IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 11.25 U;|28 |2.5 Ui Uii 122 ^ US, 12.0 U ||.6 6" ^; ^ 7 ^/ >* '/ apnic ScMices Corpotatian 23 WIST MAIN STMET WIBSTIR,N.Y. 14510 (716)t72-4S03 ^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Instituta for Historical IMicroreproductions / Institut Canadian da microraproductions historiquas -■^ Tachnical and Bibliographic Notaa/Notas tachniquaa at bibliographiquaa Tha inatituta Itaa attamptad to obtain tha baat original copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia copy which may ba MbllographicaNy uniqua, which may altar any of tha imagaa in tha raproduction, or which may signif leantly changa tha uaual mathod of filming, ara chaclcad balow. Q D D D D Colourad covara/ Cauvartura da coulaur Fyj Covara damagad/ Couvartura andommagia Covara raatorad and/or laminatad/ Couvartura raataur4a at/ou pallicul4a Covar titia miaaing/ La tlira da couvartura manqua I I Colourad mapa/ Cartaa gtographiquaa 9n coulaur Colourad ink (i.a. othar than biua or black)/ Encra da coulaur (i.a. autra qua blaua ou noira) r~| Colourad plataa and/or illuatrationa/ Pianchaa at/ou iliuatraitiona an coulaur Bound with othar matari«il/ RaiiA avac d'autraa documanta r~^ Tight binding may cauaa ahadowa or diatortion along intarior margin/ La re liura aarrAa paut cauaar da I'ombra ou da la diatortion la long da la marga intMaura Blank laavaa addad during raatoration may appaar within tha taxt. Whanavar poaaiblv, thaaa hava baan omittad from filming/ II aa paut qua cartainaa pagaa Manehaa ajoutiaa lora d'una raatauration apparalaaant dana la taxta, maia, loraqua cala Atait poaaibia, caa pagaa n'ont paa *t« fiimiaa. Additional commanta:/ Commantairaa aupplAmantairaa; L'Inatitut a microfilm* la maillaur axamplaira qu'll lui a AtA poaaibia da aa procurar. Laa dAtaila da oat axamplaira qui aont paut-Atra uniquaa du point da vua bibllographiqua. qui pauvant mrc'^fiar una imaga raproduita, ou qui pauvant axigar jna modification fiana la mithoda normala da fil\naga aont indiquA'i ci-daaaoua. I I Colourad pagaa/ D D Pagaa da coulaur Pagaa damagad/ Pagaa andommagAaa Pagaa raatorad and/oi Pagaa raataurtea at/ou palliculAaa Pag<9a diacolourad, atainad or foxai Pagaa dicoiorAas, tachatAat ou piquiaa Pagaa datachad/ Pagaa dAtach^as Showthroughy Tranaparanca Quality of prin Quaiiti inigaia da I'impraaaion Includaa aupplamantary matarii Comprand du material auppl^mantaira |~~| Pagaa damagad/ r~1 Pagaa raatorad and/or laminatad/ [~p| Pag<9a diacolourad, atainad or foxad/ I I Pagaa datachad/ Fyl Showthrough/ Fyl Quality of print variaa/ I I Includaa aupplamantary matarial/ Only adition availabia/ Saula Mition diaponibia Pagaa wholly or partially obacurad by arrata alipa, tiaauaa, ate hava baan rafilmad to anaura tha baat poaaibia imaga/ Laa pagaa totalamant ou partiallamant obacurciaa par un fauiilat d'arrata. una palura, ate, ont At* filmAaa * nouvaau da fa^on A obtanir la maillaura imaga poaaibia. Tl t( Tl P< 01 fil O b< tti ai ol fil ai 01 Tl •f\ Tl wl M dl1 an bfl lit rai mi Thia itam ia filmad at tha raduction ratio chackad balow/ Ca documant aat film* au taux da reduction indiqu* ci*daaaoua. 10X MX 18X 22X aix 30X Y 12X 16X aox a4x 2BX 32X Th* copy f]lm«d Iwr* has b««n r«produc«d thanks to tha flanarosity of: Library of tha Public Archivaa of Canada L'axampiaira f f'mA f ut raproduit grica k la OAnArosit* da: La bibiiothAqua dat Archivaa pubiiq^ ^« du Canada Tha imaoas appaaring hara ara tha bast quality poaaibia oonaMarlng tha condition and iaglbillty of tha original cop*^- and In kaaping with tha filming contract: spacif icetiona. Original coplaa in printad papar covara ara filntad baglnning with tha front covar and anding on tha laat paga with a printad or illuatratad impraa- sion, or tha back covar whan appropriata. All othar original copiaa ;m filnnad baglnning on tha first papa with a printad or Illuatratad Impraa- sion, and anding on tha last paga with a printad or iSiuatratad impraaaion. Tha last racordad frama on aach microflcha shall contain the aymbol — ^> (moaning "CON- TINUED"), or tha symbol ▼ (moaning "END"), whichavar appllaa. Las imagaa suivantas ont At* raproduitas avac ia plua grand soin. comr m tanu da ia condition at da la nattatA da l'axampiaira f limA, at an conformitA avac las conditions du contrat da flimaga. Laa axamplalraa originaux dont la couvartura an papiar ast ImprimAa sont filmis an commandant par ia pramlar plat at an tarminant soit par la darnlAra paga qui comporta una amprainta d'imprassion ou d'iiiustration, soit par ia sacond plat, salon ia caa. Tous laa autras axamplalraa originaux aont filmAa an commandant par ia pramlAra paga qui comporta una amprainta d'Imprasaion ou d'iiiustration at an tarminant par ia darnlAra paga cjui comporta una talia amprainta. Un daa symbolaa sulvants apparattra sur la darnlAra imaga da ch^qua microflcha, salon ia caa: la symbols — ^ signifia "A SUIVRE", la symboia y aignifia "FIN". IMaps, plataa, charts, ate, may b« filmad at diffarant radustion ratloa. Thoaa too larga to ba antiraly Includad in ona axpoaura ara filmad beginning in tha uppar laft hand cornar. laft to light and top to bottom, m many framaa as raquirad. Tha following diagrama illuatrata tha method: Lea cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre fllmAa A daa taux da rAductlon diff Arents. Lorsque ie document est trop grand t>our Atra raproduit an un aaul ciichA, II est fllmA A partir da i'angle aupArieur geuche, de gauche A droite, et de haut an baa, an prenant ie nombre d'imagea nAceaaalre. Lea diagrammea sulvants illustrent la mAthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ^. ^vcK*^ '^^:i>^ rn '■7 COPIES OF LETTERS ADDRESSED BY THE REV. P. McMAIION, TO THE EDITORS or L£ JOIMAL i)£ aUEB£€, MS LE CANADIEN, CONTAINING THE REPORT OF A CONFERENCE, Which took place, at hi* rcaideucc, IN THE MONTH OF APRIL LAST, BETWEEN HIM ANIJ TWO ITINERANT PREACHERS. My thouijliU are not. as ynur thoiii;hts, neither an" your ways my ways, saith tliu Li>ril ; for an the hea- vens are exalteil hIiovo the earth, even so are my wav* exaltett above your ways, anil my thoughts abiive your thoui;ht.s. Itaiat -Sup. LI'., I'er. HV. QUEBEC: PRINTED BY AUGUSTIN c6Tfc ET CIE. L843. TO THE EDITOR OF THE JOURNAL DE QUEBEC. Mr. Editor, — There has been just this moment placed in my hands a pamphlet, written in French by an Itinerant Preacher, whose name is Morel, and who Styles himself a Missionary of what he calls the Evangel' ical Church reformed. This pamphlet purports to contain an account of a Conference on the subject of religion which he says took place between Two Missionaries of the above named Ckurch,and Four Priests of the Church of Rome, The object of this publication is evidently to mislead its readers, and make wrong impressions on the public mind by a bold misrepresentation of what really passed on the occasion to which it alludes. Fortunately, how- ever, it carries with it its own refutation. For, in spite of all the author's shifts to give his statements an air of truth, a want of sincerity betrays itself even in the very title page. Mr. Morel there sets forth that the confer- ence took place between " Two Missionaries of the Reformed Evangelical Church and Four Priests of the Church of Rome," Four against Two ! surely, Mr. Edi- tor, this is not what an Irishman would call fair play in the 19th century. Here, sir, are fearful odds, in favor of the valiant old Romans, But this is only one of those shabby little stratagems, one of those specimens of Evan- gelical tricks, which Mr. Morel, no doubt, employs with the greatest purity of intention, for the triumph of Bible truth ! IV I would not, I beg to assure you, Sir, liave stooped to notice this inisenibh; production of a brainless fanatic, had he not most unwarrantably and contrary to all the laws of hospitality, taken the unjustiliable liberty ot drag- ging me pcrsonullf/ belbre the public, by publishing, without my knowledge or consent, the pretended contents of a private interview, which, at his own recjuest, took place under my roof. But, I suppose, Mr. Morel considered it as highly Haltering to his vanity, and sub- servient to his extravagant hopes of seducing the Cana- dian people from the venerable faith of their forefathers, if he could have it believed that through me, he was contending with the Catholic Clergy of this city. Such, however, I need not assure you, was not the case. Indeed, I frankly admit that were I in need of any assistance to enable me to confute these religious adven- turerSf there are certainly none to whom I would more readily apply than to the Catholic Clergy of Quebec, from whose extensive erudition and superior abilities I might expect to derive information which, would be sought for in vain, among Mr. Morkl's fraternity. .Justice, how- ever, to my Rev. Brethren of this city, requires that I should not allow this designing fanatic to connect their names with this discussion. For it was I alone who spoke on the different subjects that were debated on that occasi- on; and consequently for my inaccuracies or deficiencies, whatever these may be, they are by no means accounta- ble, no more than the Rev. Gentlemen of the Church of England are accountable for Mr. Morel's absurd and ridiculous answers to my arguments against his rule of faith. Mr. Morel has, I find, carefully abstained from men- tioning the circumstance which has occasioned the discussion in question, as also the place where it was ^ held, lie oi" course knows best his own niolives lor ihe omission. But 1 have only to beg that, should any of my Protestant fellow citizens find any of the observations which I found it my duty to make on the occasion allu- ded to, harsh or iliiberal ; I have only to request, I say, that such will remember that the Conference was abso- lutely forced upon me, and that too, at a time, when severe indisposition had confined me to my bed, and after having previouslif refused to accept a challenge which Mr. Morel had conveyed to me, to meet him and his confrere at a certain house in the Suburbs, for the purpose of entering into a religious controversy with them, 'ihis Challenge, Mr. Editor, I peremptorily refused to accept ; not indeed because I felt the least apprehension, as to the result of any such controversy, but because I (juestioned very seriously, the propriety of my consenting to enter into a polemical disputation with individuals, who were utter strangers to me, and with whose moral character and religious creed, I was equally unacquainted. Rut the circumstance of their coming to my house left me no alternative. Mr. Morel states, in what he terms his uvanl-propos, that a report had obtained circuLtion in the public which went to say that he and his confrere had been " confuted in a few words ;" and I suppose it is to this circumstance he would wish to hold the community indebted for the inestimable benefit, which, in the plenitude of his folly, he expects they will derive, from the perusal of his learned production. This statement, however, I have good rea- son for believing to be insincere, and would feel inclined to think that the public acknowledgements for this very elaborate ivork are due rather to some latent cause, which might perhaps be oasily traced to a certain uneasi- ness or mortification of mind, naturally resulting from the VI t)ainful conviction, which he must have feU, of the random assertions of nonsense which he substituted for answers to my wguments against his rule of faith — nonsense, I say, which one moment's cool reflection could not have failed to render obvious even to his own weak and disor- dered imagination. This, my opinion, as to the cause of the publication in question, receives additional strength from the circumstance of his having suppressed the whole of my arguments and conclusions, and substituted others of course more suitable to his evangelkal designs. It is a uniform custom with us, Mr. Editor, when we undertake to censure or refute our adversaries, to select their best arguments, to place them in the most favorable light, and then to measure our strength with theirs. But Mr. Morel has, I find, for obvious reasons, preferred quite an opposite course ; for he passes over in dignified silence, all my arguments, and catches up some mutilated sentences, some disjointed reflection, and then exhibits these for purposes the very reverse of those for which they were intended. Having premised these observa- tions with the view of letting the public see how the con- troversy originated ; I shall now, Mr. Editor, with your kind permission, proceed to lay before them a true ver- sion of what Mr. Morel calls une Conference entrt deux Missionaires de VEglise Evangelique Reformee, d quatre PrStres de VEglise Romaine, P. McMahon. THE DISCUSSION. The Rev. Mr. McMahon opened the discussion by I calling on Mr. Morel to define his rule of faith. Mr. Morel rose and stated in reply that the Bible, and the Bible alo?ie, as understood by each individual reader, vv^as his rule of faith. The Rev. Mr. McMahon further enquired, whether Mr. Morel received, for religious truth, anything not expressly contained in the Bible ? Certainly not, replied Mr. Morel. The Rev. Mr. McMahox — I call upon you then, Sir, to point out to me the express passage or text of Scrip- ture, which says that the Bible alone is the Christian's rule of faith. I defy you to produce any such text, from the first leaf of Genesis to the last of the Revelations ; and if you cannot, as I am sure you cannot, then, in honest, sincerity, you must avow first, that you receive for an article of faith, something not expressly contained in the Bible : and 2ndly that your boasted rule of faith is a mere gratuitous assumption, unwarranted and unsupported by the very book itself from which you pretend to derive it. Mr. Morel rose and cited, in proof of the Protestant rule, the usual passages, viz : that all Scripture is given by inspiration, — that it is good and profitable 8fc. that the Jews were directed by the Saviour to search the Scrip" il ■ 2 iures ; and that the Beieans were commended by St. Paul for examining by the test of Scripture the doctrines that wei'c preached to them. The Rev. jMr. JMcMaiion — All this I admit, Sir, but between tliis and the Bible alone being the sole and only rule of faith, instituted by .Jesus Christ, there is an im- mense difference. For these passages and every other which you can adduce, will only go to prove what no Catholic ever denied, viz. that Holy Scripture is good and profitable and has been written for our instruction and edification, and, ichen correctly understood is able to make us wise unto sakation. But they will never prove that the Bible alone is the sole and exclusive rule of faith, which please remember, is the express point you are called upon to establish. Moreover, Sir, I object to your rule, because it is evident that it is not the one which Christ did institute. Are not, I would ask you, the very terms of the divme commission, which he delivered to his Apostles, when he was sending them, not to scatter Bibles among the nations of the earth, and constitute every man the arbiter of his own faith, but io preach the Gospel to every creature, proof positive that he never intended the dead letter of Scripture to be a rule of faith for his followers ? As my father sent me, so I send you. Going, therefore, teach all nations, 8fc. Is not, I would again enquire, the manner in which the apostles understood and laboured to fulfil this divine commission, ^vooi unanswerable that the Bible alone is not the Christian's rule of faith ? Did they or did they not, when they received the command to an- nounce the doctrines of salvation to the nations of the earth, preach the Gospel in every country from. Judea to Spain in one direction, and to India in another ? every where founding c hurches, and every where commending their doctrine to faithful men, tcho would be Jit to teach others. (2 Tim. 2). But nowhere do vvc find them employ- ing their time in distributing Bibles, nowhere do we find them stating the Bible alone to be the rule of faith. Verily, Sir, this divine commission of the Saviour to his AposUes to preach the Gospel, and the manner in which the latter fulfilled it, does not look very much like his having constituted the Bible alone ftr our rule of faith ; but, on the contrary, it will for ever record and denounce the guilt and lolly of those men, who first raised, and of others who still continue to uphold the rebellious and disorganizing standard of private Judg- ment in the interpretation of Holy-writ, against the authoritative teaching of that Church, which St. Paul calls the pillar and ground of Truth, and which Jesus Christ has commanded all his followers, not excepting Mr. Morel himself, to hear and obey, under pain of the loss of eternal life. He that will not hear the Church let him be unto thee as a heathen and a Publican. What a pity for Mr. Morel's rule of faith that the Saviour did not say : He diat will not hear, read and interpret the Bible for himself shall be considered as a heathen and a publican ? What a pity it is for the protestant rule of faith, that he did not say to the Bible what he said to the Apostles and through them, to the Pastors of his Church : He that hcarctJi you, hcareth me ; and he thatheareth me, hcareth him that sent me. (Luke X. 16.) If the Saviourhad said so of the Bible, then, indeed, Mr. Morel's rule of faith might be plausibly enough defended. But iinrorlunalely for the tottering edifice of protestanism, which is based upon the sandy foundation of the Bible alone as operated upon by private judgment, he said no such thing. Moreover, Sir, if the Redeemer had intended the letter of the Scripture, with the inter- I II pretation of every individual teader, for our rule of faith, he would, most certainly have written, at least, a portion of the JVew Testament himself ; or, he would have com- manded his Apostles to do so ; and then would have said : upon the iiiiltcn ivordf as interpreted by each indi- vidual, I will build rny Church. But we do not find that he ever wrote a word himself, except, perhaps, the condemnation of the bible reading Pharisees, with his finger in the dust ; nor is there on record any order or command of his to the Aposdes to that effect. But this we do find recorded that he said to Simon Barjona : Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church ; and the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against her. (Mat. XVI. 18.) But you tell us that Jesus ivent about all Galilee preaching the Gospel, Mat. IX. — Certainly he did ; and what of that ? was it the torittcn or dead letter of the Gospel he preached, submitting the interpretation of his words to the whim of every caprice ? certainly not, for the letter of the Gospel was not written for half a century after that ; a circumstance which forced Dr. Marsh, a Bishop of the Protestant Church of England, to acknow- ledge that Jesus Christ laid the foundation of his Church by preaching. JYor can we deny, says he, that the unwritten word was the first ride of Christianity. (See his comparative view.) What think you, Mr. Morel, of this concession to the Catholic rule ? where is now, in the opinion, even, of Dr. Marsh your boasted rule of faith ? Where was it during the many ages, which intervened between Adam and Moses ? Were the ancient Patriarchs, who lived and died before the Pentateuch was written, left without a rule of faith ? Answer if you can. What was their rule ? Was it the Bible ? Certainly not ; it could not have been the Bible lor it was not then written. No, Sir, it was tradition ! Again, I repeat the enquiry, where was your rule of faith before the New Testament was wi ilten 7 That is to say, during the greater part of the first century of the Chris- tian era. 1 answer, if you cannot, that it was then, where it now is, in the constant and aiithoritative teaching of the Church ofJcsus' Christ. Search the Scriptures, Mr. Morel, for they bear testi- mony to this Church. But, alas ! I fear that you, like the Jews, who, tho' reading the Scriptures, in which they thought they had eternal life, could not discover the manifest testimony they bore to Jesus Christ, being blinded by wilful obstinacy ; I fear, I say, that you, tho' reading the Gospel, which bears the strongest and clear- est evidence of Christ's Church will not allow the awful terrors of God's judgment in that same Gospel announced against all those, who refuse to hear that Church, to shake off the scales of prejudice from your eyes, lest seeing you might see and understand. Permit me, once more, to ring in your ears, the memorable sarcasm of the Saviour to the obstinate, bible reading Jews, search the Scriptures, in ichich you think you have everlasting life ; for, as I have already told you, they bear testimony to his Church. But, alas ! such is the naturul consequence of error that in every attempt against the truth it manifests still more its own weakness, and renders its native defor- mity more hideous and disgusting. Will you again urge the text, which appears to be such a favorite with you, search the Scriptures, 8fc. 1 If you do, be pleased not to garble or mutilate it, but give it, as it stands in the Gospel, ichole and entire. Why do 3 ou and your unhappy partners in error, whenever you cite this passage, generally omit the middle part, " in which you think you have eternal life ?" could it be that F 6 you conceive these words to be a reproach to your pre* judice and blind obrtinacy in refusing to hear the church as they were to the Jews 7 Are you aware, Sir, that some of the most learned Protestants have admitted that this passage was uttered by the Saviour rather as a reproach to the Jews (who read the Scriptures only to confirm themselves in their guilty prejudices against him) than a command to read them ? You talk of traditions. Does not St. Paul exhort the faithful to hold fast the traditions tohich the ij had learned ? (2 Thcs, 11, 14.) When Christ reproached the Jews for making void the law of God by their traditions, was it to the traditions of the Jewish Church that he alluded ? Or was it not rather to the silly and ridiculous traditions of their own, such as the washing of cupSy pots and hands, which they preferred to the positive commands of the law ? Nay, is it not a fact that, whilst the Saviour condemned them for preferring these unauthorised and silly practices, to the commandments of God, he tells them to hear those, tvho sat in the Chair of Moses. {See Matt. 23, 2.) How then Sir, can you adduce this instance as condemnatory of Catholics.for hearing the Church Siud standing fast to her traditions ? Having now proved, and I trust satisfactorily, from the example of Christ and of his Apostles that the Bible alone as interpreted by the private judgment of each in- dividual reader is not the Christian's rule of faith ; I shall proceed to shew that it was not the rule which the suc- cessors of the Aposdes adopted, for their guidance, when they went forth to announce the happy tidings ol' salva- tion to the nations of the earth. Tell me, then, Mr. Morel, was it the protestant rule of the Bible alone, or the Catholic rule of the Bible, as taught and explained by the Church, which the first Christian Missionaries made om the Bible ach in- I shall He sue- when salva- 1, Mr. lonCf or •plained smade use of when they succeeded in engaging the Huns, the Samaritans, the Goths and Vandales, the Franks and Saxons, with all those other countless tribes, which over- ran the Roman Empire, to exchange tlieir paganism for the piety and mortification of the Cross, and to believe and practice the blessed truths and virtues of the gospel of Jesus Christ, without reading or being able to read the Bible in their respective tongues ? Was not the religion of Christ preached at Jerusalem, Syria, Aniioch, Rome, Greece, Egypt, Assyria, Galatia, Mesopotamia, Ephesus, Phillipia, Corinth, and innumerable odier places, before the New Testament was written ? And does not St. Irenoeus tell us, in his book against heresies^ cap. 4, page 178, that many barbarous nations submitted to the author- ity of the Catholic Church, who, tho* ignorant of the use of letters, had the words of salvation loritten in their hearts, and carefully guarded the doctrine which was delivered to them ? This leads :Tie to the consideration of the protestant rule of the Bible alone, as understood by each individual reader, in reference to such as cannot read. And here, Sir, I find an insuperable objection to your rule. If Jesus-Christ had intended that all his followers should learn their religion from the Bible alone, in justice to them, he should have laid down the obligation of learn- ing to read, as the first and fundamental precept of his religion. Now, this he has not done. The Bible more- over, as a rule of faith, is not calculated for all states and conditions of men, for it would give infinite advantages to the rich and the learned over the poor and illiterate ; and thousands upon thousands, in every age and in every country, never could have availed themselves of such a rule at all. You are aware that before the art of print- ing was discovered not one in every thousand, and. a indeed, I might safely say, not one in every ten thousand of the human family could read, nor was it possible, practically speaking, that they should. For before this discovery (which took place about the year 1440) it was requisite that every book should be written throughout with the pen, a laborious process, which required considerable time and very great patience, and which consequently rendered books of every description both scarce and ex- pensive. It is standing on record, that in England, in the reign of Edward the First, a fairly written copy of the Bible was not worth less than .£300 of our sterling money. How then, I would ask, could any, except the rich, have found means to purchase a Bible, even if they could read ? And yet it must be borne in mind that such was the state of things, not only in England but throughout the whole Christian world, for upwards of fourteen hun- dred years after the death of Christ and his Apostles, when more than half the nations of the earth had been converted from paganism, and the religion of Jesus Christ was flourishing from one end of the creation to the other ! Is it to be believed then, that the Saviour, who came to announce the happy tidings of salvation to the poor ; who always manifested so much sympathy for the poor ; and who pronounced a particular blessing on the poor, declaring that theirs is the kingdom of heaven ; is it to be believed I say that he would have left them, during so many ages, entirely destitute of a rule of faith, and consequently of the adequate means of salvation 7 Or are we to be told that he established one rule for the rich and the learned, and another for the poor and the unlettered ? Or did he appoint any rule of faith at all for the latter 1 And if he did, it surely could not be the Bible, for it is most absurd to maintain that Jesus d Christ would establish ii rule of faith, from the benefit of which the great overvvhelminnj majority of his followers should, necessarily, be excluded. Tell me, then, Mr, Morel, what this rule was ? Mr. Morel here rose and expressed his astonishment at hearing us date the discovery of the Art of Printing only from the beginning of the 15th century. He was evi- dently under the impression diat Moses was the discovereri and was about to amuse us with some rich specimens of his chronological acquirements, when a significant hint from a close neighbour caused him to direct his ob-* servations to the main argument, which he endeavoured to answer by saying that he who could not read himself, might get his neighbour to read for him, and he further stated that, as the laws of the state oblige all indiscri- minately, so likewise the laws of God. The Rev. Mr. McMahon — But a few moments ago, Sir, you told us that the Bible and nothing but the Bible was the Christian's rule of faith ; and, now, you contradict yourself by stating (at least for such as cannot read) that the Bible and the neighbour is that rule ! Exore tuo teju- cOf serve neqiiam. Why not. Sir, acknowledge the true rule at once ? Why not refer the unlettered peasant to the Pastors of the Church, to whom ,Iesus Christ has said : go and teach all nations, 8fc., He that heareth you^ heareth me, 8fc, Why not. Sir, why not, as you are forced to acknowledge the necessity of an interpreter, allow that recourse should be had to him of whom the prophet, Malachi speaks, cap. 11, v. 7. The lips of the Priest shall keep knowledge, and they (the people) shall seek the law at his mouth, for he is the angel of the Lord of Hosts ! How very differently this inspired prophet thought from you, on this subject ? Say, Mr. Morel, which of our »^uleS dors this sacred passage seem to recognise for the R true one 7 Again, Sir, do we not (ind your rule of pri- vate interpretation condemned, in the 8th chapter of the prophet Nehemiah, which appoints thirteen interpreters whose business it was to explain the law, ^vith the Le- vites, and caused it to be understood by the people ; So they read in the Book of the Law of Gody and gave the sense and made them (the people) understand the reading. This certainly does not look very like the protestant rule of individual interpretation ! Again, Sir, was it by fol- lowing the protestant rule of reading and interpreting the Bible that the Eunuch of Ethiopia was converted to the faith of Christ ? Was it not rather by adopting the catholic rule that he came to the knowledge of the truth ? If the Bible alone was sufficient, why was Philip com- manded to meet him, on the way, and ask him if he understood tchat he read ? What was his reply ? Hear it, Mr. Morel in both your ears. And how can /, unless some man shew me ? Did he not even invite Philip to get up into his chariot and sit with him, and did not Philip explain to him the scriptures in reference to Christ ? And what was the result of this explanation ? It was this : the Eunuch believed that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and teas accordingly baptized. (Acts 8, cap.) Answer me this one question. Sir, if you can : If your rule of the Bible alone, as interpreted by each individual reader, was that which the Saviour instituted, was it not the duty of Philip to tell the Eunuch so, and, in place of explaining and interpreting Isaias for him, to refer him to his own interpretation of the Prophet ? Tell me again, Sir, why did not Jesus Christ when he arrested Saul, on the road to Damascus, from his work of slaua;hter, refer him to the Bible for instruction ? Was he told by Christ to go and read and interpret the Bible for himself ? You know, Sir, that he was, on the contrary, directed to go to 11 what IS : the God, Annanias, who would tell him what he had to do, 'n like manner, Cornelius, notwithstanding his extraordinary piety and charity, was commanded to go to Joppe, and call hither one Simout who is surnamed Peter, to hear words from him ; and was not the said Cornelius, with many others, moved by the preaching of St. Peter, and then and there baptized '] Now if the Bible alone was a sufficient rule of faith to bring mankind to the knowledge of the truth, is it not extraordinary, that these person- ages were not referred to it ? Alas ! how truly deplorable the condition of those whose mental vision is impaired and destroyed by the darkening inlluence of religious prejudice and religious error ! I could, were it necessary, multiply almost ad infinitim, examples like the above, which establish the fact that your rule was never recog- nized nor allowed of in the Church of Christ from its first foundation down to the present hour. As to your allusion to the laws of the State, it is, permit me to assure you, not only without point, but quite unfortu- nate for your cause. Your doctrine is that every man should read and interpret the Bible for himself and then square his creed and his conduct in accordance with his in- terpretation. Tell me now, Mr. Morel, are the subjects of the State allowed, in this manner, to sit in judgment on the laws of the land, and to interpret them, each one, ac- cording to his own particular fancy or interest or passion ? You know full well they are not. Where then, permit me to ask you, is the anology ? If you were a King, Mr. Morel, and were about to promulgate a code of laws for the good government of your people, what would you think of the minister who would advise you not to estab- lish a tribunal for the interpretation of these laws, but to leave them to be interpreted and executed by your sub- jects just as each one might see fit ? Would you think such a minister to be in his senses ? Yet such is the li i' counsel you ^ivc with regard to the eternal and immuta- ble laws of God, which you would submit to the tribunal of private judgment, to be interpreted, judged, ruled and executed by every man, according to his caprices, interests or passions. The idea is so perfectly ridiculous that the most impervious intellect cannot fail to see its palpable absurdity. You do not seem to understand, Sir, that Christianity is a divine revelation, not a human science. Human laws and sciences are changeable and open to constant improvement ; not so the religion of Jesus Christ. It is as unchangeable as its divine audior. It is a final revela- tion and the perfection of all former dispensations, and leaves no room whatever for Evangelical Bcforrners to work on. Surely then it is quite rational to conclude that our heavenly legislator, would never have revealed such a law, without making the necessary provision for its stability and unchangeable integrity. If the Saviour had neglected doing so, what opinion would we form of his wisdom as a Lawgiver ? But he has made this ne- cessary provision, in the establishment of an infallible tribunal, by whose decisions he has commanded all his followers to be governed, under pain of eternal damna- tion. A circumstance which destroys, root and branchy your boasted doctrine of private judgment. I will now leave you. Sir, to go in search of this tribunal, and turn to the consideration of the difficulties of your rule of faith in reference to such even as can read. •Before the Protestant sits down to cull the articles of his creed from the Bible, he must, if he act rationally, make himself morally certain that the book which he holds in his hand contains the true and real w ord of God. Now, this, I am bold to say, he never will be able to do, by the aid of his private judgment alone ; lor the Bible being a^dead i;i letter cannot boar testimony to its own authenticil ; <>i' prove itself to be the inspired word of God ; for I p'.esun.c nothing is proved to be true, merely because it is said or written to be so in a book. Tl»is principle if admitted, would prove too much; it would prove the Koraji of Ma- homet to be the inspired word of (Jod, tor it asserts that muchof itself,and boldly maintains Uiat the .Arabian Impos- tor was the inspired prophet of the Lord ! I call on you then. Sir, to prove to me by your rule that the Bible is the true and authentic word of God. Mr. Morel, in answer, repeated the same texts which he had before cited in proof of the bible being the rule of faith. But he was immediately reminded that his mode of arguing was what Logicians call pehtio prin- cipii, or begging the question, which could not be admit- ted. For before he could argue the question from Scrip- ture, he should first prove thai die Bible is the true and inspired word of God, which was exactly the point he was called upon to do. — Otherwise his scriptural quota- tions could have no weight whatever. Mr. Morel here became wofully embarassed, lost his temper, called us all infidels, and concluded by saying that the Bible does bear testimony to its own truth, and proves itself to be the inspired word of God. The Rev. Mr. McMahon.— You say, Sir, that the Bible bears testimony to itself. Please then tell me in what part of the Pentateuch does Moses assure us that he was inspired, when he wrote it ? where do the Apostles or Evangelists tell us they were under the influence of the divine inspiration of the Holy-Ghost, ,. ^n they wrote the Gospe's and Epistles and the other portions of the New Testament ? 13y making such an assertion, are you aware, Sir, that you flatly contradict Hooker, 14 Chillingworlh, and a host of the greatest protestant au- thorities, of which the Church of England can boast. Be- sides, Sir, had not the Church authority to /eac/«,before the New-Testament was 'vritten, and was it not by her au- thority *^at the sacreu volume was formed, and stamped with the character of being divinely inspired ? More- over, Sir, why are the Scriptures called Canonical'] Is it not, because they were sanctioned by the Canons of the Church ? It is, then, upon the authority of the Church, and not that of private judgment, or any other criteriou ?(?Aa/eucr, that we mustrely for the authenticity and inspiration of Holy -Writ. Hear what the great St. Au- gustin says on this subject : Ego vcrd Evangelio non ere' derem, nisi me commoveret eccksitc Calholictc auctorilas, I tcould not believe the Gosvcl but for the authority of the Catholic Church. Did this Holy father believe that the Bible bears testimony to itself ? certainly not. Again, Sir, are you aware that the original text of the Bible was destroyed, together with the city and Temple of Jerusalem, by the Assyrians, under Nebuchadnezzar? I will be told, of course, that it was afterwards restored by Esdras, at the end of the captivity. This I wiUingly admit ; but Esdras' copy was again destroyed, in the subsequent persecution of Antiochus. See Maccabees, Lib. 1, cap. 1, V. 59. .^nd Ihey cut in pieces (says the sacred text) and burnt icith fire the Books of the Laio of God. Nor have we, fror-: that time, any evidence of its authenticity, till it was supplied by Christ and his Apos- tles, who committed the sacred deposit to the keeping of the Church. How then, Sir, can you, who reject the authority of this Church, be morally certain, by your rule of private judgement, that you have the Bilble as it came from the inspired pen of Moses and the ancient Prophets ? 1$ Here Mr. Morel rose and boldly denied the above state- ment, and maintained that the Bible was never wholly destroyed, advancing for proof oi his assertion the most ridiculous absurdities, in the teeih of the positive declara- tions of the Bible itself, and of all history. ( Thosp^ who wish to have more ample information on this heady are referred to BrctCs dissertation, in Bishop Watson^s Col- lections, vol. 3, page 5, Protestant JVriters.) It is evident. Sir, said the Rev. Mr. McMahon to Mr. Morel, that you are under the impression that the Bible, in those days, was to be fonnd on every shelf, in every shop and in every school, a.^ is now the case. But, Sir, youareegregiously mistaken. The HebreivYoMth. were not permitted, as yours are, to thumb over the sublime writ- ings of the ancient Prophets, nor to extract moral poi- son from the bold figures of Hosea, Ezekiel, and the Canticles of Solomon ; nor were they, in afterlife, as is now unfortunately, in too many instances, the case, tempted to treat these and other portions of Hcly-Writ, with open contempt, as uncommenled records of depra- vity and the histories of unreprobated vice. You deny that the writings of the Maccabees are inspired ; but, surely, you cannot help allowing them, at least, historical credit ; and even as such, they unanswerably refute your assertions. I refer you again, Sir, to the fact that there existed, in the reign of King Josias, but one single copy of the original text of the hook of the Laiv of God, and that copy was accidentally discovered by the High Priest Helcias and a Scribe, while repairs were being made, in the temple. Contradict this fact, if you can ; and if you' cannot, what are we to think of the bold and wreckless manner, by which you seek to disprove the best esta- blished historical facts. But let us now come to the New Testament, and we IB i ivill find your rule of faith to be equally defective and insuf- ficient. Tell me then, Mr. Morel, are you aware that several spurious Gospels and Epistles were written and circulated among the early Christians, under the vene- rable names of the Aposdes and Disciples, and that too, during the first 300 years of the Christian era ? How do you know, or how can you ascertain, by your private judgment, that the Gospels, which you now have, are ge- nuine ? How was this most important point decided 1 Was it by the authority of your rule of private judg- ment, or by the authority of the Church 1 Answer ! Do you not receive books as Canonical Scripture, which were not written by Apostles at all, viz : the Gospels of St. Mark, St. Luke and the Acts ? and do you not re- ject as spurious others that were written by Apobdes ? namely that written by St. Barnaby, who is called an Apostle and declared to be full of the Holy- Ghost ? See Jlds Cap. 14. Ver. 24. Is it by the authority of your private judgment you do so ? No, Sir, for this and innu- merable other points of the deepest importance, you must, whether you will avow it or not, throw yourself upon our rule, and entirely rely upon the authority of the Catholic Church. Again, Sir, if the Bible alone be the Christian's rule of faith, as you have told us, the wnole Bible must be necessary — must be read and studied by every individual Christian before he can make up his creed. Now the impracticability of this rule is self-evident, at least, so far as the mass of human kind are concerned. Besides, it is a historical fact, proved and established beyond the power of controversy, even by Protestant writers them- selves, that more than 20 Books of Holy- Writ ai3 mis- sing ; and St. Justin, Martyr, in his book agaiiist Tryphon, tells us that the Jews destroyed several books of the Old 17 I irisuf- re that en and s verie- lat too, How private are ge- cided 1 3 judg- r! Do which spels of not re- (Obiles ? tiled an I? See of your id innu- ;e, you jrourself of the n's rule must be dividual ^ow the east, so besides, ond the them- ai3 mis- Vyphon, the Old Testament, that the JVeio might not seem to agree. There- fore, as you have not the entire bible, your rule must necessarily be incomplete and consequently insufficient. Moreover, we all surely know that the New Testament does not contain all the truths which Jesus- Christ taught. Where, for example, do you find recorded, in that book, the mafty proofs he gave, and all he spoke to his Apos- tles of the Kingdom of God, during the forty days after his resurrection? {Jets 1. 3.) Say, Mr. Morel, did he not give many signs, in the sight of his Aposdes, which' are not written 1 {John, 20. 30.) Where are all the ex- planations which he gave them, in private, concerning the mysteries of the Kingdom of heaven ? (Matt xiii. 2.) Where are all or any of the expositions which he gave to the disciples of Emmaus, ivhen beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, he expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things that loere concerning him ? Luke. — Where in fine are all those doings and sayings of the Sa- viour, of which St. John speaks at the close of his Gos- pel, and which were so numerous that, according to the declaration of that Apostle, the whole world would not be able to contain all the books they tcould fill ? With these facts then Sir, before your eyes, how can you any longer say that you have the whole of God's' word in the Bible, and that the Bible is a complete and sufficient rule of faith ? But let uf ^opose for the sake of argument, that not one of ihe difficulties which I have mentioned, exists, and that, by your private judgment, you can arrive at moral certainty of the integrity, authen- ticity and inspiration of the Bible ; in a word, that you have the whole of God's word, as it was revealed to Moses, the Ancient Prophets, and Aposdes, &c., there remains still a difficulty before you, which appears, at least, to m.e, insurmountable ; and that is the moral as- € 18 Surance that you understand it rightly. You are aware, Sir, that it is not the dead letter of the Bible, which is the word of God, but the sense and meaning of that letter. This moral assurance you must huve before you can pretend to make the Bible a sure rule of faith. And how, please inform me, can you be morally certain that you, by the aid of your private judgment, interpret the word of God, according to the sense and mind of the Holy-Ghost ? Hear what the inspired Apostle Peter says on this subject, and tremble for your guilty pre- sumption ! Yes, sir, St. Peter tells us that no prophecy of Scripture is of pricate inlerprelation. And he adds that, in the Epistles of St. Paul, there are somethings hard to be understood^ which the unlearned and unstable wrest as they do also the other Scriptures to their own des- truction. Contrast, now, Sir, your rule of faith with this solemn declaration of the inspired Apostle. You teach that every prophecy of Scripture is of private interpretation, and that it is the bounden duty of every man to interpret the Bible by his own individual judgment. St. Peter solemly warns us against doing so, and tells us that, if we do, we run the risk of wresting the word of God from its true meaning, and thereby expose ourselves to everlasting damnation. This warning of St. Peter is, in my opinion, quite decisive of the question between us ; for it establishes upon the authority of the Bible itself the fact that Holy Scripture should never be subjected to the various and conllicting interpretations of men ; and proves moreover that some parts of Holy Writ are hard to be understood, and that the unlearned and un- stable wrest these and other portions of the word of God from their real meaning, to the destruction of their own immortal souls ; a circumstance, which should suffice to 19 convince every rational, sincere, honest minded Christian that Christ our merciful Saviour ncer intended the Bible ahnCi as interpreted by each individual reader, for a rule of faith to guide his followers in the way of sal- vation. Hear, Sir, what the learned and ingenious Bo- lingbrooke says on this subject : Writers of the Roman religion have attempted to prove that the text of Holy-icrit is, on many accounts, insuffi- cient to he the sole rule of faith. 1 apprehend too that they have proved it. Sure J am that e crience, from the first promulgation of Christianity to mis hour, has abun- dantly shewn, vrith how much ease and success, the most opposite, the most extravagant, nay, the most impious opinions and the most contraductory systems of faith may be founded on the same text and plausibly defended by the same authority. (See his letters on the use and study of history. Letter 5, page 11.) As a. practical illustration of the truth of Lord Boling- brooke's statement will present my argument against your rule in the most intelligible form, I beg to observe that, of all the doctrinal questions at present debated among Christians, there surely is not one of more serious import- ance than the divinity of Jesus-Christ, because upon this single point depends the whole system of man's re- demption, and practical duties too of a very serious na- ture are likewise involved in it. On this momentous question, however, Bible-readers and Bible-interpreters are widely at issue, and the Bible, as operated upon by your rule of private judgment, affords no solution whate- ever to the difficulty. There are sundry passages in the sacred volume which the Unitarian (whose rule of faith is precisely yours) is free to interpret as favourable to his belief that Christ is not God ; while there are other passages of equal force, which to Christians of other denominations (who have also auupied your rule) ap- 1 f 1 1 .tr 20 pear conclusive of doctrine directly the reverse. Amongst the Unitarians, you must allow, there are men ol integrity,of acute and penetrating minds, and heaven for- bid that I should presume to pronounce of them that they are not as sincere, in their way of thinking, as any other class of believing Christians. On the other hand there are numberless individuals of equal talents and of equal sincerity — equally learned and equally competent to judge, who, interpreting the same passages, by the very same rule of private judgment, ar/ive at the very opposite conclusion. With these facts then before you, please tell me, Sir, by what criterion can a christian, taking your rule for his guidance, reasonably determine, whether he is bound to worship Christ as his Lord and Creator ? Or whether, in doing so, he may not be guilty of the damning crime of idolatry ? The Bible, as I have before stated, interpreted by private judgment, can afford him no help whatever to solve his difficulty, and the question, so far as his mind is concerned, must remain forever undecided. Are we then. Sir, to conclude that, in the christian dispensation, the Divine Founder of our holy religion has left his followers without the adequate means of ascer- taining, with moral certainty, who the God is they ought to adore ? Or rather should we not conclude that the protestant rule of faith, which leaves so momentous a ques- tion undecided, is erroneous in itself and insecure in its results, exactly "erifying these words of the Holy Ghost : There is a way which seemeth right unto a man hut the end thereof leads to death. Here Mr. Prevost, Mr. Morel's confrere rose to reply, but, in place of meeting the above arguments against his rule of faith, with the capacity and learning of a scholar and the sincerity of a christian, he began to talk 21 verse. J men enfor- [) that is any hand and of petent )y the i very eyou, ristian, ;rmine, ird and ; guihy I have afford nd the remain hristian ion has ' ascer- y ought that the a ques- e in its Ghost : the end rose to juments rning of 1 to talk about Jesuits andJansanists, Holy-watcr,beads andscapu- lars ; and after speechifying forth with a furious vehe- mence, so as to render it even necessary to be called to order several times, he concluded a shower of Billings- gate, which lasted at least a long half hour, by calling Catholics the usual JVicknamcs of ignorant, stupid, Idohtors ! The Rev. Mr. McMahon — Perceiving that my oppo- nents are entirely unable to extricate themselves from the difficulty in which I have, or rather their own doctrihe has placed them, and that they are forced to substitute vul- gar abuse for argument, I will take leave to make a few observations on other consequences fairly deducible from their rule of private judgment, as operating upon the Bible ; consequences, which must powerfully influence the mind of a Catholic ngainst the validity of that rule. If the Bible alone. Sir, is, in your opinion, the only rule of faith which Jesus Christ did establish, then tell me, how you are justified in the exercises of your profession of preaching 7 If the Bible alone, as interpreted by each individual reader, be the christian's rule of faith, as you have told us repeatedly that it is, then to be honest and consistent, you should immediately abandon your work of preaching, and cease to interpret the Bible for any but yourself. For the bible alone, and not the bible and the preacher is the rule of faith which all christians, according to you, are obliged to be guided by ? Again, Sir, if the bible alme be the sole rule of faith, the Apostles were tvrong in drawing up that venerable symbol of faith, commonly called the l^postles^ Creed, which we all were taught in our very cradles, and which, if your rule be correct, we should forthwith endeavour to forget. The Nicene and Athanasian Creeds — the 39 Articles — the Book of Homilies, and the book of Com- 22 i ^! mon Prayer — and every i ract, Commentary and Cate- chism, that were ever written lor the instruction of mankind, oii,u;ht instantly to be consigned to obHvion ; for Mr. Morel tells us that the bihlc alone : not the bible and the creed — not tlie bible and the catechism — not the bible and the articles — not the bible and the homilies, but the bible and the bible a/onc, constitutes the entire and only rule of faith, instituted by the Saviour for the guidance and instruction of human. kind in the knowledge and practice of those truths and virtues which are necessary to salvation ! Now, Sir, I appeal to you ; are not such consequences revolting to the feelings and common sense of every true and rational christian '? Yes, they certainly are, and must ever contribute powerfully to inlluence us to sus- pect that the principle in which they originate, is insecure and unsound, and well calculated to subvert the very foundations of all revealed religion. Mr. Morel said : we consider ourselves justified in receiving the creeds you have mentioned, for this reason, because they are evidently contained in the Bible as can be clearly proved by the plainest texts of Scripture. The Rev. ]\1r. McMahon — If the different articles contained in these creeds, are so evidently revealed in the bible, and can be so easily proved by the clearest and strongest passages of the Gospel, as you tell us that they can, were not the Fathers of Nice very much over- seen in taking the trouble to travel such immense distances to draw up distinct symbols and professions of faith ? And, moreover, were they not, in the hypothesis of your rule of the bible alone being that which the Saviour did institute, very guilty, in encumbering it with useless and unnecessary matter ? Drawing up articles, which, according to your declaration, are so clearly 23 nd Cate- iction of v'ion ; for the bible —not the homilies, he entire ir for the lowle'dge hich are squences very true are, and 5 to sus- ;inate, is bvert the 5tified in s reason, le as can ure. : articles vealed in I clearest II us that jch over- immense ssions of ^'pothesis I'hich the ig it with articles, ) clearly revealed in the bible, that he who runs may read them. More, Sir, if your private judgment doctrine be true, they were guilty of a sacriligious invasion of that right by seeking to force their symbols upon the christian world, thereby most unjustiliably violating the simple rule which Jesus Christ bctjueathcd to his followers. And you, Mr. Morel, and your brother preachers too, who maintain with you, that the bible, as interpreted by the private judgment of each individual reader, is the true and only rule of faith, you are grossly inconsistent, to speak in the least possibly olTensive terms, to endeavour, as you are constantly doing, to lorcc your tracts upon the public, and to cram your incessant banolings about your reformed evangelical church down your neighbours throats. Is not this inconsistent conduct of yours a manifest proof, if any were wanting, that you, your very selves have no confidence whatever jn the validity of your rule? But you tell us. Sir, thrtt you receive the creeds of which there is question, only because tlicy can be proved by certain texts of Scripture. Come then, Mr. Morel, and tell me, where in the Bible, you can shew us expressly mentioned, the procession of the Holy-Ghost from the Father and the Son? This article of the Christian faith, with many others, wliich I have never yet been able to find expressly revealed in the Bible, constitutes a portion of the Nicene Creed. Tell me again, in what chapter and verse of the Bible you meet the word Con- siibstantialily ? You are aware that that the Nicene Fa- thers have drawn up an article, which declares Christ to be consubtantial to the FaUier. Where is this word to be found in the Bible ? Mr. Morel, please don't blink the question. Mr. Morel, nothing, Sir, is more easy to be proved than the procession of the Holy-Ghost from the Father 24 and the Son. In the Gospel of St. John, Cap. 15. ver. 26, 27, we find this doctrine manifestly revealed ; for there we read these words of Jesus- Christ : When the Paraclete coinethy whom I wilt send you from the Father, the spirit of truth, who proceedeth from the father, he shall bear testimony of me. And again, Cap, 16, For if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you ; hut if I depart, 1 will send him unto you, Mr. M. produced other passages from the New Testament just as proper to prove the doctrine of the Seven Sacrements or of Purgatory, as the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son. The Rev. Mr. McMahon. Are you serious. Sir, when you assert that these passages prove the eternal procession of the Third person of the most Holy Trinity from the Father and the Son ? Or are you aware that the Greek Church, which denies this article, takes its stand upon the strength of the very passage you have cited — the spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father. Here, say the Greeks, the Saviour positively declares that the Holy-Ghost proceeds from the Father alone. But I perceive that you, Mr. Morel, do not compre- hend the nature of the question now before us. The question is not, I wish you to understand, about the pe- culiar atributes of the Holy- Spirit, but as to hoio he ex- ists. The Catholic Church has ever believed and taught that it is by procession from the Father and the Son. Mr. Morel — Does not Christ say that he will send them (the Aposdes) the Paraclitc. Therefore, if he proceeds from the Father, and is sent by the Son, surely he proceeds from the Father and the Son. Nothing ^an be clearer. * ' The Rev. Mr. McMahon — Here again. Sir, I find 15. ver. led ; for Vhen the Father, FATHER, 16, For rito you ; >roduced s proper its or of from the )us. Sir, } eternal y Trinity are that takes its ou have e Father, declares ;r alone, compre- is. The t the pe- he ex- id taught Son. i^ill send •e, if he )n, surely Nothing \ I find you are still Ignortrtit of the real nature of the ([uestioiT. You ought to be aware that this passage has reference only to the peculiar ofliccs attributed to the Holy, Spirit, and not at all to his eternal procession from the Father and the Son. According to your notions and mode of arguing this question, it might be inferred that the Apostles proceed from the Son, for did not the Sa- viour say to them ; as the Fat'ier sent me ; so I send you. Therefore as the Father sent the Son, and the Son sent the Apostles ; these latter must necessarily proceed from the Son, and, according to Mr. Morel's logic, must con- stitute so many Holy-Ghosts ! A las ! for poor Mr. Mo- rel's bible and private judgment ! You see now, Mr. Morel, that you are forced to avow that there are some articles of the Christian doc- trine, which you receive, tho' not clearly revealed in the Bible, and that you believe them, not, certainly, upon the authority of the bible, but upon that of the Catholic Church. What then becomes of your boasted rule of faith? Again, Sir, give me Scripture, and nothing but Scripture, for your catalogue of the inspired books of Holy-Writ — for the true translation and true sense of these books. Where do you find, in the bible, the words Unity and Trinity of God ? Give me Scripture for the observance of the Festivals of Christmas, Easter and other days kept sacred by Protestants. Shew me, if you can, scriptural authority for changing the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday. Does not the Bible, whose ordin- ances you pretend to make the rule of your moral and religious conduct, tell us that the Lord rested on the seventh day 1 and that he blessed, sanctified, and com,' manded that day to he kept holy ? Sec Exodus, cap. 10. Deut. 12. Now, Mr. Morel, tell me what Scripture you can adduce to shew that Christ annulled this positive i» I • precept of (ho Lord. Surely the keeping holy the Sab- bath day is one of the Ten Commandmcnls^ the strict and faithful observance of which the Saviour tells us is absolutely and indispensably necessary to salvation. If thou wilt enter into life, says he, keep the Commandments, Mat. Moreover, does he not assure us that he came not to destroy, tnit to fulfil the law ? He not only observed the Jewish Sabbath himself hut commanded his Apos- tles to keep it holy. By what authority then, Sir, I de- sire to know, do you set aside this precept thus most positively and bindingly enjoined by the Kternal God himself, and upheld by the express command and exam- ple of .Jesus-'Jhrist ? Is it by the authority of the bible alone and private judgment ? I could, were the thing necessary, lengthen this list of queries by adding more than one hundred other items of great importance, in a doctrinal and moral point of view, which must convince every honest and sincere Christian that you and your unhappy partners in religi- ous error, notwithstanding your eternal brawlings about the Bible, and the bible alone, have never taken the bible alone for your rule of faith. Where, for example, do you fmd the 39 articles in the bible? Or the book of Homilies, or the book of Common Prayer, so many times revised, altered, sul)tractcdfrom, and added to ? Where, I say, is there Scripture and notliing but Scripture, for all the rites, ordinances, articles, rules, offices, notes, Comments, formuloires, creeds, Catechisms, and profes- sions of faith, so fJiiferenl, in the various protestant Chur- ches ? Are all iJiese and coundcss other things which I omit for brevity sake, to be found expressly revealed in the bible? Where is your warrant, in the bible, for baptiz- ing infants ? There is positively none. Tell me. Sir, what we are to understand by the baptism of fire, mentioned by "11 our Saviour in St. Matl. '! or hy tliu haplism of the dead, spoken of by St. I'aul ? Vou, who have so much of the Spiritt will find of courso no tlilliculty in enlightcninj^ us poor ignorant Papists, on these liark passages. I shall now make you ac(|uaiiil('(l with the opinion of Doctor Whitaker, a Proti'stant T-ishop, on the subject which we arc discussing. IV/icn Iklannint says he, stales thai Protcslnnts rccvirc for arUrlcs of faith and practice many Ihiiii^s not clciirh/ rcrcakd in the bible ; and that the Scriptures arc not in thcmsclrcs so clear and plaint as without any inlcrprclulion, fo decide controversies of faithf he fights without an udrersary ; for in this we agree with him. Now, Mr. JMoiikl, be pleased to remember your definition of the rule of failli, which you gave us at the outset of this little controversy, and contrast it with this avowal of the celebrated Dr. Whitaker ! Hear again wh&t Doctor Walton, known to the Christian world, as one of the most eminent biblical scholars of his day, states to be the fruits of your rule of faith : " Aristar- chus formerly could scarce find seven ivisc men in Greece ; hut amongst us, note a days, we can scarce sliew that num- ber of fools. Every one is a Doctor ; every one has the Spirit. There is not a f malic or a J^lountebank, nor one of the vilest dregs of the ral)ble, tvlio does not vend his dreams for the word of God. The bottomless pit seems to he opened, and there came out of the smoke locusts with stings, the whole tribe of Sectaries and heretics, icho have reneived all the heresies of former aires, and added a nu- merous and monstrous progeny of their own .'" What now, Mr. Morel, do you think of your rule of faith and your blasphemous pretentions to a familiar in- tercourse with the Spirit ! Our blessed Lord and Re- deemer tells us that the tree is known by its fruit. Let us then apply this test to your rule, and we will find that 28 I:- } iJt has been the fertile parent of all those countless and contradictory systems of religion, which now, by their conflicting iniluence; divide and distract the Christian family, and tear to pieces the seamless garment of Jesus- Christ. Yes, Sir, juur rule of faith has produced, in the lapse of ages, a thousand religions, as different from each other, as from the parent Church, and as divided from one another, as the fallen leaves of autumn, without uni- ty, without universality, without permanency, tossed to and fro hy every wind of doctrine^ till, like these leaves, 3ome mighty storm nt last scatters and disperses them for ever. Does '"oi the world abound, at present, with de- monstradve evidence, that your rule is an attack upon the Majesty of God ; is an opposition 1o the example, preaching, practice and commands of Jes"s-Christ and his AposUes ; is a direct sanction of man's worst errors and impieties ; o' d in fine is the foundation stqne on which blasphemy against high heaven stands ? in a word, Mr. Morel, was not your rule of private inter- pretation first suggested by the old serpent in the earth- ly paradise, and, unfortunately, brought into operation upon God's divine prohibition, by our first Parents ; and has it not continued ever since to be as fertile in blasphe- my, impiety, and religious discord, as a dunghill is in vermin ; Count if you can, the number of religions which your rule has spawned upon the world, each one differing from all the rest — each one contradicting all the rest, and each one claiming for itself the exclusive right of primogeniture. And how truly p~inful is the reflection that the most prevalent of all these religions is that which professes to believe nothina at all ! Look around you, Sir, and bohold, with fear and trembling, the moral ravages, which your doctrine of Pri- vate Judgment is every where committing among Protes- I ■^ 29 tants. See the disastrous cindcmic, wliich the bitter fruits of this Tree of Knoidcdi^e have produced, and are still producing, in the neiglibouring States, ihro' the quackery of your confrere, F^rsor Miller. Tell mc, Mr. Morel, how it happens that, while the erdii^hlcned, bible reading Yankees are Hocking, 'n crowds, liom all (|uarters of the Unionf to join the ProphcCs slandavd, not so much as onei solitary^ benighted Papist has been converted by this Evangelical Reformer 7 With regard to the memorable declaration, which this »^rch Impostor has made, at New .Tersy, last Fail, mone of his inflammatory harangues on the Mrcnty that " the days of the Bomun Beast wore, at lengdi, numbered ;" I have only o say, that time, will prove him, as it has already proved all his Predecessors, from Simon Magus down to Sir Edward Courtney, to be only links in that chain of false Prophets, to whom an angry God has said • / have not sent yov, yet you ran. — / have not spoken, yet you prophesied. ( I s aiah ) . Enough I think now. Sir, has been said to convince any sincere Christian that the Saviour of the world, (who told us that there was to be but one Shepherd and one Sheepfold, and that all hi.> followers should be one, as He and the Father are one) never intended the eternal and unchangeable truths of his Gospel to be subordinate to the evervarying dictates of Private Judgment, which never will allow men to be of one mind ; — nor tcithone mind and one mouth to glorify God. Rom. 12.-16. nor to come to the knowledge and profession of the One Lord — One Faith — and One Baptism ; but must ever result in producing discord among Christians, and in making their religious opinions as difierent as their faces ! Fly 'hen, Sir, from this house of discord — this BaJjcl of confusion, and instantly sue for peace and security in the bosom p •' ■) ill m of Catholic Unity, where alone, it is to be found. As the dove, which left the Ark of Noah, could find no resting place for her foot, till she returned back ; so you; Mr. Morel, will never enjoy true repose until you re- turn back to the Church of Jesus-Christ, which your forefathers, at an evil hour, have deserted. END OP THE CONFERENCE. Having now, Mr. Editor, thro' the medium of your Journal, laid before the Public, the line of argument, which I used, in the conference with Mr. Morel, against his rule of Faith ; I have only to add that I shall, as soon possible, take up his thesis on the Supremacy of St. Peter, and I pledge myself that. Twill tear to pieces and scatter to the winds the cobweb objections, which he has woven for the purpose of casting a veil over the evidence of truth. In the meantime, I remain, Sir, Your very obedient servant, P. McMahon. 31 found. (ind no so you; you re- ch your POSTSCRIPT. ISRENCE. oi' your 'gument, against y as soon It. Peter, d scatter is woven donee of AHOX. Among the great variety of unfounded charges, which are constantly urged by Protestants against the Catholic Church, I know not of any one more seriously important, or more comprehensive in its nature, than that which has reference to the sacred volume of the Holy Scriptures. The accusation is repeatedly brought against her, that she keeps the Bible locked up from the Laity ; palming doctrines upon them, which its pages do not recognize, and then forbidding them to read it, lest the imposture should be detected. Now, this foul accusation is entire- ly destitute of foundation, in point of fact ; for in every age from her first establishment down to the present hour, she has venerated the mysterious volume, as con- taining the oracles of the God of eternal truth. Her doctrine and her discipline respecting it, are invariable and the same ; and if they are not in accordance with the doctrine and practice adopted by Protestants, she is not afraid openly to acknowledge that they are not, nor ever possibly can be. In refutation of this bold and comprehensive calumny, which, I believe, has been more extensively circulated and more generally believed among our protestant brethren, than any other, I need here only copy the letter of Pope Pius the Sixth, to the Most Rev. Anthony Martini, Archbishop of Florence, on the occasion of his having translated the Holy Bible into Italian. From SH2 i i this letter it will appear how utterly unt'ounded the charge is. Beloved Sojif health and Jlpostolic Benediction^ " At a time that a vast number of bad books, which most grossly attack the Catholic religion, are circulateu even among the unlearned, to the great destruction of souls, you judge exceedingly well tliat the faithful should be excited to the reading of the Holy Scriptures : for these are the most abundant sources which ought to be left open to every one, to draw from them puiity of morals and of doctrine, to eradicate the errors which are widely disseminated in these corrupt times : This yo have seasonably effected, as you declare, by pub- lish.i ^ '0 Sacred Writings in the language of your country, suitable to every man's capacity ; especially when you shew and set forth, that you have added expla- natory notes, which, being extracted from the Holy Fathers, preclude every possible danger of abuse : Thus you have not swerved either from the laws of the Congregation of the Index, or from the constitution pub- lished on this subject by Benedict XIV, that immortal Pope, our predecessor in the pontificate, and formerly when we held a place near his person, our excellent master in ecclesiastical learning ; circumstances which we mention as honourable to us. "We therefore applaud your eminent learning, joined with your extraordinary piety ; and we return you our due acknowledgments for the books which you have trans- mitted to us, and which, when convenient, we will read over. In the mean time, as a token of our pontifical benevolence, receive our apostolic benediction, which to you, beloved son, w'e very affectionately impart. Given at Rome, on the calends of April, 1778, the foiu'th year of our Pontificate." m ided the s, which irculattu iction of ul should ures : for ght to be puiity of rs which PS : This by pub- of your specially ?d expla- he Holy abuse : rs of the ion pub- immortal formerly excellent !S which ?, joined you our ve trans- ivill read lontifical vhich to Given rth year 33 There is yet another point on which I shall make one or two short observations, as it is immediately connected with the conference, and forms an inexhaustible subject of bitter invective against the Church. I mean the right of private Judgment, which we are told is the inalienable birth right of every child of Adam, and which, it is as- serted, the Catholic Church most tyrannically withholds from her children. Now, the solution of this question, entirely depends upon the nature of the right contended for ; for the right of Private Judgment, like other ques- tionable rights, may be considered in a two fold point of view, either with reference to Almighty God, or to our fellow men. If considered in reference to God and understood in the sense of a positiv: divine right, the Catholic Church certaily denies that any individual possesses such a right ; and I do not believe there is a single sensible Protestant in t^lis community who will undertake to main- tain the reverse. If for example, to prove our obedience, God has been pleased to impose upon us certain restric- tive laws, the Ten Commandments for instance ; will any Christian contend that he has a right to sit in judg- ment upon these laws, and to determine by his private judgment, how far he will admit them, or how far he will reject them ? Well, and if for the exercise of our Faith, God has revealed certain truths to be believed by us, ivill it be contended that his creatures have ^ right to determine, by their private judgment, how far they wilj believe or disbelieve these truths ? To pronounce of some that they are true, because they fancy they under- stand them ; and of others that they are false becaus.^ they do not. But if the right contended for be understood as a mere htman, civil, right, the Catholic Church admits it E I 34 li,: . I i ireely in its fullest possible extent. For if J, or any other man should choose this day to renounce every ar- ticle of the Christian Creed, we have a civil right to do so, and no human power has any just authority to punish us for so doing. For we believe that to God aloiie man i s responsible for his religious opinions ; and that we will have to account to him for our faith as well as for our moral conduct. With the conviction of this awful accountability then before you, my Catholic friends, take the Holy- Bible, and read and peruse its sacred pages for your instruction and edification ; and whilst others, who read it, acknowledging no other guide than the ignis fa- tuus of their own private judgment, are liable, at all times, to pervert its meaning, and thereby wrest it to their own perdition ; may you divine from it evidence to con- firm and consolidate your faith ; encouragement to cheer and envigorate your hope ; and precepts of fraternal cha- rity, with every inducement to observe them. In fine let these words of Isaiah make you sensible how incom- petent man is to sit in judgment on the sublime truths of divine revelation : My thoughts, says the Lord, are not as your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways ; for as the heavens are exalted above the earth, even so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts. Cap. 55. v. 8-9. • ' t . ■ I I ■ ■ , I will here subjoin for the inforhiation of the reader, a few extracts from the most ancient of the Fathers, as bearing upon the doctrine of Private Judgment : He, who reading the Gospel, applies it to his own inter" pretation, not understanding it as the Lord spoke it, he is truly a false Prophet, uttering tvords from his own mind Heretics always apply their own fables to the Gospels and the writings of the Apostles, expounding 35 jr any ery ar- t to do punish ne man that we as for s awful Is, take »ges for rs, who ^nis/a- y at all to their to con- cheer lal cha- in fine incom- uths of are not for as are my above reader, lers, as in inter" it, he is m mind to the oi,ndin§ them by their own Judgment, and not according to the; sense of the Holy- Ghost, speaking and teaching by the Church. (Origen, Horn. 2. in Ezech. Tom. 3. pag. 362). Recollect, says St. Hilary, that there is not one of the heretics who does not now impudently assert that all his blasphemies are derived from the Scriptures. They all urge the Scriptures icithout the right knowledge of them, and tvithout faith talk about their faith ; for it is not by reading, but by comprehending their meaning, that the Scriptures should be weighed. (Ad Constans. Lib. 2. pag. 1227). St. Ephrem says : Heretics, wishing to give strength to their error, endeavour to extract passages from the Scriptures by which they pervert the minds of those ivho listen to them. And St. Irenoeus, in his book, against heretics, cap. 8. pag. 35. says : such being their doctrines, which the Prophets never preached, nor Christ taught, nor the Apostles delivered, they boast their own superior know- ledge of Scripture, and attempt to make it seem credible, forming, as it were, a rope of sand by adducing some pas- sages from the sayings of the Prophets, or of Christ, or of his Apostles, but in such manner as to violate the order of the Sacred Writings, and, as far as in them lies, dissolve the whole connexion of truth. They appeal to the Scripture icilh such frontless impu- dence, that they make impressions upon some ; in the course of their disputes they tire out the strong, entrap the feeble, and fill the minds of ordinary persons with great perplexity. We therefore establish, as a fixed principle, that Heretics should not be allowed to dispute from Scrip- ture ; for if they contend with these weapons, we should first enquire to whom these Sciiptures belong, lest we should allow these men to usurp that treasure, to which they have neither right nor pretensions. (Tertullian).