power of the Church, the spiritual, that is, and the material. 
 But this (the material) is to be used for the Church; that (the 
 spiritual) is to be used hy the Church. This, indeed (by the 
 hand), of the Priest; that, by the hand of kings and soldiers, but 
 at the bidding and sufferance of the Priest." 
 
 3. That though both swords are in the Church, they are held in 
 different hands, and to be used by the subordination of the one to 
 the other. Oporiet autem gladium esse sub gladio : the one 
 sword must be subordinate to the other, the lower to the higher. 
 
 4. That Boniface VIII., in this very Bull Unam Sanctam, ex- 
 pressly declares that the power given to Peter was the " Suprema 
 Spiritnalis potestas" not the Temporal, or a mixed power, but 
 purely Soiritual, which may judge all Powers, but itself is judged 
 
 of God alone. " . x ^ v 
 
 Now, on tho principles already laid down, there ought to be no 
 , difficulty in rightly and clearly understanding this doctrine. 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
158 
 
 BBLATIOKS OF TUB. 
 
 SPIRITUAL AND CIVIL POWERS. 
 
 159 
 
 1. For first the Material Swofd is •• oM te human society. It 
 was not given by grace, nor held by grace, which is a heresy con- 
 demned m Wicklif by the Council of Ck)n8tjince ; but it belongs 
 to the Civil Ruler in the order of nature, as St. Paul, speaking of 
 the heathen empire, says: "He beareth not the sword in vain; for 
 lie is the minister of God to execute wrath." 
 
 Nothing but want of care or thought could have led men to 
 iimt this, which is a truth and fact of the natural order. 
 
 When any prince by baptism became Christian, he became sub- 
 ject to the law of God an«f to the Church as its expositor. He be- 
 came subject, not only as a man. but as a prince ; not only in the 
 iutiM of his privatB life, but in the duties of his public Kfo atoo. 
 But this did not deprive hum of the civil sword, nor of any of the 
 
 CrifAis of the natural order.* OpcrUi autem gladium esft tub 
 ^io. The Bull declares that the Material Sword which he 
 Uriit with him when he was baptised ought to be subject to 
 <|it Spiritual Sword. But it nowhere says that the Material 
 Bwofd was given to the Church, or that the Church gave it to the 
 IsMrial Kuler. It is in the Church, because he that bears it is 
 in lie Church. It is the office of the Church to consecrate it, and 
 (immutre) to imtrMCt it. But it belongs essentially to the nat- 
 ural order, though it is to be exercised according to the supernat- 
 
 iiial order of faith. .. . ^, j. ^i^ 
 
 2. When it is said that both Swords are "in the power of the 
 Church:* it means that the Church in a Christian world includ^ 
 the natural oider in its unity. The conception of the <^h«rch 
 iaeiuded the whole complex Christian Society, made up of both 
 powers, united in a complete visible unity. . 
 
 Mr Bryce, in his excellent work on the Holy Roman Empire, 
 
 •Thus the Holy Roman Church and the Holy Roman Empire 
 are one and the same thing in two aspects; and Catholicism, the 
 
 Sinciple of the universal Christian Society, is also Romanism: 
 at isi rests upon Rome as the origin and type of universality, 
 manifesting it§elf in a mystic dualism which corresponds to the 
 two natures of its Founder. As Divine and eternal, its head is 
 the Pope, to whom all souls have been entrusted ; as human and 
 temporal, the Emperor, commissioned to rule mens bodies and 
 
 Mr. Bryce has here cleariy seen the concrete unity of the 
 Christian world; but he has missed the order which creates that 
 unity. His description is what Boniface VIII. calls "a monster 
 with two heads." Mr. Bryce quotes this saying in a note. If 
 he had mastered the spiritual element as he has mastered the 
 political. Mr. Bryoe's book would have ranked very high among 
 
 jrreat authors. . 
 
 Mr. Freeman in an article on Mr. Bryce's book, is nearer to 
 Hift true conception. He writes as follows : , 
 
 "He theory of the MediiBval Empire is that of an universal 
 
 •Bianchi lib. i. cap. iv. ,M.n«,ni«„ ift7i \ 
 
 t The JMrj Rmmn Brnptre, p. 108. (Macmillan, 1871.) 
 
 Christian Monarchy. The Roman Empire and the Catholic 
 Church are two aspects of one Society." • • • J' ^ "^« ^^ 
 of this Society, in its temporal character as an Empire, stands 
 the temporal chief of Christendom, the Roman Caesar; at its 
 head, in its spiritual character as a Church, stands the spiritual 
 chief of Christendom, the Roman Pontiff. Caesar and Pontiff 
 alike rule by Divine right." * , i -c 
 
 Now here are two things to be noted. First, that the Emperor 
 holds an office of human creation ; the Pontiff an office of Divine 
 creation. Secondly, that the office of Divine creation is for a 
 higher end than the office which is of human origin. The fo^ 
 mer is for the eternal, the latter for the earthly happiness of 
 
 jnan. — v^* • i» 
 
 But as I have said before, the office of Dmne creation, or- 
 dained to guide men to an eternal end, is higher than the office 
 of human origin, directed to an earthly and temporal end; and 
 in this the perfect unity and subordination of the whole is consti- 
 tuted and preserved. , ,, ,^ i. . i. 
 Nevertheless, both Mr. Bryce and Mr. Freeman bring out 
 clearly what Boniface means when he says that the two swords 
 are in Ecclesiajn the Church, and inpotestate Ecclesioi, %n the 
 
 power of the Church. r xu i x n 
 
 To this I may add the following passage from the late Car- 
 dinal Tarquini,t who states the whole subject with great pre- 
 
 ciBion *^~~> 
 
 "The Civil Society of Catholics b distinguished from others 
 by this— that it consists of the same assemblage of men as the 
 Church of Christ, that is, the Catholic Church, consists of: so 
 that it in no way constitutes a real body diverse and separate 
 from the Church; but both (societies) together have the charac- 
 ter of a twofold federative association and obligation inhering in 
 the same multitude of men, whereby the Civil Society under the 
 Bovernment of the Civil Magistrate exerts its powers to secure the 
 temporal happiness of men, and, under the government of the 
 Church, to secure eternal life ; and in such wise .that eternal life 
 be acknowledged to be the last and supreme end to which tem- 
 poral happiness and the whole temporal life is subordinate; be- 
 cause if any man do not acknowledge this, he neither belongs to 
 the Catholic Church, nor may call himself Catholic. Such, then, 
 is the true notion of the Civil Society of Catholics. It is a so- 
 ciety of men who so pursue the happiness of this life as thereby 
 to show that it ought to be subordinate to the attainment of etei- 
 nal happiness, which they believe can be attained alone under 
 the direction of the Catholic Church," ^,^ „ « 
 
 We have here the full and genuine doctrine of the Unam banc- 
 iam— the one body, the two swords, the subordination of the 
 material to the spiritual sword, the indirect power of the spirit- 
 ual over the temporal whensoever it deviates from the eternal 
 end. 
 
 I 
 
 ii 
 
 I 
 
 ♦ Freeman's ITtstorical Emty^ pp. 13€^137. (^lacmiTlan, 1872.) 
 tTarquini, Juris Ecd. PMici Listitiaiones, p. 56. (Kome, liii6.) 
 
160 
 
 BKfJiTIONS OF THE 
 
 Dr. Bollingpr't interpreWioii. then, la 8^"^% *^<>";tt" p wJk 
 "II was therefore," he says, "the mdirect power of the Church 
 mm the temporal power of Kingp which the Pope defended in 
 theie Biilli; 'Hiot tW power of the Pope is ^^^^f f "*;*^^^., 
 
 VIIL Ffom this doctrine Cardinal Tarquim draws the follow- 
 
 ine conclusions : . . . .« x i a i^p 
 
 1. In things temporal, and in respect to ttie temporal end {fit 
 Government), the Church has no power m Civil eociety. 
 
 The proof of this proposition is that all things merely temp^ 
 nl^i^mterjinem ^cluia,) beside, or outoide of ti>e end of 
 iM Chsrok It is a general rule that no society has no power m 
 IhoM things which are out of its own proper end 
 
 2. In w&tsoever things, whether essentiaUy or by accident, m 
 fpirttual end, that is, the end of the Church, is necessarily in- 
 ▼oked, in those things, though they be temporal, tiieC^^^^^ 
 may bV right exert its power, and the Civil State ought to yield * 
 
 /n ties? two propositions we have the ?«" «»Fl»«*tl«» f *^« 
 indirect spiritual power of the Church. I give it in Ciirdinal lar- 
 
 " mreetiy the care of temporal happiness alone belongs to the 
 Btate, but indirectly the office also of protecting morals and 
 reIi»on; so, however, that this be done dependently on the 
 ChuTh, forasmuch as the Church is a society to which the care 
 of religion and morals is directly committod. 
 
 " Thtt which in the Civil Society is indirect and dependent, is 
 direct and independent in the Church ; and. on the other hand, 
 the end which iiproper and direct to the Civil State, that is, tern- 
 pTril happiness, Lls^nly indireetly, or so far as the spiritual 
 end requires, under the power of the Church. 
 
 " The result of all this is— ^ . u«- «# ;# Im. 
 
 " 1 That the Civil Society, even though every member of it be 
 Catholic, is not subject to the Church, but plainly independent in 
 temporal things which regard itstemporal end. 
 
 ••r That thT language of the Fathers, which seems to affirm f 
 an absoluto indepe^See of the Civil State, is to be brought 
 
 within this limit. ^ , , .x • *k« w^*<ia 
 
 VIII I will now give a summary of this matter in tnc woras 
 
 of Suarez and also his comment on the terminology used by 
 
 ^trrX^lthe^Jnion'tS the Pontiff h» thU direct 
 
 temporal power over the Church. k«^„ offi,.m<wi— 
 
 Hethengives as the true opinion that which has been affirmea— 
 
 MMiely. thit the Pontiff has not direct i<^l'«'*«^^P^^«'^V®^TJ^i'^ 
 S^e Ws of which he is Temporal Prince; but that he has a 
 smrilMtd power indirectly over temporal toings, in so lar as mey 
 aibot the salvation of men or involve sin. J 
 
 •Tarqulni, Juris EccL PtMid ImtUidime*, p. 57. 
 
 fibidf. p. 55 and note. _ 
 
 i Suarei, Be Legibm, lib. iii. c. vi. 
 
 SPIRITUAL AND CITIL FOWBRS. 
 
 161 
 
 One chief cause of the confusion of Regalists and our non- 
 Catholic adversaries has been the uncertain use of language, and 
 the want of a fixed terminology until a certain date. 
 
 The word Temporal was used in two senses. It was used to 
 signify the power of Civil Rnlen in the order of nature. And in 
 this sense the Church has never claimed it for its h^. It was 
 used also to signify the spiritual power of the Pontiff when wm^ 
 dent indirectly mton temporal things. The spiritual power, then, 
 had a temporal effect, and took, so to speak, its color and name 
 from that use, remaining always spiritual as before. 
 
 For instance, we speak of the " Colonial power of tlie Crown, 
 meaning the Imperial power applied to the ffovernment of the 
 Colonics ; in like manner the spiritual power of the Pope, appjte* 
 indirectly to temporal things, was {impropHe) improperly caUed 
 Temporal, and this usus loquendi gave rise to much misinterpre- 
 
 What I have here stated was the judgment of Bellmnine, 
 Hho, in his ansvrer to Barclay, writes as follows : — - ' 
 
 " Barclay says that there are two opinions among Catholics (on 
 the power of the Pontiff). The one, which most Canonists fol- 
 low, affirms that in the Supreme Pontiff, as Vicar of Christ, b^ 
 powers Spiritual and Temporal, exist; the other, which is the 
 common opinion of Theologians, affirms that the power of the 
 Supreme Pontiff, as Vicar of Christ, is strictly spiritual m itself; 
 but that, nevertheless, he may, by the same, dispose temporal 
 things so that they be ordered for spiritual ends. * 
 
 Barclay argued that the power of the Pope in temporal thin^si 
 was a free and open opinion among Catholics : Bellarmine, in 
 
 "^^f'^hat thfs' power is in the Pope is not opinion but certitode 
 amonz Catholics, though there may be many discussions a« to 
 whatlnd of what quality the power is: that is to say. ^*^^f « 
 it be properly and in itself of a temporal kind, or whether it be 
 not nfiher spiritual, but by a certain necessary consequence, and 
 in order to spiritual ends, it dispse of temporal things, f 
 Bellarmine states his own opinion in these words : 
 "Temporal Princes, when they come to the family of i^nrist, 
 lose neither their princely power nor jurisdiction ; but they become 
 Bubiect to him wbom Christ has set over His family t» be gov- 
 erned and directed by him in those things which lead to eternal 
 
 Now, from these passages it would appar iiiat in Bellarminc's 
 iudirment the opinions of the Canonists and the Theologians 
 iractically came to one and the same thing, though their language 
 Wasdiflferent. By Temporal Power some eariier Cknonwte m^ 
 nerhaps have intended a power temporal m itself; but the laier 
 Canonists did not intend more than a Spinturi powwr over tem- 
 poral things : which the Theologians also asserted. But this use 
 
 ♦ Bellarmine, De PotestaU Sbmni i\>ntt/fcw, cap. i. p. 848 A, Cologne, 
 
 ^^^^t IfrW. cap. iii. p. 852 a. t J^- caP- i"- P- ^® ^• 
 
 14 
 
llLAflONS Of THB 
 
 c»f «h<i word Ump^ml awmed ^J^^.^^^l^^t^!^ 
 
 bieoitf k the ioans© of 4li© mwendewtwidiiigB which we owy 
 3 m filtaoka upon the Cktholio Church. I can the more retd- 
 STbelieTe the good faith of those who so misconceive it because 
 
 l^ean remember that I wan misled by the ^J^\^'^^\IZJS!aI 
 Mm For instance, the CanoniatB aflinii that the whole world is 
 Krrito^ Tthe P^^^ Ponlf^). But they 
 
 ri^CSswering the o^j^^^r^ ^^^^S^J'-^'.^^L^^tfX^ 
 spiritually in the territory of any temporal Pnnce, »»« « ^ "Lf 
 tlio territory of another. The meaning "evident namehr, that 
 llie Pontiff has universal jurisdictipn over the whole world. But 
 tiiis does not say that his jurisdiction is tempowJ;^ I* jf "»• 
 mh that it runs into all the, world. It merely affims that it w 
 Bniversal; and the same writers assert that m itself it is only 
 
 ^^Wrhivebeen told that Bellamine's book was put upon the 
 Index. But, after a judicial e«amination, it was removed bY 
 Mder of the Holy See, and its perfect soundness acknowledged. 
 ^uwei lays down precisely the same doctrine as Bellarmine. 
 
 * TS!Be"author8 who teach absolutely tiiat the Pope has Su- 
 preme Power, and that temptyrah in the whole wOrld, mean this, 
 •that the Pontiff in virtue of his Spiritual Fo^er and jurisdio- 
 fHm. is superior to Kings and temporal Princes, so as to direct 
 ihem in the use of the& temporal Power m order to Sptniual 
 •Dds.'" 
 He then goes on :— , ^vv^t,* 
 
 " For thoui?h they sometimes speak indistinctly, and without 
 ■afiiient clearness, or even (impramu) incorrectly-^because the 
 power of the Pope is not temporal but spiritual which contains 
 Vder itself things temporal, and is exercised about them tndt-- 
 Sr%, that is. forthe sake of Spiritual tlMngs--neyerttiele8s they 
 XT make this sense clear, and lay down their distinctions 
 either expressly or virtually; for they affirm that the Pontiff can 
 do some thin^ imitrcc^y, but deny that he can do them dir 
 
 '^iSt if the Pope had Ummtal power properly so caUed, he 
 could do all things d^ecUy, This negative proves that the power 
 of which they spoke was only Spiritual 
 
 Suarez further says : — , . j. ^ a u:««*;«« 
 
 " Subiection is of two kinds—direct and indirect. Subjection 
 
 is ealled direct when it is within the end and limits of the same 
 
 power; it is called indirect when it springs ^om direction to a 
 
 liigher end, which belongs to a J^X^w *»d,,'»<>'2i^''''!J flKT*: 
 The proper Civil Power in itself is directly ordained for the fit- 
 tinir itato and temporal happiness of the human commonwealtfi 
 in time of this present life; and therefore the power itself is 
 
 t8u2el"k}eMio>i<fet OrfAirftcaj, torn, xxiv. lib. iii. c. xxii. 2d ed. 
 Paris, 1869. 
 
 SPIRITUAL AHD OITIL POWBRS. 
 
 lU 
 
 called temporal The Civil Power, therefore, is then called su- 
 preme in its own order when within the same, and in respect to 
 Its end, the ultimate resolution (of power) is made within its 
 own sphere." ..." The chief ruler is, then, subordinate to 
 no superior in order to the same end of Civil Government. But, 
 as temporal and civil happiness are related to that which is 
 spiritufu and eternal, it may happen that the matter of Civil 
 Government must be otherwise oroered and directed, in order to 
 spiritual welfare, than the Civil policy alone seems to require. 
 And then, though the temporal Prince and his power do not di- 
 rectly depend in their acto upon any other power in the same 
 (t. e. the temporal) order, which also regards the same end only, 
 nevertheless it may happen that it needs to be directed, helped, 
 and corrected in the matter of its government by a superior 
 power, which governs men in order to a more excellent and eter- 
 nal end ; and then this dependence is called indirect, because 
 that higher power is not exercised in respect to temporal things 
 ( per se) of its own nature, nor for its own sake, but indirectly, 
 and for another end." * 
 
 It will be seen here: — . . 
 
 1. That the superior power can not be temporal, or its jurisdic- 
 tion vrould be direct. 
 
 2. That, if temporal, it would not be of a higher, but of the 
 same order. 
 
 3. That, therefore, the claim of indirect power is an express 
 exclusion of temporal power, properly so ealled, from the spirit- 
 ual supremacy oi the Head of the Church. 
 
 Suarez states, but rejects, the opinion of certain early Canon- 
 ists and Jurists who taught that the power of the Pontiff over 
 any temporal thing was also temporal in itself. He then states 
 and proves that this indirect power is Spiritual only. After 
 speaking of the power of the Keys, he says : — 
 
 •' In no other place did Christ imply that He gave to Peter or 
 to the Church temporal dominion, or a proper and direct royalty ; 
 nor does Ecclesiastical tradition show this, but rather the re- 
 verse " ^ 
 
 With these authorities before us, there can be little difficulty 
 in explaining the texts usually quoted by adversaries, who desire 
 to fasten on the Unam Sanctum and upon the Catholic Church a 
 claim to temporal power, that is, temporal in its root and in it- 
 self 1 a i> -J 
 
 The passages usually quoted from Pope Nicholas, St. Bernard, 
 St. Thomas, Alvarez, Hugo of St. yictor, St Bonaventura, Du- 
 randus, and others, are fully discussed and proved by BcUm*- 
 mine to affirm no more than Spiritual power ; and that indirectly 
 over temporal matters, when they involve the Spiritual end of 
 the Church.} 
 
 * Suarez, Defensio Fidti, 4tc. lib. iii. cap. v. sect. 2. 
 t Suarez, Defamo Fidei, &c. lib. iii. cap. v. sect. 14. 
 X This may be seen in his CotUroverda de Sumrno PontificCf cap. v.; 
 and in Bianchi's work, Ddla P^estciy torn. i. p. 91, lib. i. ch. x. xi. 
 
BBLATIOiro or TU 
 
 IX. I hope »««ffickn%topww.l2!5^Z^^ 
 
 in ifcw Divine oonstitotioii ma4 connniwion of th« Church, ite ex- 
 mhm m tlie world depend, on certoin monOand material oon- 
 dUions. by wMoh alone He exerciee m ^^^,V^^^,J^ ^i'S^ 
 Vhk aiiiill be shown by treating te inbjecta raised by the Ex- 
 pMtulation ; " • naaehf, the depoeing power, and the ««« «VP«^ 
 tcBl force or penal leg&lation in matters of reliffon. J ?«>!>«» ""^ 
 I believe, thiS^I an able to show that the mofal condition of the 
 €hrislian woiW made jnstiiable in other ages that which would 
 be uninstlfiablc in this ; and that the attempt to raiee P^godioe, 
 ■aniieioii, and hostiUty against the CTatholie Ghureh at this^y 
 tjJin Enghind by these topics, is an act essentially unfl^*; frj"* 
 wliieb a roal science of history ought to have preser^ Mr. 
 Gladstone. I must repeat here again that between the VatM»n 
 Council and these subjects there is no more relation than be- 
 tween jarisprudence and Hie equinox. Some fifteen U>uncil8 ol 
 the Church, of which two are General, have indeed recognised 
 •nd acted upon the suprcmiwjy of the Spirit^sl, authori^ o^^ 
 Church over temporal tilings; but the Infallibi% of the Koman 
 Fontiff is one thing, his supreme judtcud authority m another. 
 And the Definition^f Infallibility by the Vatican Cfouncil has m 
 no way, by so much as a jot or tittle, changed or sffected that 
 which was infallibly fixed and declared before. But, " 1 ^^. «^ 
 nn to show, even infiillible laws cease to apply when the subject 
 Miller is wanting, and the necessary moral conditions are passea 
 
 I must acknowledge, therefore, that the following words fill me 
 vith surprise. Speaking of Dr. Doyle and otfiers, he says :— 
 
 "Answers in abundance were obtained, tending to show tnai 
 As doctrines of deposition and nersecution, of keep"^'?^^^ 
 with heretics, and of universal dominion, were obsolete D^ona 
 
 •This passage impUoitly affirms what I hope ex^licitlv to prove. 
 Sow can toS bwjome ohokU/hut by the cessation of ^e moral 
 ©onditions which require or justify their exercise? How eaii 
 Isws, the exercise of whieh is required by the pwmanent pres- 
 mm of the same moral conditions which calj«?.**»««|» "jj^®^^^^ 
 ence, become obsolete ? I pass over the no foith with heretics, 
 which is am example of the injustice which P©™? *"*• 
 FtanpWei I should have thought it impossible for Mr. Glsdstone 
 mi to know the true meaning of this controversial dirtortion: 
 bot I am willing to believe that he did not know it; for if he 
 had. it would have been impossible for such as^he is to write it 
 
 The moral principles on which Hm exercise of supreme TOwers 
 and rights was ju^&Oile In the age of Bonifiice VIU. austo no 
 longer m the nineteenth century in Bnghind. Let no one cyn- 
 Icafly pretend that this is to give up or to explain away. 1 read 
 
 the other day these words:— 4U««.— 
 
 "The Pope has sent forth his prohibitions and his anathemas 
 
 * Expostuiaiwn^ p. 26. 
 
 f Expoaulaiim^ p. 26. 
 
 SPIRITITAIi AXn CIVIL rOWBBS. 
 
 165 
 
 to the world, and the world has disregarded them. The fiuthful 
 receive them with-eonventional resnect, and then hasten to assue 
 
 bid the exercise of the supreme ludicialpower of the Church on 
 such a civil order as that of England. When it was df facto sub- 
 ject to the Church, England had by its own free will adopted 
 {he kws of Christendom. It can never be anin sul^ject to such 
 laws except on the same condition— namely, by its own free wilL 
 TiU then the highest Uws of moralitjr render the exercises of such 
 Pon^cal acts in Bnghind impossible. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone has ealled on rius IX. to renudiate such powers.t 
 But Pius IX. can not repudiate powers which his predecessors 
 iustly exercised, without implying that their actions were unjust. 
 He need not repudiate them for himself, for the exerise of them 
 18 impossible, and, if physically possible, would be morally im- 
 possible, as repugnant to all e(juity, and, under correoUon, 1 
 will say to naturd justice. The infallible witness for iustice, and 
 equity, and charity among men, can not violate these laws which- 
 unerringly govern his office. • * xu.. 
 
 X The command of our Lord to the Apostles : Go ye into the 
 whoie world and preach the Gospel to every creature: he that 
 believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not 
 shall be condemned "t— clearly invests the Church with the au- 
 thority to baptize every creature. But the exercise of this right 
 was suspended upon a moral condition. It conveyed no right to 
 baptize any man against his wUl : nor vnthout an act of faith on 
 his part But an act of fiiith is a spontaneous and voluntary act 
 of sobmission, both of intellect and will, to the truth, and to tiie 
 teacher who delivers it. The absolute and univers^ authority 
 therefore of the Church to baptize depends upon tiie free and 
 vohintary aet of those who believe, and, throi^h their own spon- 
 taneous submission, are willing to be baptized. , . , .. . 
 The Church so regards the moral conditions on which iw acts 
 depend, that as a rufe It will not even suffer an infant to be bap- 
 tised unless at least one of the parents consents. 
 
 In like manner the power of absolution, which has no limit of 
 time or of subject, can be exercised only upon those who we wil- 
 ling. Confession and contrition, both voluntary acts of the peni- 
 tent, are absolutely necessary to the exercise of the power of the 
 'sLavs. 
 
 This principle will solve many questions in respect to the Spir- 
 itual authority of the Church over the Civil State. 
 
 First, it shows that, until a Christian world and Christian Killers 
 existed, there was no subject for the exercise of this spiritual au- 
 thority of judgment and correction. Those who amuse themselves 
 by asking why St Peter did not depose Nero, will do well to find 
 
 ♦ Time*, Wednesday, December 30, 1874, in leading article on 
 ^i^stuMion, p. 26. tSt Mark xvi. 15, 16. 
 
166 
 
 JMMBMniHh4RMNIMpwwP ^#i» •■••^w 
 
 f ' 
 
 oiit whether people ue liPikiiig with them or at them. Such 
 qiMdtioiit wre usefbl They eompendiottily show that the ques- 
 mom does not underBtttiid the fint principles of hii subject If . 
 he will find out why fit Peter neither bfiptiied nor absolved 
 Hem, he will have found out why he did not depose him. Until a 
 Christian world existed there was no apia fnaieria for the supreme 
 judieial power of the Church in temporal thin|^. Therefore St 
 jPaul hddi down as a rule of law that he had nothing to do in judg- 
 iu those that were without the unity of the Church. 
 
 But when a Christian world came into existence, the Civil so- 
 ei#ty of man became subject to the Spiritual direction of the 
 Church. So long, however, as individuals only subjected them- 
 selves, one by one, to its authority, the conditions neeessaiy for 
 the exercise of its office were not fully present The Chureh 
 guiiled men, one by one, to their eternal end ; but as yet the col- 
 lective society of nations was not subject to its guidance. It ia 
 only when nations and kingdoms become socially subject to the 
 supreme doctrinal and judicial authori^ of the Church that the 
 conditimia of its exercise are verified. When the senate and peo- 
 ple of the Roman Empire were only half Christian, the Church 
 ilil] refrained from acts which would have affected the whole 
 body of the State. When the whole had become Christian, the 
 whole became subject to the Divine Law, of which the Roman 
 Pontiff was the supreme expositor and executive. 
 
 It would be endless to state examples in detail. I will take, 
 therefore, only one in which the indirect spiritual power of the 
 dmrch over the temporal State is abundantly shown. Take, for 
 instance, the whole subject of Christian Matrimony: the intro- 
 duction of the Christian law of the unity and indissolubility and 
 iMsmnental character of marriage; the tables of consanpinity 
 and of aMnity ; the jurisdiction of the Church over matrimonial 
 cases. This action of the Pontifical law upon the Imperial hiw, 
 and the gradual conformity of the Empire to the Church, exhibiti 
 in a clear and complete way what is the power claimed by the 
 Church over the temporal laws of Princes. 
 
 The Council of Trent reserves matrimonial causes to the Eccle- 
 siastical Tribunals ; and in the Syllabus the proposition is con- 
 ieamed that they belong to the Civil lurisdiction* 
 
 In like manner, in prohibiting duels, the Council declares tem- 
 poral penalties agiiiift not only the principals, but those also who 
 are guilty of permitting them, t 
 
 In like manner, again, the Christian law of faith and morals 
 mssed into the public law of Christendom. Then arose the 
 Christian jurisprudence, in which the Roman Pontiff was rec- 
 ngPliied as the supreme Judge of Princes and of People, with a 
 twoiiid coercion : spiritual by his own authorifrjr, and temporal 
 by the secular arm. These two acted as one. ExcommnnicKation 
 and deposition were so united in the jurisprudence of Christen- 
 dom, #iat he who pronounced the sentence of excommunication 
 
 •Sees. xxiv. De Ref. can. zii. 
 fUmk zzT. cap. xix. 
 
 SPIRITOAL IKD CIVIL POWERS. 
 
 167 
 
 pronounced also the sentenct of deposition ; as before the repeal 
 of our Test Acts, if a member of the Church of England became 
 J^ttholic, or even Nonconformist he was ipso facto incapable of 
 flitting in Parliament or holding office of State. And by the first 
 of Wuliam IIL the heir to the Crown, if he become Catholic, or 
 marry a Catholic, ipso facto forfeits the succession. Nothing is 
 more certain upon the foce of history, and no one has proved 
 more abundantiRr than Dr. DoUinger, that in every case of depo- 
 sition, as of Philip le Bel, Henry IV. of Germany, Frederic U.. 
 and the like, the sentence of the Electors, Princes, States, and 
 people, and the public opinion and voice of nations, had already 
 pronounced sentence of rejection upon those tjrrants before the 
 Fontiffs pronounced the sentence ot excommunication and depo- 
 sition. It was only by the faith and free will of nations that they 
 became socially subject to this jurisprudence ; it was by their free 
 will that it was maintained in vigor; and it was in conformity with 
 their free will that it was exercised by the Pontiflfe. Their free 
 ■entence preceded the Pontifical sentence. It was at their prayer, 
 and in their behalf, that it was pronounced. The moral condition 
 of spontaneous acceptance, and the material conditions of execu- 
 tion, were alike present, rendering these supreme Pontifical acts 
 legitimate, right lawful, wise, and salutary. 
 
 XL And here 1 shaU be met with the answer: "You iustify, 
 then, the deposition of princes, and therefore you hold that the 
 Pope may depose Queen Victoria." Such, I am sorry to say, is 
 the argument of the " Expostulation ; " for if it be not why was 
 it implied ? I altogether deny the argument, or inference, or call 
 it what you will. I affirm that the deposition of Henry IV. and 
 Frederic II. of Germany were legitimate, right, and lawful; and 
 I affirm that a deposition of Queen Victoria would not be legiti- 
 mate, nor right nor lawful, because the moral conditions which 
 were present to justify tibe deposition of the Emperors of Ger- 
 many are absent in Ae case of Queen Victoria; and therefore 
 such an act could not be done. 
 
 This is not a mere personal opinion of my own, or even a mere 
 opinion of theologians. What I have affirmed has been declared 
 by the authority of Pius VI. In a letter from the Congregation of 
 dardinals of the College of Propaganda, by order of His Holiness 
 Pius VL, addressed to the Roman Catholic Archbishops of Ire- 
 land, dated Rome, June 23, 1791, we read as follows:— 
 
 " In this controversy a most accurate discrimination should be 
 made between the genuine rights of the Apostolical See and those 
 that are imputed to it by innovators of this ace for the purpose 
 of calumniating. The See of Rome never taught that faith is not 
 to be kept with the heterodox— that an oath to kings separated 
 from Catholic communion can be violated— that it is lawful for 
 the Bishops of Rome to invade their temporal rights and do- 
 minions. We, too, consider an attempt or design against the life 
 of kings and princes, even under the pretext of religion, as a 
 horrid and detestable crime." ., 
 
 I may add that this passage was not unknown to Dr. UQllinger, 
 
im 
 
 nUIMifi W TWM' 
 
 dmrek uid lli« 
 
 wlM mokm a il f . 51 i« Mi work on " 
 fHiiiffliot." 
 
 Bot iMl tnj 0B« tliOiiM mplf tiittl this wm Mid when CkOi- 
 oKcB w«ro under penal laws, and with a view to blinding the 
 Bncliah Goveninient, I will add that no one baa more iranklj 
 mS forcibly eipreeeed this than Piua IX., in the Tenr text of 
 wikh Mr. eiadstone has qnoted a part The Hohr IVither, on 
 W^ 20, 1871, thne addresaed a Litetaiy Soeietj in Rome:— 
 
 "In the ▼arioly of sulijeeti whieh will preeent themselTee to 
 
 £n, one appears to me of great importanee at this time; and 
 It i«, to defiMl the endearora which are now directed to fidsify 
 the Idea of the InfiOMbility of the Pope. Among all other errow, 
 that is mapeiow above ill which wooM attribute (to the InfalU- 
 bilitr of tfie I«»e) the ritht of deposing soveteigns, and of ab- 
 ioltitig people irom the obligation of allegiance. 
 
 " This right, without doubt, has been eieroised by the Supreme 
 Pontine from time to time in extreme cases, bol it has nothing 
 to do with the Pontifical Inftdlibility ; neither does it flow from 
 the Inliaiibility, but from the authority of the Pontiff. 
 
 "Moreover, the exercise of this right in those ages of faith 
 which respected in the Pope that which he is, that is to say, the 
 Supreme Judse of Christendom, and recognised the benefit of his 
 tribunal in the great contentions of peoples and of sovereigns, 
 was freely extended (by aid, as was jast» of public jurisprudenoej 
 and the common consent of nations) to the gravest interests of 
 Slilea and of their rulers." , 
 
 8(1 fa Mr. Gladstone quoted from what was before him. Un- 
 ivrlniiately, he appears not to have known what followed. Pius 
 
 IX. went on to say:— ,. . . . . ^ 
 
 "But altogether difierent are the conditions of the present time 
 from the conditions (of those ages); and malice alone can oon- 
 Ibund things so diverse, that is to say, the Infidlible Judmiient m 
 respect to truths of Divine Bevelation with the right which the 
 Popes exercised in virtue of their authority when the common 
 good demanded li They know better than we, and every body 
 can discern the reason why such an absurd confusion of ideas is 
 stirred up at this time, and ip*f hypf^thetical eases are paraded 
 ofwkkk mo wmn ikimks. It is because every pretext, even the 
 moal frivolous and furthest firom the truth, is eagerly caught at, 
 provided it be of a kind to give us annoyance, and to excite civil 
 rulers against the Church. 
 
 "Some would have me Interpret and explain even more fully 
 Hie Definition of the Council ^ , 
 
 " 1 win not do it It is clear in itself, and has no need of other 
 oomments and explanations. Whosoever reads Aat Deeree with 
 a dispassionate mind has Its true sense easily and obviously beforu' 
 
 iiin. • 
 
 Now, the Holy Father in these words has abundantly shown 
 tiro things: fliit, that they who connect Infallibility with the 
 Bepoiing Power are talking of what they do not understand; 
 
 Jtmitf^ta^Hi^m ' " 
 
 •Mmmi di Pio Nmo, July 20, 1871, p. 203, Rome, 1872. 
 
 SPIRITUAL AKD OITIL POWERS. 
 
 im 
 
 1, secondly, that the moral conditions which justified and de- 
 manded the deposition of tyrannical Princes, when the mediaeval 
 world was both Christian and Catholic, have absolutely ceased to 
 exist, now that the world has ceased' to be Catholic, and has 
 ceased to be even Christian. It has withdrawn itself socially as 
 a whole, and in the public life of nations, from the unity and 
 the jurisdiction of the Christian Church. In this it differs al- 
 togetlier from the mediaeval world. And it differs also from the 
 ancient world. For, the ancient world had never yet believed 
 the fiuth; the modem world has believed, but ^len from it^ 
 fiuth. The ancient world was without the unity of the Christian 
 Church de faeio et de jure. The modern world is without de 
 facto ; and this has chanj^ed all the moral conditions of the 
 subject The Church never, indeed, loses its jurisdiction in ra- 
 dice over the baptized, because the character of baptism is in- 
 dellible; but unless the moral conditions Justifying its exercise 
 be present, it never puts it forth. As Mr. Ghuistone has cited the 
 example of Queen EliKabeth, implying that he sees no difference 
 between Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria, I will add that 
 Queen Elizabeth was baptized a Catholic ; that she was crowned 
 as a Catholic; that she received Holy Communion in the High 
 Mass of her consecration as a Catholic ; that she was both dejure 
 and de facto a subject of the Catholic Church; that the majority 
 of the people of England were still Catholic. What one of ail 
 these conditions is present in the case which I refuse to put in 
 parallel? The Enj^^lish Monarchy has been withdrawn fur three 
 centuries from the Catholic Church; the English people are 
 wholly separate; the Legislation of England has effaced every 
 trace of the jurisprudence which rendered the Pontifical acts of 
 Si Gregory VII. and Innocent IV. legitimate, just, and right 
 The public laws of England explicitly reject and exclude the first 
 principles of that ancient Christian and Catholic jurisprudence. 
 Not only is every moral condition which could justify such an 
 act absent, but every moral condition which would render such 
 an act unjustifiable, as it would seem to me, is present.^ Thia 
 is a treatment of history which is not scientific, but shallow ; and 
 a dangerous use of inflammatory rhetoric, when every calm dic- 
 tate of prudence and of justice ought to forbid its indulgence. 
 " The historic spirit," f commended in the " Expostulation," 
 would have led to such a treatment of this question as Mr. Free- 
 man wisely recommends. 
 
 " The cause of all this diversity and controversy— a diversity and 
 controversy most fatal to historic truth — is to be traced to the 
 unhappy mistake of looking at the men of the twelfth century 
 with the eyes of the nineteenth ; and still more of hoping to ex- 
 tract something from the events of the twelfth century to do 
 service in the controversies of the nineteenth." J 
 
 XII. For the same reasons I deplore the haste, I must say the 
 
 ♦Appendix B. f ExposttikUwnf p. 14. 
 
 t Freeman's Historical Estc^ " St Thomas of Canterbury and hia 
 Biographers," p. 80. 
 
 15 
 
170 
 
 BELAIIOXS OF THE 
 
 passion, which carried away no large a mind to affirm or to im- 
 Pj tlial the Church at this daj wonld. if she could, «»e torture. 
 and fofoe, and coercion in matters of religious belief. 1 am well 
 aware that men of a mind and calibre as far remoTcd from Mr. 
 Gladstone as almost to constituto a different species, have at 
 times endeavored to raise suspicion and animosity against Cath- 
 olics, by affirming that if they became the majority in this 
 country — & danger certainly not proximate — they would use 
 their power to compel men to conform to the Catholic faith. In 
 the year 1830 the Catholics of Belgium were in a vast majority, 
 but they did not use their political power to constrain the faith 
 or conseienee of any man. The "Four Liberties" of Belgium 
 were tho work of Catholics. This is the moat recent example of 
 what Catholics would do if they were in possession of power. 
 Bat there is one more ancient and more homel:^ for us Englisn- 
 inen. It is found at a date when the old traditions of the Caili- 
 oie Church were still vigorous in the minds of men. It will 
 therefore show that in this at least we owe nothing to modem 
 progress, nor to the indifference of liberalism. If the modern 
 spirit had any share in producing the Constitution in Belgium, 
 it certainly had no share in producing the Constitution of Mary- 
 land. Lord Baltimore, who had been Secretary of State under 
 James I., in 1633, emigrated to the American Plantations, where, 
 tlifough Lord Strafford's influence, he had obtained a grant of 
 lund. He was acctimpanied by men of all minds, who agreed 
 (^ieiy in the one desire to leave behind them the miserable re- 
 ligious conflicts which then tormented England. They named 
 their new country Maryland, and there they settled. The oath 
 of the Governor was in these terms : " I will not, by myself or 
 any other, directly or indirectly, molest any person professing 
 to believe in Jesus Christ, for or in respect of religion." Lord 
 Baltimore invited the Puritans of Massachusetts, who, like him- 
 self, had renounced their country for conscience' sake, to come 
 into Maryland. In 1649, when active persecution had sprung up 
 again in England, the Council of Maryland, on the 21st of April, 
 passed this Statute : "And whereas the forcing of the conscience 
 mmattera of religion hath frequently fallen out to be of danger- 
 ous aoiifequence m the Commonwealth where it has been nrao- 
 tloed, and for the more quiet and peaceable government or the 
 Province, and the better to preserve mutual love and amity 
 among the inhabitants, no person within the Province professing 
 to believe in Jesus Christ shall be anyways troubled, molested, 
 or discountenanced for his or her religion, or in the free exercise 
 thereof."* The Episcopalians and Protestants fled from Virginia 
 4nto Maryland. Such was the Commonwealth founded by a 
 Catholic upon the broad moral law I have hero laid down — ^that 
 faith is an act of the will, and that to force men to profess what 
 they do not believe is contrary to the Uw of God, and that to 
 generate faith by force is morally impossible. It waa by convio- 
 
 » Bancroft's Msi&r^ o/ ike Untied SMmt vol. i. pp.. 238, 286, 806, 
 
 etc* 
 
 SPIRITtJAL AXD CIVIL POWERS. 
 
 171 
 
 iskm of the reason and by persuasion of the will that the world- 
 wide unity of faith and communion were slowly built up among 
 the nations. When once shattered, nothing but conviction and 
 persuasion can restore it. Lord Baltimore was surrounded by a 
 multitude scattered by the great wreck of the Tudor persecu- 
 tions. He knew that Ood alone could build them up again into 
 unity; but that the equity of charity might enable them to pro- 
 tect and to help esich other, and to promote the common weal. 
 
 I can not refrain from continuing the history. The Puritan 
 Commonwealth in England brought on a Puritan revolution in 
 Maryland. They acknowledged Cromwell, and disfranchised the 
 whole Catholic population. "Liberty of conscience" waa de- 
 elared, but to the exclusion of " Popery, Prelacy, and licentious- 
 ness of opinion." Penal laws came, of course. Quakers in 
 Massachusetts, for the first offense, lost one ear; for the second, 
 the other; for the third, had their tongue seared with a red-hot 
 iron. Women were whipped, and men were hanged, for religion. 
 If Catholics were in power to-morrow in England, not a penal law 
 would be proposed, nor the shadow of constraint be put upon the 
 faith of any man. We would that all men fully believed the 
 truth ; but a forced faith is a hypocrisy hateful to God and man. 
 If Catholics were in power to-morrow, not only would there be 
 no penal laws of constraint, but no penal laws of privation. If 
 the Ionian Islands had elected, some years ago, to attach them- 
 selves to the Sjjvereignty of Pius IX., the status of the Greek 
 Church separate from Catholic Unity would have been tolerated 
 and respected. Their Churches, their public worship, their 
 Clergy, and their religious rites would have been left free as be- 
 fore. They were found in possession, which was confirmed by 
 the tradition of centuries; tney had acquired Civil rights, which 
 enter into the laws of political justice, and as such would have 
 been protected from all molestation.* 
 
 I have drawn this out, because a question absolutely chimerical 
 has been raised to disturb the confidence of the English people 
 in their Catholic fellow-countrymen. And I have given the rea- 
 son and the principle upon which, if the Catholics were to-mor- 
 row the " Imperial race" in these Kingdoms, they would not use 
 political power to molest the divided and hereditary religious 
 state of our people. We should not shut one of their Churches, 
 or Colleges, or Schools. They would have the same liberties we 
 enjoy aa a minority. I hope the Nonconformists of England are 
 prepared to say the same. As we are in days when some are 
 
 ♦Our older writers, such as Bellarmine and Suarez, when treating 
 of this subject, had before their eyes a generation of men who all had 
 been in the unity of the faith. Their separation therefore was for- 
 mal and willful. Their separation from the unity of the Church did 
 not release the conscience from its juri-jdiction. But if Bellarmine 
 and Suarez were living at this day, they would have to treat of a 
 
 auestion differing in all its moral conditions. What I have here laid 
 own is founded upon the principles they taught, applied to our 
 times. Cardinal Tarquini, in treating the same matter, has dealt 
 with it as it has been treated here.— /wrw Eccl. Fubl. ImtittaioneSt p. 78. 
 

 AOGBEiMlONS Of THE CIVIL POWER. 
 
 AOORBSSIOHS OF THE CI7IL POWEB. 
 
 173 
 
 II 
 
 iiiviled,*' and aome are " ©xpcted/* and some are "required " 
 to speak out, I will ask my fellow'ooiiiitrjmeii of all reUgious 
 ki&os to be as frank as I am. 
 
 XIII. I have now given, I hope, sufficient evidence to prove the 
 aiserlion made in the second letter quoted at the outset of these 
 pages; namely: — 
 
 '•That the relations of the Catholic Church to the Civil Powers 
 have been fixed immutably from the beginning, because they 
 arise out of the DiYine constitution of the Churoh, and out of 
 the civil society of the natural order." 
 
 And we have also seen how fiur from the truth are the coiii* 
 dent assertions put forward latelr, that the Church ascribes to its 
 head Supreme Temporal as well as Supreme Spiritual Power.* 
 
 Fmlher, we have seen with what strange want of reflection 
 aiid of depth the Pontifical acts of the old Catholic world are 
 liMisferrea ptr galium to a world which has ceased, in its public 
 life and laws, to be Catholic, I may altfost say, to be even Chris- 
 
 tian* 
 
 Finally, I have shown, I hope, what are the relations of the 
 Chnrch to the Civil Powers of the world; and I have given evi- 
 denae to prove that those relations have been fixed from the be< 
 
 finning by reason of the Divine constitution of the Church, and 
 ave been declared by Councils, not only before the Council of 
 the Vatican, but before the Council of Trent; and, therefore, that 
 to charge upon the Vatican Couneil a change in these relations 
 it not ®nlj an assertion without proof, but an assertion contrary 
 t^' iifloriiMd fact 
 
 ill. AgGKESJSIONS of TBI CiVII, POWBB, 
 
 Bfr. Gladstone says: — 
 
 ** II is the peculiarity of Roman theoloflnr that, by thrust- 
 ing itself into the temporal domain, it naturally, and even neces- 
 sarily, comes to be a frequent theme of political discussion. To 
 quiet-minded Boman Catholics it must be a subject of infinite 
 unnoyance that their relicion is on this ground more than any 
 ntlier the subject of criticism; more than any other (he oeoasion 
 of iMHiiiiits with the State and of eivil disquietude. I feel sin- 
 oerely how much hardship their case entails, bitt this hardship is 
 brought upon them altogether by the conduct of the authoritiea 
 of their own Church." f . , , 
 
 His pamphlet from beginning to end bristles with the same 
 aceuMons against the Catholic Church. His whole ar^ment 
 might be entitled, " Reasons to show that in all Conflicts the 
 Christian Chnrch is always in the wrong, and the Civil Stote al- 
 wayt in the right; " or, "On the outrageous Claims X ^^^ "-^~ 
 orbitances of Papal Assumptions,} contrasted with the Inno- 
 cence and Infallibility of Civil States." This seems to me to be 
 
 history read upside down; and not history only, but also Chris- 
 tianity. I can hardly persuade myself that Mr. Gladstone would 
 contend that even in the Constitutions of Clarendon * St. Thomas 
 of Canterbury was the aggressor, and Henry II. was within the 
 law ; or that either the Pope or Archbishop Langton began the 
 conflict with the " Papal minion John ; " or, again, that in the 
 question of Investitures and Ecclesiastical Simony, the Emperors 
 of Germany were on the side of law and justice, and St. Greg- 
 ory VII. and Innocent III. were aggjressors. And yet all this is 
 necessary to his argument. If he is not prepared to maintain 
 this, the whole foundation is gone. But I ao not know how any 
 man who believes in the Divine office of the Christian Church 
 can maintain such a thesis. And I have always believed that 
 Mr. Gladstone does so believe the Christian Church to have a 
 Divine office, which, within some limit at least, is independent of 
 bU human authority. 
 
 But as the contention before us is not of the past so much as 
 of the present, I will come to the facts of the days in which we 
 live. 
 
 My third proposition, then, is, that any collisions now existing 
 between the Catholic Church, and the States of Europe have been 
 brought on by changes, not on the part of the Church, much less 
 of the Vatican Council, but on the part of the Civil Powers, and 
 that by reason of a systematic conspiracy a^inst the Holy See. 
 No one will ascribe to the Vatican Councu the Revolution in 
 Italy, the seizure of Rome in 1848, the invasion of the Roman 
 State in 1860, the attacks of Garibaldi a^inst Rome, ending with 
 Mentana. And yet there are people who ascribe to the Vatican 
 Council the breach at the Porta Pia, and the entry of the Italians 
 into Rome. Such reasoners are proof against history, chronology, 
 and logic. If anybody will persist in saying that the two and 
 twenty years of aggression against the Holy See, from 1848 to 
 1870. were caused % Pius IX., I must address myself to other 
 men. That Pius IX. has been in collision with those who at- 
 tacked him is true enough. So is every man who defends his own 
 house. Who, I ask, be^n the fray? From the Siccardi laws 
 down to the laws of the Guarantees, who was the aggressor ? But 
 where the Pope is concerned locic seems to fail even in reasonable 
 men. The other day Prince Von Bismarck told the Catholics of 
 the Reichstag that they were accomplices of Kulmann, and there- 
 fore, as he implied, his assassins. Moreover, he affirmed that the 
 
 * Apoafutoliofi, €te.f p. 27. 
 t Falifiww Decrmi, p. 9. 
 
 I Jfrtd. p. 11. 
 
 fJMI. p. 26. 
 
 ♦Mr. Gladstone says, upon what evidence I do not know, "The 
 Constitutions of Clarendon, cursed from the Papal Throne, were the 
 work of the English Bishops."* St. Thomas himself says that " Rich- 
 aid de Luci and Jocelin de Balliol, the abettors of the Royal tyr- 
 anny, were the fabricators of those heretical pravitie8.'*t Herbert 
 of Bosham, who was present at Clarendon, says that they were 
 the work of "certain nobles (proceres) or chief-men of the king- 
 dom." t The Bishops were indeed terrified into submitting to them, 
 hut the Constitutions were in no sense their work. 
 
 * VaUcan Deertea.pp. 87, 58. fWp. 9t. ITbofmr, torn. ill. p. 12, ed. Giles, IMS, 
 I VUa 8t. Thomett torn. vil. p. 115, ed. Giles. 
 
 I 
 

 ATOR18SI0XS QW THB CITIL WWML 
 
 vtr of Franc© afsainift Prassia mm forced on th© Freiicli Bm- 
 iMiior by the Pop© and the Jesuita. How proTidentially, then, 
 though altogether fortuitously, no doubt, had Prussia been for 
 three years massing its munitions of war and putting France m 
 the wrong by intngues in Spain, and fables from Ems. Ncver- 
 th©l©«8, all these things arc believed. Prince \ on Bismarck ha« 
 ■aid them. But surely they belong to the Arabian Nights. 
 
 Mow I have already shown that, before the Vatican Council a»- 
 mmhM, there was an opposition systematically organized to re- 
 sist it. It was begun by certain Professors at Munich, lb© 
 Munich Gov ©mment lent itself ns an agent to Dr. Dollinger, and 
 ©ndeavor©d to draw the other Governments of Europe into «- com- 
 Mii©d attempt to hinder or to intimidate the Council And this 
 was done on the plea that the Council would not be free. I well 
 remember that at one time we were told in Ronie, that if the 
 Council persevered with the Deanition of the Infallibility, tli© 
 French troops would be withdrawn. That is to say, tliat the Gan- 
 baldians would be let in to make short work of the Definition. 
 It was said that the presence of the French troops was an undu© 
 pressure on the freedom of the Council, and that their departure 
 ^ essential to its true liberty. There was a grim irony amount. 
 ins to humor in this solicitude for the liberty of the Council. 
 
 I wil now trace out more fully the history of this conspiracy, m 
 order to put beyond question my assertion that the plan of attack 
 was prepared before the Council met, and that the Falck Lawi 
 sr© a deliberate change made by the Civil Power of Prussia, th© 
 ■latus of the Catholic Church in Germany being stiU unchanged. 
 
 J will her© ask leave to repeat what I stated two years ago: 
 
 "In the year 1869 it was already believed that th© Bavarian 
 Government, through Prince Hohenlohe, had begun a systematic 
 agitation against the Council. It was known that he had ad- 
 dwiised a circular note to the European Governments. But th© 
 text of that note was not, so far as I know, ever made public. 
 
 I ani able now to give the text in full. It affords abundant proof 
 of til© assertion here made, that a deliberate conspiracy against 
 the Council was planned with groat artiice and spcciousness of 
 matter and of language. Moreover, the date of this documcnl 
 ■hows how long befor© th© opening of the Council this opposition 
 was commenced. The Council was opened on December 8, 1869. 
 Prince Hohcnlohe's note is dated on th© 9th of the April preced- 
 ing, that is to say, about eight months befor© th© Council began. 
 
 II urns as follows : — i. n -i 
 
 *• * Monsieur,— It b©«iiis to b© certain that th© Council con- 
 ¥okod by His Holin©88 Pop© Pius IX. will meet in the month of 
 Beoember next Th© number of prelates who will attend it from 
 all parts of th© world will b© much greater than at any former 
 Counca This fact alon© will help to give to its decrees a great 
 authority, such as belongs to an CEcumenical Council. Taking 
 this circumstance into consideration, it appears to me indispenMr 
 bl© for every government to give it their attention, and it is with 
 - - ^ ^1^^ n^i J j^jjj about to address to jou som© observations. 
 "It is not probable that th© Council will occupy itself only 
 
 AOORBSSIOKS OF THB CIVIL POWER. 
 
 175 
 
 with doctrines appertaining to pure theology; there does not ex- 
 ist at this moment any problem of this nature which requires a 
 conciliar solution. The only dogmatic thesis which Rome would 
 wish to have decided by the Council, and which the Jesuits in 
 Italy and Germany are now agitating, is the question of the Infal- 
 libility of the Pope. It is evident that this pretension, elevated 
 into a dogma, would go far beyond the purely spiritual sphere, 
 and would become a question eminently political, as raising the 
 power of the Sovereign Pontiff, even in temporal matters, over all 
 the princes and peoples of Christendom. This doctrine, therefore, 
 is of such a nature as to arouse the attention of all those Govern- 
 ments who rule over Catholic subjects. 
 
 '"There is a circumstance which increases still more the gravity 
 of the situation. I learn that among the commissions delegated 
 to prepare matter, which later on is to be submitted to the delib- 
 erations of the Council, there is one which is occupied only on 
 mixed questions, affecting equally international law, politics, and 
 canon law. All these preparations justify our believing that it is 
 the fixed intention of tne Holy See, or at least of a party at pres- 
 ent powerful in Rome, to promulgate through the Council a series 
 of decrees upon questions which are rather political than eccle- 
 siastical. Add to this that the Cimlth CattoUca — a periodical 
 conducted by the Jesuits, and bearing an oflScial character through 
 th© brief of the Holy Father — ^has just demanded that the Council 
 shall transform into conciliar decrees the condemnations of the 
 Syllabus, published on December 8, 1864. Now, the articles of 
 this encyclical bein^ directed against principles which are the 
 base of modern public life, such as we find it among all civilized 
 nations, it follows that Governments are under the necessity of 
 asking themselves if it is not their duty to invite the serious con- 
 sideration both of the Bishops who are their subjects, and of the 
 future Council, to the sad consequences of such a premeditated 
 and systematic overturning of the present relations between 
 Churcn and State. It can not, indeed, be denied, that it is a mat- 
 ter of urgency for Governments to combine, for the purpose of 
 protesting, either through their agents in Rome, or in some other 
 way, against all decisions which the Council may promulgate 
 without th© concurrence of the representatives oi the secular 
 power, in questions which are at the same time of a political and 
 religious nature. 
 
 " * I thought that the initiative in so important a matter should 
 be taken by one of the great Powers ; but not having as yet re- 
 ceived any communication on this subject, I ha^ thought it nec- 
 essary to seek for a mutual understanding which will protect our 
 common interests, and that without delay, seeing that the interval 
 between this time and the meetinj^ of tne Council is so short I 
 tiierefore desire you to submit this matter to the Government to 
 which you are accredited, and to ascertain the views and inten- 
 tions of the Court of * * * in respect to the course which it 
 deems advisable to follow. Tou will submit, for the approbation 
 of M, ♦ * *, the question whether it would not be advisable to 
 fix beforehand the measures to be taken, if not jointly, at least 
 
lis 
 
 AmiianoNS of ihi crrii. fowmb. 
 
 lintiMBj. in order to mllghUn the Holy See m to the attitoda 
 which the Governments of the Continent will assume in reference 
 to the Ecumenical Conncil; or whether conferences composed of 
 WfftMiitatives of the States concerned would not be considered 
 «g the b«8t means to bring about an understanding between thou 
 
 Clover nments. . i l •»#• 
 
 " * I authorise you to leave a copy of this dispatch with the Min- 
 iater for Foreign Affairs at * ♦ * , if he desires it; and I wish 
 yoii to inform me as early as possible of the manner m whica 
 tlilt oommttnicatio& may be received. 
 
 "•I have th« honor, etc., 
 
 " ' HOHENLOBK. 
 
 " ' Jfiiiiicft. JjprtI 9, 1869.' '* 
 
 No me oowM fail to see that this Circular had not Prince Ho- 
 henlohe for its author. We shaU hereafter traoe it to its legiti- 
 mate origin. , ^,. ^ ^ ^^ 
 
 •'The indiction of the Council was no sooner published than 
 the well-known volume called Jmns appeared. It was said to he 
 the work of many hands, and of various nations — of two at least 
 Tift chief object of its animosity was Rome, and its detailed hoe- 
 iiitr was levelled against the Infallibility of the Roman Pontiff 
 tui tlio SyUabus. The book was elaborately acrimonious and ex- 
 tiffaffiiitiy iMolent against Home. Its avowed aim waa to rouse 
 tlM Civil Governments against the Council The Sovereign Pon- 
 tiff had, with great wisdom and justice, dealt with the Govern- 
 ments of Europe on the ground chosen by themselves. They had 
 renounced the Catholic relations of union hitherto subsisting be- 
 twfl«ii the Civil and Spiritual Powers. Pius IX. took them at 
 tli«if word. He convened the Spiritual Legislature of the Church ; 
 he did not invite those who have gloried in their separation from 
 it This, again, sharpened the jealously and suspicion of the 
 Governments. At this time came forth certain publications—to 
 whieh I will not more explicitly refer— avowedly intended to ex- 
 cite the Civil Powers to active opposition. 
 
 "About the month of September, 1869, as I have already said, 
 a document containing five Questions was proposed by the Bava- 
 fian Government to the Theological Faculty at Munich, ^o one 
 Muld for a moment doubt by what hand those interrogatories also 
 were framed ; they were intended to elicit the answer, that the 
 action of the Council, if it were to define the Infallibility of the 
 Boman Pontiff, would be irreconcilable not only with Catholic 
 dootrine, but wi^ the secirity of Civil Governments. In due 
 tiaie tiM answers appeared, leaving no doubt that both the (jiiet- 
 tions and the replies were inspired by one mind, if not written 
 
 % me and the same hand. , _ . ^ ,^ i . « -j # 
 "We have already seen that Pnnce Hohenlohe, President of 
 til* Council and Minister of Foreign Affisiirs in Bavaria, addressed 
 II litter to the French and other Catholic Governments, calling 
 HI them to interfere and to prevent the ' fearful dangers to 
 which the Council would expose the modern world. Next the 
 ipiilsh Minister, Olozaga, hoped that the Council would not sieet» 
 
 AGCIKESSIONS OF THE CIVIL POWEB. 
 
 17T 
 
 or at leaat would * not approve, sanction, or ratify the Syllabas, 
 which is in contradiction with modern civilization.' He then 
 threatened the Church with the hostility of a league formed by 
 the Governments of France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, and Bavaria. 
 An Italian infidel then took up the game, and proposed an Anti- 
 Ecumenical Council to meet at Naples. A French infidel was 
 invited, who promised that his soul should be present and said : 
 ' It is an efficacious and noble idea to assemble a council of ideaa 
 to oppose to the council of dogmas. I accept it On the one side 
 is theocratic obstinacy, on the other the human mind. The hu- 
 man mind is a divine mind, its rays on the earth, its star is 
 above. . . . If I can not go to Naples, nevertheless I shall 
 be there. My soul will be there. I cry, Courage ! and I squeeze 
 your hand.' The reader will forgive my repeating this trash, 
 which is here inserted only to show how the liberals and infidels 
 of Europe rose up at tlie instigation of Dr. Dollinger to meet the 
 coming Council. 
 
 "About the month of June, in 1869, another dispatch had been 
 addressed by Prince Hohenlohe to the other Governments, invit- 
 ing them to make common cause against the Council. It was 
 extensively believed to be inspired by Prussia, the policy of 
 which was thought to be, to put in contrast the liberty accorded 
 to its own Catholic subjects in respect of the Council with the 
 pedantic meddling of the Bavarian Government At this tiine 
 General Menabrea, under the same inspiration, addressed a cir- 
 cular to his diplomatic agents, proposing to the Powers to prevent 
 the assembling of the Council, on the ground of their not having 
 been invited to it It was supposed at that time that this policy 
 also was secretly supported by Berlin. A joint dispatch was sent 
 by Prince Hohenlohe and the Italian Government to the French 
 Ooiernment urging the withdrawal of the French troops from 
 Borne during the Council, to insure its freedom of deliberation.'* 
 
 These preparations to oppose the Council were made before it 
 had assembled. It met on December 8, 1869. In the following 
 January, Dr. Dollinger received the freedom of a German city, 
 io reward for his attacks on the Holy See. 
 
 " When the yfeW-knowa postv latum of the Bishops, asking that 
 the definition of the Panal Infallibility should bo proposed to the 
 Council, was made public, Dr. Dollinger openly assailed it; and 
 the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Count Daru, addressed a 
 letter to the Holy See with a view to prevent the definition. 
 Bome was at that time full of rumors and threats that the pro- 
 tection of the French army would be withdrawn. I had per- 
 sonally an opportunity of knowing that these threats were not 
 mere rumors. 
 
 "At the same moment while France was attacking Uie defini- 
 tion of the Pope's Infallibility, the Protestant Chancellor of Aus- 
 tria, Count Von Beust addressed himself to the Canons of the 
 Schema published in the Augsburg Gazette, which he declared 
 would * provoke deplorable conflicts between the Church and 
 State.' Every European Government from that time put a 
 pressure more or less upon the Council to prevent the definition. 
 
lid 
 
 AOomEasioNS op thi gitil powbr. 
 
 *• The sourc© of this opposition, then, was Munich. The chief 
 agent, beyond all doubt, waa one who in his earlier days had 
 iMaa giwatly venerated in Germany and in England. Trutn com- 
 pels me to ascribe to Dr. DoIIinger the initiative in this deplora- 
 ble attempt to coerce the Holy See, and to overbear the liberty 
 of the Bisnope assembled in Council. Prince Hohcnlohe is as- 
 suredly no theologian. The documents published hj him came 
 firom another mind and hand. Such was the opposition before 
 and during the Council. 
 
 *' What I have hitherto said to |)rove the conspiracy of certain 
 European Governments, and the intrigues of the Old Catholics 
 against the Council, both before the assembling and during its 
 sessions, would not have been needed if the Diary of ike Voun- 
 cil by Professor Fricdrich had sooner come into my hands. I 
 lisve been feeUns in the dark for proo& which he brings to light 
 by a series of astounding confessions. I had always believed in 
 tibe ©onspiracy ; but I never knew how systematic and how self- 
 Miiident it was. I had always known that the Gnostic vain- 
 
 f lory of German scientific historians was its chief instigator; 
 at I never before imagined the stupendous conceit or the malev- 
 olent pride of its professors. A critique of Professor Friedrich's 
 Diary, by some strong German hand has appeared lately in one 
 of our |oumaIs. and I can not refrain from giving certain passa- 
 gee in Inal confirmation of wimi I have said above. 
 
 •'And first as to the Governments. Professor Priedrich puts 
 into the mouth of a diplomatist the following words: 'The 
 means by which the greatest amount of influence mieht be 
 biought to bear on the Council would be a determined and plain 
 manifeitation of the public opinion of Europe in favor of the mi- 
 nority. Clearly the Ouria could not prevent this ; and it would 
 aid strength and numbers to the opposition, by giving it thef as- 
 eoranee, that if at the last moment it found itself obliged to pro- 
 test and appeal to the nation, the Governments and all intelligent 
 laymen would support it. This measure would also secure " weak 
 sad doubtful bishops " ' (Diaru, p. 184). On the 26th of Decem- 
 ber, 1869, Friedrich wrote, 'That he was considered by many 
 persons to be residing in Rome as the representative of an ap- 
 proaching schism, if the majority obtained Oie upper hand in the 
 Council ' (p. 41^. He says in another place : ' It would not be 
 the first time in the history of the Church that a schism had 
 liioken out. Church history recounts many such, besides that 
 of the Greeks' (p. 196). The critic of Professor Friedrich's 
 book writes as follows : * The alliance between *' German science " 
 and diplomacy was not productive of all the results which at 
 first had been looked for. Friedrich expresses himself very bit- 
 lirlj on this point; nevertheless he endeavored all the more to 
 exeitfl German science to fresh efforts.' Under date of the 27th 
 of March (p. 202) he writes: *The Governments are by degrees 
 Mting an almost ridiculous part towards the Council — first 
 boasts; then embarrassment connected with meaningless threats; 
 and at last the confession that the right time has passed by, and 
 iiairthe Curia has command of the situation. If German science 
 
 AGGRESSIONS OF THE CIVIL POWER. 
 
 179 
 
 had not saved its position, and been able to establish a firm op- 
 
 Eopition in the Council, even in contradiction to its own will, and 
 ept it alive ; and if our Lord God had not also set stupidity and 
 ignorance on the side of the Curia and of the majority, the Gov- 
 ernments would have been put to shame in the sight of the 
 whole world. Prince Hohenlohe, in fact, is the only statesman 
 possessed of a deeper insight in this question, and by degrees he 
 has come to be looked upon as belonging to the minority.' * 
 
 " Of all the foreign sources from which the English news- 
 papers drew their inspiration, the chief perhaps v^as the Augs- 
 burg Gazette. This paper has many titles to special considera- 
 tion. The infamous matter of Janus first appeared in it under 
 the form of articles. During the Council it had in Rome at 
 least one English contributor. Its letters on the Council have 
 been translated into English, and published by a Protestant book- 
 seller in a volume by Quirinus " 
 
 A distinguished bishop of Germany, one of the minority op- 
 posed to the definition, whose cause the Augsburg Gazette pro- 
 fessed to serve, delivered at the time his judgment on Janus, and 
 the letters on the Council. 
 
 " Bishop Von Ketteler of Mainz, publicly protested against ' the 
 systematic dishonesty of the correspondent of the Augsburg Gar 
 zette.* 'It is a pure invention,' he adds, 'that the Bishops 
 named in that journal declared that DoIIinger represented, as to 
 the substance of the question (of Infallibility), the opinions of a 
 .majority of the German Bishops.' And this, he said, * is not an 
 isolated error, but part of a system which consists in the daring 
 attempt to publish false news, with the object of deceiving the 
 German public, according to a plan concerted beforehand.' .... 
 ' It will be necessary one day to expose in all their nakedness and 
 abject mendacity the articles of the Augsburg Gazette. They 
 will present a formidable and lasting testimony to the extent of 
 injustice of which party-men, who afifect the semblance of su- 
 perior education, have been guilty against the Church.' Again, 
 at a later date, the Bishop of Maina found it necessary to address 
 to his diocese another public protest against the inventions of 
 the Augsburg Gazette. 'The Augsburg Gazette,' he says, 
 * hardly ever pronounces my name without appending to it a 
 falsehood.' ... * It would have been easy for us to prove that 
 every Roman letter of the Augsburg Gazette contains gross per- 
 versions and untruths. Whoever is conversant with the state of 
 things here, and reads these letters, can not doubt an instant 
 that these errors are voluntary, and are part of a concerted sys- 
 tem designed to deceive the public. If time fails me to correct 
 publicly this uninterrupted series of falsehoods, it is impossible 
 for me to keep silence when an attempt is made with so much 
 perfidy to misrepresent my own convictions.' 
 
 "Again, Bishop Hefele, commenting on the Roman correspon- 
 dents of the Augsburg Gazette, »a.ya : 'It is evident that there are 
 people not bishops, but having relations with the Council, who 
 
 • Preface to Vol. HI. Sermons on Eccksiantical Subjects, p. xxy., etc. 
 
Jw 
 
 A0QRBSSI058 OF THE CITIL POWEB. 
 
 AGORKtiSIOXS OP THE CIVIL POWER. 
 
 181 
 
 1^ 
 
 sn mmi miniiied bj duty mud conscience/ We had reason to 
 lielieTe thai the names of these people, both German and Eng- 
 Bdi, were well known to ns. 
 
 II Uq^ iiig testimony of the Bishop of Mainz, as to the false- 
 hoods of these correspondents respecting Rome and Germany, I 
 ean confirm by my testimony as to their treatment of matters re- 
 lating to Borne and England. I do not think there is a mention 
 of my own niune without, as the Bishop of Mainz says, the ap- 
 
 Fndam ©f a falsehood. The whole tissue of the correspondence 
 u false. * 
 
 I havo quoted aU this to show the small chance the people of 
 Bni^and md of knowing the truth as to the state and acts of the 
 €k)uncilt and also how systematic was the opposition organized 
 against it in Germany. 
 
 Alter the suspension of the Council, the action of this con- 
 •piiacy, hi^erto secret, became open. Dr. Von Dollinger and 
 certain Professors openly rejected the Vatican Council, accusing 
 it of innovation, Tney therefore either took, or were called b^, 
 tii« name of " Old Catholics." This schism has never been m 
 one stay. Its development has had three progressive stages. At 
 irst the Old Catholics professed to hold by the Council of Trent, 
 and to reject only the Council of the Vatican. As such they 
 claimed to be recognized by the Pifussian law. But next, at a 
 SMting at Augsburg, a large infusion of German Rationalists 
 «iiai>eired them to enlarge meir comprehension, and to include 
 those who rejected most of the doctrines of the Council of Trent. 
 
 Jjastly, at Colore and Bonn, they received the accession of 
 Anglicani, American Episcopalians, Greeks, and various Prot- 
 estants. 
 
 The Old Catholic schism, therefore, has lost its meaning and 
 its character, and has become a body without distinctive creed. 
 Br. Von Dollinger, at Bonn, last September, declared (if the re- 
 port be correct) that Old Catholics are not bound by the Council 
 of Trent 
 
 III the sphere of theology and religion the movement is already 
 fataiyied, and has no future; but in the sphere of politics it has 
 ftgrwt power of mischief T have already shown how the first 
 Mts of the diplomatic and political hostility to the Council began 
 «l Munich. There mm be little doubt that it reached Benin 
 through the Circular of Prince Hohenlohe, the present German 
 Ambassador at Paris. The Berlin Government supported the 
 Old Catholic Professors who rejected the Vatican Decrees, on the 
 ifim thai the Council of Trent was known to the law in Prussia, 
 but that the Council of the Vatican was not known to it. It was 
 mieae. Therefore the Government recognized the legal status of 
 the Old Catholics who held to the Council of Trent. How they 
 will itill recognize them as Old Catholics now that they have 
 rejected the Council of Trent at Bonn, it is not so easy to saj. 
 However, Dr. Beinkins was consecrated Bishop by a Jansenist 
 Prelate, and received from the Berlin Government both legal reo- 
 
 *Fietn Frw. part iii. pp. 4-7. 
 
 ognitiOn and a good salary. We shall see hereafter that the Gov- 
 ernment would thereby try to tempt the Catholic Clergy to its 
 friendship, and to use the " Old Catholic " schism as a weanon 
 against the Catholic Church. The "Old Catholic" schism has 
 an attraction for certain minds in which there is a strong hank- 
 ering after the Catholic Church without the courage to suffer for 
 the truth's sake. An attempt, we have been told, was made to 
 set up an " Old Catholic " Church in London, but it met with 
 little encouragement. 
 
 There is not a doubt that the Berlin Government aims at 
 changing all the Catholics in Germany into Old Catholics. 
 
 The Old Catholics, in their appeal to the Civil Power, aro 
 doing what the Arians did after the Council of Nicaea. Tliey 
 have been, and they will be, the instigators of persecution against 
 the Catholic Church. But they are blindly doing God's will. 
 When the Church has been purified, their place will know them 
 
 no more. 
 
 To return to the politicians and diplomatists. What was be- 
 lieved as to the conspiracy at Munich before the Council met has 
 since been confirmed by the letters of Count Arnim, which ascribe 
 his own action to the instigation of Dr. Dollinger. The Berlin 
 Correspondent of the Daily Telegraph* after noticing the dis- 
 crepancy between the dispateh of Count Arnim, published by 
 Prince Bismarck, and his " Pro Memoria," which appeared in 
 the Vtenna Presse — the first " treating the dogma of Infallibility 
 as a mere theological dissertation," and the second, "seeing in it 
 an event that must overthrow Catholicism and the peace of Cath- 
 olic States" — proceeds to explain the contradiction thus : — 
 
 "When Prince Hohenlohe, as leader of Bavarian foreign 
 affairs, sent his well-known circular to different Powers, explain- 
 ing the dangers of that dogma, the German Chancellor applied 
 to Count Arnim, who answered that the Bavarian Minister ex- 
 a^j^^erated the danger, being influenced by Dollinger. After this 
 answer was sent to Berlin, Count von Arnim went on his holi- 
 days, and in passing Munich visited Prince Hohenlohe. There 
 they spoke about Infallibility, and Prince Hohenlohe acknowl- 
 edged that the Circular toas written under Dollinger s inspiror 
 iioH, The Prince asked the Count to visit Dollinger, which he 
 did. Ddllinger convincingly explained to Arnim the importance 
 of the dogma; and, on his return, Arnim tried every thin« to 
 
 Srevent the result of the Council by repeatedly advisinjg Prince 
 iismarck to interfere; so the change, in Arnim' s opinion, must 
 be traced to Dollinger." 
 
 Before we enter upon the present conflict in Germany, so care- 
 lessly touched and dismissea by Mr. Gladstone, it is necessary to 
 record the fact that, in the year 1849, the 15th Article of the 
 German Constitution affirmed, that " Every religious Society shall 
 order and manage its own afiBurs independenUy, but shall re^ 
 
 * Tablet Newspaper, Oct. 31,* 1874, p. 546. 
 
I'DyB 
 
 AOOBfiSSIOXS OF THE OIVIL FOWEB. 
 
 A0ORE8SI0NS OP TUB OITIL FOWB&. 
 
 183 
 
 1 
 
 
 4 
 
 > 
 
 aiais ipbleol to the geaeral power of the State." The Prussian 
 Conttitption also recognized this independence. Such was the 
 law itntil 1872. Under this law the Catbolios were luval, peace- 
 ful, and of unimpeachable allej^iance to 'the State. They served 
 it in peaee; they fought for it in war. They helped to found the 
 Empire in their blood. Who made the change? The Govern- 
 ment of Berlin. The laws of 1849 have been violated, and a 
 ■eries of laws, which I will hereafter describe, have been forced 
 upon the Catholics of Prussia. The conflict was thus begun, 
 not by the Catholics nor by the Church, but by the Civil Power. 
 Prince Ton Bismarck is so conscious of this fact, that he has 
 Bjpared no accusation, how wild soever, against the Catholics to 
 disi^ise and to mask it The laws resisted now by the Bishops 
 ana .Catholics of Prussia are not the old laws of their countiy, 
 Imt innovations, intolerable to conscience, newly introduced, and 
 inflicted uf>on them by the fine and imprisonment of five Bishops 
 and 1,400, it is even said 1,700, clergy. Surely the day is past 
 when any one believes that the Falct Laws were caused by the 
 Vmtican Council. The French war was scarcely ended when 
 Prince Von Bismarck accused the Catholics of Germany of dis- 
 loyalty and conspiracy against the Empire. They had not even 
 hiid time to be disloyal or to conspire. The Catholic blood shed 
 in the war was not yet dry. He said then, as he said the other 
 day, that he had secret evidence. Not a particle has ever been 
 produced. For a time Englishmen were perplexed. They did 
 not know what to believe. Thev could not conceive that Prince 
 Von Bismarck would make such charges without evidence ; but, 
 little by little, the truth has come out The Old Catholic con- 
 spiracy has been laid open to the world. The manly and inflex- 
 ible constancy of the Catholic Binhops, Priests, and people of 
 Germany has roused the attention of Englishmen, and thej have 
 Mmetoknow that no body of men were more gladly loval to the 
 Prasaian Government than the Catholics on the basis of the laws 
 of their country from 1848 to 1872; that no change whatsoever. 
 W a jot or tittle, waa made on their part; that, on the part of 
 Government, a new and elaborate legislation, anti-Catholic and 
 intolerable to conscience, was introduced in 1872. The whole 
 innovation was on the part of Government The new laws ex- 
 cluded the Clergy from the schools; banished the religious 
 ardors ; made Government consent necessain^ to the nomination 
 of a Parish Priest; fined and imprisoned Bishops for the exer- 
 cise of their Spiritual oflice ; subjected to the State the education 
 of the OerCT, even to the examination for orders ; and estalv 
 lished a final tribunal of Ecclesiastical appeal in Berlin. And 
 yet men were found who had still the hardihood to say that the 
 Church had begun the conflict At last. Dr. Friedberor, Profes- 
 sor of Law at Leipsic, and one of the chief advisers of Govern- 
 ment, in its Ecclesiastical policy, let out the real cause. With 
 sn inoi|utious candor he has told us the truth. 
 
 I will take the account of Dr. Friedberg's book, " The German 
 Empire and the Catholic Church," from a pamphlet of the Bishop 
 
 of Mayence, entitled, ** The New Prussian Bills on the Position 
 of the Church in reference to the State." * 
 
 Bishop Ketteler begins by asking, "What could pompt the 
 Liberal party to denounce as Ultramontane presumption, and as 
 ft surrender of the essential rights of the State, that which, in the 
 years 1848-1850, it had acknowledged as the necessary 'conse- 
 quence of its own principles?' " (p. 9). 
 
 Bishop Ketteler answers, "The true reason of the thorough 
 systematic change of the Liberal party, as well as of all those 
 measures aimed against the lawful rights of the Church, is * the 
 spiritual power of the Church based upon the foundation of 
 freedom" (p. IX). 
 
 He then quotes an Address of Dr. Friedberg, in which he says, 
 " The Doctrinaries will still tell us that the all-sufficient remedy 
 of this is the separation of tiie Church from the State ; but, on 
 the contrary, under actual circumstances, this would be a very 
 injurious measure, for the Church has become too much united to 
 the people.'* 
 
 He then shows that wherever the Church is free, as in the 
 United States, it is powerful, because it is the Church of the 
 people. *' What would be the consequence," he asks, " with us 
 if the Church were freed from the control of the State?" "On 
 the contrary," says Dr. Friedberg, "as the whole question has 
 become now 07ie of main force, the State must go so far as to de- 
 prive the Church of her influence over the people, in order that 
 its own power may be firmly established" (pp. 10, 11). 
 
 Dr. Newman, more than thirty years ago, said that Governments 
 establish and endow Churches as people cut the wings of mag- 
 pies, that they may hop upon the lawn and pick up worms. 
 " Yiiberals love a tame Church." 
 
 I quote this in answer to those who have been taunting the 
 German Bishops with complaining of persecution and of yet 
 holding to their legal status : Pharaoh has taught all oppressors 
 " not to let the people go." 
 
 " Our crime as endangering the State," says Bishop Ketteler, 
 *' consists in this — that wheresoever the people and the Church 
 are free, the people turn to the Church, and not to the doctrines 
 of the Liberal partv" (p. 13). 
 
 " Here we have tne whole undisguised truth. To separate the 
 Christian people from the Church, to deprive it of freedom, to 
 subjugate it by force to Liberal Statecraft and human wisdom, 
 thus reducing it to a Liberal State-religion — this is the triumph 
 of modern science and knowledge which Liberalism and its pro- 
 fessors offer to the German people " (p. 14). 
 
 Bishop Ketteler then goes on to give Dr. Friedberg's argument : 
 ''The Protestant Church is, at this day, a» essential political 
 agent — solely by its opposition to Catholicism." 
 
 Dr. Von Holzendorff says of the Protestant Church, that " it 
 has no intellectual unity, because a short-sighted orthodoxy has 
 
 ^ — ,.___,_.»______-»«_-_ — . — __-_—-.» 
 
 * A translation made in Germany has been published by Messrs. 
 Burns & Gates, 17 Portmau Street. 
 

 IMBBSSIOXB OF THE CIVIL TO 
 
 town tnd fotiei«d indiibcenee towmrd the Omreli; and nJso 
 ifom the fact that the Protestant Church did not create a consti- 
 tution iuited to its own spirit Who could count upon the High 
 Couetstory Court of Berlin outliving for a day the separation of 
 the Church from the State ? or that the fiercest party strife would 
 not break it up into sects ? But what an opportunity for the com- 
 pact mass of the Catholic Church as opposed to these dismem- 
 bered eknents," etc^ This lets in Ikht 
 
 Bishop Ketteler than sums up: "These confessions of a pre- 
 tended Liberal deserve notice. 
 
 ••First, the Protestant Church is 'an essentia! political agent,' 
 and especially so by her opposition to Catholicism. 
 
 "Secondly, the Pniteilant Chureh ean not endure freedom and 
 indepeiMtenee. ' 'After sepavation from the State it would be "dis- 
 memlitfei;' The high Consiatoiy of Berlin would scarcely sur- 
 vive a day.' 
 
 "Thirdly, out of these dismembered elements an increase would 
 fall to the Catholic Church. Principles trulir Liberal. No longer 
 ■hall the power of truth under the protection of equal freedom 
 ilMide between the different creeds. In the hands of the Liber- 
 als the Protestant Church is to become a * political aeent,' ' a tool 
 of the State,' to fight apinst Catholicism. Even liberty of con- 
 science on the part of tne people is to be destroyed to avert the 
 dancer of their turning to the Catholic Church. 
 
 "Ijistly, Dr. Friedberg refused to separate the Church from the 
 Stale, because it would be a ' severity and an injustice,' forsooth, 
 in tiie Old Catholics. If the Church were set free, the Govern- 
 iMiit would lose 'an immediate support and a co-itperaUon so nee- 
 mtwry to the State for the inienud reform of the Church.* " 
 
 The Bishop then sums up as follows :-~The Government has 
 ulianged its relations to the Catholic Church, " not because the 
 Catholic Church is dangerous to the State, nor because it is hos- 
 tile to the Empire, nor because it will overbear the State ; these 
 are not the motives, though thoy are daily expressed in Parlia- 
 ment and in the press by the Liberal party, to show that the Cath- 
 olic Chureh must be robbed of her liberty, but because the Ger- 
 man people must be torn away by force from the Church ; and in 
 order to attain this end, the Protestant State Church and the ' Old 
 Catholict' are to be used as weapons to fight the Catholic Church, 
 and to destroy it internally," etc. (p. 17). 
 
 Such is the end and aim : now tor the means. Dr. Friedberg 
 says, "One must first attempt to draw off the waters carefully, 
 letting them flow into other channels, and conducting them into 
 reservoirs; what remains will then be easily absorbed into the 
 •it" (p. 19). In other words, dry up the Church; draw from it 
 ai Intellectual, moral, and spiritual influence over the people ; 
 paralyze the action of its Pastors; substitute Bureaus, Registrars, 
 Professors, State Teachers, and State Officials; make its worship 
 
 •Ymr-Book of the German Empire, By Dr. P. von Holiendorff, 
 I^ipzig, p. 478, 1872. 
 
 AGORES8I0NS OF THE CIVIL POWER. 
 
 185 
 
 a State Ritualism, a ceremonial of subjective feelings, not of ob« 
 jective Truth. This done, religion will soon evaporate. The 
 sum of all. Bishop Ketteler says, is that — 
 
 " The State will regard the Church as a historical established 
 institution, which may be very useful to the State by fulfilling its 
 peculiar and necessary mission for the civilization of the Ger- 
 man people, but which, on the Qther hand, may become danger- 
 ous to the State, and has become so. 
 
 " For the first reason the Church shall be not only tolerated but 
 also be authorized by the State. For the second reason, it is to 
 be rendered harmless. 
 
 " This will dry up the stream, and the rest will evaporate." 
 
 Ader this I think even an English Nonconformist would read 
 the Uiiam Sanctam with new eyes. 
 
 - Now, the proximate means of accomplishing this draining of 
 the Pontine Marshes is " the inward and outward release of 
 the Clergy from all dependence on powers *' outside our nation," 
 and " strangers to our national consciousness ; " that is to say, a 
 spiritual blockade against the Church throughout the world, or 
 "our German consciousness" a^iinst Christianity. 
 
 The inward release of the Cler^ is to be effected " through 
 their education " (pp. 29, 30). Their education is to be as fol- 
 lows : — 
 
 1 . Every Priest is to go through an examination at a German 
 College. 
 
 2. Me is to study Theology for three years in a Gefman State 
 University/. 
 
 All independent seminaries and religious colleges for boys are 
 interdicted. 
 
 3. He is finally to be examihed in the presence of a Commissary 
 of the Government. 
 
 4. The State has the superior direction of all instruction of the 
 Cler/y^. 
 
 5. it fixes the method of their teaching. 
 
 6. It decides the qualifications of their teachers. 
 
 The Bishop is to be, in all these relations, dependent on the 
 State ; the state forms the Catholic Clergy to its own fashion ; and 
 the Bishop has only to receive them and to give them cure of souls. 
 
 The Bishop of Mayence justly says : "A Clergy inwardly de- 
 prived of faith, falling under the bondage of unbelief ana the 
 spirit of the times, would, no doubt, become the perfect ideal of 
 national education " (pp. 35, 36). 
 
 Next for the " outward release " of the Clergy. 
 
 First it means that the State will regulate the appointment and 
 deposition, and the correctional discipline of the Clergy by local 
 Civil authorities, and partly by a Supreme Royal court for Cleri- 
 cal affiiirs. 
 
 The Clergy are therefore perfectly released : 
 
 First, from the jurisdiction of the Head of the Church. 
 
 Secondly, from the iurisdiction of their own Bishops. 
 
 The effect of this release is : 
 
 First, that any fit and worthy Priest may be kept out of 
 16 
 
IHH AGOEBSSIOJta OF TMB OlVIt POWBE, 
 
 tie cure of loiilt and il tpiritoia offices by the veto of llie 
 
 *sLnd, tbal mj niiit or ^^S^^y' Wr^Xi "Z, ^^"^^^t 
 Prieit may be supported m defiance of bw Bishop, to the scan 
 dal of the Chureh and the perdition of Souto. 
 
 An unlimited veto is an nnhmited r ght of pa*T?»W- ,. . 
 
 What kind of mm will grow up oat of the soil of Stote Uni- 
 vnniities and under the sun of State ratronage r , ,. .^^ 
 
 Whrt pri^t of fidelity to the Church and of penpnJ digmty 
 
 of oh««ter will 8cU or fend himeeU ^ »"?'' »/«»S?'Z «d M,r. 
 We have read lately a 1 tUc too much of the phaney and mi- 
 
 Tility " and "degradation" of the 0»'h»l'^pP.'fSP'^„ J^^'' \'i 
 Se ideal of a Bishop in thoee who agsail the Vatican Council 
 «d .wpi^thi'e with the Old Catholics? By these laws the 
 oic?lTBi8hop. are liberaUd or releaned from the foreign op- 
 Son of Bome^ The Pope «m not snspend one of Aem. 
 
 moral sense should grow upon us. «»f^^„al rAlAiuia 
 
 The Bishop of Mayence finally sums up this external release 
 
 of their Clergy as foUows : 
 These lata amount to— , 
 1 Separation of the Church in Germany from Rome. 
 2. Annihilation of the powers of the Bishops, 
 i. The breaking up of all authority and discipline of er the 
 
 ^'^nUmirtntrol of the Slate over the Clergy, and over re- 
 
 ion. 
 
 rUniversal and moral «^™P*i«V/f t^^Xtr^^^^^ con- 
 
 6. Introduction and encouragement of every form of error con 
 
 trarv to faith and to Christianity among the teachers. 
 7 lioss of Christian faith among the people. 
 The Bishop then protests againsl these l;'^«."Vfv„.«f«f;n«»l 
 "A violation of all Christian M^J^'*;»' *»*1,.«V*" J^^^^^^ 
 
 ri£hts : as an attempt to force on^the Catholic Church the Royal 
 
 SuV«mcy of the Irotestant ^f^^^^jrc^^Jf tj^^^^^^^^ 
 Bi^ne coMtitution and authority of *»'tAK^^l^i^^m of ^^ 
 imaUy. as leading men back »«^"/"**^, ^^^J^^'?^,^? ^ 
 Paifan world in wh ch the temporal and spiritual sovereignty 
 wSe urtJd in one fmmm. The^epan^^^^^^^ of the two powers 
 vbioh the Divine Founder of Christiamtjr has introduced for the 
 ZZtion of the liberties of human ife in faith, consc^nce, and 
 wlirion. would be once more extinguished in Germany It 
 would then be easy to overthrow, one after another, the otiber 
 iSeiruards of the fkedom of the people. The army, the official 
 sSSTpress, or Slate school, or Stat« Church. ^1 united together 
 ^d'^ transplant the old despotism of the Pagans to German 
 •oil" (p. 49). 
 
 AGGBBS8I0H8 OF THB OITIL FOWBB. 
 
 187 
 
 He concludes in these words :~- 
 
 " Finally, these laws are in their whole substance revolution* 
 ary, and a denial of the historicaJ positive development of the 
 rights, and an uprooting of all the constitutional privileges, of 
 the people. They will bring about a conflict with the Catholic 
 Church, with its essential constitution and its doctrines; they 
 attempt to force upon the Catholic Church a constitution similar 
 to that of the Protestant Church. By placing all earthly power 
 in the hands of one man they introduce the system of the hea- 
 then despotism into Germany. 
 
 *' May God guard our German Fatherland from the disastrous 
 consequences of such laws." 
 
 Before this noble protest was published these Bills became law. 
 I hope no Englishman will now say that the conflict in Germany 
 was brought on by the Chorch. The pretext of the Vatican 
 Council is as transparently false as the plea of the wolf against 
 the lamb. Such, then, are the Falck Laws ; and I have read no 
 part of Mr. Gladstone's " Expostulation" with more sadness than 
 the following words : — 
 
 " I am not competent to give any opinion upon the particulars 
 of that struggle. The institutions of Germany, and the relative 
 estimate of State power and individual freedom, are materially 
 different from ours."* 
 
 Are faith and conscience "institutions" to be "estimated" 
 " relatively " ? Is religious freedom, to the vindication of which 
 Mr. Gladstone has given a long public life, a matter to be meas- 
 ured by geographical or political conditions ? I do not recognize 
 this voice. 
 
 It may, I think, with safety be affirmed, that in the lamentable 
 conflict now waging in Germany, the Berlin Government, urged 
 on by the conspiracy of the " Old Catholics," aided, no doubt, at 
 a later stage, by the pseudo-Liberals of Prussia, has been the ag- 
 gressor. 
 
 The same could be abundantly proved in respect to the perse- 
 cution of the Church in Switzerland. I have before me full and 
 authentic evidence of the aggression of the Cantonal Govern- 
 ments of Bale. Soleure. and Berne, and others. But I will not 
 prolong this chapter by a recital. The proof will be found in 
 the Appendix C. , 
 
 It would be as easy also to show that in Brazil the Government 
 was the aggressor. The Bishop of Olinda is at this moment in 
 penal servitude, for refusing religious rites at the burial of an 
 excommunicated person. • 
 
 This will, I hope, be deemed a sufficient proof of my third 
 proposition, which in sum is this, that the present collisions be- 
 tween the Civil -and Spiritual Powers have not been caused by 
 the Church. There is every-where a party aiming at the subver- 
 sion of ChriHtianity. The great barrier m their way is the Ca- 
 tholic Church. They are now openly conspiring for its overthrow. 
 
 In England our old craters are extinct and the mountains are 
 
 ■ iw - — ■ 
 
 * ITie Vatican Bccrces, dc, p. IS. 
 
w 
 
 TBUB IKD FAME PBOOBMS. 
 
 I 
 
 niiiitL Sucli ft conflict lifti, liftppUy, not yef been rekindled 
 21% n« No change onlSe v^Ji the CathoHc Ch«r«h of » 
 kind to proToke »uch a conflict, either haa been or will be made. 
 He declining to accept a scheme of education baaed on pnnci- 
 
 Ijles dangerou^s to CathSlic Faith « <^*'-»^^;/y "^ «"«^^^ JX 
 W a tempting gift ia no aggreaeion. 1^ we are wrain to be die- 
 Cted bjVeligious conflicts, the resnonsibility wiH 'est undmd- 
 cdlv nnon the head of any one who shall break our present 
 public confidence and peace. And that miedeed would be indel- 
 ibly written in our history. 
 
 Ill|' 
 
 ( 
 
 IV. Tmui AND WMjm Ttmmwm. 
 
 I wEl now go on to the fourth propoeition-that l>yj^«»f ^^; 
 liaions with the Church the Cif il Powers everywhere arc at this 
 tinie destroying the first principle of their own 8^f>»l»*y,- . ^ ,^ 
 
 Mr. Gladstone has represented me as Baying that "the civa 
 order of all ChriBtendom is the offspring of the Temporal Power, 
 and has the Temporal Power for it« keystone; that on the de- 
 Btraclion of the ¥emporal Power 'the laws of nations would at 
 
 once fall in ruins.* " ^ t i- n -.«:.«« *\.^^ • iina«i». 
 
 Understood as I wrote these words I fully affirm them, unaer- 
 
 stood a. they may be in this garbled form, they ^^^f. ^V^"^ 
 
 rtiim which'is not mine 1 ''^^ T?^^"^^"*"^ y f f,?: J^3™^ 
 Power of the Pope over his own State : whereby, as a King amone 
 Bngp, he Busta^ed the Christian character of ^^^^\'^^'J 
 was not speaking of Temporal Power over the Temporal Govem- 
 STnt of ?rkcesr' And I was speaking in defense at a time when 
 every journal in the country, with hardly an exception, was day 
 •Her iay assallinE^ and I must add ^fy^""^^ uTo%l 
 and Mm of the Temporal Government of the Pope. My own 
 words were as follows:— , 
 
 "Now, the la«t point on which I will dwell is this: that as the 
 Church of God has created— and that speciaHy through the ac- 
 tion of the Supreme Pontife in their civiT mission to tibe world- 
 this vast and liir fabric of Christian Europe, so it has perpetr 
 TOllf sustained it I aak. what has given it coherence? What 
 is it^that has kept alive the governing principle among men but 
 Hint pure faith It knowledge of God which W gone forth from 
 the Holy See, and has filled the whole circumference of Christen- 
 dom? Vhat has bound men together in the j[«yj^*/?f *^ 
 mutual rights, but that pure morality which was delivered to toe 
 Church tigukrd, and oY which the Holy See is the supreme in- 
 lerpreter? These two streams— which, as St. Cyprian says in hw 
 teeStise on the unity of the Church are .like tke rays tW flow 
 fram the sun, or like the streams that rise and break from the 
 fountain— illuminated and inundated the whole Christian world. 
 Now, I Mk, what has preserved this in secuntv, ^"^*^e 'f*"^" 
 biHty of the Church of God vested chiefly and finally in the per- 
 son of the Vicar of Jesus Christ? It will rather belong to the 
 next lecture to note how, by contrast, this may be proved, ana 
 
 TRUE AND FALSE PB06BBSS. 
 
 191 
 
 the twofold character of Christian Pontiff and Christian King. 
 Luther's blast has brought this down at hist. First, by regdieni 
 in Protestant nations ; and, secondly, by revolution m Catholio 
 States. The principles of 1789 are Lutheranism applied to pol- 
 itics. We have already reached the time of cijil marriage, of 
 secular education, and of States in their public life without Chri^ 
 tianity. But let us not think that we have reached our plaje of 
 rest. Luther's blast, I fear, has yet more to do. Faith « aying 
 out of the public life and action of all Governments. There is 
 hardly a Catholic or a Christian Government left. The people 
 they govern are divided in religion, and " the religious difficulty 
 forces them to become simply secular in legislation and in ac- 
 tion. So long as there vras a Christian world, the Head of the 
 Christian Church was recognized as the Vicar of a Dmne Mas- 
 ter and had a Temporal Power among Christian Sovereims, and 
 a sovereignty of his own; but now that the nations have become 
 secular, and no longer recogniue his sacred office, his direction 
 in temporal things is rejected by their rejection of faith. 1 am 
 not arguing or kmcnting, but explaining our actual state. And 
 what 18 now the state and condition of the Christian world? 
 Where are the Christian laws which formed it m the beginning f 
 I was not i^r wrong in saying that the temporal Power ot the 
 Head of the Christian Church was the kejstone of a world 
 which has crumbled from its Christian unity into a dismembered 
 array of secular and conflicting nations, of armed camps and re- 
 tarded maturity. And it is with this " progress and modern civ- 
 ilization that the Roman Pobtiff is invited to conform and to 
 reconcile himself." This is the sum and exposition of modern 
 thought," save only that It omits the Agnostic theologjDe Veo 
 nan existente, and the anthropology of Apes Mr. "Gladstone 
 Quotes this contemned proposition, recited m the SyUabue, as a 
 amvainan against the Pope and the Catholics of these kingdoms. 
 We have no desire to see the Christian Commonwealth of Eng- 
 land decompose before our eyes under Luther s blast. We are 
 content with the English Monarchy, founded and consolidated 
 by our Catholic forefathers ; and with our English Constitution, 
 of which the solid and unshaken base and the dominant con- 
 structive lines are Christian and Catholic. We Englishmen were 
 once perfectly one in faith. Luther's blast has given «» n^lj 
 three hundred years of penal laws, bitter contentions, a bloody 
 reign of Mary,'*^ a relentless shower, indeed, between two seas ot 
 blwd, in the reigns of her father and her sister; and when these 
 horrors relaxed, streams of blood still flowed on for another hun- 
 
 se^ii, and that against nearly a half of the English population^ 
 We were weakened because we were divided; liaunted by su^ 
 picions of conspiracy and scared by fancied .<i^"f ;?i ^^^^^^^g^^ 
 were consciously doing wrong. a« Prussia is at «»» f *^y;^^'* 
 how for fifty years weTiave had peace. ^^^^f^Z'^Kiltd^Z 
 interests, and a solid common weal. The three Kingdoms are 
 
 m 
 
 » 1 
 
 % I 
 
 I- 
 
192 
 
 TmUE AKD FALSE PSOOSESa. 
 
 f 
 
 L 
 
 without anxiety and withont fear. And why ? Because we haTe 
 eliminaled reUg|0ii8 conflicte from our Legislation, because we 
 have learned to be just, because we have learned also that the 
 Civil Ruler may punish what men do, but not what men think, 
 unlets they issue in acts against the State. All men, so far as 
 consMMM) and faith extend, are now .equal before the law. No 
 nan is molested for his religion. Although this is not the 
 ffolden age of uni^ in truth, which the Christian Church once 
 created and Pius lA. declares to be the only ciTilization and the 
 <Mily progress to which he can conform himself, though he toler- 
 stee what he can not cure; nevertheless, it is a silver age m 
 which we can peaceably accept what we can not either justify 
 as the will of Uod, or extol an the normal state of the Christian 
 worM. In our shattered state of religious belief and worship 
 there is no way of solid civil peace, but in leaving all men free 
 in their amplest liberty of faith. It is because this is vital to 
 mat welfare as an Empire, and because, as it seems to me, the 
 late sudden and needless aggression on the Catholic religion is 
 dangerous to the social and political tranquillity of these King- 
 doiis, that I have pointed to Germany, as a warning.^ A mon- 
 twihy of a thousand years is a majestic thing in this modern 
 world of fleeting dynasties and of chronic revolutions. We po^ 
 •esi a royal lineage the least broken and the most closely united 
 to the people that the world has ever seen, save one. The line of 
 Pontifi ruled before the crowned heads of to-day came into exist- 
 ence. It has been the vital chord of the Christian people of the 
 world. Next after the line of Pontiflfe, there is nothing m historr 
 more time-honored or grander than the Monarchy of Alfred, 
 which reigns to this day. Does Mr. Gladstone think that th« 
 Vatican Council binds me to desire its overtlirow? Next to se^ 
 ing again the laws and the faith of good King Edward restored 
 throughout the land, we desire to see the Sovereign of England 
 leignmg by equal laws over a people united at least »». every 
 tiling that is right and iust and lawful in this world, if indeed 
 they must still be in higher laws and truths divided. 
 
 One thing is most certain, Catholics will never lend so much as 
 II finger or a vote to overturn by political action the Christianity 
 which still liogers in our public laws. They will cherish all of 
 il that remains in our popular education. If we could see the 
 tfidition of our national Christianity healed of its wounds and 
 tiken up into the full Efe and unity of perfect faith by the 
 ■piritual forces of conviction and of persuasion, as that super- 
 iiAtiiral unity was created in the be|jinning, we should rejoice 
 with thanksgiving; but no Catholic will diminish by a shade the 
 Christianity which still survives. We can not, indeed, co-operate 
 by aay direct action to uphold what we believe to be erroneous; 
 but it will find no plitical hoetility in us. They who wish its 
 overthrow would pull it down not for what we think erroneous in it, 
 Imi Ibr what is true ; and what is true in it we revere as the truth 
 ©f Cbd. In our divided religious state the public revenues, once 
 fftid into the treasury, have passed bevond the individual con- 
 Mience. Thenceforward they fall under the impartial admini»- 
 
 TRUE AND FALSE PROGRESS. 
 
 19a 
 
 tration of our mixed commonwealth. I am not responsible for 
 the application of them. My conscience is not touched if pub- 
 lie revenues are given to a f'reibyterian or to a Baptist School. 
 Mv conscience is nut ill at ease even if grants are made to a 
 school in which no religion at all is taught. A people divided in 
 reiigion pays its taxes, and a Parliament divided in religion votes 
 the public money by an equitable balance for our manifold uses 
 in the midst of our manifold divisions. No one has a right to 
 control this mixed administration to satisfy bis private conscience, 
 or to claim to have it all his own way. No Secularist can regard 
 my schools with more aversion than I regard his ; but I am pas- 
 sive when he receives his share of the public money. I trust the 
 day will never come when any one section or sect among us 
 shall gain a domination over the equities which render tolerable 
 our divided state. I hope no Puritans will rise up again to do 
 in England, by the help of Secularists and unbelievers, what 
 they did in Maryland. There they destroyed the fairest promise 
 of peace that a wrecked world ever saw. England at this time 
 is Maryland upon an imperial scale. He who shall break our 
 religious peice will go down to history with those whose names 
 Englishmen try to forget. 
 
 It is for this reason that I lament when six millions of British 
 subjects are told by a voice of great authority that they are loyal 
 indeed, but in spite of their reUgion. When men are so taught 
 they are very apt to learn the lesson. They will be ready to say, 
 if by my whole life 1 am loyal, but by my religion I ought, as I 
 am told, to be disloyal, I am, therefore, either a traitor or a her- 
 etic. If I am a heretic I shall lose my soul; but for imputed 
 treason I can only lose my life. If men of Mr. Gladstone s age 
 and fame say these things, the masses will be very apt to believe 
 them. And if he should also say that Pius IX. and the whole 
 Episcopate, and the Vatican Council, and the Clergy of England 
 and Ireland, so believe and teach, I can hardly find fault with a 
 plain man who savs, " Your arguments and quotations are above 
 me, but I know that the Pope and the Church can not mislead 
 me ; they must know the Catholic faith better than you. At all 
 costs I must believe them." I could not blame such a man in 
 refusing for so obvious a reason to listen to Mr. Gladstone when 
 he expostulates with the Vatican Council. Indeed, I can conceive 
 that it will not promote loyalty in England or Ireland to hold up 
 passages from books written even by me in proof that Catholics 
 must choose between their loyalty and their religion. They may 
 be more likely to choose to err even with me than to correct 
 their faith at the voice of any politician. Moreover, they may 
 even be tempted to think that if I am not loyal they need not be. 
 It is a dangerous thing to tell a flock of many millions that the 
 Pastors they trust are, or ought to be, disloyal. They will be 
 apt to say, " We do not understand it; but if it be true, there 
 must be some very strong and sufficient reason." I can conceive 
 that the Catholic peasants in Germany may have argued in this 
 plain way, even before they understood the merits of the cause. 
 They saw the Archbishop of Posen carried off" to prison. De- 
 17 
 
■1 <rM 
 
 TmUft A.\II FALSE PICOCICE^S. 
 
 jpeiMi iiDoii it their confidence went with him. This is playing 
 with eamd tools, and in a matter where it is hardly moral to pky 
 at all Qreat public diMisters might be cauRcd by the game, and 
 the costs of the game would fall, not upon the gamester, but upon 
 innocent men, and women, and children. 
 
 I could not refrain from saying thus much of England. But I 
 have little fear that the stream of our equal legislation will be 
 turned aside, much less turned back; or that our public peace 
 will be broken. The destinies of the British Empire are in 
 strong hands, guided b^ calm heads, and supported by a bal- 
 ancMf mnd steady public opinion, which in the last two months 
 has manifested a self-command and on equity which do honor to 
 our country. 
 
 As to Germany I shall say no more. Luther's mighty trumpet 
 has already rung twice through Germany. It rang long and loud 
 from 1S35 to 1M2, and apin longer and louder from 1618 to 
 1648. The old Germany that heara it has ceased to exist* God 
 grant that it may not give such notes again. Every one who 
 hears a human hearty ana a love for the Christian world, and a 
 gfMid-will to Germany, mill share in this desire. 
 
 But if the conflicts of Governments against the Church are 
 l:ital t4> the public jjeace and to themselves, as assuredly they 
 would l>e to the British Empire if our accusers should rekindle 
 old strifes, and as they assuredly wOl be in the German Empire, 
 whether the policy of Prince Von Bismarck fail or succeed, tnero 
 can be found no sadder example of this disastrous imprudence in 
 statesmen than in the case of Italy. For eight and twenty years 
 a wanton and uiischievouM aggression against the Holy See has 
 been oarried on. I say wanton, because it has been without a 
 eause. I say mischievous, because it has retarded and endan- 
 gered th® unit^r and independence of Italy, and the public and 
 private Biosperity of the Italian people. As Mr. Gladstone has 
 reviewea his relation to the Italian question in its bearing on his 
 Expostulation, I mav do the same. 
 
 At the outset of their task of unifying and vindicating the in- 
 depndence of Italy, the Italian politicians began by assailing the 
 pnncinle of all unity amonju; men. They engaged all the pride 
 and all the passion of Italy in a deadly conflict with the special 
 source of all its greatness. Had they worked from that center 
 of their moral life, Italy at this day would have been united, 
 peaceful, and strong. These are, indeed, my convictions, but not 
 my words. Neitlier the present party which rules Italy, nor the 
 party which has encouraged them in this country, will, perhaps, 
 listen to me. But they will listen, I hope, to one who was an 
 Italian, and a lover of the unity and independence of Italy. 
 Vineenao Gioberti, in his " PriiiiHto degli Italian i," after proving 
 that religion is the source of all civilixation, says : — 
 
 " If. then, the whole culture of a people has its impulse and 
 origin from religion, how can we treat of its culture without 
 speaking of its religion? |f the culture of Europe in general, 
 
 * See Archbishop Trenph's 0uMmmt Ado^m, pp. 88, 89, 161. 
 
 TRUE XSB FALSE PROOBESS. 
 
 195 
 
 and that of Italy in particular, were the work of the New Rome 
 and of its belief, how is it possible to discuss this twofold argu- 
 ment, and to be silent about Catholicism and about the Pope? 
 In writing a book upon Italy I protest that I desire to speak of 
 the living and real Italy as it exists at this day, not of the Italy 
 that is dead these fourteen hundred years, nor of an abstract alle- 
 gorical Italy that is not to be found in the outward world, but 
 only in the brain of some philosopher." ..." Italy is differ- 
 enced from the Gentile nations by its Christianity : from those 
 that are in heresy and schism by its Catholicism ; and from the 
 other nations which are Catholic by the fact that it is placed in 
 the center of Catholicism, and not in the outline or circumfer- 
 ence." • ' ' "But among the Catholic populations, the Italian 
 has the privilege of occupying the first place, because it possesses 
 in its heart the first See. 
 
 " I hope that these suggestions will be enough to justify the 
 small amount of theology that I have put into this book. . . . 
 Two facts seem to me conspicuous in the political (civile) world 
 at this day" ..." the first is the exclusion of the Theology 
 of Revelation from the field of the Encyclopedia of human 
 knowledge ; the second is the removal of the Catholic clergy from 
 the influence in civil affairs." .... "I count it to be the 
 duty of a writer, above all if he be a philosopher, Catholic and 
 Italian, to combat these two grand aberrations of modern civili- 
 sation, and to recall things to their first principles ; endeavoring 
 to restore the universal primacy of religion in the circle of things 
 and of knowledge." . ..." I therefore do not believe that 
 1 deceive myself in affirming that every scientific reform is vain, 
 if it do not make chief account of religion, and that every scheme 
 of Italian renovation is null, if it have not for its base the corner- 
 stone of Catholicism."* 
 
 After a contrast of the theoretical abstractions of the Ghibel- 
 line party and the practical and popular policy of the Guelphs, 
 Gioberti continues: — 
 
 "The Italy of that day was not the Italy of the ancient Latins, 
 corrupted by the incapacity of the later Emperors, and destroyed 
 by the ferocity of the northern barbarians. In its stead a new 
 Rome had been created, under the auspices, not of Romulus, but 
 of Peter, not of the Conscript Fathers of Old Rome, but of the 
 Episcopate, and of the councils which are the Patrician order 
 and the Senate of the universal Christendom. The Guelphs, 
 therefore, did not separate the civil constitution of Italy from the 
 Pontificate, and, without confounding the human order with the 
 divine, they believed that God, having privileged the Peninsula 
 with the first See of tlie faith, mother of all others .... 
 it ought to exercise the chief part in the political order of 
 Italy.* ..." But in this day many think otherwise, and 
 in tneir opinion the Pope has about as much to do with the na- 
 tional condition of Italy as he has with that of China. This 
 comes from the weakness into which foreign influences have led 
 
 ♦Gioberti, Primato degli liatiani, vol. ii. pp. 28-31. 
 
1% 
 
 TIME AND FALSE niOCRKSS. 
 
 TRUE AXD FALSE PROGRESS. 
 
 197 
 
 V 
 
 tlie Papacv, mid from the sprin-jiug up again for the last century 
 uf tli0 aracienl spirit of the Nominalists and the Ghibellinei, 
 under the form of Gallicmnism; Jansenism, Cartesianism, Voltair- 
 ianism, or under the disguise of rationalism and German pan- 
 theism, prompted by the same principles, and springing from the 
 same countries respectively as those former heresies. And the 
 ©¥i! will kat as long as men persist in substitntinc a heathen or 
 chimerical Italy in the place of a real and a Christian Italv, 
 which God, and a life of eighteen hundred years, has created; 
 that is to say, a French or German Italy in the place of an Italy 
 of the Italians. But I can not understand how men can ascribe 
 the civilization of Europe in teneral to Christianity (of which 
 there is at this day no writer of any force who doubts), and not 
 award in particular the culture of our Peninsula to the Holy See; 
 for the Pope is to the universal Church that which the civilita- 
 tion of Italy is to tha| of Europe." * . • i. 
 
 I will add but one more passage, which will enunciate in the 
 words of an Italian patriot the affirmation I have made:-— 
 
 " The separating of tlic national personality of Italy from its 
 reliaous principle, and from the dignity which spreads through- 
 out it from the Christian nionarchy of which it is the home {res- 
 idema), m not, in my opinion, the least of the causes which, for 
 many centuries, weakens the minds of Italians. This error 
 sprung in part from theliabit of arguing and judging of Christian 
 Italy after the manner of pagans, and in nart from the custom of 
 reasoning, according to the^canons of a philosophy which is gov- 
 erned, not by rational ideas nor by living and concrete fiicts, but 
 
 by empty abstractioiw." t 
 
 Such was the estimate of a man who loved Italy with all his 
 heart, and desirwl to see it united, and independent of all foreign 
 
 dvnasties* 
 
 This is no mere speculation as to what the Catholic religion 
 and thffl Pope may be to Italy, but a strict historical fact. The 
 Pontifi have been for fourteen hundred years the chief 
 popular power in Italy. I say popular, not dynastic; not des- 
 potic, but Guelf. In the ifth century the Pontiffs saved Italy 
 from the Gothic invasions. St. Innocent I. saved Ravenna and 
 Home. St. Leo saved Italy fnmi Atilla, and Home from Gensenc. 
 In the sixth and seventh centuries St. Gregory was the chief de- 
 fender of Italy and Kouie against the Lombards. The same is 
 true in the time of Gregory II. and Adrian I. In the ninth, 
 tenth, and eleventh centuries the Pontiffs Leo IV. and Gregory 
 IV. saved Italy from the Saracens. So also John VIIL, John A., 
 Benedict VIII. beat back the Saracens, and finaUy drove them 
 from Sardinia. The Crusades of Urban U. and St Pius V. saved 
 Italy and Europe from the Mohammedan Power. In the great 
 contest about Investitures, the Pontiflfe from Gregory VII. to C^ 
 listus II., saved the Church from subjection to the Empire, and 
 Italy from subjection to Germany. The ecclesiastical and po- 
 
 •Gioberti, Friimit4f detjU Jtoliaiti, vol. li. pp. 66, 67. 
 I Gioberti, iVinuito d^i ItaMam, vol. ii. p. 60. 
 
 litical liberties of Italy were ))oth at stake, and were both vindi- 
 cated together by the action of the Pontiffs. In the twelfth and 
 thirteenm centuries the liberty of the Italian communes was 
 saved from the feudal despotism of the Hohenstaufen by the 
 Popes. Alexander 111. andf the Lombard League defended popu- 
 lar liberty against Frederick Barbarossa. The City of Alexandria 
 is to this day the monument of the gratitude of the Lombard 
 people. The City of Gaesarea has ceased to exist. Innocent III. 
 and the Tuscan League saved the liberties of Central Italy. 
 Gregory IX and Innocent IV. resisted the tyranny of Frederick 
 II., and finally saved the independence of Italy from the Impe- 
 rial despotism. Then came the contest of the people and the 
 Empire, the Guelfs and the Ghibellines. In these conflicts the 
 Popes and the people were indivisible. In the fourteenth and 
 fifteenth centuries the Popes were the soul and the strength of 
 the Italian Leagues, wherebjr the people and their liberties were 
 protected from the enormities of tyrants and adventurers and 
 Free Companies. In the fifteenth century Nicholas V. main- 
 tained peace among the Princes and people of Italy, and drew 
 Naples, Milan, Florence, Venice, and Genoa into a Confederation 
 to maintain the Italian independence. 
 
 Pius II protected, in like manner, the liberty of Italy from the 
 intrusions of France. Paul II. leagued together all the Princes 
 of Italy in defense of Italian freedom. Julius II. labored to 
 drive all foreign domination out of Italy. Leo X. made it his 
 chief policy to liberate Italy from all foreign dominion, and to 
 unite all the Princes of Italy in a Confederation of independ- 
 
 ence. 
 
 Paul IV., though unsuccessful, was the champion of the inde- 
 pendence of Italy against the Spaniards. From that time on- 
 ward the Pontiffs were ever in conflict against Spain or France 
 to save the liberties of Italy and of the Church. The histories 
 of Pius VI. and Pius VII. are too well known to need recital. 
 
 It is therefore too late in the day to go about to persuade men 
 that the Pontiffs were ever opposed to Italian unity, Italian free- 
 dom, Italian independence. These three things have been the 
 aim and the work of the whole line of Popes, dovm to Pius IX 
 Even Mr. Gladstone acknowledges that Pius IX. is " an Italian." * 
 Beyond all doubt there is not one in the long line I have quoted 
 who has loved Italy more than he. There is riot one who had at 
 heart more ardently the unity, freedom, and independence of 
 Italy. His first act was to set free every political prisoner with a 
 full pardon. By that act he showed that he recognized the mis- 
 directed love of country in those who had been seduced into false 
 or unlawful ways of seeking the unity and the liberties of their 
 country. 
 
 In 1847 Pius IX. invited all the Princes of Italy to a League 
 of Customs, by which the principle of Federal Unity would have 
 been established. From this germ the National Unity would have 
 iteadily grown up, without shock or overthrow of right or justice. 
 
 * Eqiostttlation^ p. 49. 
 
lilcl 
 
 fBIJB AND FALSE PR06RS89% 
 
 TEUE AND FALSE PROGRESS. 
 
 1«.K> 
 
 
 W 
 
 Once confederated, there was no identity of interests, no nnity 
 of power, which might not have ;rrown solid and mature. Tins 
 ana the Sapreuie Council for the Government of the Pontifical 
 State are proof enough of his de«ire for Italian onityj and of the 
 far-reaching foresight with which he aimed at the elevation of 
 Italy. And as for Italian independence, let the following letter, 
 written by himself to the Emperor of Austria on the 2d of May, 
 1849, wliee :— 
 
 ** Tour Imperial Majesty, this Holy See has been always wont 
 to speak words of peace in the midst of wars that stain the Chris- 
 tian world with blood ; and in oitr Allocution of the 29th of last 
 month, while we declared that our paternal heart shrunk from de- 
 claring war, we expressly declared our ardent desire to restore peace. 
 Let it not be displeasing, therefore, to your Majesty that we turn 
 lo your piety and religion, and exhort you with a father's affection 
 to withdraw your armies from a war which, while it can not re- 
 fonqner to the Empire the hearts of the Lombards and Venetians, 
 ilrsws After it the lamentable series of calamities that ever accom- 
 pany warfare, and are assuredly abhorred and detested by yon. 
 Let it not be displeasing to the generous German people, tliat we 
 invite them to lay aside all hatreds and to tnrn a domination 
 which eonld not be either noble or happy while it rests only on 
 the sword, into the useful relations of friendly neighborhood. 
 Thus we trust that the German nation, honorably proud of its 
 own nationality, will not engage its honor in sanguinary attempts 
 against the Italian nation, but will place it rather in nobly ae- 
 Inowledging it as a sister, as indeed Doth nations are our daugh- 
 ters, and most dear to our heart: thereby mutually withdrawing 
 to dwell each one in its natural boundaries with honorable treaties 
 and the benediction of the Lord. Meanwhile, we pray to the 
 Uiver of all lights and the Author of all good to inspire your 
 Majesty with mlj counsels, and give from our inmost heart to 
 you and Her Majesty the Empress, and to the Imperial family, 
 the Apostolic benediction. 
 
 " Given in Rome at Santa Maria Maggiore, on the thjrd day of 
 May, in the year 1848, the second of our Pontificate. 
 
 Pius PP. IX." 
 
 The following passage, from an impartial observer, will attest 
 what were the intentions and desires of Pius IX. : — 
 
 "The opposition of Austria has been constant and intense from 
 the moment of his election. The spectacle of an Italian Prince, 
 relying for the maintenance of his power on the affectionate re- 
 gard and the national sympathies of his people ; the resolution of 
 the Pope to pnrsue a course of moderate reform, to encourage 
 railroaas, to emancipate the press, to admit laymen to offices in 
 the State, and to purify the law; but, above all, the dignified in- 
 dependence of action manifested by the Court of Rome, have filled 
 the Aiistrians with exasperation and apprehension. There is not 
 the least doubt that the Cabinet of Vienna is eager to grasp at the 
 slightest pretext for an armed intervention south of the Po. If 
 ■neh a pretext do not occur, it is but too probable that it may be 
 created; <tnd any dUtnrbancee calculated to lead to such a result 
 
 would at once betray their insidious origin. Meanwhile, the Pope 
 is menaced in Austrian notes, which have sometimes transgressed 
 the limits of policy and decorum ; and the minor Princes of Italy 
 are terrified by extravagant intimations of hostile designs enter- 
 tained against them by the National Party, headed by the Pope 
 and the House of Savoy, in order to persuade them that their only 
 safeguard is the Austrian army. These intrigues may be thought 
 necessary to the defense of the tottering power of Austria south 
 of the Alps, for every step made in advance by Italy is a step 
 toward the emancipation of the country."* 
 
 But the evil genius of revolution had begun to work. Across 
 the field of the Christian and Catholic traditions of Italy, a chim- 
 erical theory of a Communistic State, a Republic without Chris- 
 tianity, a democracy without King or Pontiff, forced itself. 
 
 Mazzini had been crying for yearR, " The Papacy is extinct, 
 Catholicism is a corpse, and the Pope knows this. . . . Read 
 the Evangelical Letter."! He had taught Youn^ Italy the three 
 degrees, of Guerrilla Bands, Insurrection, Revolution. J: The mine 
 was charged and the fuse already lighted. This widespread 
 Secret Association covered the face of Italy. What followed all 
 men know: the murder of Rossi, the siege of the Quirinal Pal- 
 ace, the wreck of all authority, the Socialist Revolution, the Ro- 
 man Republic, impunity of sacrilege, and a reign of terror. 
 
 Now let us suppose that in the period of our history, when the 
 unity of the English people was gradually consolidating, some 
 organized Apostleship of Socialism had begun to whisper* in pri- 
 vate and to preach in public such doctrines of conspiracy as these, 
 and to teach that the people could never be free so long as King 
 or Priest existed; that aU monarchical power and ecclesiastical 
 authority were enemies of the public weal ; that the overthrow 
 of the Monarchy and the extinction of the Church were the 
 only remedies of present evils, the only means of future progress. 
 Such a foreign element of discord, mistrust, conspiracy would 
 have divided the hearts, intellects, and wills of the people of 
 England, and rendered its unificgLtion impossible. The unity of 
 religion in faith and worship, the unity of the Spiritual authority 
 which spoke to the reason and the will of men, was then, as it is 
 at this hour, the only principle of unity. Without this, legisla- 
 tion is merely mechanical; a dynamic power is wanted to bind 
 men into one people. Our forefathers had it, and the English 
 Monarchy of a thousand years is its fruit. The Italians have it 
 at this hour in great vividness ; but Philosophers and Doc- 
 trinaires, Conspirators and Communists, are perverting the intel- 
 lect and dividing the wills of the rising men of Italy. If such a 
 conspiracy had crossed our early unification, we should have been, 
 
 ♦ Time», March 28, 1847. . 
 
 t Life and WrUirigs of Mazzini, vol. i. p. 248. 
 
 tjSid. p. 108, and Appendix, 1864. 
 
i 
 
 4. 
 
 200 
 
 TIITB A3m FALSI PS00RE88. 
 
 MOTIVE OF THE DEFIXITIOS. 
 
 205 
 
 quent speech, the other day, that a people which breaks with its 
 past is doomed to division and to instability. The rupture of 
 Franc© with its ancient traditionn in 1789 bus generated the brood 
 of political parties, which, from month to month, thwart and de- 
 feat each other's action, like palsied limbs. If Italy should break 
 with its past : if it should forget the labors, and sufferings, and 
 dangers which united its Pontiffs and its people in the wars of 
 its independence, freedom, and unity ; if it should forget the con- 
 Merations wrought bv the Pontiflfe, by which they made all the 
 iwisions of Italy work together for the liberties of the whole 
 Peninsuk, from the Alps to its foot— then, indeed, I should despair 
 of its future. It could have no other in store than a chronic war- 
 lire of parties, and the final sway of some successful soldier. 
 
 Of the population of 26,000,000 Italians not three millions have 
 launched themsehes in the revolution of the last twenty years. 
 The great bulk of the people are, as they have always been, Chris- 
 tian, Catholic, and loyal. The Electoral body who have votes to 
 return the Italian Parliament do not exceed in number some 
 half million- Of these hardly one-half record their vote. The 
 Italian Deputies are, therefore, chosen by one-lmndredth part of 
 the population. The whole Chamber is, therefore, revolutionary, 
 and may be divided into two parties — the moderate revolution 
 and the eitreme revolution. The Catholic voters abstain from all 
 participation in such a state. They are not revolutionists, 
 either extreme or moderate. They could elect no denuty but 
 one of their own principles ; and no such deputy could sit, be- 
 eaiise to take his place he must bind himself by oath to the exist- 
 ing state of things, including, therefore, the violation of the sov- 
 ereignty of the Pontiff. More than this, the existing state of the 
 law nas invaded the liberties and jurisdiction of the Church. It 
 has abolished religious orders and institutions, it has harshly 
 turned out their inmates upon a pittance, which, if paid, would 
 not suffice for food. It has confiscated property, seized upon col- 
 lege, abolished theology from the universities, and the Coristian 
 doetrine from schools. And a^l this, be it remembered, not to 
 meet the distracted state of a people who have lost their religious 
 unity, and must be provided with civil marriage and secular edu- 
 cation, but in the midst of a population absolutely and universally 
 Catholic. This, and not what Mr. Gladstone, with a strange want 
 of accuracy, supposes, is what the^ Syllabus condemns. It 
 nowhere condemns the civil policy which is necessary for a peo- 
 
 Ile hopelessly divided in religion. For us this may be a necessity, 
 n Italy it is a doctrine of the Doctrinaires. To force upon the 
 united people of Italy that which is necessary for the divided 
 
 Cple of England is a senseless legislation, and a mischievous 
 aking with the glorious past of Italy. I do not now stay to 
 fiwtll upon the unpatriotic and un-Italian agitation of men who 
 for twenty-five years have threatened Pius IX. with violence, an'd 
 assailed him as the Yampire, the Canker, the Gangrene of Italy. 
 Such men, from Aspromonte to this day, have been the chief 
 Mnderance to the unification and pacification of Italy. And those 
 wlio in this country have encouraged and abetted those agita- 
 
 these acts the Pontiff may be subject to error. In one and one 
 only capacity he is exempt from error; that is, when, as teacher 
 of the whole Church, he teaches the whole Church in things of 
 faith and morals. 
 
 "Our Lord declared 'Super Cathedram Moysi sederunt Scribae 
 et Pharisaei — the Scribes and Pharisees have sat in the chair of 
 Moses.' The seat or cathedra of Moses signifies the authority 
 and the doctrine of Moses; the cathedra Petri is in like manner 
 the authority and doctrine of Peter. The former was binding by 
 Divine command, and under pain of sin, upon the people of God 
 under the Old Law ; the latter is binding by Divine command, 
 and under pain of sin, upon the people of God under the New. 
 
 " I need not here draw out the traditional use of the term ca- 
 thedra Petri, which in St. Cyprian, St. Optatus, and St. Augus- 
 tine, is employed as synonymous with the successor of Peter, and 
 is used to express the center and test of Catholic unity. Ex ca- 
 thedra is therefore equivalent to ex cathedra Petri, and distin- 
 guishes those acts of the successors of Peter which are done as 
 supreme teacher of the whole Church. 
 
 .• The value of this phrase is great, inasmuch as it excludes 
 all cavil and equivocation as to the acts of the Pontiff in any 
 other capacity than that of supreme Doctor of all Christians, 
 and in any other subject-matter than the matters of faith and 
 
 morals. 
 
 " II. Secondly, the definition limits the range, or, to speak ex- 
 actly, the object of Infallibilitv, to the doctrine of faith and mor- 
 als. It excludes, therefore, all other matter whatsoever. 
 
 " The great commission or charter of the Church is, in the 
 words of our Lord, 'Go ye therefore and teach all nations .... 
 teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded 
 you ; and behold I am with you all days, even to the consumma- 
 tion of the world.* * 
 
 " In these words are contained five points : 
 
 *' First, the perpetuity and universality of the mission of the 
 Church as the teacher of mankind. 
 
 *' Secondly, the deposit of the Truth and of the Command- 
 ments, that is, of the Divine Faith and Law intrusted to the 
 
 Church. , . . ' - - 
 
 " Thirdly, the office of the Church, arthe sole interpreter of the 
 
 Faith and of the Law. ..... ... 
 
 ••Fourthly, that it has the sole Divine jurisdiction existing 
 upon earth,* in matters of salvation, over the reason and the will 
 of man. 
 
 as doctor, some as pope; that is, as head and foundation of the 
 Church • and it is only to these (last-named) actions that we attribute 
 the gift of Infallibility. The others we leave to his human condi- 
 tion. As, then, not every action of the Pope ispapal so not every 
 action of the Pope enjoys the papal privilege. This, therefore is to 
 act as Pontiff, and to speak ex cathedra which is not within the 
 competency of any (other) doctor or bishop: '-Regale Sacerdotium, Ub. 
 
 iii. sec. 1. 
 *St. Matt, xxviii. 19,20. 
 
soo 
 
 rtmm and falsb pboorsss. 
 
 MOTIVE OF THE DEFINITION: 
 
 205 
 
 'till 
 
 liuenl aiMeel), the other day, that a people which hreaks with its 
 ptst is doomed to division and to instability. The rupture of 
 IVanc© with its ancient traditionf* in 1789 has generated the brood 
 of political parties, which, from month to month, thwart and de- 
 feat each other's action, like palsied limbs. If Italy shonld break 
 with its past : if it should forg:et the labors, and sufferings, and 
 iiiiiffers which united its Pontiffs and its people in the wars of 
 its iiiiwpeiidence, freedom, and unity ; if it should forget the con- 
 fedemtfons wrought bv the Pontife, by which they made all the 
 diTisions of Italy work together for the liberties of the whole 
 Peninsula, from the Alps to its foot — then, indeed, I should despair 
 of its future. It could have no other in store than a chronic war- 
 im ©f parties, and the final swav of some successful soldier. 
 
 Of A© popuktion of 26,000,000 Italians not three millions have 
 launched themselves in the revolution of the last twenty years. 
 The great bulk of the people are, as they have always been. Chris- 
 tian, Catholic, and loyal. The Electoral body who have votes to 
 feturn the Italian Parliament do not exceed in number some 
 half million. Of these hardly one-half record their vote. The 
 Ilaliiui Deputies are, therefore, chosen by one-hundredth part of 
 the population. The whole Chamber is, therefore, revolutionary, 
 and may be divided into two parties — the moderate revolution 
 and the extreme revolution. The Catholic voters abstain from all 
 participation in such a state. They are not revolutionists, 
 either extreme or moderate. They could elect no deputy but 
 one of their own principles ; and no such deputy coula sit, be- 
 cause to take his place he must bind himself by oath to the exist- 
 ing state of things, including, therefore, the violation of the sov- 
 effeknty of the Pontiff. More than this, the existing state of the 
 law nas invaded the liberties and jurisdiction of the Church. It 
 has abolished religious orders and institutions, it has harshly 
 turned out their inmates upon a pittance, which, if paid, would 
 not suffice for food. It has confiscated proi>crty, seized upon col- 
 leges, abolished theology from the universities, and the Christian 
 doetrine from schools. And a)] this, be it remembered, not to 
 meet the distracted state of a people who have lost their religious 
 unity, and must be provided with civil marriage and secular edu- 
 eation, but in the midst of a population absolutely and universally 
 Catholic. This, and not what Mr. Gladstone, with a strange want 
 of accuracy, supposes, is what the Syllabus condemns. It 
 nowhere condemns the civil policy which is necessary for a jjeo- 
 
 fle hopelessly divided in religion. For us this may be a necessity. 
 n Italy it is a doctrine of the Doctrinaires. To force upon the 
 united people of Italy that which is necessary for the divided 
 people of England is a senseless legislation, and a mischievous 
 breaking with the glorious past of Italy. I do not now stay to 
 dwell upon the unpatriotic and un-Italian agitation of men who 
 for twenty-five years have threatened Pius IX. with violence, an'd 
 assailed him as the Vampire, the Canker, the Gangrene of Italy. 
 Such men, from Aspromonte to this day, have been the chief 
 hlnderance to the unification and pacification of Italy. And those 
 who in this country have encouraged and abetted those agita- 
 
 these acts the Pontiff may be subject to error. In one and one 
 only capacity he is exempt from error ; that is, when, as teacher 
 of the whole Church, he teaches the whole Church in things of 
 faith and morals. 
 
 "Our Lord declared 'Super Cathedram Moysi sederunt Scribae 
 et Pharisaei — the Scribes and Pharisees have sat in the chair of 
 Moses.' The seat or cathedra of Moses signifies the authority 
 and the doctrine of Moses; the cathedra Petri is in like manner 
 the authority and doctrine of Peter. The former was binding by 
 Divine command, and under pain of sin, upon the people of God 
 under the Old Law ; the latter is binding by Divine command, 
 and under pain of sin, upon the people of God under the New. 
 
 " I need not here draw out the traditional use of the term ca- 
 thedra Petri, which in St. Cyprian, St. Optatus, and St. Augus- 
 tine, is employed as synonymous with the successor of Peter, and 
 is used to express the center and test of Catholic unity. Ex ca- 
 thedra is therefore equivalent to ex cathedra Petri, and distin- 
 guishes those acts of the successors of Peter which are done as 
 supreme teacher of the whole Church. 
 
 '• The value of this phrase is great, inasmuch as it excludes 
 all cavil and equivocation as to the acts of the Pontiff in any 
 other capacity than that of supreme Doctor of all Christians, 
 and in any other subject-matter than the matters of faith and 
 
 morals. 
 
 " 11. Secondly, the definition limits the range, or, to speak ex- 
 actly, the object of Infallibilitv, to the doctrine of faith and mor- 
 als. It excludes, therefore, all other matter whatsoever. 
 
 " The great commission or charter of the Church is, in the 
 words of our Lord, 'Go ye therefore and teach all nations .... 
 teaching them to observe all things whatsoever 1 have commanded 
 you ; and behold 1 am with you all days, even to the consumma- 
 tion of the world.' * 
 
 " In these words are contained five points : 
 
 *' First, the perpetuity and universality of the mission of the 
 Church as the teacher of mankind. 
 
 ** Secondly, the deposit of the Truth and of the Command- 
 ments, that is, of the Divine Faith and Law intrusted to the 
 
 Church. . 
 
 " Thirdly, the office of the Church, ar the sole interpreter of the 
 
 Faith and of the Law. , ^. . . . ^. .. 
 
 "Fourthly, that it has the sole Divine jurisdiction existing 
 upon earth, in matters of salvation, over the reason and the will 
 01 man. 
 
 as doctor, some as pope; that is, as head and foundation of the 
 Church • and it is only to these (last-named) actions that we attribute 
 the gift'of Infallibility. The others we leave to his human condi- 
 tion. As, then, not every action of the Pope is papal so not every 
 action of the Pope enjoys the papal privilege. Jhis, therefore is to 
 act as Pontiff, and to speak ex cathedra which is not within the 
 competency of any (other) doctor or bishop."-i2fl^a/6 Sacerdotium, lib. 
 
 iii. sec. 1. 
 *St. Matt, xxviii. 19,20. 
 
206 
 
 MCyriVB OF THE DEFISITIOX. 
 
 I 
 
 " Fifthly, tlmt in the discharge of this office, oar Lord is with 
 Hii Church always, and to the conHummation of the world. 
 
 "The doctrine of faith and the doctrine of morals are here 
 explicitly described. The Church is infallible in this deposit of 
 
 WTelation. ■ « i_ i 
 
 '• And in thia deposit are truths and morals both of the natural 
 find of the supernatural order; for the religious truths and mor- 
 als of the natural older are taken up into the revelation of the 
 Older of grace, and form a part of the object of Infallibility, 
 
 '•The phrase, then, 'faith and morals' signifies the whole rev- 
 clalion of faith ; the whole way of salvation through faith ; or the 
 whole superafttunil order, with all that is essential to the sancti- 
 fication and salvation of man through Jesus Christ 
 
 •* Thii formula is variously expressed by the Church and by 
 iiMlociaiis; but it always means one and the same thing. 
 
 "The Fourteenth Ecumenical Council of Lyons m 1274 savs, 
 •If any questions arise concerning faith, they are to be decided 
 
 by the Roman Pontiff.' * i^ i- • u 
 
 "The Council of Trent uses the formula 'In things of faith 
 tind morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, f 
 "The object of Infallibility, therefore, is the whole revealed 
 word of God; and all that is so in contact with revealed truth, 
 that without treating of it the Word of God could not be yarded, 
 eipounded. and defended. As, for instance, in declaring the 
 Caiion, and authenticity, and true interpretation of Holy Bcrip- 
 
 tupe, and the like. . 
 
 ••Further, it is clear that the Church has an infallible cuidance, 
 mot only in all matters that are revealed, but also in all matters 
 which are opposed to revelation. For the Church could not dis- 
 ©harg e its office as the Teacher of all nations, unless it were able 
 with infallible certainty to proscribe doctrines at variance with 
 
 the Word of God. ,,..,. ^ i. r nr 
 
 "From this, again, it follows that the direcl object of Infalli- 
 bility is the Revelation, or Word, of God; the indirect object is 
 whutsoever is necessary for its exposition or defense, and whatso- 
 mm is eontrariant to the Word ol God, that is, to faith and mo^ 
 ala. The Church, having a divine office to condemn errors m 
 faith and morals, has therefore an infallible assistance in discern- 
 ing and proscribing false philosophies and false science. | . . . 
 "I will not here attempt to enumerate the subject matters 
 which fall within the limits of the Infallibility of the Church. 
 It belongs to the Church alone to determine the limits of its own 
 
 nertinentiiiui,"— Sess. iv. Decret de Edit d Urn Sac, Lib. 
 
 I'^Further, the Church, which, together with the A postohc office 
 ofteaching, has recefved a charjje to guard the deiwsit of faith, de- 
 rives from God the right and tlie duty of prosiTibing false snence, 
 lest any should be deceived by philosc)phy and ^ain deccj^t (Colos^ 
 ii. gyComMiMkn mi the Catholic FaUh, chap. iv. "Of Faith and 
 Reason." 
 
 MOTIVE OP THE DEFIXITIOX. 
 
 207 
 
 Infallibility. Hitherto it has not done so except by its acts, and 
 from the practice of the Church we may infer to what matter its 
 infallible discernment extends. It is enough for the present to 
 show two things : — 
 
 ••Firstly, that the Infallibility of the Church extends, as wo 
 have seen, directly to the whole matter of revealed truth, and in- 
 directly to all truths which, though not revealed, are in such con- 
 tact with revelation that the deposit of faith and morals can not 
 be guarded, expounded, and defended without an infallible dis- 
 cernment of such unrevealed truths. 
 
 "Secondly, that this extension of the Infallibility of the 
 Church is, by the unanimous teaching of all theologians, at least 
 theologically certain; and, in the judgment of the majority of 
 theologians, certain by the certainty of faith. 
 
 "Such is the traditional doctrine respecting the Infallibili^ of 
 the Church in faith and morals. By the definition of the Vati- 
 can Council, what is traditionally believed by all the faithful in 
 respect to the Church is expressly declared of the Roman Pon- 
 tiff. But the definition of the extent of that Infallibility, and of 
 the certainty on which it rests, in matters not revealed, has not 
 been treated as yet, but is left for the second part of the Schema 
 de Ecclesia. 
 
 " Again, the definition declares the efficient cause of Infalli- 
 bility to be a Divine assistance promised to Peter and in Peter to 
 his successors 
 
 "The explicit promise is that of our Divine Lord to Peter, 'I 
 have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not; and thou, being once 
 converted, confirm thy brethren.' * 
 
 "The implicit promise is in the words, *0n this rock I will 
 build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against 
 
 >^'t . • • 
 
 " The Divine assistance is therefore a charisma, a grace of the 
 
 supernatural order, attached to the Primacy of Peter, which is 
 
 perpetual in his successors. 
 
 " I need hardly point out that between the charisma, or gratia 
 gratis data, of InMlibility and the idea of impeccability there is 
 no connection. I should not so much as notice it, if some had 
 not strangely obscured the subject by introducing this confusion. 
 I should have thought that the gift of prophecy in Balaam and 
 Caiaphas, to say nothing of the powers of the priesthood, which 
 are the same in good and bad alike, would have been enough to 
 make such confusion impossible. 
 
 "The preface to the Definition carefully lays down that Infalli- 
 bility is not inspiration. 
 
 "The Divine assistance by which the Pontiff are guarded from 
 error, when as Pontiffs they teach in matters of faith and morals, 
 contains no new revelation. Inspiration contained, not only as- 
 sistance in writing, but sometimes the suggestion of truths not 
 otherwise known. The Pontiffs are witnesses, teachers, and 
 judges of the revelation already given to the Church; and in 
 
 ♦St. Luke xxii. 32. 
 
 fSt. Matt. xvi. 18. 
 
208 
 
 MOTITE OF TEE DBFIXITIOK. 
 
 giiArding, ©ipounding, and defenditipt that revelation, their wit- 
 ness, tetuliini, lud judgment are by Divine assistance preserved 
 foim error.** * 
 
 I wiU now answer Mr. Gladstone's question — ^why the Definition 
 wni made. The Vatican Council, then, defined the Infallibility 
 of the Head of the Church, because, if it had failed to do so, the 
 doctrinal authority of the Church would have been weakened 
 throughout the world. Every motive of worldly i^olicy would 
 have tempted the Coun< i to compromise, and to shrink from de- 
 fining it; but the perei ptory obligations of Divine Truth com- 
 pelled it in defiance of all policy to define it. Necessity was laid 
 upon the Council, and it could not recede. Universal doubt and 
 Bsepticism are pervading men and nations : therefore the Church 
 defined the Infallibility of its Head, which is the confirmation of 
 its own. As a Divine witness, it declared his commission, and 
 the powers given for its exercise. The Vicar of Jesus Christ tes- 
 tiiea to the world, wearied with doubt and sick with religious 
 contentions, that the promise of his Master, " He that heareth 
 you heareth Me,*' lias mot failed. The definition of the Infalli- 
 ble teaching of the Church by its Head affirms that there is still 
 a divine certainty of faith upon earth ; and that, as God is the 
 sole Fountain of all Truth, so the Church is the only channel of 
 its conveyance and custody amon^ men. No other policy prompted 
 the Definition. And even though the combined hostility of Civil 
 Powers, as we now see it, had been heated sevenfold hot before 
 its eyes, the Council would not have swerved from declaring, 
 Hhittier politic or not, the truth delivered to its charge. If I 
 ■peak witSiout hesitation, it is because I am able to speak of that 
 which I saw with my own eyes, and heard with my own ears. 
 
 I hope I shall not violate any confidence which ought to be sa- 
 cred, or any reserve the delicacy of which I fully recognize, in 
 jjoing on to state a fact of which I am able to give personal tes- 
 
 timoiiy* 
 
 One day, during the deliberations of the Council, when the 
 pressure of Diplomatists, and Governments, and journals was at 
 Its highest* the Holy Father said, " I have just been warned that 
 if the Council shall persist in making this definition, the pro- 
 tection of the French' army will be withdrawn." After a pause 
 he added, with great calmness, "As if the unworthy Vicar of 
 Jesus Christ could be swayed by such motives as these." I can 
 with perfect certainty affirm that "policy" had as little influence 
 on the Council of the Vatican as it iiad on the Council of Nicaea; 
 and that to ascribe the Definition to policy is as strange an aber- 
 ration of judgment as to ascribe to the Definition the occupation 
 of Rome, or the Franco-German war to the Jesuits and to the 
 Pope. When men say these things, can they believe them? 
 
 It needs but little of the historic spirit to perceive that if the 
 Vatican Council, for such motives as these, ought to have ab- 
 stained from defining the Infallibility of the Head of the Chris- 
 tian Church, the Council of Nicaea ought also to have abstained 
 
 *Ftin Prmkffium, part iii. pp. 56-60, iS 78, 84. (Longmans, 1870.) 
 
 MOTIVE OF THE DEFIXITIOX. 
 
 209 
 
 from defining the Homoomion. There vras violence all round 
 about it. There was the certainty of a schism. After the Coun- 
 cil eighty Bishops apostatized. They appealed, as all heretics 
 ever do, to the Civil Powers. The Arian Schism was formed; it 
 was protected by Emperor after Emperor. Arianism became a 
 State tool against the Catholic Church. It infected Constantino- 
 ple ; it spread into Italy and Spain ; it lasted for centuries. But 
 where is it now? And where now is the Creed of Nicaea? The 
 Hombousion is at this day in the heart of the whole Church 
 throughout the world. So will it be with the Council of the Vat- 
 ican. What the Council of Florence implicitly declared, and the 
 Council of Trent assumed as of faith, that the Council of the Vat- 
 ican explicitly defined. It is very true that since the Council of 
 Constance, that is, since the great schism of the West, when the 
 Civil powers of Europe, for a time, shook the visible unity of the 
 Church bv endeavoring to lessen the authority of its Head, the 
 power of "the Roman Pontiff has steadily consolidated itself in 
 the intellect and the will of the Church. What was believed from 
 the beginning has been now forced into explicit declaration. But 
 while the Church has thus been more and more defining its faith 
 with a Divine precision, the world has wandered off" farther and 
 farther into the wilderness of unbelief The Council of Trent 
 defined the particular doctrines denied by Luther's Reformation. 
 But it did not deal with the master principle on which it rested. 
 The chief character of the sixteenth century was the denial of 
 the Divine authority of the Church, secured to it in virtue of a 
 perpetual assistance of the Spirit of Truth. Three hundred 
 years have unfolded the consequences of this denial. It is 
 nearly complete in the rationalism and infidelity of Germany. 
 The "Centuria praerogativa" has a mournful privilege of prece- 
 dence in the Comitia of unbelievers. It has run its course, too, 
 in Switzerland ; and I must add, with sadness, it is running its 
 course in the widespread doubt which is undermining the Chris- 
 tianity of England. Day after day I hear the words, "I wish I 
 knew what to believe, and why to believe any thing: and this 
 from some of the noblest and most masculine natures, who re- 
 coil from the incoherence and contradiction of teachers who 
 §ainsay one another. But here is a subject on which I have no 
 esire to enter. If I were asked to say what is the chief intel- 
 lectual malady of England and of the world at this day, I should 
 say, ubiquitous, universal doubt, an uncertainty which came in 
 like a flood after the rejection of the Divine certainty of Faith. 
 This uncertainty has already led multitudes to an entire rejection 
 of Christianity; and they have not rested even in Deism. They 
 have gone on to the rejection even of natural religion. Thev 
 have no certainty that they have a conscience, or a will, or a soul, 
 or a law of morality, or that there is a God. Three hundred years 
 hence, when men look back upon the Council of the Vatican, as they 
 now look back upon the Council of Trent— I will say even thirty 
 years hence, when the noise and dust of the present conflict is 
 laid— they who have faith left in them will recognize the Divine 
 guidance under which the Council of tlie Vatican declared the exist- 
 
005CLCSI0>'. 
 
 eiicc of Ood. with all the truths radiating from it. as resting upon 
 the witness of the visible world; and also the Divme certainty of 
 the Faith, as resting upon the witness of the Visible Chureh and 
 inding its perpetofi and infallible expression in the voice of ita 
 
 But It irnow more than time to Rum up what 1 hope has been 
 
 •tffiiSfrnTer to the charge that the Vatican Council haa 
 made it impossible for Catholics to render a loyal ciyil allegiance, 
 k that the Vatican Council has not touched our ciVil allegiance at 
 dl; that the laws which govern our civil ^^^f Jff^f ?,^^ ^.^^ 
 the revelation of Christianity, and are regulated by t^e Dmne 
 constitution of the Church and the immutable duties of «ajural 
 nmrality. We were bound by all these obligations before the 
 Valiean Council eiisted. They are of Dmne institution, and are 
 beyond all change, being in themselves «iic^.*"g^*^^«- /,.*'?7^ 
 Zwn, I hope, tfat in the conflicts of the Civil Powers with the 
 Church, the causes have arisen, not from acts of tl»« Church 
 |>ut from such acts as the Constitutions ^^ Clarendon the claim 
 of Investitures, the creation of Royal Courts of final appeal, and 
 the like; that these invasions of the Spmt««a doma v^^^^^ 
 been from the attempts of Government to subject the Church to 
 their own jurisdiction; and now more than «Y«[;^;f^J^,/|^^:^«^^ 
 sal and simultaneous conspiracy against it. A leader of this con 
 BBiracy said the other day. "The net is now drawn so close about 
 S^Ch^rch of Rome that'if it escape *?i« ^°^« ^^^^ ^^^^^^^ 
 Im Bivine " If God grant him hfe, I have hope of his conyer- 
 Sfen For. that the Church of Rome will escape out of the net is 
 Tftain, and that for two reasons: first, for the same reason why 
 its Divine Head rose again from the grave-' ' it was not po«f.ib e that 
 He should be holden by it; -and next, because the Civ 1 Gov- 
 ernments, that are now conspiring against it are Preparing lor 
 their own dissolution. Finalfy . I Save £iven the true and evident 
 Lason why, when some six hundred BiSiops from ^e end^^^ 
 Omrch were gathered together, tliey defined the Infallibility oi 
 their Head—" Visum est Bpiriiui Sancto ei nobu. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 And now there only remains for me the hardest and saddest 
 part of the task, whicll has not been sought by me. but has been 
 fc^ed upon me. A few months ago I could^ not have believed 
 that I should have ever written these pages, I have never written 
 liny with more pain, and none of them have cost me so much as 
 that which 1 am about to write. .„i.:^f 
 
 Thus Ikr I have endeavored to confine mvself »« *he subj^^ 
 matter of Mr. Gladstone's pamphlet; but before I c>id,^^*«f* 
 bound by an imperative duty to lay before him, in behalf of his 
 
 ♦ Acts ii. 21. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 211 
 
 Catholic fellow-countrymen, the nature of the act which he has 
 done. 
 
 He ha« not only invited, but instigated Catholics to rise against 
 the Divine authority of the Catholic Church. He has endeavored 
 to create divisions among them. If Mr. Gladstone does not be- 
 lieve the authority of the Catholic Church to be Divine, he knows 
 that they do. 
 
 If he thinks such a rising to be "moral and mental freedom," 
 he knows that they believe it to be what his own Litany calls 
 •' schism, heresy, and deadly sin." If he believes religious separa- 
 tions to be lawful, he knows that thev believe them to be violations 
 of the Divine law. I am compellecl therefore to say that this is 
 at least an act of signal rashness. 
 
 No man has watched Mr. Gladstone's career as a statesman 
 with a more generous and disinterested good-will than I have. 
 No one has more gladly appreciated his gifts; no one has more 
 equitably interpreted certain acts of his political life, nor has 
 hailed his successes with greater joy. But when he casts off the 
 character of a statesman, for which he has shown so great ca- 
 
 Eacity. to play the Canonist and Theologian, for which he has 
 ere shown so little, and that with the intent of sowing discord 
 and animosities among six millions of his fellow-countrymen — 
 and, I must moreover add, with an indulgence of unchastened 
 language rarely to be equalled — I feel bound to say that he has 
 been betrayed into an act for which 1 can find no adequate ex- 
 cuse. I must tell him that if he would incline the Catholics of 
 the Empire to accept the ministries of his compassion, he must 
 first purify his style both of writing and of thinking. Catholics 
 are not to be convinced or persuaded by such phrases as " the 
 present perilous Pontificate; "the Papal chair, its aiders and 
 abettors;" "the great hierarchic power and those who have 
 egged it on ; " " the present degradation of the Episcopal order; " . 
 "the subserviency or pliability of the Council; " "hideous mum- 
 mies ; " " head-quarters ; " " the follies of Ecclesiastical power ; " 
 "foreign arrogance;" "the myrmidons of the Apostolic Cham- 
 ber;" "the foreign influence of a caste." I transcribe these 
 words from his pages with repugnance ; not, indeed, for our sake 
 against whom they are leveled, but for the statesman who has 
 thought them fitting. Mr. Gladstone can do many things ; but 
 he can not do all things. He has a strong hand j but there is a 
 bow which he can not bend. He has here tried his hand at a 
 task for which, without something more than mere literarv knowl- 
 edge, even his varied gifts will not suffice. This Expostulation is, 
 as I have already said, an act out of all harmony and proportion 
 with a great statesman's life. 
 
 I have written these words with a painful constraint; but, cost 
 what it may, duty must be done, and I believe it to be my duty to 
 record this judgment, in behalf of the Catholics of this country, 
 on an act unjust in itself, and therefore not only barren of all 
 good results, but charged with gra\^e public dancers. 
 
 But, I can not break off with a note so cheerless. If this Ex- 
 postulation has cast down many hopes both of a public and pri- 
 
i 
 
 212 
 
 (kJnclusion. 
 
 APraKDlOES. 
 
 213 
 
 mk kind, we can not altogether remt ite publication, ^f ««ch 
 mistruits and misconceptions existed in the minds of our fellow- 
 Biibjccts the sooner and the more openly they were made public 
 the better. We are not content to be ^^l^^^*;;^ *^ «"7«^,^^^^^^ 
 
 frous persons, or to be set at large upon good behavior. W e tnanK 
 r. GlSstone for gaining us the liearing which we have Jiad 
 before the public justice of our country; and we are confident 
 that his impeachment will be withdrawn. His own mind is too 
 large, too just, and too upright to refuse to acknowledge an error 
 when he sees that he has Seen misled.^ It i\^^^ ''j^'^J't 
 too accurate not to perceive that such is no7,*J« «^*- * !J® l^ 
 this the augury of a happier and more peaceful future than if this 
 momentiry conflict hai never arisen. We shall all understand 
 each other better. Our civil and religious peace at home wiU be 
 
 firmer by this trial. ... xi.* x 
 
 If the Veat German Empire shall only learn in time, thirteen 
 millions of contented Catholic subiects, reconciled as they siU 
 may be by a return of just laws, will give a support to its unity 
 
 which nothing can shake. ^„*:^« »t • 
 
 If ItJily shall only come to see that the " Roman question is. 
 and forever will be, a source of weakness, contention, and dan- 
 ger to its welfare; and. seeing this, shall solve it peacefuUy, as 
 ftalv alone can do. by undoing its un-Catholic and therefore un- 
 Italian policy, then its unity and independence will be aecured 
 by the spontaneous cooperation of a united people, gatiiered 
 abound tte center of all its Christian glories. S«ch a solution 
 would then be consecrated by the highest sanctions of its faith. 
 If wise counsels prevail, and wise friends of Italy shall gain its 
 ear. it may be agpiin what once it was, the foremost people in 
 
 the Christian world. , , . , « . !*..«., 
 
 And, lastly, for ourselves, our world-wide Empire can not torn 
 back upon its path without disintegration. It is bound together. 
 Bol by material force, but by the moral bond of lust laws and 
 m gM consent of a free people. But justice and freedom can 
 iiotl>e put asunder. They flow from one source ; they can bo 
 kept pure only by the same stream. They have <^^^^ ^^;^Jl^^.^^ 
 from our Christfanity. Divided as we are^ 5« ^'J*/ J.^'"*"^^ 
 people stitt By religious conflict our Christianity will wa^te 
 
 Way m a moth fretting a garment ?y. '^'*«*T KPr^!;^tnlnv 
 is true, and wise, and just, and Christian, will be perpetually 
 multiplied, binding indisaolubly in one all men and all races of 
 our Imperial Commonwealth, 
 
 appe:ndioes. 
 
 APPENDIX A. 
 Inkocbntius III. PR^r.ATis PER Feanciam oonstitutis. a. d. 1200. 
 
 NovitlUe, qui nihil ignorat: €<«•»/'•«• 
 
 Non putet aliquis, quod jurisdictionem lUustris Regis Franco- 
 rum perturbare, aut minuere intendamus, cum ipse jurisdictionem 
 nostram nee velit, nee debeat impedire. Sed cum Dominus dicat 
 in Evancelio, " Si pereaverit in te frater tuus, vade et corripe eum 
 inter teet ipsum solum: si te audierit, lucratus ens fratrem 
 tuum ; si te non audierit, adhibe tecum unum vel duos, ut in ore 
 duorum vel trium testium stet omne verbum. Quod si te non au- 
 dierit die Ecclesiae: si autem Ecclesiam non audierit, sit tibe si- 
 cut ethnicus ct publicanus." * Et Rex Angliae^ sit paratus suf- 
 ficienter ostendere, quod Rex Francorum peccat in ipsim, et 
 ipse circa eum in correctione processit secundum re^ulam Evan- 
 gelioam, et tandem quia nullo modo profecit, dixit Hicclesias. 
 Quomodo nos, qui sumus ad regimen universalis Ecclesiae superna 
 dispositione vocati. mandatum divinum possumus non exaudire, ut 
 non procedamua secundum formam ipsius? Nisi forsitan ipse 
 coram nobis, vel Legato nostro, sufficientem in contrarium 
 rationem ostendat. Non enim intendimus judtcare defeudo, cu- 
 ius ad ipsum special judicium : nisi forte jure communi per 
 speciale privilegium, vel contrariam consuetudinem aliquid sit 
 detractum : sed decernere de peccato, cujus ad nos pertmei sine 
 dubitatione censura, quam in quemlibef exercere possumus et de- 
 Ifctnus . . . Cum enim non humanae constitutioni, sed 
 
 divin» potius innitamur, quia potestas nostra non est ex hominc, 
 Bed ex Deo. nullus qui sit sanae mentis ignorat, qum ad officium 
 nostrum spectet de quocunque mortali peccato corripere quem- 
 libct Christianum : et si correctionem contempserit, per distric- 
 tionem ecclesiasticam coercere. Sed forsan dicetur, quod aliter 
 
 BONIFACIUS VIII., AD PBEPBTDA31 RKI MeMORIAM. A. D. 1302. 
 
 Unam Sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam et ipsam Apostolicam ur- 
 eente fide credere cogimur et tenere. Nosque hanc hrmiter cred- 
 imus et simpliciter confitemur: extra quam nee salus est, nee re- 
 missio peccitorum, Sponso in Canticis proclamante. "Una est co- 
 
 *Matt. xviii. 15-17. 
 
 |-Deut. i. 17. 
 
214 
 
 AJTinuf'l/IUBB* 
 
 M 
 
 lumba mea, pcrfecta mea: mia est matri sum, electa gen itrici 
 •u»:"* quae anum corpus uiYstioum rcpraesentat, cojus caput 
 Cliristue, Christ! vero Deus. id ^ua unus Dominus, una fides, 
 uniun liaptisiiia.t Una nempe fuit Diluvii tempore area Noe, 
 unaiu Ecclesiam prsefigurans. quo) in uno cubito consammata,! 
 UEiim, Noe videlicet, gubcrnatorem habuit et rectorem, extra 
 
 Stam omnis subsistentia super terrain legimus fuisse deleta. 
 ane autem veneramur et umoam; dicente Domino in Propheta, 
 ** Erue a framea, Deus, animam meam et de manu canis unicam 
 moam; " { pro anima enim, id est, pro seipso capite simul oravit 
 el corpore: quod corpus unicam scilicet Ecclesiam nominavit, 
 propter sfODsii fi<^ei, sacramentorum et charitatis Ecclesiis uni- 
 telein. £^ est tunica ilia Domini incon8utilis,|| quse scissa non 
 full sed sorte provenii Igitur EccIesisB unius et unicse unum 
 corpus, unum caput, non duo capita quasi monstrum, Christus 
 videlicet^ et Christi vicarius Petrus Petrique successor; dicente 
 Domino ipsi Petro, "Pasce oves meas,"1[ "meas," inquit, et ge- 
 neraliler non singulariter has vel illas, per quod cpmmisisse sibi 
 intelligitur universas. Sive ergo Graeci, sivi alii se dicant Petro 
 dusque suecessoribus non esse commissos, fateantur necesse se 
 de ovibus Christi non esse; dicente Domino in Joanne "unum 
 oVile et unicum essee pastorem."** In hac ejusque potestate 
 duos mm gladios, spiritualem videlicet et temporalem, Evangeli- 
 cis dictii instruimur. Nam dicentibus Apostolis, "Ecce gladii 
 duo hic,"tt ^^ Ecclesia scilicet, cum Apostoli loquerentur, non 
 respondit Dominus nimis esse sed satis. Certe qui in potestate 
 Petri temporalem gladium esse negat, male verbum attendit dom- 
 ini proferentis, " Con verte gladium tuum in vaginam." I]: Uter- 
 fue ergo est in potestate Ecclesiae, spiritualis scilicet gladius et 
 insleriaHs. Sed is quidem pro Ecclesia, ille vero ab Ecclesia ex- 
 ercendus. lUe sacerdotis, is manu rcgum et militum, sed ad nu- 
 tum et patientiam sacerdotis. Oportet autem gladium esse sub 
 gladio et temporalem auctoritatem spirituali subjici potestati: 
 nam cum dicat Apostolus, " Non est potestas nisi a Deo, quse au- 
 tem sunt a Deoordinata sunt; " §§ non autem ordinata essent, nisi 
 gladius esset sub gladio, et tanquam inferior reduceretur per 
 iilium in suprema. Nam secundum beatum Dionjsium, lex di- 
 Ymitatis est, infirma per media in suprema reduci. Non ergo se- 
 cundum ordinem universi omnia sB^ue ac immediate, sed infima 
 per media el inferiora per supenora ad ordinem reducuntur. 
 Bpiriluiaem autem et dignitate et nobilitate terrenam quamlibet 
 prtMeilere potestatem, oportet tanto clarius nos fateri quanto 
 gpiriluiillii temporalia antecellunt. Quod etiam ex decimarum 
 datione, et benedictione, et sanctificatione, ex ipsius potestatis 
 acceptione, ex ipsaram rerum ^bernatione claris oculis intuo- 
 niur. Nam veritate testante, spiritualis potestas terrenam potes- 
 latem instituere habet et judicare, si bona non fuerit, sic ae Eo- 
 
 APPEKDICB5. 
 
 215 
 
 *Oant- Tl. 8. 
 
 IBuilm zxi. 21. 
 *Joann. x. 16. 
 1} Bom. ziii, 1. 
 
 tEph. IV. 6- 
 
 I Joann. xix. 38, 24. 
 
 ft Luc. xxii. 38. 
 
 t Oen. vi. 16. 
 f Joann. xxL 17. 
 tl Matt xxvi. 52. 
 
 clesia et ecclesiastica potestate verificatur vaticinium Hieremica3 : 
 " Ecce constitui te hodie super gentes et regna," * et csetera quae 
 sequntur. Ergo si deviat terrena potestas, judicabitur a potes- 
 tate spirituali, sed si deviat spiritualis minor a suo superiori : si 
 vero suprema, a solo Deo, non ab homine poterit judicari, tes- 
 tante Apostolo, *' Spiritualis homo judicat omnia, ipse autem a 
 nemine judicatur." f Est autem haec auctoritas, etsi data sit 
 homini et exerceatur per hominem, non humana, sed potius di- 
 vina, ore divino Petro aata, sibique suisque suecessoribus in ipso, 
 quem confessus fuit petra firmata, dicentie' Domino ipsi Petro, 
 *' Quodcunque ligaveris," | etc. Quicuncjue igitur huic potestati 
 a Deo sic ordinatae resistit, Dei ordinationi re8i8tit,§ nisi duo si- 
 cut Man ichaaus fingat esse principia : quod falsum et hasreticum 
 judicamus : quia testante Moyse, non m principiis, sed in prin- 
 cipio coelum Deus creavit et terram.|| Porro subesse Romano' 
 Pontifici omni humanas creaturas declaramus, dicimus, definimus 
 et pronunciamus omnio esse de necessitate salutis. 
 
 ^tum Laterani xiv kal. Decembris, pontificatus nostri anno 
 octavo. 
 
 Corpus Juris Canonici. Extrav. Commun. lib. i. 
 Be Majoritaie et Obediential cap. i. 
 
 Clbmentis v. Diploma, a. d. 1306. 
 
 Clemens Episcopus, etc. Ad perpetuam rei memoriam. 
 
 Meruit carissimi filii nostri Piiilippi regis Francorum illustris 
 sinceras devotionis ad nos et Ecclesiam Komanam integritas, et 
 progenitorum suorum praeclara merita meruerunt, meruit insuper 
 fida regnicolarum pietas, ac devotionis sinceritas, ut tam regnum 
 
 a nam regem favore benevolo prosequamur. Hinc est quod nos 
 icto regi et regno per definitionem sen declarationem bonse me- 
 moriae Bonifacii PP. VIII. praedecessoris nostri, quae incipit 
 Unam nanctam, nullum volumus vel intendimus praejudicium 
 generari. Nee quod per illam rex, regnum, regnicolae praelibati 
 amplius Ecclesiae sint subjecti quam antea existebant. Sed om- 
 nia intelligantur in eodem esse statu quo erant ante definitionem 
 prasfatam, tam quantum ad Ecclesiam quam etiam quod regem et 
 regnum et superius nominatos. 
 
 Datum Lugduni kalendis Februarii, pontificatus nostri anno 
 prime. 
 
 Labbe, Concilia, sub ann. 1305, tom. xiv. p. 1374, 
 
 ed. Ven. 1731. 
 
 ♦Hier. i. 10. 
 I Rom. ziii. 2. 
 
 tl Cor ii. 15. 
 I Oen. L 1. 
 
 I Matt. xvi. 19. 
 
210 
 
 DICES. 
 
 I 
 
 APPENDIX B, 
 
 Mtimd from the Eneyduxd Ldter of Oregory XVI. "Mirari Votf* 
 
 AttguMi 15| 18%^. 
 
 As we have learned that oertain writings spread abroad among 
 tiie people publish doctrines which destroy the loyaltT and sub- 
 aiMon due to princes, and kindle everywhere the torch of civU 
 discord, we have to take especial care that the nations may not 
 be deoeiTed thereby, and led away from the right path. Let all 
 bear in mind, according to the words of the Apostle, that •' there 
 is no power but from God, and those that are ordained of God; 
 therefore he that resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of 
 God, and they that resist purchase to themselves damnation." * 
 
 Wherefore both divine and human laws cry out against those 
 who, by basely plotting civil discord and sedition, abandon their 
 allegiance to their princes and unite to drive them from their 
 ihnines. 
 
 For this reason, to avoid so base a crime, it is a well-known 
 fact that the first Christians, in the midst of nersecutions, ren- 
 dered meritorious service to their Emperors ana to the safety of 
 the Empire. This they showed by the clearest proofs, not only 
 in fulilling with all loyalty and {promptitude all that was com- 
 manded them not contrary to their religion, but by persevering 
 therein even to shedding their blood in battle for them. 
 
 " Christian soldiers," says 8t Augustine, " served an unbeliev- 
 ing Emperor, but when the cause of Christ was in question, 
 they auknowledged only Him who is in Heaven. They distin- 
 giisliod between the Eternal Lord and a temporal lord, and were 
 nevertheless subject to the temporal for the sake of their Eternal 
 Lord." t 
 
 St Maurice, the invincible martyr, the captain of the Theban 
 Legion, had this before his eyes when, as 8t. Eucherius relates, 
 he gave his answer to the Emperor : — " We are your soldiers, O 
 Emperor, but nevertheless, we are free to confess, the servants 
 of God. . . . And now we are not driven into rebellion, even 
 to ame our lives, for here we have arms in our hands, and we do 
 not fight, because we have the will to die rather than to slay." 
 
 This loyalty of the first Christians to their princes is the more 
 ennipicuous if we consider with TertuUian, that Christians at 
 that lime " were not wanting in numbers and strength if they 
 bad wished for open war. We are but of yesterday, and we ar^ 
 found ©very-where among you, in your cities, islands, strong- 
 holds, towns, public places, in your camns, your tribes, your com- 
 panies, in your palaces, your senate, ana your forum. . . . For 
 what warfare should we not have been able and willing, even at 
 mat odds, who so readily offer ourselves to death, if our religion 
 did not oblige us rather to die than to slay ? . . . If we, so 
 larpe a number as wo aro, had broken away from you and gone 
 
 tRom. xiii. 2. fSt August, m Pmdm cxxiv. n. 7, 
 
 ▲PPBNDI0B8. 
 
 217 
 
 to some distant corner of the world, the loss of so many citizens, 
 oven such as we are, would have put your empire to shame, nay, 
 would have punished you by the very loss. Without doubt you 
 would have been daunted in your solitude. . . . You would 
 have asked over whom you were ruling: more enemies would 
 have been left than citizens : but now you have fewer enemies, 
 owing to the number of Christians." * 
 
 These luminous examples of immovable loyalty to princes, 
 which necessarily followed from the holy precepts of the Chris- 
 tian religion, at once condemn the detestable pride and wicked- 
 ness of those who, boiling with unbridled lust for an inordinate 
 liberty, are wholly engaged in destroying and tearing to pieces 
 all the rights of princes in order to reduce the nations to slavery 
 under pretense of liberty. — See Recueil des Allocutions de» 
 Souverains Foniifes. Paris, Le Cl^re, 1865, pp. 165-6. * 
 
 
 For the accuracy of the following statement I have direct evi- 
 dence: 
 
 For several years past the Radical authorities of the Diocese 
 of Basle have persecuted the Catholic Church, as they still con- 
 tinue to do. Formerly the persecution was carried into eflfect, 
 partly by violence and partly by underhand means ; but it was 
 always specious and very injurious to religion. It was invaria- 
 bly carried on in the name of progress, liberty, and the welfare 
 of the people, whom it pretended to free from the tyranny of the 
 priesthood and the despotism of Rome. 
 
 The Catholic populations were thus oppressed by the so-called 
 omnipotence of the State, and, incredible as it would seem under 
 a republican form of government, the State, or rather a few in- 
 dividuals acting in its name, supported by a non-Catholic ma- 
 jority, and- backed by the Radical element, have succeeded in 
 monopolizing power, and in maintaining themselves in it by ter- 
 rorism and bribenr for a length of years, assuming to themselves 
 the functions of the Holy See and the Episcopate, and so adding 
 to their temporal rule the spiritual government of souls. Not 
 only have they possessed themselves of the direction of all pub- 
 lic schools, and of the administration of all pious foundations, 
 but they have destroyed all the monastic, capitular, and ecclesi- 
 astical institutions, claimed the right to regulate the parochial 
 system, the preaching of the Gospel, catechising, confessions, first 
 communions of children, the celebration of public worship, pro- 
 cessions, burials and benedictions, and even extended their juris- 
 diction to matrimonial causes. More than this, by the Federal 
 Constitution, which the recent revolutionary laws have just ex- 
 
 * TertuUian in Apolog. cap. xxxvii. 
 19 
 
21.8 
 
 AM»K?rDI0'E8. 
 
 AFFEXDICES, 
 
 aI <l 
 
 i 
 
 N* 
 
 tended to the Catholic cantons, contrarj to the will of the popu- 
 Ittions OS expressed by the vote of an immense majority, the 
 State has virtually and insidiously suppressed the Catholic 
 Church by the introduction of that article of the Federal Cod© 
 by which the ecclesiastical jurisdiction is abolished. (Art. 58^. 
 
 iinjilly, in five cantons of the Diocese of Basle, the Catholic 
 pcipnlittloiis have lost all liberty of worship in a more or less 
 degree. 
 
 Since the Council of the Vatican more especially, the war 
 aicainst the Church has been waged with greater acrimony in the 
 lliiMsese of Basle, and since the victories of Prussia, our enemies 
 hme acted more openly. The five governments of Soleure, Ar- 
 jovie, Basle-Cam pagne, Berne, and Tliur^ovie have sent their del- 
 agate to an assembly calling itself a Diocesan Conference, com- 
 posea, not of ecclesiastics, but In great part of Protestants, and 
 of lay-Catholics notoriously hostile to the Church. 8uch a bodj, 
 of course, possessed no legal authority, but notwithstanding its 
 patent incapacity, it committed, among many other illegal and 
 unjust acts, that of pronouncing a sentence of deprivation against 
 the Bishop of Basle, on the 29th of January, 1873. The princi- 
 pill offense imputed to him was, that of having published the def- 
 inition of Papal Infallibility in his diocese, and of having refused 
 ti> withdraw the publication. Several minor accusations were 
 brought against him ; but it may be remarked that the authori- 
 ties were unable to prove that he had violated a single law during 
 the whole course or his episcopate. Ho was therefore deprived 
 of his see solely because he had fulfilled the duties of a Catholic 
 bishop, and because h© would not separate himself from the Unity 
 of the Holy See, by refusing to publish the decrees of the Vatican 
 Council. 
 
 Since the above attack on the liberties of the Catholic popula- 
 tions, the Holy See, and the Church, a scries of laws favoring 
 BOliiBm and apostasy have been passed by the five cantonal gov- 
 emmenta in question. They have forbidden the Bishop of Basle 
 to exercise his episcopal charge throughout the five oantons coni- 
 posing his diocese; and they have also forbidden the clergy to 
 nmintfiin any official relations with him, so that the faithful suffer 
 grievous injury in their most sacred rights, and in their most ur- 
 
 fent religious needs, in common with the whole Catholic priest- 
 ood, which has been |>uni8hed in all the cantons for having pro- 
 tested against these unjust acts. 
 
 But it is the Protestant Canton of Berne which hfis signalized 
 ilMlf beyond all others by its despotism and its cruelty. It has 
 iUipended all the parish priests of the canton from their pastoral 
 functions, and has since then deprived them, as well as all their 
 curates, to the number of sixty-nine. It next pronounced sen- 
 tence of exile on tlie whole clergy, ninety in number, only except- 
 ing five or six aj^ed priests, who were, however, forbidden to say 
 nfiM lave in their own rooms, or in any way to exercise their sacred 
 ministry. The government then drove all the priests out of their 
 ehurches and presbyteries, and confiscated all their benefices and 
 tevenues, so tnat they are deprived of all means of subsistence. 
 
 Before the sentence of exile was carried out, many of them were 
 moreover punished by fine and imprisonment. The Catholic laity 
 has suffered there, and still has to suffer from every kind of injust- 
 ice: fines, imprisonment, dismissal from public employment, are 
 common occurrences, and men, women, nuns, and even children 
 have been imprisoned for their faith. 
 
 There are, at the present moment, more than 60,000 Catholics 
 in the Canton of Berne, who are deprived, as far as State influ- 
 ence can effect it, of all religious help, whether in life or in death, 
 the exiled priests of the Bernese Jura being arrested and cast into 
 prison if discovered within the cantonal limits. 
 
 The immense majority of the people, however, remain firmly 
 attached to their pastors. In many parishes not a schismatic is 
 to be found, and in others, containing a numerous population, the 
 exceptions are very few. In a word, the Catholics of the Bernese 
 Jura maintain their fidelity to the faith of their fathers, and the 
 only partisans of the schism are apostates or persons long notori- 
 ously hostile to the Church. 
 
 But the most revolting feature of the present persecution is that 
 the Government of Berne has sought in every part of Europe for- 
 eign priests in order to replace the lawfully appointed clergy of 
 the Jura. It has succeeded in finding a certain number o? sus- 
 pended or apostate priests, who have consented to act as the in- 
 struments of State persecution. During the fourteen months 
 which have witnessed the exile of the sixty-nine faithful parish 
 clergy, twenty-five strangers have been brought to replace them. 
 These men are of the worst moral antecedente. The government, 
 notwithstanding, has imposed them on the parishioners, gives 
 them profuse supplies of money, makes over the churches and 
 presbyteries to them, and supports them in every way, while the 
 native clergy are despoiled and exiled. 
 
 The Catholics of the Jura being thus deprived of their pastors, 
 meet in farms or outhouses for coinmon worship; and yet even 
 this liberty is not always conceded to them. It is only in pro- 
 found secret they can receive the sacraments, or hear mass, and 
 they even bury their own dead without the assistance of a priest. 
 It*is thus that religious animosity, making common cause with 
 Radicalism, tyrannizes over its tellow-citizens, who commit no 
 offense against the public peace, and who bear their proportion- 
 ate share of the public burdens ! 
 
 By the course it has pursued the Government of Berne has vio- 
 lated the treaties and constitutions which protect Catholic liber- 
 ties within the cantons. In order to give a color of legality to 
 future persecutions, it has voted a new Ecclesiastical Constitution, 
 expressly framed against the interests of the Catholic Church in 
 Switzerland, and which it has imposed, against their will, on the 
 Catholics of Berne by a preponderent non-Catholic majority. 
 
 One consolation remains to us, namely, the fidelity of the en- 
 tire body of clergy to the Catholic Church. They have freely 
 chosen to lose all rather than betray their faith. 
 
 In order to perpetuate the supply of schismatic or "Old Cath- 
 olic " priests, the Government has recently established a faculty 
 
220 
 
 APFKN DICES. 
 
 I 
 
 i 
 
 II 
 
 
 of theology in Berne. It has brought professors from Gennany, 
 either Protestants or apostate priests, and has indnced a small 
 number of students to follow the courses, by paying them highly 
 for their attendance. 
 
 In Soleure, too, the Radical authorities carry on the same per- 
 secution of the Catholics of the cantons. The government has 
 succeeded in placing three schism atical priests m as many par- 
 ishes. It has suppressed and confiscated the celebrated and an- 
 cient abbey of the Benedictines at Mariastein and the Chapters of 
 Schoennenwerth and of the Bishopric of Basle at Soleure. In the 
 other mixed cantons where the anti-Catholic Badicals are in a 
 majority, the Catholics have much to suffer. 
 
 The Diocese of Basle includes seven cantons— viz. Soleure, Ar- 
 
 fwie, Thurgovie, Basle-Campagne, Berne, Lucerne, and Zug. 
 he two last-named cantons are Catholic, and possess a just gov- 
 ernment. In the other cantons the majority is Protestant. To 
 these must be added the city of Basle and the canton of Schaff- 
 hausen, both of which form part of the same diocese. 
 
 The Diocese of Basle comprises 430,000 Catholics and 800,000 
 Protestants and other denominations. It contains 800 priests, 
 only seven of whom have become Old Catholics. The so-called 
 Diocesan Conference has pushed its pretensions to the point of 
 prescribing what authors are to be used by ecclesiastical students 
 in the seminary ! The bishop was not even free to appoint the 
 superior and his assistants, but was obliged to obtain the "Placet" 
 of the State for such nominations, as well as for his Pastoral 
 Letters. 
 
 [FBOM THK LONDON WBBKLT KE6I8TEB.] 
 
 INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 
 
 BY THE RIGHT REV. MONSIGNOR CAFEL, D.D. 
 
 Though a blow is dealt us through the Ritualists, and a severe 
 judgment passed on the converts in Mr. Gladstone's pamphlet, 
 yet the real stumbling-block of offense on our part is that, ac- 
 cording to him, ever since 1870 we have accepted the infallibility 
 of the Pope. This wonderful " change in the constitution of the 
 Latin Church" sorely distresses the author, and leads him to say 
 that Rome " has substituted for the proud boast of semper eadein 
 a policy of violence and change in faith." Yet, as though for- 
 getful of so writing, he proceeds to the contradictory assertion 
 that the Church " has refurbished and paraded anew every rusty 
 tool which she was fondly thought to have disused." With this 
 definite accusation we wish, therefore, to deal. 
 
 We have to remember that previous to 1870 every Catholic 
 was bound to believe : — 
 
 1. That the gift of infallibility was given to the Church of 
 God; that Church being none other than the communion under 
 the authority of the See of Rome. 
 
 2. That this gift of infallibility was exercised both by the 
 teaching body of the Church united to its head, whether that 
 Church was dispersed throughout the world, or assembled in 
 General Council. 
 
 By this no Catholic meant to imnly that infallibility was iden- 
 tical with inspiration, much less that the Church was snotless, 
 either in its individual pastors or in its head, but onlv that the 
 Spirit of God so overruled her utterances that she could not teach 
 the faithful any thing at variance with the truth. As to the ob- 
 ject or sphere of this infallibility, every Catholic was further 
 bound to believe that it extended to all truths bearing upon faith 
 and the eternal welfare of mankind ; or, in other words, to the 
 whole of faith and morals. Every instructed Catholic further 
 knew and held that the belief ex animo in these^ discussions of 
 the Church was the primary and necessary condition for his com- 
 munion with her. He believed, however, that until she spoke he 
 had a perfect right to discuss undecided questions, but always 
 subject to the suppressed premise in his mind that he would obey 
 whatever she would declare. 
 
 Now, we ask what change after the decision by the Vatican 
 
 (221) 
 
jC^' jS' 
 
 IKFALLIBILITY OF THK POPE, 
 
 INFALLIBILITr OF THE POPE. 
 
 223 
 
 It 
 
 I 
 I 
 
 h 
 
 R^ 
 
 Council was effected in the creed of a Catholic? None as to tlie 
 pift of infallibility; none as to the ohject of infallibility ; none as 
 to the double exercise of the infallibility mentioned; but only 
 that the ex cathedra, or official utt^niueei of the Head of the 
 Church, were so directed by the Holy Ghost that they could not 
 be at Yariance with the truth. In fact, the Vatican Council de- 
 clarea that the Head of the Church when teaching ex cathedra 
 ii m unerring as she herself is in General Council, or when dis- 
 persed throughout the world. By this, what had been the un- 
 varying practice of the Popes for so many centuries was declared 
 to be an infallible nile of action for the Church. 
 
 How, then, Mr. Gladstone can assert that an essential change 
 in her constitution lijis taken plncc passes our comprehension. 
 He must be fully aware that throujjhout the long history of the 
 Church of God the Popes have not waited to have their infalli- 
 bility declared, but have acted m possessors of it, condemning 
 unsound doctrines whenever they made their ai)pcarance, or pro- 
 claiming truths anew when thev were in danger of becoming oh- 
 wured or perverted. Those wno obstinately refused submission 
 to any dogmatic decree of the Sovereign Pontiff were ever con- 
 sidered guilty of grave sin. It was nut until the iifteenth century 
 thai any attempt was ever made to assert that an appeal might 
 be made against the Pope's judgment to a future (Ecumenical 
 Council. The promptitade with which the faithful assented to 
 Pope Martin V. s condemnation of this proposition in 1418 bears 
 witness to the sense of the Church on this question. But we 
 may pass from theory to facts. 
 
 Not to go earlier back than the year 516, ©verjir Eastern Bishop, 
 without exception, whom Mr. Gladstone would, in common with 
 High Churchmen, hold to have been Catholic, individually as- 
 serted his belief that, by Christ's promise, the Apostolic See 
 could not fail in faith, and that communion with tne Catholic 
 Church could be defined by saying that a person was in har- 
 mony r'coii«eii/i>M«") with that See; and tnat, in so doing, ho 
 was following in all things the constituti«>ns of the Fathers. The 
 following is the notable "Kegula Fidei" of Pope Hormisdas, 
 which was signed by all the Eastern Bishops who had joined the 
 Acacian schism, ana by the Emperor Justinian, and by the Pa^ 
 triarcha of Constantinople — Epiphanius, John, and Mennas. At 
 the 8th General Council (and this has the same authority as the 
 fret four) no Bishop took his seat without signing it — mutatis 
 mutandis — the grounds of his faith being identical, viz., the in- 
 fallibility, or, in the language of the day, the immaculateness, by 
 Christ's "promise, of the Faith of the See of Peter: — 
 
 " The first condition of salvation is t4> hold firm the Rule of 
 tho true Faith, and in no way to deviate from the constitutions 
 of the Fathers. And because the statement of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, when He said, * Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will 
 build my church; etc.. can not be set aside; this, which is said, 
 is provea by results, because in the Apostolic Sec religion has al 
 wavs been preserved undcfiled. Desirous, therefore, by no means 
 to be separated from this hope and fuith, and following in all 
 
 matters the constitutions of the Fathers, we anathematize all 
 heretics, especially . . . ." Then follow certain heretics bv 
 name (others of the time being substituted for them at the 8th 
 General Council), and, among them, ". . . Acacius, who per- 
 sisted in their communion and fellowship; because he has de- 
 served a sentence like that of those whose communion he at- 
 tached himself to. . . . Wherefore we receive and approve 
 of all the General Epistles (Epistolas Univeisns) of Pope Leo, 
 wherein he wrote concerning the true religion. Hence, as we 
 have said, following in all respects the Apostolic See, and pub- 
 lishing all its constitutions, 1 nope that 1 may deserve to be in 
 the one communion with you, which the Apostolic See proclaims, 
 wherein the Christian Religion is effectually and truly consol- 
 idated (ill qtid est integra et mrax ChruilaiKB religionis soUdi- 
 tas): promising, also, that the names of those who are cut off 
 (sequestratos) from the communion of the Catholic Church; that 
 18, not consentient with the Apostolic See, shall not be recited 
 during the sacred mysteries. This, my profession, 1 have sub- 
 scribed with my own hand, and delivered to you, Hormisdas, the 
 holy and venerable Pope of the City of Rome." {In Matisi. Col- 
 lect, concil, T. viii., pp. 407, 408.) 
 
 At this period the rights of the primacy were recoj^^nized by 
 imperial constitutions, as in the instances of Valentinian and 
 Justinian. "According to ancient custom," says the law of Val- 
 entinian, "neither the Bishops of Gaul nor those of any other 
 provinces, may undertake any thing (that is, of importance causa 
 tnajor) without the authoritv of the venerable Pope of the Eter- 
 nal City. Whatever, therefore, has been or may be approved by 
 the authority of the Apostolic See, let it be a law for all. 
 '* The Emperor Justinian calls the Bishops of Rome caput om- 
 nium Dei sacerdotum, omnium ecclesidrum ; and the Church of 
 Rome Apex Pontificatns, by whose judgment heretics were at all 
 times overthrown (Cod. Justin, de summa Trinib., T. i., Ex. 7 and 
 8, novel 9, at the beginning). When King Theodoric summoned 
 a Synod " to meet at Rome, a. d. 503, for the purpose of passing 
 judgment upon Pope Symmachus, who had been accused of 
 various misdemeanors, the assembled Bishops cried out that the 
 i^m oi ' subjecting the Head of the C%nrch to the judgment of 
 his inferiors was entirely unheard of The reply of the Eastern 
 Bishops was of a similar character." (Cf Socrat h. e. ii. 8, cited 
 hj Alaog, p. 673.) 
 
 "Peter has spoken by the mouth of Leo," said the -Fathers at 
 Chalcedon in 451, when the letter of S. Leo was read to them. 
 Fourteen centuries later the assembled Bishops at Rome on S. 
 Peter's Day cried, "Peter has spoken by the mouth of Pius." 
 
 In the Council assembled at Florence m 1439, a decree condemn- 
 ing the opinions professed at Constance to the detriment of the 
 Papal supremacy ran thus : " Moreover, we find that the Holy 
 Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff possess the primacy over 
 the whole world, and the Roman Pontiff himself is the successor 
 of S. Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and that he is the true Vicar 
 of Christ, and Head of the whole Church, and the Father and 
 
'SS4 
 
 IHFALLIBILITT OF THE POP!. 
 
 11 
 
 11 
 
 I 
 
 I* 
 
 ill 
 
 Teacher of all Christians; and that to him; S. Peter, was deliirered 
 bj Jesus Christ our Lord the full power of feedinjr, rulinj!;, and 
 governing the Universal Cliurch : as also is contained in the acta 
 of (Ecumenical Councils and in the Saned Canons." Need Mr. 
 Gladstone he reminded that it maa Innocent the Tenth, in 1653, 
 that condemned the propositions of .lansenins; that it was Innocent 
 the Eleventh who, in 1682, raised his voice in condemnation of 
 the Gallican opinions, which were published for the first time 
 ■ince the Councils of Constance and i^asle. Hpace would fail us 
 to note the unceasing; exercise of supremacy by the Apostolic ISee 
 in matters of doctrine, of morals, and of discipline. The previous 
 oases are sufficient for our purpose, and we would refer our 
 toadofs for further instances to " Kenrick on the Primacy of tho 
 BeO of 8. Peter," or to the invaluable little work of Father Knox, 
 of the Oratory, entitled " When does the Church speak Infalli- 
 bly T from whose pages we have freely cited. We think that 
 our readers will candidly avow that, notwithstanding the assertions 
 of Mr. Gladstone, the power and pretentions of the Papacy have 
 lieea always the same. 
 
 But the right honorable gentleman feels much concern lest 
 this power of the Pope should trespass on the civil domain. 
 We need only remind him that ai^er the deeision of 1870, the 
 
 ethical character present many points of contact with revealed 
 truth. The principles on which it is based flow from the natural 
 law. They can never, therefore, be in real contradiction with 
 the precepts of the Divine and positive law. Hence the State, if 
 it only remain true to its fundamental principles, must ever be in 
 the completest harmony with the Church and Revelation. 
 
 Now, so long as this harmony continues, the Church has neither 
 ©all nor right to interfere with' the i^tate, for earthly politics do 
 not fidl within her direct jurisdiction. The moment, however, 
 the State becomes unfaithful to its principles, and contravenes 
 the Divine and positive law, that moment it is the Church's right 
 and duty, as guardian of revealed truth, to interfere, and pro- 
 claim to the State the truths which it has ignored, and to con- 
 demn tlie erroneous maxims which it has adopted. Unhappily 
 the State has too often given the Church occasion for interference, 
 and false doctrines in politics have always found adherents, be- 
 cause they pandered to the greed of power and money, as well aa 
 to the abhorrence of control, which are so deeply rooted in our 
 fallen nature. In former days, when civil society was leavened 
 with the principles of the f*aith, the Church, by entering into 
 direct communication with the rulers of different States, could often 
 auietly impede the spread of error, and allay, by personal in- 
 fluence, the evil consequences arising from false principles of 
 government. But what was possible then is not possible now, 
 when iociety is unchristianising itself more and more every day, 
 and kings and statesmen habitually assume a position of open hos- 
 tility or haughty distrust toward the Church. Therefore of lat« 
 
 ill 
 
 lit 
 
 IKFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 
 
 '^Sbd 
 
 years she has been forced to lift up her voice, and from the Chair 
 of Peter to cry aloud to the faithful throughout the world, in ac- 
 cents of solemn warning, against the pernicious errors with which 
 the political atmosphere is everv-where loaded." — Knox on "The 
 Infallibility," p. 70. His mind may be quieted by reading the 
 following letter, addressed l)y Pope Gelasius, at the close of tho 
 fifth century, to the Emperor Anastasius : — 
 
 " God forbid that a Roman Prihce should feel offended at the 
 declaration of the truth ! There are two things, august emperor, ^ 
 whereby this world is governed, namely, the sacred authority of 
 Pontiffs and the royal power, wherein the weight of priestly 
 authority is so much the greater, as in the Divine judgment 
 Priests must render to the Lord an account of themselves. For 
 you know, most clement son, that although you preside over men, 
 you devoutly bend the neck to the dispensers of the Divine Mys- 
 teries, and ask from them the means of salvation : and in the re- 
 ception and proper administration of the heavenly Sacraments, 
 you know that you should be subject to them according to the 
 religious rule, rather than preside over them. You are aware, 
 then, that as to these things you depend on their judgment, and 
 that they are not to be forced to compliance with your will. For 
 if, as regards public order, the prelates of the Church, knowing 
 that the empire has been confided to you by Divine Providence, 
 obey our laws, lest they should appear to oppose your will in 
 things of this^ world, with what affection should you obey them 
 who are appointed to dispense the awful mysteries ! Wherefore, 
 as the Pontiffs incur a serious responsibility if they suppress 
 what they should declare for the honor of the Deity, so the dan- 
 ger is great of others who insolently refuse obedience. And if 
 the hearts of the faithful should be submissive to all priests in 
 general who treat Divine things properly, how much more should 
 assent be yielded to the Prelate of this See, whom the Supreme 
 Lord ordained to preside over all priests, and whom the piety of 
 the universal Church has always honored ! You clearly under- 
 stand that no one can, by any human device, oppose the prerog- 
 ative of confession of him whom the voice of Christ preferred to 
 all others, whom the Holy Church has always acknowledged, 
 and whom she now devoutly regards as her Primate." 
 
 " This," says Dr. Kenrick, from whom we cite, " has been de. 
 servedly regarded as an admirable exposition of the relation of 
 Catholic princes to the prelacy. The power of the prince is su- 
 preme in the civil order; the power of the Pontiff is supreme in 
 things spiritual. The civil and the ecclesiastical powers are from 
 God : the former by his implied sanction of the means of main- 
 taining social order; the latter by the direct institution of Christ. 
 In both the sovereignty of Goii must be honored. The civil 
 power extends to all things necessary for the maintenance and 
 welfare of society but it can not command any thing opposed to 
 the Divine law. The ecclesiastical authority is eng:i^ed in tho 
 
 Sroraulgation of truth and the maintenance of discipline, with a 
 m respect for public order as regulated by the civil power. 
 
 
 I 
 
 i 'tj 
 
-2G 
 
 INFALLIBILITT OF TUB FOPB. 
 
 '•Tlie Pope, 2m head on earth of the Church, exercises, by Di- 
 vme right, authority over Catholic princes in the things that are 
 of salvation. When by flagrant crimes they cause the name of 
 God to be blasphemed, he may admonish and reprove them, m 
 Nathan reproved David by the Divine command ; and, in case of 
 contumacy, he may inflict on them ecclesiastical censures. The 
 exercise of this power peculiarly suits the Chief Bishop, since 
 local prelates could scarcely venture to say to their prince — 
 ' Thou art the man.* The majesty of the Sovereign is guarded 
 by reserving cases in which he is concerned to the mature and 
 unbiased judgment of the Pontiff." — (Primacy of the Apostolic 
 See, p. 326.) 
 
 These extracts, bo clearly stating the relations of the primacy 
 to the civil power, wiU doubtless establish, to the satisfaction of 
 many, that, instead of seeking the destruction of the State, the 
 Church has always been her co-operator, and that in condemning, 
 aa «he has in her Syllabus, a iiberias which is synonymous witn 
 license, and in maintaining the supremacy of Divine authority 
 in declaring the sacr^dness of marriage, and asserting the neces- 
 sity of religion in the instruction of vouth (see the 18th propo- 
 sition, cited on page 16 of the pamphlet), she is but throwing a 
 safeguard arouna society, and upholding the absolute sovereignty 
 of God over man. 
 
 We should have expected that a High Churchman like Mr. 
 Gladstone, and a statesman of such great experience, who, doubt- 
 less, recognizes the necessity for enactments such as Lord Camp- 
 bell 8 Act, would, instead of questioning these truths, be the first 
 to give them his cordial assent. He must not blame us if, in- 
 itoail of accepting his views on these points, we prefer to be 
 guided by the unerring instinct of the Cnurch of God. 
 
 REPLY OF LORD ACTON. 
 
 Hh the Editor of ike Times : 
 
 giR^_Mav I ask you to publish the inclosed preliminary reply 
 to Mr. Glaastone's public Expostulation? 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 ACTON. 
 
 AthbnjEUM, November 8. 
 
 Dear Mr. Gladstone, — ^I will not anticipate by a single word 
 the course which those who are immediately concerned may 
 adopt in answer to your challenge. But there are points which 
 I think you have overlooked, and which may be raised most fitly 
 by those who are least responsible. The question of policy and 
 opportuneness I leave for others to discuss with you. Speaking 
 in the open daylight, from my own point of view, as a Roman 
 Catholic born in the nineteenth century, I can not object that 
 facts which are of a nature to influence the belief of men should 
 be brought completely to their knowledge. Concealment is un- 
 worthy of those things which are Divine and holy in religion, and 
 in those things which are human and profane publicity has value 
 
 as a check. 
 
 I understand your argument to be substantially as follows: 
 The Catholics obtained Emancipation by declaring that they 
 were in every sense of the term loyal and faithful subjects of 
 the realm, and that Papal Infiillibility was not a dogma of their 
 Church. Later events have ftilsified one declaration, have dis- 
 turbed the stability of the other; and the problem, .therefore, 
 arises, whether the authority which has annulled the profession 
 of faith made by the Catholics would not be competent to change 
 their conceptions of political duty. 
 
 This is a question that may be fairly asked, and it was long 
 since made familiar to the Catholics by the language of their own 
 Bishops. One of them has put it in the following terms: " How 
 shall we persuade the Protestants that we are not acting in defi- 
 ance of honor and good faith, if, having declared that Infalli- 
 bility was not an article of our faith while we were contending 
 for our rights, we should, now that we have got what we wanted, 
 withdraw from our public declaration and aflirm the contrary ? 
 The case is, primA facie, a strong one, and it would be still more 
 serious if the whole structure of our liberties and our toleration 
 
 (227) 
 
 P 
 
BirLT or LORD AOTON. 
 
 WIS foiinded on the declarations given by the English and Irish 
 Bishops some years before the Belief Act. Those documents, in- 
 teresting and significant as they are, are unknown to the Consti- 
 Imtion. What is known, and what was for a generation part of 
 the law of the country, is something more solemn and substantial 
 thsn a series of unproved assertions — namely, the oath in which 
 the political essence of those declarations was concentrated. 
 That was the security which Parliament reouired ; that was the 
 pledge by which we were bound ; and it binds us no more. The 
 Lepilffltiire, judging that what was sufficient for Republicans, 
 WIS sufficient for Catholics, abolished the oath, for the best 
 roasons, some time before the disestablishment of the Irish 
 Church. If there is no longer a special bond for the loyalty of 
 Ckiholics, the fact is due to the delioerate judgment of the House 
 of Commons. After having surrendered the only real constitu- 
 tional security, there seems scarcely reason to lament the depre- 
 ciation of a less substantial guarantee, which was very indirectly 
 eonneeted with the action of Parliament, and was virtually supers 
 seded bv the oath. 
 
 The doctrines against which you are contending did not begin 
 with the Vatican Council. At the time when the Catholic oath 
 wan repealed the Pope had the same right and power to excom- 
 municate those who denied his authority to depose princes that 
 he possesses now. The writers most esteemed at Kome held that 
 doctrine as an article of faith; a modern Pontiff had affirmed 
 IllSt it can not be abandoned without taint of heresy, and that 
 Hume who questioned and restricted his authority in temporal 
 matters were worse than those who rejected it in spirituals ; and 
 accordingly men suffered death for this cause as others did for 
 lilasphemy and Atheism. The recent decrees have neither in- 
 creased the penalty nor made it more easy to inflict. 
 
 That is the true answer to your appeal. Your indictment 
 would be more just if it was more complete. If you pursue the 
 inquiry further, vou will find graver matter than all you have 
 enumerated, established by higher and more ancient authority 
 than a meeting of Bishops half-a-century ago. And then I think 
 ymt will admit that your Catholic countrymen can not fairly be 
 ealled on to account for every narticle of a system which has 
 Bfiver come before them in its integrity, or for opinions whose 
 existence among divines they would be exceedingly reluctant to 
 neiievoB 
 
 1 will explain my meaning by an example: A Pop who lived 
 in Catholic times, and who is famous in history as the author of 
 the int Crusade, decided that it is no murder to kill excommu- 
 iiieated persons. This rule was incorporated in the Canon Law. 
 In the revision of the Code, which took place in the 16th cen- 
 iniy, and produced a whole volume of corrections, the passage 
 was allowed to stand. It appears in every reprint of the " Cor- 
 pus Juris." It has been for 700 years, and continues to be, part 
 (»f the ecclesiastical law. Far from having been a dead letter, it 
 eiblained new application in the days of the Inquisition ; and one 
 of the later Popes has declared that the murder of a Protestant 
 
 RKPLY OP LOKD ACTON. 
 
 229 
 
 is so good a deed that it atones, and more than atones, for the 
 murder of a Catholic. Again, the ^eatest legislator of the Med- 
 iaeval Church laid down this proposition, that allegiance must not 
 be kept with heretical Princes — cum ei qui Deo Jidem non servat 
 Jides servanda non sit This principle was adopted by a celebrated 
 Council, and is confirmed by St. Thomas Aquinas, the oracle of 
 the schools. The Syllabus which you cite has assuredly not ac- 
 quired greater authority in the Church than the Canon Law and 
 the Lateran Decrees, than Innocent the Third and St. Thomas. 
 Yet these things were as well known when the oath was repealed 
 as they are now. But it was felt that, whatever might be the let- 
 ter of Canons and the spirit of the Ecclesiastical Laws, the Cath- . 
 olic people of this country might be honorably trusted. 
 
 But I will pass from the letter to the spirit which is moving 
 men at the present day. It belongs peculiarly to the character of 
 ft genuine Ultramontane not only to guide his life by the example 
 of canonized Saints, but to receive with reverence and submission . 
 the words of Popes. Now, Pius V., the only Pope who has been I 
 proclaimed a Saint for many centuries, having deprived Elizabeth, 
 commissioned an assassin to take her life; and his next successor, 
 on learning that the Protestants were being massacred in France, 
 pronounced the action glorious and holy, but comparatively bar- 
 ren of results ; and implored the King during two months, by his 
 Nuncio and his Legate, to carry the work on to the bitter end un- 
 til every Huguenot had recanted or perished. It is hard to believe 
 that these things can excite in the bosom of the most fervent Ul- 
 tramontane that sort of admiration or assent that displays itself 
 in action. If they do not, then it can not be truly said that Cath- 
 olics forfeit their moral freedom, or place their duty at the mercy 
 of another. , * 
 
 There is waste of power by friction even in well-constructed 
 machines, and no machinery can enforce that degree of uni^ 
 and harmony which you apprehend. Little fellowship or confi- 
 dence is possible between a man who recognizes the common 
 principles of morality as we find them in the overwhelming mass 
 of the writers of our Church and one who, on learning that the 
 murder of a Protestant Sovereign has been inculcated by a samt, 
 or the slaughter of Protestant subjects approved by a Pope, sets 
 himself to find a new interpretation for the Decalogue. There is 
 little to apprehend from combinations between men divided bv 
 such a gulf as this, or from the unity of a body composed of such 
 antagonistic materials. But where there is not union of an active 
 or aj^ressive kind, there may be unity in defense ; and it is pos- 
 sible, in making provision against the one, to promote and to 
 conform the other. 
 
 There has been, and I believe there is still, some exaggeration 
 in the idea men form of the agreement in thought and deed which 
 authority can accomplish. As far as decrees, censures, and per- 
 secution could commit the Court of Rome, it was committed to 
 the denial of the Copernican system. Nevertheless, the history 
 of astronomy shows a whole catena of distin§;uished Jesuits ; 
 and, a century ago, a Spaniard, who thought himself bound to 
 
 rM 
 
 M 
 
 (tar 
 
230 
 
 BBFLY OF LORI^ ACTON. 
 
 !||u 
 
 adopfc the Ptolemaic iheorj, was laughed at by the Roman diTines. 
 The submission of Fenelon, which ProteBtanta and Catholics have 
 ■0 often celebrated, is another instance to my point. ^ When his 
 hmk waa condemned, F^nelon publicly acceptea the judgment as 
 lb« voice of God. He declarea that he adnered to the decree 
 •hiolutely and without & shadow of reserve, and there were no 
 bounds to hia submission. In private he wrote that his opinions 
 were perfectly orthodox and remained unchanged, that his opj:ro- 
 mmkiB were in the wrong, and thai Rome waa getting religion 
 into peari 
 
 It IS not the unpropitious timea only, but the very nature of 
 things, that protect Catholicism from the consequences of some 
 theories that have grown up within it. The Irish did not shrink 
 from resisting the arms of Henry II., though two Popes had eiven 
 him dominion over them. They fought against Wflliam III., al- 
 tlwugh the Pope had given him efficient support in his expedition. 
 Even James II., when he could not get a mitre for Petre, reminded 
 Innocent that people could be very good Catholics and yet do 
 without Rome. Philip II. was excommunicated and deprived, 
 but be dispatched his army against Rome with the full concur- 
 rence of the Spanish divines. 
 
 That opinions likely to injure our position as loyal subjects of 
 S Protestant sovereign, as citizens of a free State, as members of 
 a community divided in religion, have flourished at various times, 
 and in various degrees, that they can claim high sanction, tliat 
 they are often uttered in the exasperation of controversy, and are 
 most Rtron|rIy urged at a time when there is no possibility of put- 
 ting them into practice — this all men must concede. But I affirm 
 that, in the fiercest conflict of the Reformation, when the rulers 
 of the Church had almost lost heart in the struggle for existence, 
 and exhausted every resource of their authority, both political 
 and spiritual, the Dulk of the English Catholics retained the 
 spirit of a better time. You do not, I am glad to say, deny that 
 tU continn™ to be true. But you think that we ought to be 
 compelled to demonstrate one of two things — that the Pope can 
 not/bj virtue of powers »»serted by the late Council, nmke a 
 claim which he was perfectly able to make by virtue of powers 
 asserted for him belbre; or, that he would be resisted if he did. 
 The first is superfluous. The second is not capable of receiving 
 a written demonstration. Therefore, neither of the alternatives 
 you propose to the Catholics of this country opens to us a way 
 of escaping from the reproach we have incurred. Whether there 
 is more truth in your misgivings or in my confidence the event 
 will show, I hope, at not distant time. 
 
 I remain sincerely yours, 
 
 ACTON. 
 
 VATICANISM. 
 
 Mr. Glamtone*s Reply to His Critics— His Views op the 
 Bbarino of the Vatican Decrees on Civil Allegiance Re- 
 asserted IN A Second Pamphlet — ^The Objections op Dr. 
 Newman and Archbishop Manning Analyzed — ^Papal Infal- 
 libility, Reason and Conscience. 
 
 In his tract on the Vatican Decrees, Mr. Gladstone dwelt prin- 
 cipally on two main propositions : I. That Rome had reproduced 
 for active service those doctrines of former times termed by him 
 "rusty tools," which she was fondly thought to have disused. 2. 
 That the Pope now claims, with plenary authority, from every 
 member of his Church, that he shall place his loyalty and civil 
 duty at the mercy of another j that other being himself. The 
 truth of these assertions was immediately and vigorously denied 
 by some of the ablest men of the Catholic Church, notably by Dr. 
 Newman and Archbishop Manning ; and to these able antagonists 
 Mr. Gladstone's answer is principally addressed. His object is 
 twofold : first, to state in what degree he conceived the immediate 
 purpose of his Expostulation to have been served ; secondly, to 
 examine whether the allegations of antagonists have dislodged his 
 arguments from their main positions, or, on the contrary, have 
 confirmed them, and to restate those positions accordingly. 
 
 After a splendid outline of eulogy of the character and ability 
 of his principal antagonists. Dr. Newman and Archbishoj) Man- 
 ning, Mr. Gladstone proceeds to discuss the " rusty tools." He 
 has been charged with misrepresenting the language of the Syl- 
 labus, and he defends, at the outset, his good faitn and care in his 
 Bummaiy of that important document. — Cin. Com'l. 
 
 The Pamphlet. 
 
 The first charge of unjust representation is this: I have stated 
 that the Pope condemns liberty of the press and liberty of speech. 
 By reference to the original, it is shown that the right of print 
 ing and speaking ia not in terms condemned universally ; but only 
 the right of each man to print or speak all his thoughts {stios 
 eonceptus quoscunque), whatever they may be. Hereupon it ia 
 justly observed that in all countries there are laws against bias- 
 
 (231) 
 
jglj^ 
 
 THB PAMPHLBT 
 
 THE EiFALLIOILlTY OF THE POPE. 
 
 JiHd 
 
 plieiiiy, OP obscenity, op Bedition. op all thpeo. It is argued, then, 
 timt men are not allowed ilio right to speak or print all their 
 thongbts, and that such an extreme right only is what the Pope 
 has condemned. 
 
 It appears to me that this is, to use a mild phrase, mere trifling 
 with tne subject We are asked to believe that what the Pope 
 intended to condemn waa a state of things which never has ex- 
 isted in any country of the world. Now he says he is condemn- 
 ing one of the commonly prevailing errors of the time, familiarly 
 known to the Bishops whom he addresses. What Bishop knows 
 of a State which by law allows a perfectly free course of blas- 
 jAemy, filthiness and sedition ? The world knows quite well what 
 M mmMt by free speech and a free press. It does mean, cenerally, 
 iwphaps it may be said universally, the right of declaring all 
 opinions whatsoever. The limit of freedom is not the justness of 
 the opinion, but it is this, that it shall be opinion in good faith, 
 and not mere grossness, passion, or appeal to violence. The law 
 of England at this moment, allowing all opinions whatever, pro- 
 ¥ided they are treated by way of rational discourse, most closely 
 olipresponds to what the Pope has condemned. His condemna- 
 tion is illustrated bjr his own practice of Governor in the Roman 
 States, where no opinions could be spoken or printed, bat such 
 as he approved. Once, indeed, he permitted a free discussion on 
 8t Peter's presence and prelacy in the city; but he repented 
 i|iiiokIy, and forbade the repetition of it ^ We mi^ht even cite his 
 practice as Pope in 1870, where every thing was done to keep the 
 proceedings ot the Council secret from the Church which it pro- 
 fessed to represent, and even practically secret from its members, 
 «X4Mpt those who were of the governing cabal. But there can be 
 no better mode of exhibiting his real meaning than by referring 
 to Ma account of the Austrian law. Mac lege omnis omnium 
 ©piiifoiiMiii et UbraricB ariis Mbertas, omnis turn Mei, turn con- 
 mieniiw ate docirinm, lihertas slatuiiur. [From the Pope's Allo- 
 cution of June 22, 1868: "By this law is established universal 
 liberty of all opinions and of the press, and, as of belief, so of 
 ©onicience and of teaching."] To the kind of condemnation given 
 I shall again refer ; but the matter of it is nothing abstract or 
 iiiiglnary — it is actual freedom of thinking, speaking^ and print- 
 ing, as it is practiced in a great civilized and Christian empire. 
 I repel, then, the charge against me as no better than a verbal 
 mbterfuge; and I again affirm that in his Syllabus, as in his acts, 
 the Pope has condemned liberty of speech and liberty of the press. 
 
 Thb Marriaoe QuESTioir. 
 
 A grave charge is made against me respecting the matrimonial 
 pwpositions, because I have cited the Pope as condemning those 
 who affirm that the matrimonial contract is binding whether there 
 is OP is not (according to the Roman doctrine) a sacrament, and 
 liA¥e not at the same time stated that English marriages are held 
 by Rome to be sacramental, and therefore valid. 
 
 No charge, serious op slight, could be more e;ntirely futile. 
 But it is serious, and not slight, and those who prompt the exam- 
 ination must abide the recoil. I begin thus : 
 
 1. I am censured for not having given distinctions between on© 
 country and another, which the Pope himself has not given. 
 
 2. And which are also thought unnecessary by authorized ex- 
 pounders of the Syllabus for the faithful. 1 have before me the 
 Exposition, with the text of the Encyclica and Syllabus, published 
 at Cologne in 1874, with the approval of authority (mit ober- 
 kirchlicher Approbation). In page 45 it is distinctly taun;ht that 
 with marriage the State has nothing to do; that it may safely rely 
 upon the Church ; that civil marriage, in the eyes of the Church, 
 is only concubinage; and that the State, by the use of worldly 
 compulsion, prevent the two concubinary parties from repenting 
 and abandoning their guilty relation to one another. Exactly the 
 same is the doctrine of the Pope himself, in his speeches pub- 
 lished at Rome, where civil marriage is declared to be, for Chris- 
 tians, nothing more than a mere concubinage, and a filthv concu- 
 binage {sozzo conmbinato). These extraordinary declarations 
 are not due to the fondness of the Pontiflf for speaking intr 
 promjitu. In his letter of September 18, 1852, to King Victor 
 Emmanuel, he declares that matrimony carrying the Sacrament 
 is alone lawful for Christians, and that a law of civil marriage, 
 which goes to divide them, for practical purposes, constitutes a 
 concubinage in the guise of legitimate marriage. So that, in 
 truth, in all countries within the scope of tliese denunciations, 
 the parties to a civil marriage are declared to be living in an il- 
 licit connection, which they are called upon to renounce. This 
 call is addressed to them separately, as well as jointly, the wife 
 being summoned to leave her husband, and the husband to aban- 
 don his wife ; and after this pretended repentance from a state 
 of sin, unless the law of the land and fear of consequences pre- 
 vail, a new connection, under the name of a marriage, may be 
 formed with the sanction of the Church of Rome, I know not by 
 what infatuation it is that adversaries have compelled me thus to 
 develop a stjite of facts created by the highest authorities of the 
 Roman Church, which I shall now not shrink from calling hop- 
 pible and revolting in itself, dangerous to the morals of society, 
 the structure of the family and the peace of life 
 
 The Infallibility op the Pope. 
 
 After citing various authorities to sustain his views of the dog- 
 matic force of the Syllabus, denied by Dr. Newman, Mr. Glad- 
 stone proceeds to consider the " Vatican Council and the Infalli- 
 bility of the Pope." 
 
 Like the chieftains of the heroic time, Archbishop Manning 
 takes his place with promptitude, and operates in front of the 
 
 force he leads. , 
 
 Upon the first appearance of my tract he instantly gave utter- 
 ance to the following propositions; nor has he since receded from 
 them. 
 
 •'I 
 
< f 
 
 234' 
 
 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE roPK. 
 
 THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE. 
 
 235 
 
 fiii 
 
 First— That th© Infallibility of the Pope was a doctrine of 
 Bivinc Faith before the Council of the Vatican was held. 
 
 Hecond — ^That the Yatiain Decrees have in no jot or tittle 
 eliitiiged either the obligations or the conditions of civil allegi- 
 imee^ 
 
 Tltird— That the ciril allegiance of Eomftn Catholics is as un- 
 divided as thai of other Christians, and neither more nor less 
 lunited. 
 
 Fourth — That the claim of the Roman Church against obedi- 
 wm^ to the civil power in certain cases is the same as that mado 
 bj other religious communions in England. 
 
 These four propositions may be treated as two. The first is so 
 alied with the second, and the third with the fourth, that the two 
 members of each pair respectively must stand or fall together. 
 I ean make no objection to the manner in which they raise the 
 fiiestion. I shall leave it to others, whom it may more concern, 
 to treat that portion of his work in which passing by matters 
 that more nearly touch his argument, he has entered at large on 
 the controversj between Rome and the German Empire; nor 
 shall I now discuss his compendium of Italian history, which in 
 no manner touches the question whether the dominion of the 
 Pope ought again to be imposed by foreign arms upon a portion 
 of the Italian people. But of the four propositions I will say 
 that 1 accept tliem all, subject to the very simple condition that 
 the word "not" be inserted in the three whicn arc affirmative, 
 and its equivalent struck out from the one which is negative. 
 
 Oft to state the case in my own words : 
 
 My task will be to make ^ood the two following assertions, 
 which were the principal subjects of my former argument : 
 
 1. That upon the authority, for many jgeuerations, of those 
 who preceded Archbishop Manning and his coadjutors in their 
 
 f resent official position, as well as upon other authority, Papal 
 nliillibility was not "a doctrine of Divine Faith before the 
 Council of the Vatican was held." 
 
 And that, therefore, the Vatican Decrees have changed the ob- 
 ligations and condition of civil allegiance. 
 
 2. That the claim of the Papal Church against obedience to 
 the civil power in certain eases not only goes beyond, but is es- 
 sentially difierent from that made by other religious communions 
 or by their members in England. 
 
 And that, therefore, the civil allegiance of those who admit the 
 claim, and carry it to its logical consequences, is not for the pup 
 pwes of the State the same with that of other Christians, but is 
 iiffsrently limited. 
 
 In his able and lengthened work, Archbishop Manning has 
 found s|>ace for a dissertation on the great German quarrel, but 
 has not included, in his proof of the belief in Papal infallibility 
 before 1870, any reference to the history of the Church over 
 whicli he presides, or the sister Church in Ireland. This very 
 grave deficiency 1 shall endeavor to make good, by enlarging and 
 completing the statement briefiy given in my tract. That state- 
 menl was that the English and Irish penal laws against Roman 
 
 Catholics were repealed on the faith of assurances which have 
 not been fulfilled. 
 
 Had all antagonists been content to reply with the simple in- 
 genuousness of Dr. Newman, it might have been unnecessary to 
 resume this portion of the subject. I make no complaint of the 
 Archbishop, for such a reply would have destroyed hi^case. Dr. 
 Newman, struggling hard with the difficulties of the task, finds 
 that the statement of Dr. Doyle requires "some pious interpreta- 
 tion;" that in 1826 the clergy both of England and Ireland were 
 trained in Gallican opinions, and had modes of thinking " foreign 
 altogether to the minds of the entourage of the Holy See ; " 
 that the British Ministers ought to have applied to Rome to learn 
 the civil duties of British subjects, and that "no pledge from 
 Catholics was of any value to which Rome was not a party." 
 
 This declaration involves all, and more than all, that I had ven- 
 tured reluctantly to impute. Statesmen of the future, recollect 
 the words, and recollect from whom they came — from the man 
 who, by his genius, piety, and learning, towers above all the em- 
 inences of the Anglo-Fapal communion; who, so declares a 
 Romish organ, "has been the mind and tongue to shape and 
 express the English Catholic position in the many controversies 
 which have aijsen" since 1845, and who has been roused from 
 his repose on this occasion only by the most fervid appeals to 
 him as the man that could best teach his co-religionists how and 
 what to think. The lesson received is this: Although pledgee 
 were given, although their validity was firmly and even passion- 
 ately asserted, although the subject-matter was one of civil alle- 
 giance, " no pledge from Catholics was of any value to which 
 Rome was not a party." 
 
 In all seriousness I ask whether there is not involved in these 
 words of Dr. Newman an ominous approximation to my allegation 
 that the seceder to the Roman Church " places his loyalty and 
 civil duty at the mercy of another ? " 
 
 But as Archbishop Manning has asserted that the decrees of 
 the Vatican have " in no jot or tittle " altered civil allegiance, and 
 that " before the Council was held the Infallibility of the Pope 
 was a doctrine of Divine Faith, and as he is the official head of 
 the Anglo-Roman body, I must test his assertions by one of those 
 appeals to history which he has sometimes said are treason to 
 the Church, as indeed thev are in his sense of the Church, and 
 in his sense of treason. It is only justice to the Archbishop to 
 add that he does not stand alone. Bishop UUathorne says " the 
 Pope always wielded this infallibility, and all men knew this to 
 be the fact." We shall presently find some men, whose history 
 the Bishop should have been familiar with, who did not know 
 this to be the fact, but very solemnly assured us they knew the 
 exact contrary. 
 
 This is not an affair, as Dr. Newman seems to think, of a par- 
 ticular generation of clergy who had been educated in Gallican 
 opinions. In all times, from the reign of Elizabeth to that of 
 Victoria, the lay Roman Catholics of England, as a body, have 
 been eminently and unreservedly loyal. But they have been as 
 
236 
 
 TBI OfrALLIBIIiFTY OF Ml fOFl. 
 
 f HB INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPS. 
 
 237 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 wniiiently noted for their thorough estrangement from UltMmon- 
 tttoc opinions; and their clergy, down to the period of the Eman- 
 ©ipfttion act, felfc with them; though a school addicted to cunal- 
 isii and Jesuitism, thrust among them hy the Popes at the 
 uoaimencemcnt of the period, first brought upon them grievous 
 BiiftringH, then succeeded in attaching a stigma to their name, 
 and now threatens gradually to accomplish a transformation of 
 their opinions, with an eventual chance in their spirit, of which 
 it is difficult to foresee the bounds, ^ot that the men who hold 
 the ancestral view will, as a rule, exchange it for the view of the 
 Vatican; but that, as in the course of nature they depart, Vati- 
 omisls will grow up and take their places. , ,. . _, , . 
 The first official head of the Anglo-Koman body m England 
 was the wise and loyal Archpriest Blackwell He was deposed 
 by the Pope in 1608, "chiefly, it is supposed, for his advocacy of 
 the Oath of Allegiance," which had been devised by King James, 
 in order that he mijgihfc confer peace and security upon loyal Ro- 
 man Catholics. Belarmine denounced as heretical its denial of 
 the power of the Pope to depose the King and release his subjects 
 from their allegiance. Pope Paul V. condemned the brief in 
 October, 1606. The unfortunate members of his communion 
 could not believe this brief to be authentic. . So a second brief 
 was sent in September, 1607, to confirm and enforce the first. 
 Blmekwell gallantly advised his flock to take the oath in defiance 
 of the brief. Priests confined in Newgate petitioned the Pope to 
 have compassion on them. Forty-eight doctors of the Sorbonne 
 lliaynst six declared that it might be taken with good conscience. 
 And taken it was by many, but taken in spite of the tyrannical 
 injunctions of Paul V., unhappily confirmed by Urban Vlll. and 
 
 toy Innocent X. . , „ ri i. i- 
 
 When it was proposed in 1648 to banish Roman Catholics on 
 •©count of the deposing power, their divines met and renounced 
 the doctrine. This renunciation was condemned at Rome as heret- 
 i<ml; but the attitude of France on these questions at the time 
 Bfevented the publication of the decree. 
 
 When the loyal remonstrance of 1661 had been signed by 
 certain Bishops and others of Ireland, it was condemned at Rome 
 in July. 1662, by the Congregation de Propaganda, and in the 
 same month tlie Papal Nuncio at Brussels, who superintended 
 the concerns of Irish Roman Catholics at the time, denounced 
 it as already condemned by the constitutions of Paul V. and I|i- 
 nocent X., and specially censured the ecclesiastics who, by sign- 
 iniz it, had misled the laity. 
 
 Well may BuUer say: "The claim of the Popes to temporal 
 fower by Divine right has been one of the most calamitous events 
 in the history of the Church. Its effects since the Reformation 
 on the Enclish and Irish Catholics have been dreadful." And 
 
 Xin: *• I&w often did our ancestors experience that ultra-Cath- 
 ism is one of the worst enemies of Catholicity I " . . . 
 I now pass to the period which followed the Revolution of 1688, 
 MiMMilllly with reference to the bold assertion that before 1870 
 Che Pope*B infallibility was a doctrine of divine faith. 
 
 The Revolution brought about by invasions of the law and Con- 
 stitution, with which the Church of Rome was disastrously asso- 
 ciated, necessarily partook of a somewhat vindictive character as 
 toward, the Anglo-Roman body. Our penal provisions were a 
 mitigated, but also a debased copy of the Papal enactments a^inst 
 heresy. It was not until 1757, on the appointment of thfe Duke 
 of Bedford to the Lord Lieutenancy of Ireland, that the first sign 
 of life was given. Indeed, it was only in 1756 that a new penal 
 law had been proposed in Ireland. But in the next year the 
 Irish Roman Catholic Committee published a declaration which 
 disavowed the deposing and absolving power, with other odious 
 opinions. Here it was averred that the Pope had " no temporal 
 or civil jurisdiction," "directly or indirectly, within this reAhn." 
 And it was also averred that it " is not an article of the Catholic 
 faith, neither are we thereby obliged to believe or profess thai 
 the Pope is infallible; " in diametrical contradiction to the decla- 
 ration of Archbishop Manning that persons of his religion were 
 bound to this belief before the Council of 1870. 
 
 If any thing had been wanting in this Declaration, it would 
 have been abundantly supplied by the Protestation of the Roman 
 Catholics of England in 1788-89. In this very important docu- 
 ment, which brought about the passage of the great English Re- 
 lief Act of 1791, besides a repetition of the assurances generally 
 which had been theretofore conveyed, there are contained state- 
 ments of the greatest significance. 
 
 1. That the subscribers to it " acknowledge no infallibility in 
 the Pope." 
 
 2. That their Church has no power that can directly or indi- 
 rectly injure Protestants, as all she can do is to refuse them her 
 sacraments, which they do not want. 
 
 3. That no ecclesiastical power whatever can "directly or indi- 
 rectly affect or interfere with the independence, sovereignty, laws, 
 constitution, or government " of the realm. 
 
 This protestation was, in the strictest sense, a representative 
 and binding document. It was signed by 241 priests, including 
 all the Vicars Apostolic ; by all the clergy and laity of England 
 of any note; and in 1789, at a general meeting of the English 
 Catholics in London, it was subscribed by every person present. 
 
 The act of 1791 for England was followed by that of 1793 for 
 Ireland. The oath inserted in this act is founded on the declara- 
 tion of 1757, and embodies a large portion of it, including the 
 
 words '• 
 
 " It is not an article of the Catholic faith, neither am I thereby 
 required to believe or profess that the Pope is infallible." 
 
 I refer to this oath, not because I attach an especial value to 
 that class of security, but because we now come to a synodical 
 declaration of the Irish Bishops which constitutes, perhaps, the 
 most salient point of the whole of this singular history. 
 
 On the 26th of February, 1810, those Bishops declared as fol- 
 lows: — 
 
 "That the said oath, and promises, declarations and abjurar 
 tions, and protestations therein contained, are, notoriously, to the 
 
MB 
 
 OBBDmiOB 10 THV KXra. 
 
 OBEDIENCE TO THE POPS. 
 
 2S9 
 
 M 
 
 Boman Catholic Charcli at large, become a part of the Roman 
 Catholic religion me taught by us. the BishopB, and received and 
 maintained bj the Roman Catholic Churches in Ireland ; and as 
 ■uoti are approved and sanctioned by the other Roman Catholic 
 
 €httrches. ' 
 
 I Obedience to the Pope. 
 
 Arehbishop Manning has boldly ^^rappled with my proposition 
 that the Third Chapter of the Vatican Decrees had forged new 
 chains for the Christian people, in regard to obedience, by givinff 
 it» authority to what was previously a claim of the Popes onlj, 
 and so making it a claim of the Church. He is astonished at 
 the statement, and he offers what he thinks a sufficient confuta- 
 tion of it in six citations. 
 
 The four last of these begin with Innocent ITI. and end with 
 the Council of Trent. Innocent III. and Sextus IV. simply claim 
 the regimen or government of the Church, which no one denies 
 ihem. The Council of Florence speaks of plena poieatas, and 
 the Council of Trent of snprema potestas^ as belonging to the 
 Pope. Neither of these assertions touch the point. Full power 
 in the government of a body may still be limited by law. No 
 other power can be above them, but it does not follow that theyj 
 can command from all persons an unconditional obedience, unless 
 themselves empowered by law so to do. We are familiar under 
 the British monarchy, both with the term supreme and with its 
 liiDitations. 
 
 The Archbishon, however, quotes a canon or chapter of a Ro- 
 man Council in 863, which anathematizes all who despise the 
 Pope's orders with much breadth and amplitude of phrase. If 
 taken without the context it fully covers the ground taken by the 
 Vatican Council. It anathematizes all who contemn the decrees 
 of the Roman See in faith, discipline, or correction of manners, 
 or for the remedy or prevention of mischief Considering that 
 the four previous canons of this Council, and the whole proceed- 
 ings, relate entirely to the case of the divorce of Lothair, it might 
 perhaps be ar^ed that the whole constitute only a privilegium 
 or law for the individual case, and that the anathema of the fifth 
 canon must be limited to those who set at naught the Pope's pro- 
 ceedings in that case. But the point is of small consequence to 
 my argument. 
 
 Bnt then the Roman Council is local, and adds no very potent 
 reinforcement to the sole authority^ of the Pope. The question 
 then remains how to secure for this local and Papal injunction 
 the sanction of the Universal Church, in the Roman sense of the 
 word. Archbishop^ Manning, perfectly sensible of what is re- 
 quired of him, writes that "this canon was recognized in the 
 Eighth General Cooneil, held at Constantinople in 869." He is 
 then more than oontented with his array of proofs, and con- 
 fining himself, as I am bound to mj he does in all personal mat- 
 lira Qiroughout this work, to the mildest language consistent with 
 
 the fbll expression of his ideas, he observes that I am manifestly 
 out of my depth. 
 
 I know not the exact theological value of the term " recognized; " 
 but I conceive it to mean virtual adoption. Such an adoption of 
 such a claim by a General Council appeared to me a fact of tho 
 utmost significance. I referred to many historians of the Church ; 
 but 1 found no notice of it in those whom I consulted, including 
 Baronius. From these unproductive references I went onward to 
 the original documents. 
 
 The Eighth General Council, so called, comprised only those 
 l^ishops of the East who adhere to, and were supported by, the 
 See of Rome and the Patriarch Ignatius in the great conflict of the 
 ninth century. It would not, therefore, have been surprising if 
 its canons hiui given some at least equivocal sanction to the high 
 Papal claims' But, on the contrary, they may be read with the 
 greatest interest as showing, at the time immediately bordering 
 on the publication of the false Decretals, how little way those 
 claims had made in the general body of the Church. The sys- 
 tem which they describe is the Patriarchal, not the Papal, sys- 
 tem; the fivefold distribution of the Christian Church under the 
 five great Sees of the Elder and New Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, 
 and Jerusalem. Of these the Pope of Rome is the first, but as 
 primus inter pares (Canons XVII., XXI., Lat.). The causes of 
 clergy on appeal are to be finally decided by the Patriarch in each 
 Patriarchate (Canon XXVL, Lat.), and it is declared that any 
 General Council has authority to deal, but should deal respect- 
 fully, with controversies of or touching the Roman Church itself 
 (Canon XXI. Lat., XIII. Gr.). This is one of the Councils which 
 solemnly anathematizes Pope Honorius as a heretic. 
 
 The reference made by Archbishop Manning is, as he has had 
 tho goodness to inform me, to the Second Canon. The material 
 words are these : 
 
 •' Regarding the most blessed Pope Nicholas as an organ of the 
 Holy Spirit, and likewise his most holy successor Adrian, we 
 accordingly define and enact that all which they have set out or 
 promulgated synodically from time to time, as well for the defense 
 and well-being of the Church of Constantinople, and of its Chief 
 Priest and Most holy Patriarch Ignatius, as likewise for the ex 
 pulsion and condemnation of Photius, neophite and intruder, he 
 always observed and kept alike, entire and untouched, under (op 
 according to) the heads set forth (cum expositus capitulis)," 
 
 There is not in the canon any thing relating to the i^opes gener- 
 ally, but only to two particular Popes; nor any reference to what 
 they did personally, but only to what they did synodically; nor to 
 what they did synodically in all matters, but only in the contro- 
 versy with Photius and the Eastern Bishops adhering to him. 
 There is not one word relating to the Canon of 863, or to the 
 Council which passed it; which was a Council having nothing 
 to do with the Photian controversy, but called for the purpose oi 
 supporting Pope Nicholas I. in what is commonly deemed his 
 righteous policy with respect to the important case of the divorce 
 01 Lothair. 
 
i£ 
 
 240' 
 
 0BEDICXC7B TO THB POFB. 
 
 TMB DSFOmro rOWBB OV TBM POFB. 
 
 ^: 
 
 So that the demonstration of tlie Archbishop falls wholly to the 
 ground ; and down to this time my statement remains entire and 
 unhurt The matter contained in it will remain yery important 
 until the Council or the Pope shall amend its decree so as to bring 
 il into oonformity with the views of Dr. Newman, and provide m 
 relief to the private conscience by opening in the great gate of 
 ob«dience a little wieketrdoor of exceptions for those who are 
 alnied to disobey. 
 
 Had the Decrees of 1870 been in force in the sixteenth and sev- 
 enteenth centuries, Roman Catholic peern could not have done 
 what, until the reign of Charles II. , they did; could not have 
 made their way to the House of Lords by taking the oath of al- 
 legiance, despite the Pope's command. But that is not all. The 
 Pope €x cathedra had bidden the Roman Catholics of England in 
 the eighteenth century, and in the sixteenth, and from the four- 
 teenth, to believe in the deposing: power as an article of faith. 
 But they rejected it; and the highest law of their Church left 
 Hem free to reject it. Has it not bound them now? The Pope 
 in the sixteenth century bade the Roman Catholics of England 
 iiieist the invhsion of the Spanish Armada. They disobeyed him. 
 lie highest law of their Church left them free to disobey. Are 
 they free now? That they will assert this freedom for themselves 
 I do not question — nay, I entirely believe. From every standing- 
 point, except that of V'aticaniem, their title to it is perfect. With 
 Vaticanism to supply their premise, how are they to conclude? 
 Dr. Newman says there are exceptions to this precept of obedi- 
 ence. But this IS just what the Council has not said. The Church 
 by the Council imposes yea. The private conscience reserves to 
 itself the title to say no. I must confess that in this apology there 
 is to me a strong, undeniable siliack of Protestantism. To recon- 
 cile Dr. Newman's conclusion with the premises of the Vatican 
 will surely reouire all, if not more than all, " the vigilance, acute- 
 ness, and subtlety of the Sckola Theologomm" 
 
 The days of such proceedings, it is stated, are gone by, and I 
 believe that, in regard to our country, they have passed away be- 
 yond recall. But that is not the present question. The present 
 fiiMtioB is whether the right to perform such acts has been effeot- 
 vally.diBtivowed. 
 
 fHl DEPOSING POWER OP THl POPl. 
 
 It will perhaps have been observed by others, as it has been by 
 me, that from me charges against my account of the Syllabus are 
 notably abeont two of the most important and instructive heads. 
 I accuse the Syllabus of teaching tne rights of the Church to use 
 inrce, and of maintaining the deposing power. 
 
 When my tract was published, I had little idea of the extent 
 to which, and (as to some of them) the hardihood to which those 
 who should have confuted my charges would themselves supply 
 evideneo to sustain ihem. 
 
 Bishop Clifford, indeed, sustains the deposing power on the 
 
 ground that it was accorded to the Pope hj the Nations. It was 
 simply a case like that of the (Geneva Arbitrators. Dr. Newman 
 defends it, but only npon conditions. The circumstances must 
 be rare and critical. The proceeding must be judicial. It must 
 appeal to the moral law. Lastly, there must be a united consent 
 of various Nations. In fine, Dr. Newman accepts the deposing 
 power only under the conditions which, as he thinks, the Pope 
 nimself lays down. 
 
 These allegations quiet.my fears, but they strain my faith, and, 
 purporting to be historical, they shock my judgment. For they 
 are, to speak plainly, without foundation. The arbitration at 
 Qenera, settlea a dispute, which they recited in formal terms, 
 that the two parties to it had empowered and invited them to 
 settle. The point of consent is the only weighty one among the 
 four conditions of Dr. Newman and is the sole point raised by 
 Bishop Clifford. Did, then, Paul III., as arbitrator in the case 
 of Henry VIII., pursue a like procedure? The first words of his 
 bull are: '* The condemnation and excommunication of Henij 
 yiH., King of England "-^not an auspicious beginning. There 
 is nothing at all a£)ut arbitration or consent of any b<xly, but a 
 solemn and fierce recital of power received from God, not from 
 the nations or from one nation, or from any fraction of a nation; 
 
 Sower " over the nations and over the kingdoms to pluck up and 
 estroy, to build up and to plant as chief over all kin^ of the 
 whole earth and all peoples possessing rule." Exactly similar is 
 the " arbitration " of Pius V. between himself and Elizabeth to 
 ths "arbitration" of Paul III. between himself and Henry VIH. 
 
 Archbishop Manning indeed, has thrown in a statement, the 
 utility of which it is bard to understand, that Queen Elizabeth 
 ''was baptized a Catholic." She was baptized after Appeals to 
 Rome had been abolished, and two years after the clergy had 
 owned in the King that title of headship which Mary abofished, 
 and which never has been revived. But Archbishop Manning 
 knows quite well that the Papal claims of right extend to all bap- 
 tized persons whatever, and Queen Victoria could have no exemp- 
 tion unless it could be shown that she was unbaptized. 
 
 The doctrine of the consent of Nations is a pure imagination. 
 The general truth of the matter is that the Popes of the Middle 
 Ages, like some other persons and professions, throve upon the 
 discords of their neighbors. Other powers were only some- 
 where ; the Pope, in the West, was everywhere. Of the two par- 
 ties to a quarrel, it was worth the while of each to bid for the 
 assistance of the Pope against his enemy; and he that bid the 
 highest, not merely in dry acknowledgment of the Papal pre- 
 rogatives, but also commonly in the solid tribute of Peter s pence 
 or patronage, or other tangible advantages, most commonly got 
 the support of the Pope. This is a brief and rude outline; but 
 it is history, and the other is fiction. 
 
 But does Dr. Newman stand better at this point? He only 
 
 grants the deposing power in the shape in which the Pope asu 
 
 it; and he sa^ the Pope only asks it on the conditions oi which 
 
 one is " a united consent of various nations." In the spedch of 
 
 21 
 
TVM BBFOfllHO POWXB OW ^fm FOiB. 
 
 1^9 Pope, howeven which he cites, there ie nothiDg oorreipondv 
 ing to this aocouni The Pope says distinctly, " of this right the 
 Ftmniain is (not the Infallibilitj. but^ the Pontifical authori^,** 
 The people or the Middle Ages, what did they do ? — ^made him an 
 arbitrator or judge ? No; but recognized in him that which — 
 what? he was? no ; but—" he is, the Supreme Judge of Chriaten- 
 iam" The right was not created, bill " assisted a« was due to it| 
 bj the public law and common consent of the nations." If this 
 is not enough, I will oomplete the demonstration. An early re- 
 port of the speech from the Boman newspapers winds up the 
 5|»itepent by describing the deposing power as— 
 
 "A right which the Popes, inyited oy the eall of tiie nations, 
 had to exercise when the general good demanded it. 
 
 But in the authorized and final report given in the " Collection 
 oflhe Speeches of Pius IX" this passage is corrected and runs 
 thus I 
 
 **A right which the Popes exercised in virtae of tiieir authority 
 wlien the general |:ood demanded it." 
 
 Thus Bishop Clifford^ and Dr. Newman are entirely at isfiiie 
 ifjth the Pope respecting the deposing power. WiU thev not 
 have tQ reconsider what they are to say and what they are to be- 
 lieve? That power, it must be borne in mind, appears to have 
 on^ of the firmest j>08sible Pontifical foundations in the Bull 
 ytiaiit Sanctum, which is admitted on all hands to be a declartr 
 t|on €z cathedra. 
 
 But it is not to the more moderate views of the Bishop and Dr. 
 Newman that we are to resort for information on the ruling &8h> 
 lopi of Boman doctrine. Among the really orthodox defender* 
 of Vaticanism, who have supplied the large majority of Reproofs 
 and Beplies, I do not recollect to have found one single disavowal 
 of the exposing power. Perhaps the nearest approach to it from 
 any writer of Siis school is supplied by Monsignor Capel, who re- 
 nl^rks that the Pope's office of arbiter is at an end, or " at least in 
 •It^anoe." There are, indeed, enough of disavowals wholly 
 valiteless. For example, disavowals of the universal monarchy ; 
 by which it appears to be meant that the Popes never claimed, in 
 temporals, sncn a monarchical power as is now acceded to them in 
 spirituals, namely, a power absorbini^ and comprehending every 
 otiher power whatever. Or, again, disavowals of the direcia po- 
 tmtas. For one, I attach not a feather's weight to the distinction 
 bnlween the direct power and the indirect, Speakinjg in his own 
 person. Archbishop Manning eschews the gross assertion to which, 
 in another work, ne has lent a sanction, and seems to think he 
 has mended the position when he tells us that the Church — that 
 is to say, the. Pope — " has a supreme judicial office, in respect to 
 the moTal law, over all Nations, and over all persons, both gov- 
 ernors iind governed." As long as they do right it is directive 
 and pi«ceptive', when they do wrong, the black cap of the Jud^ 
 it put on, ratione peceaU, " by reason of sin." That is to say, m 
 plain words, the right and the wrong in the conduct of States and 
 of indlfidnab is now, aa it alvrays has been, a matter for the judi- 
 
 MATirBB IHD OfUfDITlOir f» PAPAL DTFALUBILITT. 
 
 243 
 
 eial Mgnizanoe of the Choroh; and the entire judicial power of 
 the Church is summed up in the Pope : 
 
 " If Christian Princes and their laws deviate from the law of 
 €k>d, the Church has authority from God to judge of that devia-^ 
 tion, and by all its powers to enforce the correction of that de- 
 parture from justice." 
 
 I must accord to the Archbishop the praise of manliness. If 
 we are henceforward in any doubt as to nis opinions, it is by our 
 own fault. I sorrowfully believe, moreover, that he does no more 
 than express the general opinion of the teachers who form the 
 ruling body in his Church at large, and of the present Anglo- 
 Komish clergy almost without exception. In the episcopal man- 
 ifesto of Bishop Ullathorne I see nothing to qualify the doctrine. 
 In the Pastoral Letter of Bishop Vaughan the comfort we obtain 
 is this: "It will never, as we believe, be exercised again;" and 
 ** it is a Question purely speculative. It is no matter of Catholic 
 faith, and is properly relegated to the schools." Bishop Vaughan 
 does not appear to bear in mind that this is exactly what we 
 were told, not by his predecessors of 1789, who denied Infallibi^ 
 ity outright; not by the Synod of 1810, who affirmed it to be im- 
 possible that Infallibility ever could become an article of faith ; 
 but even in the "bated breath" of later times with respect to 
 Infallibility itself, which, a little while after, was called back from 
 the schools and the speculative region, and uplifted into the list 
 of the Christian credenda ; and of which we are now told that it 
 has been believed always and by all, only its boundaries have 
 been a little better marked. 
 
 In the train of the Bishops (I except Bishop Cliffi>rd) come 
 
 Sriests, monks, nay, laymen ; Vaticanism in all its ranks and or- 
 ers. And among these champions not one adopts the lauguage 
 even of Bishop iSayle, much less of 1810, much less of 17o9. 
 The "Monk of St. Augustine's" is not ashamed to say that 
 Bishop Doyle, who was put forward in his day as the champion 
 and representative man of the body, " held opinions openly at 
 variance with those of the great mass." 
 
 Nature and Coitoition of Papal Infallibility. 
 
 We are told it would be an entire mistake to confound thid 
 Infallibility of the Pope, in the province assigned to it, witli 
 absolutism. 
 
 " The Pope is bound by the m6ral and divine law, by the com- 
 mandments of God, by the rules of the Gospel, and by every 
 definition in faith and morals that the Church has ever made. 
 No man is more bound by law than the Pope; a fact plainly 
 known to himself and to every bishop and priest in Christen- 
 dom." — (Bishop Vaughan, Pastoral Letter.) 
 
 Every definition in faith and morals I These are written defi- 
 nitions. What are they but another Scripture? What right of 
 interpreting this other scripture is granted to the Church at lar^a 
 more than of the real and greater Scripture ?- Here is surely m 
 
- 4m^^ 
 
 MAnrna um oommimmi of »ai»ai. wiallibilht. 
 
 Hi forfection tiM petition for bread uiiwefed by tbe gift of • 
 
 BiihoB Yaughsii does net Tenture to Mseii that the Pope is 
 bound bj the canon law«-the written law of the Church of 
 Bono.. The abolition of the French Sees under the Concordat 
 witli Naiwleon, and the deposition of the legitimate Biahons even 
 if it were the only instanoe, bai setded that question forever. 
 Over the written law of his IChnroh the pleasure of the Pope is 
 supreme. And this justifios, for every practical purpose, the as- 
 lertfen «hatkwii# mipff etists in that Church, in the sai^e very 
 real tense as we should say there was no kw in England, m the 
 feign of James the Second, while it was subject to a dispensing 
 
 Sjwer. There exists no law wherever a living ruler, an execu- 
 ve he«i, claims and exercises, and is allowed to possess a power 
 annulling or a power of disnensing with the law. If Bishop 
 Yanghan does not know this, l am sorry to say that he does not 
 know the irsi lesson that every English citizen should learn; he 
 hm yet to pass through the lispings of civil childhood. This ex- 
 •mption ofSie individual, be he who he may, from the restraints 
 of &ie law is the very thing that in England we term absolutism. 
 By absolutism we mean the superiority of a personal will to law, 
 fbr the purpose of putting aside or changing law. Now, that 
 
 Smer is precisely what the Pope possesses. First, because he k 
 fUlible in faith and morals when he speaks ex cathedra, and be 
 himself is the final judge which of his utterances shall be utter^ 
 taoes ex cathedra. He has onlv to use the words, " I, ex eaih^ 
 ifru, declare ; " or the words, " f, in the discharge of the office of 
 ■iitor and teacher of all Christiana, by virtue of my supreme 
 SpMtolic authority, define as a doctrine regarding faith or mor- 
 als, to be held by the Universal Church," and all words that may 
 illlow, be they what they may, must now and hereafter be as 
 absolutely accepted by every Human Catholic who takes the Vatr 
 ican fbr his teacher, with what in their theological language thev 
 eall a divine faith, as must any article of the AposUes Creed- 
 And what words they are to be that may follow, the Pope by his 
 mni will and motion k tbe sole judge. 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS. 
 
 [rftOM TMI OHBUTIAM 8TAMDAU>.} 
 
 LORD CAMOYS' LETTER. 
 
 Aa our readers will be anxious to know of every new develop- 
 ment in the Gladstone-Manning controversy, we copy the follow- 
 ing telegram : 
 
 "liONDON, Nov. 30, 5.30 A. M. — ^A circular letter from Arch 
 bkhop Mannthg was read in all the Catholic Churches of thk 
 diocese yesterday, declaring that all persons who do not accept 
 the dogma of Papal Infallibility cease to be Catholics." 
 
 This, in view of what Gladstone has proved to be involved in the 
 doetrine of the Pope's Infallibility, and what has been frankly 
 admitted bv eminent Roman Catholics to be true, must be re- 
 carded 88 almost a defiance on the part of Archbishop Manning. 
 It is, at least, evidence that the Roman Catholic Church means 
 to draw the lines sharply and make a square issue. It is a bold 
 measure, especially in view of the known sentiments of leadine 
 Boman Catholics in England. We published last week the frank 
 admission of Lord Acton in his letter to Gladstone. We give now 
 another expression of English Roman Catholic sentiment, from 
 Lord Cftmoys — a nobleman who stands high in his church, and is 
 popular with all classes in England : 
 
 [rftOM THK LONOOM TIMES, KOr. 14.] 
 
 We have been requested by Lord Camoys to publish the fol< 
 lowing letter: 
 
 " Henlby-on-Thamb8, Nov. 13, 1874. 
 
 " Dear Mr. Gladstone : In your * Expostulation ' you have ap- 
 pealed to those English Roman Catholics who concur in the views 
 you have therein expressed. As I am one of those who so con- 
 cur, I am bound to say so. No one is more entitled than your- 
 self to an expression of confidence from those who have been 
 benefited by the great principles of civil and religous liberty by 
 which you have been invariably guided. I concur in the proposi- 
 tion you have stated, though I regret in reference to the reign of 
 <^ueeo Mary, vou should have considered it necessary to use the 
 term • bloody. It is unnecessary to argue upon the accuracy of 
 the expression. That word has always been and is offensive to 
 the Rcunan Catholics, and was not needed to support your assert 
 
 (245) 
 
LOBD OUfOTS 
 
 I WiiW It to be piffiotlj true, Bince that reign it wm not 
 
 WMsible f<ir tlie party to whom you allude, — I presume the Kit- 
 oaliats— iumI, jou might ha¥e added, for the Roman Catholics, and 
 I add Ibr both oombmed, though they might tend to overthrow 
 the Sstabliehed Church, jet could never make thii a Roman 
 OiHiolio country. Lord Acton and yourself have drawn atten- 
 tton, and quite appropriately, to the language held by the Roman 
 ChUhoiio clergy and hiity previoua to emaDcipation, when the dis- 
 tinolion between the civil and spiritual duties of Catholics was 
 dearly defined, and Infallibility emphatically denied. Had any 
 Catholic of importance then said, ' 1 am a Catholic first and an 
 IHglbhman after/ and that without the slightest reservation, 
 and, hid that expression been defended by a Catholic Archbishop 
 ®f thai day as it has been defended by the Archbishop of Westr 
 miaater, 1 very much doubt if Catholic emancipation would have 
 been granted. In noticing your ' Expostulation,' the Archbishop 
 of Westminster, in his published letter, said that there is no 
 change in the obligations of the Roman Catholics to the eivU 
 
 K>wer in consequence of the publication of the Vatican Decreea. 
 ow is this so? It is not likely the present Pope will adopt 
 against Queen Victoria, the course pursued by the then Pope 
 againat (£ieen Blisabeth, but there is no telling what edict midit 
 be iianed by the author of the Syllabus. Assuming an edict 
 HUM aow iMued, tending to weaken or destroy allegiance, what a 
 diUnnl poeition a Roman Catholic would be in now from what 
 he would have been in then. In&llibility was not then a matter 
 of compulsory belief, and he would have been at liberty to refute 
 oompiianoe with such an edict ; but what would be the effect of 
 his belief in the personal infallibility ? He must either withhold 
 hia allegiance on the one hand, or risk his salvation on the other; 
 and is not this a new obligation ? To be compelled to believe 
 under severe penalties now, what we were at liberty to disbelieve 
 then with impunity, is surely a new obligation. As an inde- 
 pendent English Roman Catholic, I consider it my duty to make 
 this response to your appeal. Much may be said of the serious 
 dllficiilties that many members of the Roman Catholic Church 
 Utroughout the world will be placed in, by being compelled to 
 believe in the Vatican Decrees. For myself, I will say that hit- 
 tory, common sense, and my early instruction, forbid me to ac- 
 cept the astounding and novel (novel at least, in ite present 
 promol^on) doctrine of the personal infallibility of the Pope, 
 thouehlimited, as asserted, to the krge domain of faith and 
 monOs. I remain yours, faithfully, 
 
 "Camoys." 
 All such men are ^iven to understand that they must eat their 
 words and belie their convictions, or cease to be regarded as 
 Oatholict. This is frank, definite, unmistakable— indicating a 
 settled pnrpose on the part of the Church to stand or fall with 
 thedoetrine of the Pope's Infallibility, accepting all ite logical 
 ■od Geological consequences. 
 
 Those English Catholics whom we mention elsewhere as having 
 gone or about to g9 to Rome, to persuade the Pope not to inabt 
 
 WKD OAMOTS' LETTER. 
 
 241 
 
 on applying the doctrine of Infallibility in such a way as to in- 
 terfere with their political relations in England, will find cold 
 comfort, according to the following statement : 
 
 " This morning the Pope, who has recovered from his indispo 
 sition, after receiving the Bishop of Bucharest, admitted several 
 Bnglish Catholics to an audience. In addressing them, he said : 
 
 '• A former Minister of your country, whom I had believed 
 rather moderate, and who, to say the truth, had never while in 
 office manifested arrogance or violence toward the Catholic 
 Church, intoxicated by the proceedings of another Minister in 
 another State, has suddenly come forward, like a viper, assailing 
 this bark of St. Peter. I have not read the book, and I have no 
 creat desire to read blasphemies, but from what I understand, the 
 Minister whom they call Liberal, flatters the Catholics of that 
 nation, and leads them to believe that I wish them to become 
 disloyal to their sovereign and the laws of their country. 
 Puzzled at beholding the vast progress made by that great na- 
 tion in the path of the true faith, the fallen Minister hoped to 
 arrest the luminous triumph of the Church by interpreting after 
 his own fashion, the will of this poor Vicar of Christ. A great 
 King (Charlemagne) said that even should the Church impose 
 heavy burdens on the conscience of the population, the Catholics 
 should bear them from their interest in the communion of the 
 Church ; but our dogmas, far from being burdens, are light. 
 Those who will walk astray are not Catholics ; they are worse 
 than infidels and Protestants, because, calling themselves Cath- 
 olics, they daily rebel against God and the laws of the Church." 
 
 This fierce denunciation of Gladstone without one word of de- 
 nial of the truth of Gladstone's charges, or the slightest attempt 
 to soften the doctrine of papal supremacy and Infallibility, is 
 significant as an illustration of the spirit that reigns at the Vat- 
 ican, and the policy of the Pope to push his claims to the utmost. 
 
 That Gladstone is not a victim of idle fears in asserting that 
 even England, in spite of all previous asseverations of Roman 
 Catholic ecclesiastics, is placed in a new and somewhat danger- 
 ous position, by the latest phases of Romanism, he has abund- 
 antly demonstrated; and, as we have seen, eminent Catholic 
 noblemen admit the truth and force of his statements and reason- 
 ings. In this country, while we may flatter ourselves that we 
 have no concern with this strife between Church and Stete, it is 
 well to watch all the bearings of this controversy — since it may 
 prove that even here, a strife may yet be provoked of exceeding 
 oittemess. The open and fierce assaults on our public school 
 system, the unscrupulous efforts to secure State patronage for ec- 
 jlesiastical institutions, and the bold avowal of the most offensive 
 teachings of the famous and infamous Syllabus, all show the 
 anti-republican ncture of a pcxer which is growing into im- 
 mense proportions in our land. 
 
m 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 LOIB OAMOTS' LBTTBB. 
 
 tiiMi. I Miove it to be perfectly fcnie. sinee that reiffn it mm not 
 Fg^orthaparty to ^^ allude,^! presSie ZrSh 
 
 "f^^ryi^J^ mi^hfc have added, for the Romln Catholics, and 
 iTlWhl^hL^^^^^ though thej might tend to overthrow 
 C^oho oountfj. Lord Acton and yourself have drawn atten- 
 
 Ottolieof imDortence then said, 'f am a Catholic first and d 
 
 ^hi?^ ^ e«w«e.ion b<»en defended bv a dtholio Archbishop 
 ^i^,/ " " "»« »r°.^«f«'"'«' by tfie Archbishop of Weav 
 »unrtw;rje,y much doubt if Catholic emancipation would h^i 
 
 rfwSSSi^i., i "»'?<'""« ^J;?";E?PO»talation,' the ArohbUhop 
 S^J:« ?^^'' i?. '^ published letter, said that there is no 
 etange in the obligations of the Roman Catholica to the ci°U 
 
 Krk°thk";TT°^ the publication of the Vatican Dec^ 
 J*«r » this so? It 11 not hkely the present Pope wiU adopt 
 ■gatoat Queen Victoria, the course pursued by the then Poi 
 
 Ef!L".L2"rf ""^u'^' •"•,' "">"> " «> *«'"»? what edict n^^ 
 be issued by the au^or of the Syllabus. 'Issumine an ^ct 
 
 iSh. .T T*^ *'5'*'°« *» weaken or destroyallegiaioe, what" 
 «b«»rtljM.honaRomM Catholic would bo'in nSTfrom Wh^ 
 o?.!^i " ^°;" '^*f InfcUibility was not then a mattur 
 
 J>^^Z^:±'^'^ "If- r"u" •"!• b^" «^ liberty to »faS 
 t^u&^^ T.r' '""'' "" '^'<=* ; but what would be the efleet of 
 u! X!f.'„°J^ T^"'^ infeUibility ? He must eidj wUhhoM 
 
 Mmjs not this a new obligation ? To be compelled to beliere 
 
 »!^.7; B '"P""^' » »?^y » new obligation. As an inde- 
 
 SSt^^^f^ ^"^ *^*» * "on'W" it my duty to Zkt 
 ttaj nmonse to your appeal Jlneh may be said of the serimi. 
 jMeotoe. that many members of the RomaT CaSoUc X^ 
 *rp«W«Mmt the iforldf will be placed in by TeinecomVlM 
 bdim b, the Vatican DecreesTXr mvseff. I w^l ^fffhi^ 
 to^ oommon ,en«,. and my early instruction forborne t^ 
 
 Crft^Si^"*"' "/."•« P*"°"»' infellibiUty of the'^Pop" 
 tho^Tunited, as asserted, to the laige domain of &ith uid 
 
 """^ I remain yours, faithfully, 
 
 worfLllS ne'IS.^^" to understand that they m'us^1^"tiii« 
 SSwJsif SE,- ^'^ con^ctions, or cease to be regarded •■ 
 
 SaSiSiK .h. P '^T°','?,?v9.''°"* to "^"^ <»• &» with 
 «S A^J^^ I * ^"P* ' InfallibiUty, accepting all iu logical 
 ■aatheological consequences. *^ 
 
 ^.nT^f.?!^.'!'' ^tbo'ie'whom we mention elsewhere as hayimr 
 gone or about to gp to Borne, to persuade the Pope not to in^ 
 
 U>RD OAMDTS' LBTTEB. 
 
 341 
 
 on applyiiuc the doctrine of Infallibilitr in such a wav a. r« <. 
 terfere with their political relations S En|hnd, wiff tod coS 
 oomfort, according to the following statemeft: 
 
 1 His morning the Pope, who has recovered from his indisno 
 Snrilih r^^hT'TK *be Bishop of Bucharest, admit^ sevIS 
 ■ft™., ^ *^r "»/''"""'• ^^ ""^dressing them, he said : 
 rather Zr~»'"!.''\°'^?''"'"*'°'i°'^' "bom^l had believed 
 ^ce m^ff^^^""* "'"'• *° "'y '.''? *""■. had never while in 
 rhnLh ?^.„ '^ /T^J"" '"■ ^'"'^''''^ toward the Catholic 
 ^noZer'StaU £!;^ 5-5*,* P^'^^di^eo "f another Minister in 
 th^S h!Jl nfllV^ suddenly come forward, like a viper, assailing 
 
 erl^eSire S^r^H^hi \'"^? "1*7"/ ""> book, and I have nf 
 great desire to rend blasphemies, but from what J understand the 
 Minister whom they calll Liberal, flatters the CatholS^of 'that 
 S^w;]"!^ 'r^ *'■*"' *? ^^'""^^ *batl wish them t^Wome 
 PuITJ »^l>f^*"M- ""^^""6" «'«' tbe laws of their couX 
 tio^ ^the ^*h f".^ *•"; """i K°^i^' ■P'"'*' by that great nl 
 .i^.f .K. I P^* "'^ . ^ *™? '^"b. the fiillen Itfinister Lped to 
 arrest the luminous triumph of the Church by interoretin? .ftli 
 
 KlTTctX"""' 'b* ^i" of this poor VicarTf ChriTt I'^^J 
 f.„£V 5 ''""S"?) «»"i that even should the Church im^se 
 heavy burdens on the conscience of the population, tSe Cathf H« 
 fcch^T ?""° *!;"" 'beir interest in'^ L communion of hi 
 ^nll \^''\i"",?°^'"'- *^*' from being burdens, are liAt 
 Those who will walk astray are not Catholics; they are wonio 
 «han infidels and Protestants, because, calling themselves cX 
 olics they daily rebel against God and the laws of the Oiur "h " 
 nirio? ?hTt™thTf nf r. "^ P'"^**""* "''bout one woJd of d.v 
 to .ofte^t^S^^?-*^'™^?*""* '.*=''"?"'• "' *be slightest attempt 
 to soften the doctrine of papal supremacy and Infallibility i« 
 significant as an illustration of the spirit aiWt reigns at the Vat 
 ■ 'That''r.'^'r"'=^ °' f' ^"P? *° P"«b bis claimft^ fte u Jst 
 
 STthoK^^fj .-f *-P'*? °^, *". P.™"""' "Meveratione of fiom,m 
 
 ™.^^,Uin^ I .K**S'! Pi~=?^ '" » "«" '"d somewhat dange" 
 ous position, by the latest phases of Romanism he ha« ahnnT 
 
 ^U^rT*^!^:""^- hr b'-o seen, eiinent CaS 
 
 i°n« In tlfif i' *^^ '""'V,"'^ *^""' »'■ bi' statements and reason- 
 ings. In this country, while we may flatter ourselves that w. 
 
 have no concern with this strife between Church and St^te it ^ 
 Zww'"'' "i*^" bearings of this controversy-lliince it may 
 S^™^« " tL*"*"' " '''i^l ""y y«' be provokid of exceed^n^ 
 ™te™ ^^ "P*? »°ifi«'-<'« «^«"'lt8 on our public school 
 
 ystem the unscrupulous efforts to secure State patronage for ec^ 
 Jlesiastical institutfons. and the bold avowal of t£e mosToffeMive 
 iSSr3,I?i^ ftjfons and infamous Syllabus, J? show Z 
 anti-repubhcan natjirj>..of a newer .whioh -is icrJwine into im- 
 mense proportions in ourlani .•;...-. ".if^wing into im- 
 
 » • • * • 
 
 • a 
 
 
 • * . 
 
 s .. • 
 
.' . , 
 
 % 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 
 
 ■ . 1 . 1 . . . 1 . 
 
 025990292 
 
 [J 
 
 936 
 956 
 
 C iS'4 
 
 C (5*4- 
 
 ftQ 24