Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2007 with funding from 
 
 IVIicrosoft Corporation 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/authenticreportoOOpoperich 
 
THE 
 
 AUTHENTIC REPORT 
 
 OF TKt 
 
 DISCUSSION, 
 
 WHICH TOOK PLACE AT 
 
 THE LECTURE-ROOMOFTHE DUBLIN INSTITUTION 
 
 BETWEEN 
 
 THE REV. THOMAS MAGUIRE, 
 
 AND 
 
 THE REV. RICHARD T. P. POPE 
 
 D. & J. SADLIER, 
 
 31 BARCLAY STREET, NEW YORK. 
 
 128 FEDERAL STREET, BOSTON; Alf© 
 iro NOTRE DAME ST^'F.FT iMONTREAL, r.^ 
 
:77^ 
 
 -?c 
 
 INTRO]) UCTOllY STATEMENT 
 
 As introductory to the Report of the important Controversial 
 Discussion between the Rev. Messrs. Pope and Maguire, we 
 feel It our duty to lay before the Public the arrangements which 
 preceded the meetings for the above object. 
 
 A meeting was held on Wednesday, the 11th of April, 1827, 
 at the house of Mr. Tims, in Grafton street, at which Messrs, 
 Pope and Maguire were present ; when it was resolved, that as 
 the points about to be discussed equally affected the Protestant 
 and Roman Catholic Churches, so there should be an equality 
 in every particular, in order that the public, on the after consid- 
 eration, might be satisfied that the Discussion had been conducted 
 in the most impartial manner, and entered upon with the spirit of 
 kindness and mutual good feeling. 
 
 After several meetings, in which we have the gratification to 
 say, every disposition was evinced on both sides to act with 
 liberality and candor, while at the same time principle was upheld 
 with uncompromising steadiness, the Reverend Gentlemen having 
 finally settled the points for discussion, and the undersigned, 
 definitely and with their entire approbation, having arranged the 
 preliminaries, the day of meeting was fixed for the 19th day of 
 April. From the impossibility of procuring the Rotunda for six 
 successive days, (the shortest time the discussion could last,) 
 and no more spacious or equally commodious place for meeting 
 presentmg itself, the Lecture-room of the Dublin Institution, 
 Sackville street, was taken ; and in the result manifested that, as 
 to situation, necessity bad compelled, what judgment ultimately 
 oporoved _ 
 
 920 
 
i INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT. 
 
 The preliminaries entered into were as follows : 
 
 I. 
 
 Arrangement agreed upon for the proposed discussion between the 
 Rev. Mr. Pope and the Rev. Mr. Maguire, April 12, 1827. 
 
 I. The Discus&ion to commence on Thursday, the 19th 
 instant, and continue from day to day until closed. 
 
 II. The Meetings to be presided over by two Chairmen, one 
 Protestant and one Roman Catholic. 
 
 III. The business to commence each day at eleven o'clock, 
 and to close at three, with the exception of the first day, which 
 will close at four o'clock. 
 
 IV. The Discussion to be limited to three points by each 
 party, viz : 
 
 MR. POPE. 
 
 1st, Infallibility ; 2d, Purgatory ; 3d, Transubstantiation. 
 MR. MAGUIRE. 
 
 1st, The divine right of private judgment to pronounce upon 
 the authenticity^ integrity, and canoniciiy, of Scripture, and 
 to determine its meaning in articles of faith. 
 
 2d, The justification of the Reformation. 
 
 3d, The Protestant Churches do not possess that unity which 
 forms the distinctive mark of the true Church of Christ. 
 
 V. The points to be discussed in the following order : 
 
 1st day, - - - Mr. Pope, 1st point. 
 2d do. - - - Mr, Maguire, do. 
 3d do. - - - Mr. Pope, 2d point. 
 4th do^ - - - Mr. Maguire, do. 
 5th do. - - - Mr. Pope, 3d point. 
 6th do. - - - Mr. Maguire, do. 
 YI. Not more than one point to be spoken to at a time. 
 
 VII. No new point to be spoken to by either party, until the 
 pomt under consideration is fully and finally closed. 
 
 VIII. The speeches and replies to be limited to half an hour, 
 and each point to occupy but one day at the utmost. 
 
 N. B. The number of minutes which may be lost before the 
 beginning of each day's discussion, to be added to the 
 period of closing the business of the day. 
 
 IX. Admission to be by tickets only, for which shall be charged 
 the sum of , the surplun of money so collected, after 
 defraying all the expenses attending the Discussion, to be handed 
 over to the Mendicity. 
 
 X. The Meeting to be open to the Press, but a special 
 Reporter for each party to be employed, who shall be responsible 
 
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT. O 
 
 for the accuracy of the reports that shall be made of the speeches, 
 and entire business of the discussion.* 
 
 XI. Two door-keepers to be provided, one Roman Catholic 
 and one Protestant. 
 
 XII. No indication to be admitted of approbation or disappro- 
 bation. 
 
 XIII. The authorised copy of the speeches to be authenticated 
 by the signatures of the Rev. Mr. Pope, and Rev. Mr. Maguire. 
 
 T. Maguire, P- M. Singer, 
 
 Richard T. P. Pope, John Lav^less. 
 
 II. 
 
 Further Preliminary Regulations for the Proceedings of the Meeting 
 of the Rev. Mr. Pope, and Rev. Mr. Maguire, agreed to hy the 
 undersigned, on the part of the above Gentlemen respectively. 
 
 I. No person whatever to be permitted to address the meeting 
 but the Rev. Mr. Pope, and Rev. Mr. Maguire. 
 
 II. No part of the auditory to interfere in any way whatever 
 with the Rev. Gentlemen above named, or with the subject 
 matter of the discussion. 
 
 III. The undersigned to be at liberty to explain any part of 
 the preliminary arrangements, if called upon to do so from the 
 Chair. 
 
 IV. The Chairmen are requested to prevent any manifestation 
 of approbation or disapprobation, and to enforce perfect silence 
 in the meeting. 
 
 P. iE. Singer, 
 Dublin^ \Sih April, 1827. John Law^less. 
 
 III. 
 
 Further Articles of Agreement entered into hy the undersigned, on 
 the part of Messrs. Pope and Maguire. 
 
 I. The parties not to exceed four speeches each during any 
 one day. Merely calling on the opposite party for proofs not 
 to be considered as a speech. 
 
 II. Declining to speak in turn by either party, when it is his 
 rotation, or speaking short of the limited period of half an hour, 
 to be considered as one of the four speeches of the day. 
 
 III. The business of each day to close after each party has 
 spoken, or had the opportunity of speakingybwr times, although 
 it should not have reached the hour of three o'clock ; it being 
 hereby again declared that agreeably to the regulations of the 
 12th instant, should the discussion reach three o'clock, the 
 number of minutes which may have elapsed after eleven o'clock, 
 
 'the hour fixed for commencing the discussion on each day) 
 
 * The Special Reporters appointed on this occasion were Mr. P. D. Hard? 
 and Mr. J. Sheridan. 
 
 1* 
 
6 INTRODUCTORY^ STATEMENT. 
 
 shall be added to the time allotted to the last speaker, on er ch 
 day, so as to complete his half hour, should he desire to continue 
 for that time, although such addition shall exceed three o'clock 
 by so many minutes. P. M, Singer, 
 
 20th *BpriU 1827. John Lawless. 
 
 The chairs having been taken, on the morning of the 19th of 
 April by Admiral Oliver, as the Protestant, and Daniel 
 3'CoNNELL, Esq, as the Roman Catholic Chairman, the latter 
 briefly observed, '• That he considered it necessary to state, that 
 the Gentlemen who had been appointed to make the preliminary 
 arrangements would read the particular rules by which the 
 »iieeting was to be governed ; and as he felt assured that the 
 mere reading of the rules v/ould be quite sufficient to induce 
 every gentleman to comply with them, he would not make any 
 further observations.'' 
 
 The friend appointed by Mr. Pope having been then called 
 upon, the document No. 2, was read, as containing the rules 
 immediately relating to the meeting. 
 
 The undersigned, in making the foregoing statement, have 
 discharged a duty which they felt to be incumbent upon them ; 
 and they have to express their gratification, that so important a 
 discussion, and one so likely to excite the mind beyond the exact 
 limits of discretion, was conducted with becoming zeal, but at 
 the same time with good feeling, and a conduct suited to the 
 momentous business in hand. They are also equally gratified, 
 that the arrangements which they entered into, were such as to 
 give satisfaction to the auditory, and ensure that regularity and 
 silence which became the solemnity of the occasion. 
 
 P. JE. SINGER, 
 JOHN LAWLESS. 
 
 I certify that the Report of the recent Discussion between Mr. Pope anc 
 myself, as published by Messrs. Coyne, Tims, & Curry, is alone authentic, 
 Cbch proof sheet havincr received my signature. 
 June 14, 1827. THOMAS MAGUIRE. 
 
 Philip Dixon Hardy, 
 James Sheridan. 
 
 I certify that the Report of the recent Discussion between Mr. Maguira 
 and myself, as pubhshed by Messrs. Coyne, Tims, & Curry, is alone authentic, 
 each proof sheet having received my signature. 
 Jtne 14, 1827. RICHARD T P. POPE, 
 
 James Sheridan, 
 Phimp Dixon Hardt. 
 
CONTROVERSIAL DISCUSSION 
 
 First Day.— April 19, 1827. 
 
 SUBJECT. — The Infallibility of the Roman Catholic Ckwch. 
 
 The Chair having been taken by Admiral Ohver and Mr. 
 O'Connell, and the particular rules, by which the discussion was 
 to be governed, read by Mr. Singer. 
 
 The Rev. Mr. Pope rose, and said — Gentlemen, I need 
 scarcely remark, that we are assembled here this day, for the 
 discussion of the most important subjects which can possibly 
 engage the human mind. We are not assembled to debate a 
 question relative to the politics of this passing scene — we have 
 not come here for the purpose of discussing matters which con- 
 cern us merely as the inhabitants of this lower world ; but to 
 debate topics of the most vital consequence to us as immortal and 
 accountable beings. Let us then, in entering on this momentous 
 discussion, divest ourselves of every party feeling, and come to 
 the consideration of the subject before us with minds unbiassed 
 and unprejudiced. And here it may not be uninteresting to this 
 meeting to be put in possession of the circumstances which led 
 to the present discussion. While in Longford, in November 
 last, I received a letter from an individual, (whom I afterwards 
 discovered to be a Roman Catholic of no inconsiderable informa- 
 tion) in which it was stated, that I was challenged by a Roman 
 Catholic Clergyman to meet him in public, for the purpose of 
 discussing the points of difference between the Protestant and 
 the Roman Catholic churches ; and that I had then a fair oppor- 
 tunity of defending the principles which I maintaine»i and of 
 exposing in the face of the world, the errors of the church of 
 Rome, if any such errors existed. I considered it judicious to 
 wait, until the challenge should reach me in an authentic form 
 In a day or two afterwards, I saw in the Weekly Register, of 
 the 23d November, an account of an Aggregate Meeting at 
 Carrick-on-Shannon, and which contained a speech made by 
 the Rev. Mr. Maguire, in which was the following passage :- 
 
6 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 " Let the advocates of such a system, the Wolffes and the Popes 
 of the day, bring (!*« matter to an issue, and I challenge WolfTe 
 or Pope to meet nic and answer the question of the Socinian, 
 and prove from the prir*r;iplos of private judgment that he la 
 wrong ; or if thoy l>c able to answer the question in any way 
 but that in which the Catholic church answers it, I will myself 
 become a Biblical, and go through the country on the same mis- 
 sion as they are on — but they will not, they cannot." 
 
 At a meeting of the Hibernian Society, which took place on 
 the following Tuesday, I commented on the Socinian question, 
 expressed my willingness to meet Mr. Maguire, and requested 
 that, if there were any Roman Catholics at the meeting, they 
 would convey my answer to Mr. Maguire. Fearing, however, 
 that my observations might escape his notice, and being anxious 
 that he should not be ignorant of my readiness to meet him, I 
 addressed a letter to the Editor of the Roscommon and Leitrim 
 Gazette, which, after treating on the subject of the Socinian 
 controversy, concludes thus : — " And now. Sir, in conclusion, 
 I beg leave to state, that I am ready to discuss the subject of 
 this letter, or the Roman Catholic controversy generally, with 
 Mr. Maguire, or any other gentleman, believing that "magna est 
 Veritas et prajvalebit." 
 
 Such, then, gentlemen, was my acceptance of what I con- 
 ceived to be a challenge from Mr. Maguire. Some time after, 
 a letter appeared in the Weekly Register, from Mr. Maguire, 
 in which he gives the following report of a part of his speech 
 at Carrick-on-Shannon: — " I there observed," he says, " that in 
 flippancy of tongue, tortuosity of mind, and sophistry of argu- 
 ment, the Bible-men stood unrivalled; but that were I to meet 
 the arch-crusader on the arena of polemical disputation, (and 
 this handsome compliment I intended for you) I would confine 
 him to a few solid, stubborn objections, of which, if he gave a 
 clear logical solution, I myself would become a Biblical, and 
 raise my feeble voice in the loud, holy, profitable cry." To- 
 wards the conclusion of this letter, he grounds a proposal upon 
 a concession which I could never grant, namely, " That the ob- 
 jection cf the Socinian remains unanswered and unanswerable, 
 (the principle and practice of private interpretation alone consid- 
 ered)." His proposal was as follows : — "Should you have the 
 manliness to make this necessary admission, which I must insist 
 upon as a sine qua non, I shall afford you ampler canvass, and a 
 rougher sea, viz : of all the charges which have been, and now 
 can be advanced against the doctrines of the Roman Catholic 
 church, you shall be at liberty to select whatever three you deem 
 most glaring and untenable, whilst I, in my turn, shall bring 
 three prime charges against the doctrines of your church, and 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 9 
 
 thus we shall be both plaintiff and defendant reciprocally." In 
 my next letter to Mr. Maguire, I observed, " It is apparent from 
 your own report, that you either did not challenge me, or that 
 you have retracted the challenge ; the expression ' were I to 
 meet the arch-crusader,' conveying most undoubtedly a very dif- 
 ferent meaning from that contained in the words, ' I challenge 
 Wolffe or Pope to meet me,' ascribed to you in the Register. 
 I here distinctly call upon you either publicly to confess that you 
 did not challenge me, or to meet me for public discussion, 'Utrum 
 horum mavis accipe.' I write strongly, but not in the spirit 
 of polemical bravado." I shall now rea f to you the concluding 
 paragraph of Mr. Maguire's last letter . " I do declare, dis- 
 tinctly, that I never did invite you to 3.tiva voce disputation ; — 
 and I as distinctly declare, that I now accept your challenge 
 and will meet you at the Rotunda, in Dublin." He says, he 
 never did challenge me — you, gentlemen, will judge, whether I 
 had not reason to consider his speech reported in the Register, 
 as containing a challenge. I again wrote to Mr. Maguire, and 
 the result of that correspondence has been, that after an amica- 
 ble arrangement of prelimmaries, we are met here this day to 
 discuss the various subjects which have been agreed upon ; and 
 I most willingly bear testimony to the good feeling which has 
 been evinced by my reverend opponent and his friend. 
 
 Permit me to say, gentlemen, that we should hail the appear- 
 ance of Mr. Maguire amongst us this day, as exhibiting a 
 noble display of independent feeling and judgment. I say, it is a 
 noble display of independent feeling — it is manly and bold in 
 Mr. Maguire to appear here to advocate his principles ; espe- 
 cially as it is well known that the Roman Catholic Primate of 
 Ireland has publicly expressed his disapprobation of such a 
 proceeding. I say, then, it is manly and bold in him, circum- 
 stanced as he is, thus to come forward and claim his privilege, as 
 an intellectual and rational being, of thinking and acting foi 
 himself. The present meeting is certainly one of a very peculiai 
 character, and will doubtless be regarded as a memorable event 
 in the history of this country. We have on the one hand Dr. 
 Curtis, the Titular Primate, expressing his disapprobation of 'he 
 proceedings ; but, on the other hand, has the Roman Catholic 
 Archbishop of Dublin interfered to prevent Mr. Maguire from 
 attending here this day 1 or has the Roman Catholic Bishop of 
 Mr. Maguire's diocess (Kilmore) taken any notice whatever of 
 the extraordinary circumstance of one of the Clergy disobey- 
 ing the wishes of the Titular Primate 1 Gentlemen, it appears^ 
 that neither the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, nor the 
 Roman Catholic Bishop of Kilmore has interposed their 
 authority in the business. And I do say *iiat by their silence on 
 
10 THE INFALLIBILITY OP 
 
 the subject they Lave given an indirect sanction to the proceed 
 ing ; for they possess the power of preventing Mr. Maguire 
 from attending, and that power they have not exercised. I 
 beheve, I am right, in stating that there are some Roman Catho- 
 lic Clergymen here this day. I hail their presence amongst us 
 with great satisfaction, as, in my mind, by their attendance, they 
 b.\m) give their sanction to the proceedings. With respect to 
 the preliminaries, I have one observation to make — it regards 
 myself — it is thought by some, that I possess a talent for 
 declamatory speaking. Supposing this to be the case, I am by 
 thi) arrangements which have been entered into, relative to the 
 mode in which the discussion is to be conducted, precluded from 
 availing myself of any advantage which this talent, if I possess 
 it, might give me — as it has been agreed upon that neither my 
 reverend opponent nor myself shall be allowed to address the 
 meeting for longer than half an hour at a time — my soarings 
 must be contracted — my pinions must be fettered down. It is 
 not by flights of fancy or poetical allusions that this meeting is 
 to be swayed — argument is the only weapon that can be wielded 
 here this day. We must be governed by the only unerring 
 standard, — the word of God. One word to the gentlemen of 
 the public Press — all I ask is justice — justice alike to each of 
 us — let our principles and opinions go fairly before the world — 
 let the world scrutinize and examine them, and then give its 
 verdict — I shall not at present occupy more of your time. 
 
 Mr. Maguire rose, and spoke to the following effect : — Gen- 
 tlemen — As my friend, Mr. Pope, has entered into a very long 
 narrative, touching the circumstances that have led to the pre- 
 sent discussion, it will not be considered egotism in me, if I give 
 you a brief sketch of them, as far as they regard myself. I 
 happened, last November, to come to the town of Carrick-on- 
 Shannon, on private business of importance, and I solemnly 
 assure you, that I was not aware, until I arrived in Carrick, that a 
 meeting of the Catholics of Leitrim was about to be held there. 
 I was pressed by a few particular friends to remain for the meet- 
 ing which was fixed for the next day ; and on attending at the 
 meeting, a resolution on the subject of education was pi)t into 
 my hands to move. In doing so, I prefaced it with a few 
 observations, and I distinctly recollect saying, that my great 
 objection to the disputations upon the indiscriminate circulation of 
 the Scriptures was, that they all ended in a wordy war, and mis- 
 erable speechifying. I objected to that course, and I said, that 
 on the •ocirary, solid argument, logical deduction, and close 
 fighting ibould be adopted. I went on to say, that such was the 
 course I Misftfl determined to pursue ; and that wei'e I (you vi ill 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 11 
 
 observe that my expression was an hypothetical one) to meet the 
 arch-cr"sader himself, in the arena of polemical disputation, in- 
 stead of suffering him to indulge in flights of fancy, which would 
 only obscure, or in strains of eloquence that would only confuse, 
 I would confme him to a few solid objections, such as that 
 respecting the Socinian, which, if he would satisfactorily solve to 
 me, I would myself consent to become a Biblical. You will 
 observe that my expression was put hypothetically. I did not 
 say that I would meet him, but that tvei'e I to meet him, I would 
 avoid the flights of fancy and speechifying, and confine him to 
 a few solid objections. A report of the observations which I 
 made at this meeting appeared in the Weekly Register, and 
 I was there made to say that I was ready to meet the Popes, 
 &c, &c. I can assure this assembly, that no such expression 
 as that fell from me on that occasion. A newspaper controversy, 
 the necessary consequence of a misrepresentation on the 
 part of Mr. Pope, ensued. Mr. Pope addressed a long letter 
 to me, through the columns of the Evening JVLaiL In that 
 letter he attempted to solve the objection with regard to the 
 Socinian. I replied, to show that he had not solved that question ; 
 and I trust, before this polemical conflict is over, to prove to you 
 that he has not solved it, and that he never will. With regard 
 to what he has said about the Roman Catholic Primate of Ire* 
 land, it would have been more dignified in Mr. Pope to be silen 
 on that point. — I avoided hearing or seeing any thing from my 
 own Bishop, Dr. O'Reilly. Since I came to Dubhn, I have 
 not received any communication from him, verbal or written. — 
 If I have thus come forward in this public place, and on this 
 solemn occasion, I have not done so until I have been repeatedly 
 challenged to the conflict. A number of persons were hired, I 
 know not by whom, and sent round my parish with green bags 
 containing copies of the challenge, which they circulated most 
 industriously in every possible direction. The challenge was 
 put into every cabin, it was posted upon every w^all in the county. 
 1 state these circumstances to you, as they will form with 
 you some excuse for the appearance here this day of a man who 
 has lived amidst the bogs of Leitrim — a man who has been the 
 inhabitant of the mountains, and who never before addressed an 
 enhghtened audience like the present. It must appear to you 
 from this relation of facts, that it was no overweening desire of 
 notoriety that pressed me forward. Over me Dr. Curtis and 
 Dr. Murray exercise no direct control ; and I trust that, in hold- 
 ing a conversation in this public room, I do not involve myself 
 in a breach of clerical jurisdiction. I am well aware that the 
 Roman Catholic Bishops of Ireland never will recognize the 
 prin<^iple of public discussions upon matters of rehgion in thia 
 
I» THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 country — disturbed as it is by moral, polemical, and political dif- 
 ferences and conflicts. I disclaim, I deny, with uplifted arms, 
 any thing like an indirect sanction of these proceedings on the 
 part of the Cathohc Prelates as mentioned by Mr. Pope. I stand 
 forward here, of myself, to defend my religious principles, which 
 have grown with my growth, and for the assertion of which I 
 am ready, if called upon, to lay down my life. These princi- 
 ples I am determined to maintain, unless indeed Mr. Pope shall 
 c onvince me that I am in error. If I be convinced that I am 
 in error, I am ready to change my religious opinions, and to 
 adopt whatever creed reason might in that case point out as pre- 
 ferable to my own. Having stated so much with respect to the 
 challenge, I have a few words to say with respect to Dr. Cur- 
 tis. It may not be inappropriate here to remark, that though 1 
 am independent of the control of Dr. Curtis, the Roman Catholic 
 Primate of all Ireland, I am ready to listen to any advice 
 emanating from him, with respect and dutiful attention. I am 
 well aware that obedience is one of the great and principal duties 
 of the Christian — I know, as the Apostle has it, that he who 
 refuses to obey the authorities set over hini by Divine Provi- 
 dence resisteth the ordinances of God, and procureth to himself 
 damnation. I would not, therefore, disobey my superiors, as, in 
 doing so, I would be guilty of a violation of moral principle. It 
 may not be out of place for me to mention to you the personal 
 disad vantages under which I labor on the present occasion. Mr. 
 Pope is an old practitioner in the business of disputation. He 
 has become, by habit, eloquent on the subject, and he has a fatal 
 facility of expressing himself, sufficient to make any cause in 
 his hands appear plausible. His system has all the charms of 
 novelty to recommend it — and fashion, we all know, is a formid- 
 able temptation. He has arrayed in his favor worldly power 
 and influence. He has, besides, all the saints and sinners of 
 modern times, whose pride and self-interest will secure him 
 attentive ears. He knows how to estimate the value of such 
 influence. I do not mean to say that it has any weight with him 
 in {} e assertion of his religious principles. I solemnly declare 
 that I give him credit for sincerity. But I have one complaint, 
 and a serious one, to make against him. He has left me little 
 or no ground for attack. I could not obtain from Mr. Pope, 
 without difficulty, a profession of his creed. When called upon 
 to define his faith, he has called himself a Protestant. Mr. Pope 
 protests against the church of England — so do I. He protests 
 against the church of Scotland — so do I. Against the church 
 in Gevmany — so do I, Against the Greek church — so do I. 
 Mr. Pope, in fact protests against every church, but, in a more 
 especial and particular manner, does he protect against the 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 13 
 
 *• errors" of Popery ; and if any errors do exist in Popery, I am 
 ready to protest as strongly against them as iVIr. Pope. So far 
 i am equally a Protestant with Mr. Pope, and my Protestantism 
 goes as far as his, consisting, as it does, in a simple negation of 
 Popery, if it be understood in the sense in which Mr. Pope 
 would exhibit it. On the other hand, Mr. Pope has the whole 
 range of Roman Catholicism, whence to select three favorite 
 charges agaiijst my known and established principles. Where 
 are the points which I am to select against him 1 In the confes- 
 sion of faith which he made to me, he admitted the doctrines of 
 the Trinity, the Incarnation and Justification, by Faith only. 
 Now there is not one of those principles which I do not admit, 
 except the word " only." So far it is difficult for me to select 
 three principal charges against him. It is true that Mr. Pope 
 has volunteered to defend two points which he does not entirely 
 and undoubtedly believe, but which he has the kindness to sup 
 port against me. I have a few preliminary observations to offer 
 to you regarding the scriptural proofs of the existence of an 
 infallible church. Mr. Pope is not the advocate of any church. 
 I avow myself the child and champion of an infallible church. 
 It remains for you to see whether the motives of credibility 
 which attach me to that church are defensible — it remains for 
 you to judge whether the doctrine, that Christ established a 
 church upon earth, and endowed it with infallibility, be grounded 
 upon scripture — be consistent with the primitive faith of Chris- 
 tianity — be agreeable to common reason and common sense. It 
 is p-asy to perceive, that he who denies the necessity of bending 
 to a spiritual authority, is establishing a principle latitudinarian 
 and revolutionary in the strictest sense of the words. If there 
 exist no spiritual authority upon earth, to which man is to yield 
 obedience, I assert that every act of rebellion against the church 
 and against the state is the admitted and unqualified right of 
 every inoividual. If the principle of private judgment be founded 
 upon the law of nature, or upon the positive law of God, 
 there can be no limitation of the right. The law has made no 
 exception, consequently every individual has a right (and there 
 is no exception, either in religious or political matters) to set up 
 his private judgment against the laws of the church and of the 
 community. It was such principles that caused thp revolution 
 in England, and brought a king to the block. To similar prin- 
 ciples we are to attribute the bloody scenes of the desolating 
 revolution m France. Such principles have involved Germany 
 in the darkest Atheism. I nold in my hand the work of the 
 Rev. Mr. Rose, dedicated to the Bishop of Chester, in which 
 he laments the state of the churches in Germany, with the 
 pathos of a Jeremy — he describes them as plunged in the darkest 
 
14 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 Atheism. Every thing in the scripture is explained away there, 
 and the test of natural philosophy is absurdly applied to the mira- 
 cles of our Redeemer. If the principle of private judgment be 
 once recognized, then had the heretics of former days, Arius, 
 Cerinthus, Manicheus, &c, as good a right to the exercise of 
 private judgment as Mr. Pope, or any gentleman of the 19th 
 century. If those heretics had a right to exercise it, upon what 
 principle did the Catholic church condemn them — cut them off 
 as rotten members, and treat them, as Christ said those shall be 
 treated who would not hear the church, as heathens and pub- 
 licans, and reprobates upon the earth? Mr. Pope, I suppose, 
 recognizes the first four councils, and the Athanasian creed — he 
 must then admit that the church had a right to condemn Arius, 
 Eutyches, and Manicheus, and every other heretic and heresy 
 that appeared for the first four centuries of the Christian aira. 
 If he acknowledged the power in the church to condemn heresy 
 in the first century, why not acknowledge it now? Gentlemen, 
 I am about to enter upon my proofs of the authority of the Catho- 
 lic church. Mr. Pope's rules of faith will be amply discussed 
 hereafter, hut now you are about to hear, what, to some of you 
 may appear the antiquated doctrine of church authority, which 
 hos been discarded by modern Reformers for the last 300 years. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — I beg to call upon Mr. Maguire for proofs of 
 the InfaUibility of the Church of Rome. 
 
 Mr. Macuire. — I shall make a few preliminary observations 
 before I directly enter upon the subject. If the unlimited right 
 of private judgment be recognised, then will a seven-fold shield 
 be thrown over every error, however impure — every heresy, 
 howevei* damnable — every folly, however ridiculous. It will be 
 the origin of every species of madness, violence, and fanati- 
 cism. What will each of the heretics say ? "I exercise my 
 judgment conscientiously and to the best of my ability — I have 
 prayed to God that he might enlighten me with his grace. I 
 have taken every means in my power to arrive at the truth, and 
 my decided conviction now is that Christ is not the Son of 
 God." Thus would Arianism, that heresy which distracted the 
 church of Christ, and which, if the protecting influence of the 
 Almighty had not been extended to his church, would have 
 eradicated every Christian principle, and sapped the foundation 
 of that heavenly and noble edifice, become justifiable. How 
 could Mr. Pope blame the Arian ? Mr. Pope would appeal U 
 the scriptures — but in vain he would appeal to the scriptures 
 against the obstinate Arian or Socinian. They would in reply 
 appeal to their cpnscience — they will say that they have read 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 15 
 
 the scriptures, and that they have as good a right to interpret 
 their meaning as Mr. Pope. Can Mr. Pope, who recognizes 
 the principle of gospel liberty, blame them for their conduct? 
 Will he, in this regard, violate that principle which is the boast 
 of the Reformation? Who is to judge between Mr. Pope and 
 the Socinian or Arian ? God alone can be their judge, and 
 that not till the soul is separated from the body. Mr. Pope has 
 called upon me for proofs of the infaUibility of the church of 
 Rome. I beseech you, gentlemen, for the tender mercies of 
 God, as far as in you lies, to divest yourselves of every feeling, 
 of every prejudice, of every prepossession in favor of your own 
 opinions that have been dear to you, and to weigh in the honest 
 balance of sincerity the principles which I shall lay down, and 
 which I shall invariably found upon text«s of scripture, and upon 
 the authority established in the church for the first five ages of 
 Christianity. I assure you I do hope, with the blessing of 
 heaven, and by the influence of the Holy Ghost, to make some 
 converts. I am serious, believe me. Protestants are not in 
 the habit of examining the Roman Catholic religion. The very 
 name of Popery is sufficient to frighten them — the basilisk does 
 not appear half so dangerous in their eyes as Popery. And for 
 my part I should not wonder at their thinking so, if Popery 
 really were what they have been taught to believe it is. It is 
 incumbent on you then to commence an examination of the 
 tenets of the Roman Catholic religion. The first text to which 
 I shall refer you, is taken from Isaiah, hx, 21. It is admitted 
 . by Protestants, that the inspired writer in this passage spoke of 
 the church that was to come. 
 
 " This is my covenant with them, saith the Lord ; my spirit that is in thee, 
 and my words that I have put into thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy 
 mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's 
 seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever." 
 
 But I need not dwell at length upon this text, as I am fur- 
 nished with several strong and conclusive texts in the New 
 Testament. 
 
 " As the Father has sent me, I also send you," says the Lord, addressing 
 his Apostles. Again — " All power is given to me in heaven and in earth ; 
 go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing in the name of the Father, 
 and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all 
 things whatsoever I have commanded you : and lo ! I am with you all days 
 even to the consummation of the world." — Matthew, xxviii, 18, 19, 20. 
 
 Christ here declares, that the same power given to him by 
 the Father he commimicates to his Apostles without limitation, 
 moral or personal. It is a maxim in ethics, Uhi lex non dis- 
 tinguit, nee nos distinguere debemus. The Father conferred 
 upon Christ infallibility, and here he directly communicates all 
 his power to the Apostles. Perhaps it will be said, that it 
 
16 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 rested there, and was to cease with the lives of the Apostles 
 Christ declares the contrary, for he adds, 
 
 " Lo ! 1 am with you all days, even to the consummation of tlie world." 
 
 Were the Apostles to live for ever, or rather was not this 
 power to be communicated to their representatives on earth, 
 in whose persons they would morally live for ever 1 St. Paul 
 w iting to Timothy says, 
 
 " The church of the living God, is the pillar and the ground of truth." — 
 iii. 15. 
 
 Again, our Saviour says, 
 
 " He that heareth you, heareth me, and he that despiseth you, despiseth 
 me, and he that despiseth me, despiseth Him that sent me." — Luke x, 16. 
 
 Also St. John, iv, 6. 
 
 " He that knoweth God, heareth us, he that is not of God, heareth us not, 
 oy this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error." 
 
 Therefore, those who did not hear the Aiposiles preaching and 
 instructing, were branded with the mark of the spirit of error 
 In Mark, xvi, 15, 16, we read, 
 
 " He saith unto them. Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel 
 to every creature. He that beheveth and is baptized, shall be saved j but he 
 that believeth not, shall be condemned." 
 
 Is there, I would ask, any thing like a commandment here to 
 give the scriptures to every man, woman, and child, and let 
 hem interpret them as they might please ? — No. — But if " he 
 will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and 
 the publican." 
 
 I ask you, in the sincerity of your hearts, do you think that 
 Christ would thus bind mankind in obedience to an authority, 
 which could lead them into damnable error? Our Lord says 
 emphatically, and without limitation or exception, " he that 
 will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and 
 the publican." 
 
 This, no doubt, will appear a novel doctrine to many of my 
 hearers, who have been taught to recognize no authority in any 
 church, and who have long worshipped the idol of private 
 judgment. Again we read in Hebrews, xiii, 17, 
 
 " Obey your Prelates, for they watch as being to render an account of 
 your souls." 
 
 I am at a loss to discover how the Prelates would be obliged 
 to render an account of our souls if it be not our duty to obey 
 them ; but if, on the contrary, we may read the scriptures and 
 interpret them at our own risk, must it follow in that case, as a 
 Decessary consequence, that the Bishops, to whom we acknow- 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 17 
 
 ledge no obedience, shall be ace )untable for the salvation ci 
 
 our souls 1 
 ** Oh ! Israel, Israel, destruction is thy own — thy help is only in me." 
 How can the Bishops be accountable for our souls, if we do 
 
 not make them our spiritual guides? I could quote twenty 
 
 additional passages from scripture in support of the doctrine 
 
 which I advocate, as — 
 
 '* Ye are the Hght of the world" — " ye are the salt of the earth" — " what* 
 soever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven," &c. 
 
 I ask you, in the unaffected sincerity of a Christian heart, if 
 Christ did not intend to bind mankind in obedience to hia 
 Church, is it not astonishing that he should have put forward in 
 so many and such clear texts of scripture, the authority of that 
 church ? I challenge Mr. Pope to show me a single dogma in 
 the Christian dispensation more clearly revealed in scripture. 
 I affirm that he could not prove the divinity of Christ upon texts 
 so clear — that cardinal dogma of Christianity is not established 
 upon texts so plain, so natural, and so obvious. The Homihes 
 of the church of England tell us that for upwards of 800 years, 
 " all Christendom was involved in damnable idolatry and 
 error." Could Christ himself leave hundreds of millions of 
 men for 900 years in error 1 I ask — would he lead us into the 
 beUef of an infallible church, possessing not infallibility ? Hav- 
 ing said so much upon the subject of infallibility, let me now 
 ^ive you the belief of the first ages of the church which are 
 admitted by all Protestants, and even by Luther himself to have 
 taught the truth, and to have been pure in doctrine. The 
 quotations which I shall here make from the Holy Fathers will 
 go before the learned world — I will tell the page and the book 
 m which they will be found — I have myself, in seven instances, 
 consulted the originals, and finding them so correct, I can 
 vouch for the accuracy of the other quotations. The first 
 authority which I shall quote is Irenaeus, a father of the Latin 
 church, who lived in the second century. He was by birth a 
 Greek, and his work in the original is lost, but a Latin transla- 
 tion has been preserved. 
 
 " Things being made thus plain (he is alluding to the derivation of doc- 
 trine from the Apostles,) it is not from others that truth is to be sought, 
 which is easily learned from the Church, (or in the words of the original — 
 quam facile est ah ecclesia sumere,) For to this church (he continues) as 
 into a rich repository, the Apostles committed whatever is divine truth ; that 
 each one, if so inclined, might thence draw the drink of life. This is the 
 loay of life; all other teachers must be shunned as thieves and robbers. For 
 what? Should there be any dispute on a point of small moment, must not 
 recourse be had to the most ancient churches, where the Apostles resided, 
 and from them collect the truth ?" — J Iv. Herts, lib. iii cap, iv, page 20^ 
 EkL Oxonii. 1702. 
 
 2* 
 
18 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 And again. "It is a duty to obey the Priests of the church — eis qui in 
 ecelesia sunt Presbyteri, obedire oportet— who bold their succession from the 
 Apostles, and who with that succession, received agreeably to the will of the 
 Father, the sure pledge of truth, {Charisima veritatis certum;) but as to those 
 who belong not to that leading succession they may be united, they should 
 be suspected, either as heretics or schismatics, proudly extolling and pleasing 
 themselves, or as hypocrites, actuated by vain glory or the love of lucre. 
 But they who impugn the truth, and excite others to oppose the church of 
 God, their fate is with Dathan and Abiron ; while schismatics who violate 
 the church unity — qui scindunt et separant unitatem ecclesice — experience the 
 puni?iment which fell on King Jeroboam." 
 
 My next authority is St. Clement, of Alexandria, Lib. stro- 
 matwrij Book vii, page 883, Oxford edition. He was a Greek 
 Father, and Master of the School of Alexandria. He lived in 
 the second century. 
 
 " Those who seek may find the truth, and clearly learn from the scrip- 
 tures themselves, in what manner heretics have gone astray, and on the 
 contrary, in what manner accurate knowledge and the right doctrine are to be 
 found in the true and aricient Church only. He ceases to be faithful to the 
 Lord, who revolts against the received doctrines of the Church, to embrace 
 the opinions of heretics. Heretics make use, indeed, of the scriptures j but 
 then they use not all the sacred books ; those they use are corrupted, or they 
 chiefly urge ambiguous passages. They corrupt those truths which agree 
 with the inspired word, and were delivered by the holy Apostles and teachers, 
 opposing the divine tradition by human doctrines, that they may establish 
 their heresy. — But it is clear from what has been said, that there is only one 
 true Church, which alone is ancient, and there is but one God and one 
 Lord." 
 
 Tertullian, who flourished in the end of the second century, 
 and was a citizen of Carthage, in his book De Prescript, cap. 
 6, page 331. Edit. Pamelliana, 1662, says, — 
 
 " We are not allowed to indulge our own humour, nor to choose what 
 another has invented. We have the Apostles of our Lord as founders, who 
 were not themselves the inventors nor authors of what they left us ; but they 
 have faithfully taught the world that doctrine which they received from 
 Christ," 
 
 Ibidem, cap. 21." Now to know what the Apostles taught — that is, what 
 Christ revealed to them, recourse must be had to the Churches which they 
 founded, and which they instructed by word of mouth, and by their Epistles, 
 For it is plain, that all doctrine which is conformable to the faith of these 
 mother Churches is true, being that which they received from the Apostles, 
 the Apostles from Christ, Christ from God ; and that all other opinions must 
 be novel and/aZse." 
 
 Century the Third. — Origen in his preface to the first 
 book of his Periarchon, page 47, writes, — 
 
 " As there are many who think they believe what Christ taught, and some 
 of these differ from others, it becomes necessary that all should profess that 
 doctrine, which came down from the Apostles, and now continues in the 
 Church [usque ad presens in ecelesia permanens.) That alone is truth which 
 in nothing differs from what has been thus delivered. {Q,u(B in nvlh ah 
 ecclesiastica et apostolica discordat traditione.^^) 
 
THE ROMAN CATHDLIC CHURCH. 19 
 
 And homLj the 6th, on Leviticus : — » 
 
 " Let him look to it, who arrogantly puffed up, contemns the apostolic 
 words. To me it is good to adhere to apostolic men, as to God and his 
 Christ, and to draw intelligence from the Scriptures, according to the sense, 
 that has been delivered by them. If we follow the mere letter of the Scrip- 
 tures, and take the interpretation of the law, as the Jews commonly explain 
 it, I shall blush to confess that the Lord should give such law. But if the 
 law of God be understood as the Church teaches, then only does it transcend 
 all human law, and is worthy of him that gave it" 
 
 And again, Tract 29, on Matthew, tome 3, page 864 : 
 "As often as heretics produce the canonical Scripture, in which every 
 Christian agrees and believes, they seem to say, * Lo ! with us is the word 
 of truth.' But to them (the heretics) we cannot give credit, nor depart from 
 the first and ecclesiastical tradition : we can beheve only as the succeeding 
 churches of God have delivered." 
 
 I may observe, there is only a translation of Origen's works 
 in the Latin remaining, except a few fragments of the original 
 Greek. St. Cyprian, bishop and martyr, in his treatise De 
 Unitate Ecclesiae, observes : — 
 
 " Men are exposed to error, because they turn not their eyes to the foun- 
 tain of truth, nor is the head sought for, nor the doctrine of the heavenly 
 Father upheld, which things would any one seriouslv weigh, no long arguing 
 would be necessary. The proof is easy — Christ addresses Peter, ' I say to 
 thee, thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates 
 of hell shall not prevail against it.* He that does not hold this unity of the 
 Church, can he think that he holds the faith? He that opposes and with- 
 stands the Church, can he trust that he is in the Church ?" — Page 108, &c." 
 
 And in his 66th Epistle, page 166, Oxford Edition : — 
 
 "Christ says to his Apostles, and through them to all his ministers, who 
 by a regular ordination succeed to them, — * He that heareth you, heareth me, 
 and he that despiseth you, despiseth me.' (Luke x. 16.) And thence have 
 schisms and heresies arisen, when the bishop who is one, and presides over 
 the Church, is proudly despised — Dum Episcopus qui unus est, et Ecclesicz 
 prccst, contemniturJ'* 
 
 Century the Fourth. — Lactantius, a convert to the 
 Christian religion, the most accomphshed scholar of the age, 
 and tutor to Crispus, the emperor Constantine's son, and who 
 was styled " the Christian Cicero," — In the fourth book of his 
 Institutions, c. 30, p. 232, Cambridge edition, thus speaks : 
 
 " The Catholic Church alone retains the true worship — this is the source 
 of truth — this is the dwelling of faith — this the temple of God, into which he 
 that enters not, and from which he that goes out, forfeits the hope of life, and 
 of eternal salvation — a spe vit(Z ac salutis eterncR cdienus est.^^ 
 
 Eusebius of Palestine, in his Prccmium de Eccles. TheoL 
 page 60, Ed. Colon. 1687: 
 
 " To what has been mentioned, I shall add my reasonmg on the divinity 
 of our Saviour ; but nothing newly invented from myself; nothing From my 
 own closet, nor resting on the opinion of my own sagacity. I shall deliver 
 the uncorrupted doctrine of the Church of God, which once received from 
 ^^r and eye witnesses, this chuivh preserves inviolate." 
 
20 TH£ INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 St Athanasius, Patriarch of Alexandria, first Epist, ad Sera* 
 f/wm, p. 676, Ed. Bened. 1698: 
 
 " Let us again consider from the earliest period, the tradition, the doctrine, 
 and faith of the Catholic church which God first ddivered, which the Apostles 
 proclaimed, and the succeeding Fathers fostered and preserved. On these 
 authorities the church is founded, and whoever falls from her communion 
 neither is, nor can be called a Christian." 
 
 Epist. ad Marcell. 9, 1, p. 996, Ed. Bened. 1698 : 
 " If you wish to confound the opinions of the Gentiles and of tlie heretics, 
 »nd to shew that the knowledge of God is not to be found with them, but in 
 the church alone, you may repeat the words of the 79th psalm." 
 
 St. Hilary, in his Commentary on Matthew, c. xvii, p. 675, 
 Ed. Bened : 
 
 "Christ (teaching from the ship) intimates, that they who are out of the 
 church can possess no understandmg of the divine word. For the ship is an 
 emblem of the church, within which, as the word of life is planted and 
 preached, so they who are without, being as barren and useless sands, can- 
 not understand it." 
 
 St. Basil the Great, Bishop of Csesarea, in Cappadocia, Lib. 
 de Spirit. Sanct. chap, xvi, t. 3, p. 34 : 
 
 "The order and government of the church, is it not manifestly and beyond 
 contradiction the work of the Holy Ghost? For he gave to his church — first, 
 apostles ; secondly, prophets ; thirdly, teachers," &c. — 1 Cor. xii, 28. 
 
 St. Ephrem of Edessa, whose works were published in Latin 
 Dy Gerard Yesius, at Rome, and in Greek by Thwaites, at 
 Oxford, and who was the disciple of St. James, Bishop of 
 Nissibis in Mesopotamia, Sermon 25 — Adv. Heres. t. 4, p, 
 499— Edit. Quirini— Romse, 2740 : 
 
 " They again must be reproved, who wander from the road, to run into 
 uncertain and devious tracks; for the way of salvation holds out certain 
 marks by which you may learn that this is the path which the Messenger of 
 Peace trod ; while the wise whom the Holy Spirit instructed walked over ; 
 and the Prophets and Apostles pointed out to us. My brethren let us walk 
 in this way by which his divine Son travelled. This is the royal road which 
 leads us to happiness." 
 
 St. Cyril, patriarch of Jerusalem: 
 
 " The church is called Catholic because it teaches Catholicly, and with- 
 out any omission, all points that men should know concerning things visible 
 and invisible, heavenly and earthly." — Catechism, 18, No. 2, page 270. 
 
 Ibidem, Cat. 4, No. 20. — "Learn sedulously from the church, which are 
 the books of the Old and J^eio Testament.'''' 
 
 Ibidem, Cat. 5, No. 7. — " Guard the faith, and that faith alone which ia 
 now delivered to thee by the church, confirmed as it is by all the scriptures." 
 
 Mr. Pope rose and said — Gentlemen, I find it necessary, in 
 consequence of an observation which fell from Mr. Maguiro 
 towards the conclusion of his first speech, to give the following 
 statement relative to my confession of faith. I shall read for 
 you a document, which was handed to Mr. Maguire, w'thout 
 the slightest hesitation by Mr. Singer : 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 21 
 
 "I do not stand forward as the advocate of any particular church, but of 
 the great leading doctrines held in common by the reformed churches, a3 
 contained in their pubhshed creeds, and as an opposer of the tenets of tiie 
 church of Rome, against which they in common protest. 
 
 " Our controversy is not about church -government, but about doctrines. 
 
 " I hold the doctrine of the Trinity. 
 
 "The sufficiency of the scriptures to salvation, the Apocrypha having 
 been rejected. 
 
 " The utter depravity of human nature, and tho*necessity of a change of 
 hfjart, before the soul can be admitted to the kingdom of heaven. 
 
 "The guilt and condemnation of man, and justification before God by 
 faith alone, in the finished work of Christ. 
 
 " That good works spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith. 
 
 " I protest against Infallibility ; doctrine of Supererogation ; Human 
 Merit ; Transubstantiation ; the Sacrifice of the Mass ; Service in an 
 unknown tongue ; Communion in one kind ; Adoration of Images ; and 
 Invocation of Saints and Angels." 
 
 While I acknowledge to Mr. Maguire, that I could not sub- 
 scribe to every one of the 39 articles, I beg to refer to the 
 following articles, as a further exposition of my faith, — articles 
 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and all 
 the protestations against the church of Rome, contained in the 
 other articles. Those are the principles which every real 
 Protestant professes, and to them I most cordially subscribe. 
 
 My friend has complained, that he has discovered no tangible 
 matter on which to oppose me. Mr. Maguire should remem- 
 ber, that we accuse the church of Rome of overwhelming the 
 whole structure of Christianity, by the addition of novel 
 opinions ; and, therefore, he cannot find fault with me, if my 
 profession of faith is contained within a much shorter compass 
 than his. Mr. Maguire has touched upon some subjects, 
 amongst others, the right of private judgment, which by oui 
 arrangements were not to come under consideration until a 
 future day — I shall not follow him in his wanderings, but shall 
 at once proceed to the subject more immediately before us — 
 the proofs of the infallibility of the Roman Catholic church. 
 My learned friend has endeavored to prove his point, by bring- 
 ing forward various passages of scripture, which he, no doubt, 
 looked upon as proofs. But I charge him at once with a 
 " petilio principii,^^ and maintain that the onus rests on him of 
 proving that the church of Rome is the church of Christ. 
 Until he shall bring forward proofs to demonstrate this, the 
 passages which he has adduced relative to the church of Christ 
 are irrelevant. My learned friend has also brought forward 
 various quotations from the Fathers. While I admit, that as 
 historians and witnesses of what may have occurred in the 
 times during which they lived, we may receive the testimony of 
 the Fathers ; yet I do say, we are not to place any great weight 
 upon their authority — and I contend for it, that we are only to 
 
22 THE INTALLIBILITY OF 
 
 receive their expositions, when those expositions approve them- 
 selves to our judgments, as in accordance with the general 
 tenor of the sacred scriptures. Having made these general 
 remarks upon the Fathers, I beg to read the advice given 
 by St. Augustin and Chrysostom, which, perchance, may assist 
 Mr. Maguire in deciding, whether the church of Rome be the 
 church of Christ. From St. Augustin, "Z>5 Unitaie Ecclesicp,'^ 
 cap. 16, I read as follows. Speaking of the Donatists : — 
 
 " Let them," he says, "if they can demonstrate their church not by the talk 
 and rumor of the Africans ; not by the Councils of their own Bishops ; not 
 by the books of their disputers ; not by deceitful miracles, against which we 
 tre cautioned by the word of God, but in the prescript of the law, in the 
 predictions of the Prophets, in the verses of the Psalms, in the voice of the 
 Shepherd himself, in the preaching and works of the Evangelists ; that is, in 
 all canonical authorities of the sacred scriptures." 
 
 St. Chrysostom also : 
 
 " Formerly pL might have been ascertained by various means, which was 
 •Jie true church, but at present there is no other means left for 
 
 THOSE WHO ARE WILLING TO DISCOVER THE TRUE CHURCH OF ChRIST BUT 
 
 BY THE SCRIPTURES ALONE. And why ? BccausG heresy has all outward 
 observances in common with her. If a man, therefore, be desirous of know- 
 ing the true Church, how will he be able to do it amidst so great a resem- 
 blance, but by the scriptures alone? Wherefore, our Lord foreseeing that 
 such a great confusion of things would take place in the latter days, ordered 
 the Christians to have recourse to nothing but the scriptures." — Horn. 49, in 
 f.!latL xxiv. 
 
 From these quotations, you will perceive, that much of the 
 controversy resolves itself into this simple question — Are the 
 doctrines of the church of Rome those which the Bible teaches 1 
 How then are we to know this but from the Bible ? We must 
 first then be in possession of the doctrines of the church of 
 Christ, in order to determine, whether the church of Rome be 
 the church of Christ — and then, forsooth, we must go back to 
 the church of Rome, in order to learn what the doctrines of the 
 church of Christ are ? 
 
 Methinks, my friend should have given some definition of 
 " The Church." — He should have stated, where the infallibility 
 of the church is lodged. Whether in a general council, inde- 
 pendently of the Pope, or whether in the Pope independently of 
 a general council — whether in a council and the Pope together 
 — or in the universal church dispersed throughout the world — 
 for if I know not where this infallibility lies, even supposing 
 that it did exist, of what possible use can it be to me ? I assert, 
 that there is not a single passage throughout the entire scrip- 
 tures, in which the word "church" means the body of the eccle- 
 siastical oflScers exclusive of the Christian congregations over 
 which they preside. The word church occurs in about ninety 
 places in the New Testament • and there is not one, in which it 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 23 
 
 19 to be understood of the ecclesiastical governors of the church, 
 to the exclusion of the people under their charge. 
 
 We shall see the oprnions of the Fathers on the meaning of 
 the word church. St. Clemens Alexandrinus, calls the church 
 a congregation of the elect. — {Strom, 7, p. 715.) In the same 
 sense it is used by St. Ignatius, by Critopalus, by St. Cyril of 
 Alexandria, by Isidore Pelusiota, (Ig. ad Trail Crit. in Confess, 
 Fid. c. 7. Cyril, in cap. 42, les. p. 64. Isid. ep. 246, 1. 2, p. 
 236,) and others, lobius Monachus says, that " the people 
 believing in God constitute the church." — (In Bib. Phot. Cod. 
 122, p. 636.) To nearly the same effect speaks St. Basil, 
 Theophylact, (Basil ep. 393. Theoph. in 1 ad Cor. c. 1, p. 164,) 
 and other Fathers and eminent ecclesiastical writers. Zonaras, 
 who may be considered as high authority in respect of the 
 import of ecclesiastical terms, says, that " the word ' church,' 
 properly denotes a congregation of the faithful." — (Ad Can. 6. 
 Grang. p. 314.) We see, therefore, from the scriptures them- 
 selves, and from the authority of the Fathers whom I have 
 quoted, that the word " church" does not signify an ecclesiastical 
 synod or a general council — but the body of the faithful. So 
 that even supposing it did appear from the scriptures, that the 
 church of Christ is infallible, it is evident that that infallibility 
 must not be restricted to the ecclesiastical rulers, but must be 
 extended to the entire body of Christians scattered over the 
 world, laics as well as ecclesiastics. My friend next referred 
 to Isaiah, hx, 21, and he told us that many Protestant divines 
 consider the prophet as speaking in that passage of the future 
 church. I beg to say, however, that many learned Protestants 
 have considered it as referring to the Jewish church, subsequently 
 to their restoration and introduction to the Christian dispensation. 
 — If it confers a privilege on any, it confers it on all who 
 constitute the church of Christ; but it seems to confer it 
 particularly on the Jewish church, as the promise was originally 
 addressed to them. The words are, "my spirit that is in thee shall 
 not depart from out of thy mouth from henceforth," &c. The 
 learned gentleman in his next remark, also followed up the 
 petitio principii, "as my Father sent me, so also send I you," and 
 takes for granted that these words apply to successors of the 
 Apostles. But the onus is on him to prove, that every thing said 
 to the Apostles is also said to their successors ; and again the 
 onus rests on him to show, that the ecclesiastics or Popes of 
 Rome are the successors of the Apostles. This he has not yet 
 attempted to show, and until he does so, of what avail are allhis 
 assertions. Again he quotes, " Behold I am with you all days," 
 and asks, how could he be with the Apostles to the end of the 
 world, seeing they were mortal men ? He should bear in mind. 
 
24 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 that not a line of the New Testament was written wlieh n^ spn-AO 
 these words. The "end" is regarded by many as the con- 
 summation of the Mosaical dispensation — the original word is 
 literally " age," and not world. But Christ was in truth with the 
 Apostles while in the flesh, in the power of his spirit ; and he will 
 no doubt, be with their doctrines (which under the influence of 
 the holy spirit, they committed to writing,) to the consummation 
 of time — blessing them to the salvation of thousands yet unborn. 
 But here I meet my friend, and deny that there are in the strict 
 sense of the term any successors to the Apostles. When / shall 
 see men performing miracles in the broad face of day, like them 
 proving their doctrines by the law and the testimony, evidencing 
 by the holiness of their lives that they are not of this world, and 
 that they are valiant for the truth on earth ; then, and not till 
 then, can I allow, that there are in the strict sense of the word 
 any successors to the Apostles. 
 
 "Whatever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven," 
 has been alluded to by my friend. Why should that promise be 
 exclusively claimed by the Pope and his clergy, which was made 
 to the Apostles at large. — (Mat. xviii, 18.) It is a fact, which 
 rests on the authority of historical testimony, that no bishop of 
 the church of Rome assumed the title of universal bishop till 
 the year 606, in the time of Boniface ; and Gregory the great, 
 in an epistle written a few years before that period, makes this 
 striking remark : " That if any person assume the title of 
 universal priest, he is a forerunner of antichrist." But I would 
 ask, if the promise was to be extended to any of the successors, 
 why not to the successor of Peter at Antioch, and to the succes- 
 sors of the other Apostles, to Polycarp, and to others of the early 
 Fathers. My friend has said, that our Saviour promised to com- 
 municate his power to the apostles, when he said, " All things 
 are given unto me in heaven and in earth." I really cannot dis- 
 cover this from the context. It is said, all power is given unto 
 the Saviour; but because the power is given unto him, does it fol- 
 low that he communicated that power to his Apostles and then 
 successors ? The promises, even if admitted in the sense of 
 my learned friend, rests upon this condition, " Teaching them to 
 observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." There-Q 
 fore, Mr. Maguire should show that the church of Rome is in 
 accordance with the word of God 1 My friend has again re- 
 ferred to the church being " the pillar and the ground of faith." 
 Now, as I stated, before he can apply this or any similar pas 
 gage to the church of Rome, he must first show that that church 
 is the church of Christ — this he has not yet been able to prove, 
 and I assert with confidence that he never will. 
 
 I do admit indeed, that the universal body of the faithful, by 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 25 
 
 setting forth the purity of Christian doctrine^, hy exhibiting its 
 practical inflirence, and by asseinbling on the Lorcl'ri day, hold 
 up a blazing light to the world, are " an Epistle knov. n and read 
 of men," and thus diffuse the truth as it is in Jesus, But I do 
 not thence infer, that infallibility is the prerogative o' the church 
 of Christ, though I do hold that against the faithful tlie gates of 
 hell shall not prevail, and that "neither death, nor life, nor angels, 
 nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to 
 come, nor height nor depth, nor any other creature, sliidl be able 
 to separate them from the love of God, which is in Ciirist Jesus 
 our Lord." To be preserved by the power of Gocl, and to be 
 M atched over by his providence, does not imply infallibility ; and 
 ^•ithout the possession of such a prerogative, the church of Christ 
 may be the pillar and ground of truth, by being a living exemplar 
 of the influence of Christian doctrine." "To hear the Church," 
 refers not to the universal church, but to the particidciV church with 
 which the parties concerned happen to be connected. How is it 
 possible, that an individual could make his complaint to the uni- 
 versal church I The gentleman has endeavored to give us an 
 illustration, by comparing the church to the constituted authorities 
 of the land. But I would ask, although we do look upon them 
 as the proper expounders of the law of the nation, and appeal te 
 them to decide in matters of dispute ; and although \, e do admit 
 " that the powers that be are ordained of God," does this argue, 
 that we consider them as infallible ? As far as the commands of 
 ihe church of Christ accord with the word of God, so far, and no 
 farther, are they ratified in heaven. 
 
 The expression "obey your prelates," my frienil has also 
 quoted. Now, in the original, the word is T^yov/ttsro::. — " Obey 
 them that have the rule over you." We must be careful to 
 attend to the tenor and spirit of scripture, and call no man mas- 
 ter, save in so far as his guidance is agreeable to tbs word and 
 will of God. Let it not be imagined that I am oppo.^ed to pas- 
 toral authority. No, far from it — " Christ gave to his church, 
 first, apostles, — secondly, prophets — thirdly, pastors and teach- 
 ers, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the minis- 
 try, for the edifying of the body of Christ. My frien ' is referred 
 to the passage, " Ye are the salt of the earth." e should 
 have continued the Saviour's words, "If the sa]i .' ive lost its 
 «avor, wherewith shall it be salted ?" Does this, ■ 70uld ask, 
 look like infalhbility — " If the salt lose its sav.. /herewith 
 shall it be salted ? It is then fit for nothing, but io ;e cast out 
 and trodden under foot." 
 
 Mr. Maguire has also referred to the passage, **'s.ose-soever 
 sins ye forgive, they are forgiven, and whose-socvsr sins ye 
 retain, they are retained." Now it must be remembered, that at 
 
 a 
 
26 TEIE INFALLIBILITY Of 
 
 the time our Lord uttered these words, not a hne of the >[ct# 
 Testament was wntten. Christ was about to introduce a new 
 dispensation ; ana ne appointed his Apostles as ministers of his 
 new kingdom, with authority to exact laws and regulations for 
 the governance thereof. The Saviour fully commissioned his 
 Apostles to make known the glories of his divine character, and 
 the principles of Heaven's administration — to lay'down the way 
 of salvation, clearly and fully through a Redeemer's blood, and 
 to describe the character of those whose sins had been blotted 
 out, or in other words to depict the sanctifying influence of the 
 gospel upon the life and conversation. I admit the power of the 
 church of Christ to excommunicate from its society any, who 
 by their unholy lives disgrace their profession, or, by their errors 
 as to the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, give evidence, 
 that they are not the followers of our Lord and Saviour. Bw 
 even the authority of excommunication is restricted; for it avail? 
 not except so far as the decision agrees with the will of heaven. 
 Further — there is no standard authority as to discipline in the 
 church of Rome ; for Doctor Doyle, in his examination on oath 
 before the Lord's committee, page 240, when asked, " Does 
 die last article in the priest's oath declare every thing done in 
 • he council of Trent binding? " replied, " That regards faith, 
 i*)\ discipline. The French church never received the decrees 
 )»f the council of Trent regarding discipline: and in a part of 
 Ireland such decrees are not received." My friend has spoken 
 much about unity of sentiment and supreme authority. The 
 passage just read furnishes a sufTicient commentary on his as- 
 sertions relative to these points. There are many other proofs 
 which I could adduce, that the church of Rome possesses no 
 claim whatever to infallibility — but my time at present does not 
 permit. Mr. Pope here resumed his seat. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — I regret exceedingly, that after all my en- 
 deavours to the reverse, this controversy is likely to be a war ol 
 words, and not of argument. Let us come to close fighting — 
 let Mr. Pope propose his objections seriatim, and I pledge my- 
 tjclf to answer them to your satisfaction. I fearlessly appeal u^ , 
 /scripture. lie has stated that not a single passage in the Ne\» 
 Testament refers to church authority independently of the con- 
 gregation. 1 aver that there are many such passages ; when our 
 Saviour says, — " If he will not hear thee, tell the church : and if 
 he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen 
 and the publican ; " he evidently alludes to a tribunal before 
 which the oflender is to be arraigned. Was the Bishop to be 
 arraigned before the peasant, and not the peasant before th^ 
 Bishop? No — Christ intended that there should be rulers io 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 27 
 
 his church — that the Apostles, with their successors, shouk^ 
 constitute a tribunal, to which obedience should be rendered 
 and from which the ignorant and the illiterate should receive 
 instruction in the faith. Mr. Pope says, that our Saviour must 
 refer to a particular church, and not to the universal church, from 
 the impossibility of referring to the latter. He might as well 
 say, that any individual who sought redress from the laws of his 
 country, should appeal to the congregated magistrates of the 
 country. An individual can appeal to a Bishop, as to a magig 
 trate — he can appeal from the Bishop to a Synod — from the Sy- 
 nod he can appeal to the Pope, and from the Pope to a general 
 Council, which, like the House of Lords, is the last resource. 
 It was extraordinary sophistry, then, to argue, as Mr. Pope has 
 done, that there is no tribunal but the universal church. 
 
 He endeavors to bring the Holy Fathers into a qualified dis- 
 repute, as Luther did before him. When Luther found the 
 authority of the holy Fathers strong against him, he said, "I care 
 not if a thousand Chrysostoms, a thousand Cyprians, a thousand 
 Augustines, stood up against me. And let this be my creed, 'I 
 yield to no man.' " Again, he says, " I, Dr. Martin Luther, as 
 to those matters (articles of faith,) am and wish to be deemed 
 obstinate, contumacious, and violent." Such was Luther's con- 
 fession that the Fathers were against him. When Luther found 
 a great number of sects arising amongst the reformers — Calvin 
 denying the real presence — Zuinglius saying, that this is my 
 BODY, means "this represents my body," he began to repent, 
 and he threatened to return to Popery again, if they continued 
 to raise such schisms. Mr. Pope should not endeavor to bring 
 the Holy Fathers into disrepute. If he says that they were fal- 
 lible, which I admit, yet he must allow that they are good and 
 faithful witnesses of what was the Christian doctrine in their 
 days. If I show, as I will, the infallibility of the church to be 
 the doctrine of sixty Fathers at a time, when Mr. Pope will ad- 
 mit that the church was pure, then is it not evident that such 
 doctrine must be true ? If Mr. Pope answers in the negative, 
 then he must contradict all Protestants who admit the authority 
 of the first four councils — I do not include the council of Jeru- 
 salem. Mr. Pope has said, that he cannot discover where this 
 authority exists in the Cathohc church. If he had examined 
 our divines and canonists, he would find that the Pope, at the 
 head of a council regularly convened, in their decrees regard- 
 ing faith, are admitted to be infallible. That is one instance. — 
 Also, if the Pope, with a few bishops assembled, should issue 
 decrees touching the deposit of faith, and which are subsequently 
 received by the church dispersed, we account them infallible, as 
 otherwise the promises of Christ to his church would fail. 
 
2h THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 As 10 tl.c title Ecumenical, assumed by Boniface, it certainly 
 was condemned by Gregol^ the Great, when assumed in a dif- 
 ferent sense by the patriarcn of Constantinople. It was then 
 condemned by Gregory as a blasphemous heresy, because, as 
 he said, there was no universal bishop in the unlimited sens'e 
 meant by the patriarch of Constantinople, but Christ, who is 
 with his church to the end of the world, teaching and preaching. 
 But in a limited sense, the expression is not to be condemned, 
 and that was the sense in which it was claimed by Boniface. 
 
 Again, " as the Father has sent me, 1 also send you." Mr. 
 Pope says, I did not prove that this was directed to any but the 
 apostles. I have already proved that our Savior promised he 
 would be with them to the end of the world — not that they should 
 live in a physical, but in a moral sense, and survive in the per- 
 sons of their successors. Mr. Pope says that this applied to 
 the Jewish church. I am sure the church of England will be 
 much obliged to him, for all his arguments tend as strongly 
 against the established church of England, as against the church 
 of Rome. The church of England, in her homiUes, declares 
 that she will not endure a departure from her liturgy in the slight- 
 est degree. So fir she claims obedience to her authority as 
 well as the Catholic church. There could not in fact exist any 
 regularity or order if Christ did not leave an authority to his 
 church. Mr. Pope says, granting for a moment the church of 
 Christ to be infallible, that the onus lies upon me to prove that 
 the church of Rome is the church of Christ — this argument is 
 merely ad captandum. After I have proved that Christ estab- 
 lished one true and infallible church on earth, do I not lay the 
 hatchet to the root of all the rest, and thus prove the falsehood 
 of all the heresies that have separated from that church "? and 
 consequently have I not broken the neck of Protestantism gen- 
 erally '? Is it not evident that I can prove the infallibility of the 
 church in the times of the Apostles, and under their successors, 
 the bishops and martyrs, who died for the truth ? If Mr. Pope 
 once admits the infallibility of any church, I have gained mv 
 point., I have proved to you manifestly that the passage whicl 
 I quoted from Isaiah has reference to a future church. I shah 
 read to you the passage again, with the preceding verse : — 
 
 " And there shall come a Redeemer to Zion, and to them that return from 
 iniquity in Jacob, saith the Lord. This is my covenant with them, saith the 
 Lord; my spirit that is in thee, and my words that I have put into thy mouth, 
 shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out 
 of the moutli of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth, an^ forever." 
 Isaiah, \ix, 20, 21. 
 
 Here the inspired prophet speaks of a Redeemer to come to 
 Zic .1, and to establish his church. Could there be a more obvi- 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 29 
 
 ous allusion to Christ and bis church. In reference to my quolp- 
 lion "ye are the salt of the earth,'* Mr. Pope has reminded ..le 
 of the addition, " If the salt shall lose its savor." I deny that 
 the salt does lose its savor — I am not a chemist, but I can state 
 upon the authority of the most learned men, that salt cannot lose 
 its savor — this, therefore, proves the infallibility of the church. 
 The Apostles are compared to salt, and as soon as the salt xvoida 
 lose its savor, they would lose their infallibility — that is never. 
 Mr. Pope argues that when Christ talked of the church, he talked 
 of the laity — will it be inferred, because Christ speaks one time 
 in the aggregate, that he never speaks particularly of the bishops 
 and rulers whom the Holy spirit appointed to govern the church. 
 Mr. Pope says that the passage, " obey your preUtes," means, 
 " obey your superiors in general." What says the Apostle Paul ] 
 " Obey your prelates, and be subject to them. For they watch, as beinj 
 to render an account of your souls," &c. 
 
 Are laymen, or magistrates, by Christ's appointment, to ren 
 der an account of our souls'? It would be absurd to suppose 
 that the bishops should give an account of that which they have 
 not the government. What signifies how a governm.ent exists, 
 if obedience be not rendered to it ? — How absurd to suppose 
 that an authority couid exist, and yet the people not be obliged 
 to obey it. It is evident if an episcopal church were established 
 by Christ, that bishops must be recognised in it. Our Saviour 
 gave the feeding of the sheep and lambs to one, but he also 
 gave the feeding of the lambs to the bishops. Mr. Pope 
 contends that the text *' Feed my lambs, and feed my sheep," 
 equally applies to all the Apostles, but did not Christ address 
 himself to Peter only^ when he said, " Simon Barjona, lovest 
 thou me more than these?" And when Peter answered "Yea, 
 Lord," — Christ replied, " Feed my lambs, feed my sheep." — 
 Did he not also declare that there should be but " one fold, and 
 one shepherd." Now I should be glad to learn what is there 
 in a sheep-fold, beyond sheep and lambs 1 That is — dropping 
 the metaphor, beyond clergy and laity. When, therefore, Christ 
 commissioned Peter to feed both sheep and lambs, he gave him 
 a charge over the clergy as well as the laity. — This is the sacrcid 
 edifice raised by Christ, from which Mr. Pope has not been able 
 to pick a single stone. 
 
 Mr. Pope has pronounced an eulogium upon the scriptures— 
 I too love and honor them, and I trust that in my life, I follow 
 their commands. I pay that respect to the scriptures, which I 
 pay to the images of our Saviour, his Apostles, and martyrs ; I 
 follow their precepts, I hope ; but as to the adoration either of 
 scriptures or of images, my soul abhors — my nerves shrink from 
 it. If, however the scriptures had been intended as the sole 
 
 3* 
 
30 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 rule of faith, it is evident that Christ would have given a com- 
 mand to write them. But no such command was given by our 
 Saviour. He ordered his Apostles to go teach and preach ; and 
 that those who believed would be saved. Believed what ? The 
 preaching of the Apostles. But he said nothing about writiog. 
 My arguments remain solid and undisturbed. I therefore sit 
 down, till objections of a more tangible and serious nature shall 
 be advanced. 
 
 Mr. Pope rose and said — My learned friend has observed, 
 that he will wait, until some stronger arguments shall be brought 
 forward against him. I really commend the spirit which he has 
 evinced on this occasion. He remarks, that the arguments 
 which I have advanced are not sufficiently weighty to deserve a 
 reply ; and he reserves his proofs, that the church of Rome is 
 the church of Christ, until the third day of the discussion. The 
 passages of scripture which speak of the church, I again affirm, 
 do not refer to ecclesiastics exclusively. While I admit, that 
 the church of Christ will be preserved through every age, and 
 that the gates of hell shall never prevail against it, I still main 
 tain, that not one single passage of scripture has been adduced, 
 or can be brought forward, proving that our Saviour conferred 
 infallibiliiy upon his church ; and I again put Mr. Maguire to the 
 proof of it. 
 
 I shall now show you, from the testimony of Roman Catholic 
 writers, that the term, " church of Rome," was not considered 
 as a designation of the general church of Christ; but that it was 
 at first merely given to distinguish that particular church ^rom 
 other churches — I would therefore ask, on what ground can the 
 church of Rome arrogate to herself the right of being consid- 
 ered as the church of Christ,, more than other churches. Du- 
 pin, a Roman Cathohc historian, and a doctor of the Sorbonne, 
 has the following passage : 
 
 " It is true (says he) that at present the name of the church of Rome ig 
 given to the Catholic church, and that these two terms pass for synonymous. 
 But in antiquity no more was intended by the name of the church of Rome, 
 than the church of the city of Rome ; and the Popes in their subscriptions 
 and superscriptions, took simply the quality of Bishops of Rome. The 
 Greek schismatics seem to be the first who gave the name of the church of 
 Rome to all the churches of the West ; whence the Latins made use of this 
 to distinguish the churches which communicated with the church of Rome, 
 from the Greeks, who were separated from her communion. From this came 
 the custom to give the name of the church of Rome to the Catholic church.— 
 But the other churches did not for this lose their name or their authority," &c. 
 — {Dupin. TraiU de la Piiiss. Eccles. i^c, p. 551.) 
 
 Here, then, we see nothing, even upon Roman Catholic testi- 
 mony, to induce us to esteem the Roman Cathohc church as 
 exclusively the church of Christ. 
 
THE ROMAN CATLOLIC CHURCH 31 
 
 Again, Pope Innocent III tells us, (lib. ii, Ep. 5 CO.) 
 " The church, indeed, is called Universal, which consists of all churches, 
 every where, which, by a Greek word, is denominated CathoHc, thus ths 
 Roman church is not the Universal church, but a part op the 
 Universal church." 
 
 Here are tbe opinions of a Pope and a Roman Catholic his- 
 torian. Both passages clearly show, that the term " church of 
 Rome," did not signify the universal church of Christ, but that 
 the title merely distinguished it from the other churches, which 
 had been established in various parts of the world. 
 
 I shall now show you, that the Fathers referred to the written 
 word as the standard of faith. I shall quote to you the opinion 
 of St. Ignatius, who w-as contemporary with the Apostles, and 
 successor (so to speak) of St. Peter in Antioch. — It is recorded 
 by Eusebius, lib. iii, Ecc. Hist. cap. 36. He informs us, that 
 Ignatius being on his way from Syria to Rome, where he was 
 to suffer martyrdom, addressed himself to the several churches 
 on his journey, establishing them in the faith, and cautioning 
 them against the heresies which then prevailed. — "He exhorted 
 them to hold firmly by the tradition of the Jlpostles, which testify- 
 ing that it had been already committed to writings he declared xcas 
 necfssarily so for its preservation,^^ 
 
 Augustine also, in his lib. iii, contr. Lit. Petiliani c. 6. 
 
 "If any one concerning Christ or his church, or concerning any other thing 
 which belongs to faith or our life, I will not say, if we, but (what Paul hatli 
 added) if an angel from heaven shall preach unto you, beside what you have 
 received in the legal and evangelical scripture, let nini be accursed." 
 
 Again, St. Jerome, in c. 1st, Aggaei. 
 
 "Those things which they make and find, as it were, by Apostolical tradi- 
 tion, without the authority and testimony 5f Scripture, the word of God 
 smites." 
 
 In my letter to Mr. Maguire, which appeared in the pubhc 
 prints, I referred to the opposition maintained by the early 
 Fathers against the authority of the church of Rome. Whenever, 
 therefore, they advocated the authority of the church of Christ, 
 it would not be the authority of that church ichich they themselves 
 opposed. But my friend brought forward an analogy, and asked 
 me, *' does not each particular magistrate in his own jurisdiction 
 represent the executive authority?" And he argued from this, 
 that each and every individual bishop should be regarded in the 
 same hght with respect to the church. I ask him, will ho say 
 that each and every particular bishop of the church of Rome is 
 infallible 1 I am sure Mr. Maguire believes no such thing. 
 
 Further — in order to show my friend, that the power of judg- 
 ing was vested not in a single person, but in the body of the 
 Christian congregation, I refer him to the first Epistle to the 
 Corinthians, v, 12, where the apostle asks, " Do vou iiot judge 
 
32 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 thein that re within?' And I inquire, to whom was this query 
 addressed ] Was it to the ecclesiastical rulers, or to the body 
 of the church ] Consult the Douay edition of the scriptures 
 and you v.'/ and, that the epistle is addressed "to the church of 
 God that 13 at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ 
 Jesus, called to be saints, with all that invoke the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, in every place." — Now, I would ask my friend, are ec- 
 clesiastical officers the only individuals thus denominated? Are 
 they alone the sanctified in Christ Jesus ? Are they alone called 
 to be saint^^ and do they alone invoke the name of our Lord and 
 Saviour? i the 2d epistle to the same church, ii, 10, it is said, 
 " to whom have pardoned any thing, I also.'' A reference 
 to the epi ' ' vill show that this passage also refers to the entire 
 body. My / lend quoted a verse of the 18lh chapter of Matthew 
 *' Wherever iwo or three are gathered together in my name, 
 there am I i.i the midst of them." Now I of course admit this. 
 The great head of the church, the Lord Jesus Christ, is present 
 with his people, wherever they are congregated in his name. — 
 But, though ;;resent with them by His Spirit, does he, therefore, 
 confer on r ^--i the prerogative of infalhbihty ? 
 
 As to th itimony of the Fathers — I am quite willing to admit, 
 that they m : ' be referred to as faithful witnesses of the opinions 
 current in .sir times. And, is not every faithful historian 
 entitled i • i -3 same credit? But I would ask, when we refer 
 to Hume, ,■ to any other historian, do we thence infer, that, 
 because they are faithful witnesses, they are, therefore, infallible ? 
 My friend has referred ro two sources of infallibility. Now 
 ive are irifonned by Crarles Butler, Esq., in his Book of tho 
 Roman Ciilholic church, *p. 121 — 124, that there does exist a 
 difference : :lvveen the Italians and the French church, respect- 
 ing the infcLiiibility of the Pope. The ItaUans believe in the in- 
 fallibility of the Pope ; the French hold the contrary opinion — 
 the former receive the dogmas of the Pope as infallible ; the 
 latter reject them, if they be only per se or ex-cathedra. Here we 
 have two bodies referring to sources of infallibility, which may 
 often jar Vv ith each other. I therefore ask, can there be any 
 certainty, on their own grounds, as to the foundation of their faith? 
 My friend has commented on the opinion of Pope Gregory, in 
 reference to the title of the Pope. I shall read to you the passage. 
 
 "I confidontly say, that whosoever calls himself the Universal Priest, oi 
 desires to bo no called, in his arrogance, is a forerunner of Antichrist." — Lib» 
 vi, Ep. 30. 
 
 Gregory YII, tells us, 1. ii, ep. 55, that " the Roman Pontitf 
 alone is ri'^htly called universal." Here then again you will 
 perceive, that we have Pope against Pope, and one body against 
 another body on the authority smd infallibility of the Pope. In 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 33 
 
 relation to the passage which my friend has quoted, where our 
 Saviour says, "he will be with his disciples to the consummation 
 of time," I merely observed, that it is the opinion of some an- 
 cient critics, that the words mean " to the end of the Mosaic 
 dispensation," — not but that our Saviour will be with his Apostles 
 in their ivritings to the end of time. While, however, I men- 
 tion this, merely as the opinion of eminent critics, I am quite 
 wilHng to allow, that, although the Apostles have no successors 
 in the strict sense of the term, our Lord has promised to be with 
 those who labor in the word and doctrine, by giving seals to 
 their ministry, as long as they continue to teach whatsoever he has 
 commanded in His Holy Word, 
 
 My triend has again referred to the passage which says, " if 
 the salt lose its savor," and he has told us, that salt cannot lose 
 its flavor, and therefore would build upon it the infaJUbility of the 
 church of Rome. That salt for a long time retains its savor, I 
 admit ; but can my friend prove that it is never decomposed. — 
 And does he not, by his remark upon the passage, make the 
 adorable Redeemer contradict himself? Although our Lord 
 knew all things, we invariably find him, in his discourses with his 
 disciples and others, using those terms which were most familiar 
 to them, and accommodating his language to their capacities 
 and modes of thinking. — Even in the present day, we speak of 
 the rising and setting of the sun, although it is known that the 
 sun neither rises nor sets. — These remarks account for our 
 Saviour's employing the mode of expression which we are con- 
 sidering. In connection with this passage, I would ask, was 
 there not a Judas even among the Apostles, and did he not sell 
 his master, and put himself to death] 
 
 I shall now refer Mr. Maguire to a passage of scripture, and 
 I ask him how he can reconcile the infallibility of the church of 
 Rome with if? In Romans, xi, 22, " See then the goodness and 
 the severity of God : towards them indeed that are fallen, the 
 severity ; but towards thee, the goodness of God, if thou abide 
 in goodness, otherwise thou also shall he cut off.^^ Mark this! 
 " otherwise thou also shalt be cut off." I ask, doies the church 
 of Rome m the present day wish to identify herself with the early 
 church to which the Apostle wrote these words, or not? If not, 
 then is her antiquity scattered to the four winds of heaven. And 
 if she 4oes, I would ask, is not this a strange threat to be 
 addressee lu ::r infallible church ! 
 
 My friend has again quoted the passage, " He that will not 
 hear the church" — but can he show that this speaks of pastors 
 exclusively, and not of the people also? I have already proved, 
 that every Christian body is authorised to judge them that ar« 
 wuiiiu. "Feed my sheep" was another passage brought for- 
 
S4 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 ward by Mr Maguire ; and in reference to it, I beg to call your 
 attention to the authorities of some early Fathers on the sub- 
 ject. St. xlugustin says — "when it is said unto Peter, ' feed 
 my sheep,' it is said unto all." — (De agon. Christ, c. 30.) St. 
 Ambrose says, " which sheep and flock St. Peter did not 
 receive alone, but we all received them with him." — (Lib. dc 
 Sacred.) The passage, " one fold and one shepherd," has been 
 quoted by Mr. Maguire. Our Lord's meaning clearly is this, 
 that the church which had been confined exclusively to the Jews, 
 was now to combine both Jew and Gentile ; that the barrier 
 which separated them, was henceforth to be thrown down, and 
 the waters of life to flow beyond the limits of the Jewish people, 
 carrying health and fertility through the whole world. The 
 onus lies on my friend, to show where the church of Rome is 
 called the church of Christ, or where the Pope is called the 
 shepherd. I am convinced that he cannot do so. I assert, on 
 the contrary, that to call any creature the head of Christ's church 
 on earth, is to utter a blasphemy against the Son of God, who 
 is alone the head of the church. The Psalmist says, " The 
 Lord is my shepherd, and I shall not want." — Psalm xxii. But 
 my friend has again referred to the passage in Isaiah, where it is 
 said, that " the words of the Lord shall not depart out of thy 
 mouth from henceforth and for ever." If you consult the con- 
 text, you will perceive that it was probably addressed in an espe- 
 cial sense to the Jewish church, as he mentions Zion and Jacob. 
 Some commentators do refer it to the restoration of literal Israel. 
 But in truth, if this promise confers infallibility on any church, 
 then the promise of the Holy Spirit will confer infallibility on 
 every believer. In the epistle to the Romans, St. Paul says, 
 " If an}^ man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his." 
 Now, I ask my friend, are we to understand by this, that every 
 individual having the spirit of Christ is thereby rendered infalli- 
 ble ? May not a person be enlightened by the holy sphit, with- 
 out being rendered infalhble also ? The passage from Isaiah, 
 therefore, does not prove any thing for my learned friend's argu- 
 ment. He has again quoted, " Obey your prelates." Now, I 
 find in other parts of the sacred scriptures, that we are desired 
 " to try the spirits whether they are of God, because many false 
 prophets have gone out into the world." Again, I read, " to 
 the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to 
 this word, it is because there is no light in them," or as the 
 Douay version gives it, " they shall not see the morning light." 
 And again, I find St. Paul saying, " I speak as unto wise men, 
 judge ye yourselves what I say." — (1 Cor. x, 15.) And our 
 Lord himself asks, " why even of your ownselves, judge ye not 
 w^hat is right?" — (Luke xii, 67,) If we aie thus desired to try 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 35 
 
 he spirits — to go to the law and the testimony and to judge 
 md examine for ourselves, are we, in opposition to the express 
 iiccates of the word of God, to receive every thing which an 
 :;cc]osiastic tells us, without examining whether the doctrines and 
 precepts inculcated up6n us are in, accordance with, or opposed 
 (o, the revealed will of heaven 1 And if we are authorised to 
 3X amine, as to the truth or falsehood of the doctrines brought 
 before us, then will it clearly follow, that no church is infaUible. 
 
 In conclusion, I shall now propose one or two questions to 
 (ny learned friend, to which I shall thank him to give me ex- 
 plicit answers. In the first place, I should wish him to inform 
 ji e, how many general Councils have been held ] 
 
 Secondly — By what characteristics are general Councils to 
 br distinguished from others ? 
 
 Thirdly — Can my reverend friend produce an authenticated 
 translation of the scriptures, perfect and infallible 1 
 
 And Fourthly — Can he point us to an infallible commentary 
 upon those scriptures 1 
 
 These questions I put to him, and these questions must be 
 satisfactorily answered ; or else I assert, that I have strong pre- 
 sumptive evidence against the infallibility of the church of Rome. 
 For I say, if the church of Rome be infallible, we may expect, 
 that she is able to refer her doctrines to an infallible and clearly 
 attested standard — and that she has given to her people an infal- 
 lible and authentic version of the sacred scriptures — and, as she 
 holds that a commentary is indispensably necessary, we may 
 also expect that she has furnished an infallible commentary, so 
 that her followers may not wander in the wilderness of error 
 but have a sure and certain guide to direct them, A priest 
 declares at his ordination on oath, that he, 
 
 " Unhesitatingly receives all things, defined, delivered, and declared by the 
 noly canons, and general councils ; " 
 
 and I ask, therefore, have I not a right to put these questions to 
 any priest of the Roman Catholic church! 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — It may, perhaps, appear to many of my 
 auditory, that I have an Herculean task to perform. A great 
 number of questions have been put to me to answer, which would 
 require much more than the comparatively short period allotted 
 to me for addressing you. Mr. Pope opened his speech by 
 endeavoring to draw a distinction between the church of Rome 
 and the Catholic church. 1 beg and crave the kind and impar- 
 tial attention of all, while I clear up what he seems to consider 
 an insurmountable difficulty. In the early ages of Christianity 
 llie church was not known by any other name than that of the 
 
36 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 Catholic (Iiurch. It was so designated in the Apostles' creed. 
 iNo otntr church had then the audacity to compare itself with 
 the cnurcli of Christ. In the lapse of time, however, when the 
 Arians bocame impudent and powerful — when they got the 
 Emperor Constantius on their side, and the temporal power was 
 employed to subvert the church of Christ — when, in fine, those 
 heretics, i 'litating the example of Julian the apostate, who looted 
 up the fci .dation of the old temple of Jerusalem, and vainly 
 aUemptcd U) rebuild it, in order to falsify the prediction of the 
 Son of Gel — sought to disprove the promises of Christ to his 
 church, by overturning its government, and establishing a new 
 one — it Vv'is then thought necessary, for distinction sake, to 
 superadd the epithet Roman, as a communion with the See of 
 Rome was looked upon as the test of unity, and all other churches 
 declared ho: etical or schismatical, which refused to acknowledge 
 the bisho}) o: Rome, the vicar of Christ on earth. Thus the 
 word conr.abstantial was first introduced at the Council of Nice. 
 We all kii ■ that the term had no origin in the scriptures. The 
 word, however, is to be found in the Liturgy of the Protestant 
 church. Tiiy friend must admit that the term "Roman " was in- 
 troduced lawfully, and according to the gospel, or he must deny 
 that the term " consubstantial," was introduced lawfully — he 
 must deny the Council of Nice, which is acknowledged by Dr. 
 Walton, till A all Protestant historians. The name makes nothing 
 for my fii^i d's argument. Though the name Roman has 
 been adde "t is still the same church. When Arius broachec' 
 his heres ^ :\\3 Catholic church either then was in existence, or 
 it was not. If it was then in existence, Arius had no right to 
 set up a ch irch against the church of God. If it was not the 
 Catholic ciiurch which condemned Arius, the church which he 
 set up coUi i not be the Catholic church, for he, for a time, stood 
 alone. Wh^re was the Catholic church at the time when Luther, 
 as he says himself, stood alone, and was the only one who had 
 the courage to apply the hatchet to the root of Popery ? The 
 name Roi. ^ was then, as t have clearly proved to you, giver 
 to the Ca c church to serve as a distinction. 
 
 I have ady explained to you, that the title ecumenical, as 
 assumed \y. .he patriarch of Constantinople, was blasphemous. 
 Christ is the only ecumenical pastor — he is the foundation and 
 the corner lone. The Apostles formed the edifice — But if the 
 word be ta en in the limited sense in which it is applied to the 
 bishop of llome — that is the visible head of the Universal 
 Church — it is not blasphemy. Mr. Pope has repeated the quo- 
 tation from St. Augustin — there the arguments of St. Angus- 
 tin are em;)]oyed against the Donatists, who, like ]>Ir. Pope 
 Dim&elf, set up their own authority against t'./at of the Cath-^llo 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 37 
 
 church — who appeakd from the authority of the church, and 
 from a regularly ordained ministry to their own private opinions. 
 It is just as if an individual having been condemned in the 
 King's Bench, then appealed to the House of Lords, and then 
 to the King, and, on the decision being given against him, he 
 should recur to his own private authority. 
 
 Mr. Pope has quoted St. Augustin and St. Jerome, who dis- 
 tinguished between the church of Rome, and the Catholic church. 
 But these fathers have sometimes spoken of the church of Rome 
 as a diocess, or as a patriarchate. Did they, however, deny 
 that the church of Rome was the mother and matrice of all other 
 churches ? Let them speak for themselves. 
 
 In his eleventh book De Doctrina Christiana, where laying 
 down a rule to distinguish canonical books, St. Augustin says- ♦ 
 
 "In this inquiry, the authority of the greater part of the Churches must be 
 followed, and particularly of those that hold apostolical sees, and received 
 epistles from the Apostles." 
 
 And lib. Contra Evistolam Fundamenti, he says — 
 
 " Many are the considerations which keep me in the Catholic church — th< 
 ajsent of nations — her authority — first established by miracles — cherished 
 by hope — extended by charity — strengthened by lapse of years ; the succes 
 5ion of pastors from the chair of Peter, to whom the Lord committed the care of 
 feeding his flock down to the present bishop ; lastly, the name itself of Catholic.'*^ 
 
 Thus he identifies the Catholic church with the bishop of 
 Rome, to whom he says, Christ committed the care of feeding 
 his flock. So much for the distinction between the church of 
 Rome and the Catholic church. 
 
 Mr. Pope admits, that a man may be excommunicated. How 
 can the church excommunicate unless it possess authority ] Is 
 it not evident too, that it is an authority to which man should 
 yield obedience? What does St. Augustin say? 
 
 " I would not believe the gospel, if the authority of the Catholic church did 
 not mo-ve me thereto." 
 
 Will Mr. Pope show me, that he does not deviate from the 
 living authority of the Catholic church? I defy him to do so. 
 He appeals, indeed, to an invisible church — he quotes a text of 
 scripture to prove, that where two or three are gathered in the 
 Lord's name, there will he be in the midst of them. This is 
 no new doctrine. There our Lord speaks of private prayer.— 
 The Apostles command all to believe in the holy Catholic church. 
 There never existed a time since the Apostles in which that holy 
 Catholic church was not visible on earth, otherwise the Apostles 
 would have bound us to believe in a church of whose existence 
 there was no certainty. 
 
 Let Mr. Pope reconcile the idea of a Universal church, to 
 tl:at of two or three being assembled in Christ's name, or let 
 
 4 
 
88 THE INFALLIBILITY OP 
 
 him show that two or three establish our notion of universality. 
 Mr. Pope in vain appeals to his invisible church. This is an 
 argument which would delight our infidels. The Jew may say 
 to the Christian-—" vhrist made great promises to his church 
 according to your account — he declared, the gates of hell should 
 not prevad against her — and he said, that whoever should not 
 hear her, should be condemned ; he also compared her to a city 
 built upon a mountain. Yet, we find that he has not fulfilled 
 his promises — that his church may fail — that the gates of hell 
 have prevailed against her — that the spirit of God has departed 
 from her, and that the promises of visibility have been shame- 
 fuliy violated. It is then necessary for you to look out for that 
 Messiah, whose coming we daily expect." These arguments 
 might be used against the man who admits, that a time did exist, 
 since the coming of Christ, when there was no visible church 
 upon earth. With regard to the authorities which I have pro- 
 duced from the holy Fathers, I have quoted from them where 
 they expressly treat of the authority of the church — I do no| 
 select passages from them v,'here they allude to the church, mere-', 
 ly by a side wind, and which passages prove nothing upon the 
 spbjoct. Mr. Pope calls upon me to produce a genuine infal- 
 lible translation of the Bible — that is to be found in our church, 
 which is not in his. We have the Latin vulgate, the noblf^ 
 translation of St. Jerome, and approved of by the council ot 
 Trent — that is our acknowledged and authentic Bible. I retort 
 upon Mr. Pope — I call upon him to show rne any translation in 
 his church, that can be said to be infallible. The Protestant 
 church is fallible — the translators of their Bible were fallible — 
 and the man who reads it is fallible. How can certainty be 
 built upon uncertainty ? How can infallibility proceed from 
 fallibilities, or to use an expression of a great dignitary of the 
 Established church, " How can an immoveable edifice be built 
 upon a moveable foundation 1 " 
 
 Let Mr. Pope answer that argument if he can ; a child who 
 is born in Mr. Pope's communion must remain a Deist till he 
 has arrived at the years of discretion. A Bible is then put into 
 his hands. I will admit that he is conscious of the existence of 
 a God — All his works proclaim it. " Coeli enarrant gloriam 
 Dei." But he can never ascertain of himself, from the book 
 put into his hands, the religion which God has ordained. He 
 must learn that from his Clergy or from Mr. Pope — I respect 
 the Protestant Clergy — I acknowledge they possess the titulus 
 coloratus. Mr. Pope, I should remaik, is not sent, and St. Paul 
 tells us that no one is to preach who is not called as Aaron was 
 — "And how can they preach unless they be sent." The Pro- 
 testant child, when the Bible is put into his hands cannot believe 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 39 
 
 in the infallibility of the translator — he cannot tLke the scrip- 
 tures upon the authority of the Catholic church, he must disbe- 
 lieve them altogether. The Protestant Clergy should beware 
 of the principles so confidently put forth at the present period, 
 and to which they lend their countenance and support. If every 
 individual is to be constituted interpreter of the scriptures, the 
 day will arrive when the clergy will be thrown overboard, and 
 they will be glad to fly from the machinations of those who would 
 make every old woman in the country an interpreter and ex- 
 pounder of the sacred word of God. 
 
 When Mr. Pope takes the Bible into his hands, he should 
 prove that it is inspire.d. Granting that he establishes its authen- 
 ticity, he has done nothing, if he cannot prove its inspiration. I 
 defy him to do so upon his own principles, without being enclos- 
 ed in a vicious circle. He receives the scriptures upon the righ* 
 of private judgment, and he then proves the divine right of pr*. 
 vate judgment from the scriptures. With regard to general 
 councils, he wishes to know how many have been recognised in 
 the church. If I be not able at this moment to state with nu- 
 merical certainty the councils which are received, he will con- 
 clude that the church is not infallible. I tell him there have 
 been eighteen ecumenical councils, whose definitions on articles 
 of faith are held to be infallible. If Mr. Pope proves that any 
 of the ecumenical councils have sanctioned any thing which 
 contradicts the faith of the Catholic church, that indeed would 
 be something like an unanswerable argument. He says that 
 some councils are received in one diocess, and others in another. 
 
 There never was an ecumenical councilheld, but its doctrines 
 were immediately received throughout the church. But it is not 
 so with regard to local discipline. We affirm that it would be 
 scandalous and unchristian to break communion, on account of 
 differences in what is called local discipline. Mr. Pope dissents 
 from the church of England, either in essentials, or he does not. 
 If he differ in essentials, then there is no union in the Protes- 
 tant churches. But if his cause of difference be not essential, 
 he rends the seamless garment of Christ — he goes out of the 
 ark of Noah without necessity, and separates without excuse 
 from that general society of men — the Protestant chuich, and 
 thus becomes a factious and dangerous member of society.-— 
 What says the Apostle Paul? 
 
 " I beseech that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called, 
 with all humihty and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in 
 charity, careful to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. One 
 body and one spirit ; as you are called in one hope of your calling. One 
 Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, 
 wad through all, and in us all." — Epistle to the EphesianSy iv, L 2, 3, 4, 5, & 
 
40 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 Are aifferences allowed here ? Is the conduct of the heretics 
 and reformers justified by this passage? They all set up their 
 right of private judgment, — Arius, Luther, Calvin, GEcolampadiua 
 and Zuinglius, the last of whom affirms, that in the words 
 " this is my body," the verb " is " was used by Christ for 
 REPRESENTS, Contrary to the doctrine of Luther, by whom he 
 was excommunicated. 
 
 The church of England says that good works are necessary ; 
 Mr. Pope denies that they are. Baptism with the sign of the 
 cross is received in the church of England. Will he show me 
 any authority from Scripture for that 1 We are told in scripture 
 to keep holy the Sabbath day — Mr. Pope violates that com- 
 mandment, by changing its object; or he must admit, that all 
 things appertaining to salvation are not contained in the 
 scriptures. He still sophistically endeavors to raise a difference 
 between the church of Rome and the Catholic church. But I 
 have shown from St. Augustin and many other Fathers, that 
 the church of Christ is none other than the various Christian 
 churches throughout the world in communion with the church 
 of Rome, Mr. Pope quotes St. Paul, to show that the promises 
 of Christ to his church were conditional. 'Tis well he admits 
 that the promises were made, and it were better had he riot 
 attempted to prove them conditional. St. Paul, writing to the 
 Gentiles dispersed at Rome, and who had been received into the 
 church, warns them against vainly boasting of their election, and 
 their having been preferred to the Jews. He tells them not to 
 cjlory against the branches (meaning the Jews) who had been 
 cut off through their incredulity, but rather to persevere in 
 righteousness lest they should be cut off, and the Jews again 
 engrafted. "If thou continue in his goodness (says he,) otherwise 
 thou also shalt be cut off." 
 
 Mr. Pope rose and said, — My friend has touched on several 
 topics, which more properly belong to the question to be dis- 
 cussed to-morrow. I shall, therefore, for the present pass them 
 by, and proceed at once to my subject. He says that our 
 Saviour did not give any command to write the scriptures. But 
 if the sacred scriptures were not written by the command of 
 God, then they cannot be inspired. He says, that I cannot show 
 him any passages in the Bible, in which such a command is 
 given — In the book of Exodus, xvii, 14, Douay version, I read. 
 
 " And the Lord said to Moses; write this for a memorial in a book, and 
 deliver it to the ears of Josue, for I will destroy the memory of Amalec from 
 under heaven." 
 
 Again, in the 101 psalm. — "Let these things he ivritten unto anothiv 
 generation.'' 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 41 
 
 In the 30th Isaiah, 8 verse. — " Now, therefore, go in and write for them 
 
 npon box, and note it diligently in a book, and it shall he in the latter days f of 
 
 a testimony for ever^ 
 
 Ezekiel, xliii, 11. — " Show them the form of the house, and of the fashion 
 
 thereof, the goings-out, and the cominf '|S in, and the whole plan thereof, and 
 
 all its ordinances, and all its order, and all its laws ; and thou shalt write it in 
 
 their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and its ordinances, 
 
 and do them." 
 
 Hab. ii, 2. — " And the Lord answered me, and said : write the vision and 
 
 nvake it plain upon tables : that he that readeth it, may run over ity 
 
 Rev. i, 11. — "What thou sayest, write in a book: and send to the seven 
 
 churches which are in Asia." 
 
 19t.h verse of the same chapter. — " Write therefore the things which thou 
 
 hast seen, and which are, and which must be done hereafter." 
 Chap, ii, 1. — "Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus, i«n/c." 
 8 verse. — "And to the angel of the church of Smyrna, lunie." 
 12 verse. — " And to the angel of the church of Pergamus, writer 
 18 verse. — " And to the angel of the church of Thyatira, wnte." 
 3 chap. 1st verse. — " And to the angel of the church of Sardis, writej^ 
 7 verse. — "And to the angel of the church of Philadelphia, write.^^ 
 14 verse. — "And to the angel of the church of Laodicea, lorite. These 
 
 thmgs saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, who is the beginning of 
 
 the creation of God." 
 
 Here then are the express commands of our Saviour himself, 
 for writing at least particular portions of the word of God. We 
 shall now see what are the opinions of Fathers upon the subject. 
 St. Augustin, de Consens. Evang. hb. i, cap, 7, says, 
 
 "This first is to be discussed, which some are accustomed to objict to — 
 why the Lord himself wrote nothing ? Pagans chiefly start this objection." 
 
 And further, in the same book and 25th chap, he says : 
 
 "When they (meaning the evangelists) wrote what he showed and said, 
 t is by no means to be inferred, that he himself did not wnte ; since he as the 
 nead, dictated what his members put down ; for whatsoever he wished that 
 we should know of his deeds or sayings, he commanded to be written as by 
 lis own hands." 
 
 And Gregory the Great (in Praefat. in lib. Job.) 
 
 "If having received letters from some great man, we read the words, and 
 should demand with what pen these words were written : this, indeed, would 
 be most ridiculous, to trouble ourselves inquiring, not so much who was the 
 author? or what was his name ? as with what pen the words were written ?" 
 " When, therefore, we believe the substance of the letters, and acknowledge 
 the Holy Spirit to be the author of the matter, if we should set about inquiring 
 for the scribe, what else are we doing than, if after reading letters we should 
 vainly trouble our heads about the pen they were written with." 
 
 And the same author says (Epist. lib. iv, indict, xii, ep. 31. 
 Paris, 1705,) 
 
 "What are the holy scriptures, but a certain epistle from the omnipotent 
 God to his creatures." 
 
 And Athanasius, in Rescript ad Liber, torn, i, speaking of 
 Christ, says : 
 
 " He it is who has spoken by the prophets — He it is who has composed kba 
 Old and New Testament." 
 
 4* 
 
42 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 My i3arned friend made some observations on the quotation 
 from Dupin. The opinions of Dupin are clear and distinct upon 
 the subject ; and you have only to contrast his observations with 
 those of my friet d, to convince you, that the Roman Catholic 
 church was not in primitive times acknowledged as the universal 
 church. He also referred to that passage in the creed where it 
 is said, '* I believe in the Holy Catholic church." The creed, 
 I admit, is an ancient document ; and were I even to grant that 
 it was penned by the Apostles, Mr. Maguire need not have given 
 h»mself the trouble of proving, that the universal church of Christ 
 was called the Catholic church. I admit this at once; but I 
 deny as distinctly that this term applied to the church of Rome ; 
 and until Mr. Maguire proves this, I maintain that his other 
 arguments go for nothing. I know my friend attaches great 
 importance to the authority of the Fathers, and I shall now allude 
 to a passage from TertuUian which was referred to in my lettei 
 to Mr. Maguire. In order to secure Christians in true doctrine, 
 he recommends them to consult the Apostolic churches, men- 
 tioning the churches of Corinth, of Philippi, of Thessalonica, 
 and of Ephesus, as well as of Rome. — TertuL de proescrip. aa 
 Hizr, § 14., p. 108, 109. 
 
 Now I would ask, had TertuUian considered that the church 
 of Rome was the universal church, or that she maintained an 
 authority over other churches, would he have written thus ? 
 Would he have spoken af other churches in the same strain in 
 v»'hich he speaks of the church of Rome — had he considered 
 her as the supreme or universal church? Truly TertuUian did 
 not place her in so high a rank as my friend would have us to 
 suppose. In relation to this passage which I have quoted, 
 the Roman Catholic writer, Beatus Rhenanus remarks, that 
 "if TertuUian were to utter such a sentiment in his day, relative 
 to the church of Rome, he would not escape punishment." 
 Rhenan. Argum. in Tert. de Prsec. et alibi. Impres. Basil, 
 1521. I could multiply many quotations from the Fathers to the 
 same purport, but that I wish to occupy my time ivith other matter. 
 
 In the Council of Chalcedon it was decreed, that equal 
 respect should be paid to the Bishops of Constantinople and 
 Rome. And I would ask, can any thing more distinctly prove, 
 that the church of Rome was not in the earlier ages looked 
 upon exclusively the church of Christ? Or can any thing 
 more directly contradict the assumption of universal authority 
 claimed by that church ? But I would also ask my friend, if 
 the church of Rome was in the first ages considered as the su- 
 preme or universal church, how does it happen, that the Apostle 
 Paul addressed epistles to several churches without the most 
 distant reference to the authority of the church of Rom.e ; and 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 43 
 
 that, in the epistle which he addressed to the church cf Rome, 
 he does not make the most indirect allusion to her heing the 
 Catholic or supreme Church, much less to her possessing the 
 prerogative of infallibility '? Nor is the epistle even addressed 
 to Peter, who is said to have been the first Bishop of Rome. 
 On the contrary, we find the epistle addressed " to all," (mark 
 that) " to all that are at Rome, the beloved of God, called to be 
 saints." There is not one word, you perceive, about the 
 boasted supremacy of that Church — nor the least mention of 
 the Apostle Peter. It is addressed to all those who composed 
 the church of Christ in that city. Where, then, I would ask, is 
 there the slightest ground of argument to show that the church 
 of Rome was the supreme church ? I assert, that Mr. Maguire 
 has not established his opinion on this subject ; while on the 
 contrary, it must be evident to every one present, from the pas- 
 sages which I have quoted from scripture, and from the Fathers 
 also, that no such doctrine was entertained in the first ages of 
 the church. My friend has brought forward the word " con- 
 substantial," to show that words have been introduced, which 
 are not to be found in scripture ; and argues that the term 
 Roman Catholic may be also admitted, though not found ii> 
 sacred writ. I allow that there are many words used by theolo- 
 gians which are not to be found in scripture, but deny that this 
 makes for his argument. The terms which theologians use, do 
 not contradict themselves ; but I appeal to common sense, is 
 there not an evident contradiction in the term Roman Catholic ? 
 To speak of a particular universal, I maintain, is absurd — 
 " Where the true church was before Luther," and the Pope's 
 supremacy, I shall consider, when we come to the question of 
 the Reformation. 
 
 My friend has referred to the passage which I quoted from 
 St. Augustin, pointing out the method by which we might dis- 
 cover the true church of Christ. I confess that I was not a 
 little surprised at his commentary on that passage. If, however, 
 he admits that St. Augustin held that the scriptures were to be 
 referred to in contentions with reputed heretics, — as the church 
 of Rome considers me a heretic, she should condescend to refer 
 me for the discovery of the marko of the true church to the 
 same authority. St. Augustin again says, "I am unwilling 
 that the church be demonstrated by hu'nan documents but by 
 divine oracles." — {De Unitat. Eccles. c. 3.) 
 
 I did not cite ** where two or three are gathered together in 
 my name, there am I in the midst of them," to prove the invisi- 
 bility of the church of Christ; — nor did I argue that two or 
 three constituted the universal church. What I said was, that 
 the church of Christ, or the universal church, consisted of i/u 
 
44 THE INFALLIBILITT OF 
 
 entire body of the faithful, however scattered over the world, — 
 and the Great Head of the Church had promised, that wnere- 
 ever two or three were assembled together in his name he 
 would be with them to bless them and to preside over them. 
 My friend has alluded to the promise made by Christ, " he shall 
 guide you into all truth." But he should remember, that whil/^, 
 some of the promises refer to the great body of those who com- 
 pose the church of Christ, others were intended especially for 
 the Apostles. In a succeeding chapter we find Christ promised 
 the Comforter, " to bring to their remembrance all that he haa 
 spoken.^^ We cannot say that we heard Christ speak viva voce, 
 as the Apostles did. And therefore it will be seen, that thei 
 are some of the promises which cannot apply to any but to 
 them. My friend says, " he was quits with me on the Fathers." 
 Now, I affirm, that the passages which I quoted from their 
 writings, went distinctly to prove, that in the early ages, neither 
 the infallibility, the supremacy, nor the uuiversahty of the 
 church of Rome was acknowledged. Should I grant, however, 
 that Mr. Maguire " was quits with me, in reference to the 
 Fathers," what does the concession amount to? That we have 
 Fathers against Fathers — and hov/ shall we in the midst of 
 such uncertainty, if we depend on them, be able to come to any 
 specific conclusion ? I therefore do trust, that the result of the 
 present discussion may be, that we shall throw the Fathers over- 
 board, and sailing in the ark of the living God, his holy scrip- 
 tures, launch out upon the great ocean of religious truth. My 
 friend has said, that the version of the scriptures which contains 
 the pure word of God, is that translated by Jerome, and sanc- 
 tioned by the council of Trent. The council of Trent pro- 
 nounced an edition of the Yulgate, that was afterwards to be 
 published " quam emendatissime," as correctly as possible — the 
 standard edition. She pronounced a verdict upon an edition at 
 the time, in utero, that had not seen the hght. An edition of 
 the Yulgate was published by the Louvain doctors, about thirty 
 years after the council of Trent. Pope Sixtus V. not approv- 
 ing of this edition, and wishing for a still more correct one, with 
 great trouble brought together many learned Je A'ish and Roman 
 Catholic doctors — the Yulgate was compared with the Greek 
 and Hebrew originals, and the edition was completed. Sixtus 
 considered it so perfect, that in his preface he declared, that 
 any one who should attempt to alter it " in minimi particul^," 
 should be subject to the major excommunication. Within 
 three years after the publication of this immaculate and infallible 
 edition, written as it was in a dead language, and therefore less 
 liable to suflfer from the variations to which a living language is 
 subject, another made its appearance virider the sanction of 
 
THE ROMAN CAniOLIC CHURCH. 45 
 
 Pope Clement YTIL And what think you 1 Notwithstanding 
 the anathema which Pope Sixtus had pronounced on the indi- 
 vidual who should, " in minimal particulgl," in the least particle, 
 alter the edition published by him, it has been ascertained, that 
 there were in the edition pubUshed by Clement YIII, no fewer 
 than 20 CO variations from the text of the Sixtine edition. Dr. 
 James has proved the existence of these differences between 
 the Clementine and Sixtine editions, in his work entitled Bellunri 
 Paple. Now, I would ask my learned friend, from which of 
 these editions has the version, which he represents to be so im- 
 maculate, been taken ] I answer, from the Clementine edition 
 and not from the Sixtine. So that Pope Clement VIII, and the 
 Douay translators have incurred the penalty pronounced in tha 
 preface of the Sixtine edition — have subjected themselves to 
 2000 majores excommunicationes. But this is not all. In the 
 successive editions of the Douay version are to be found many 
 discrepancies. If the present edition, of whose correctness my 
 learned friend has made such unwarrantable boast, be com- 
 pared with the Clementine and Sixtine editions, it will be found 
 to differ not only from both the Sixtine and Clementine, but 
 also from preceding editions of itself, as Mr. Hamilton has 
 clearly shown. I should mention that Clement bought up the 
 Sixtine copies to guard, if possible, his predecessor from the 
 charge of fallibility ; so that but two copies, I believe, are ex- 
 tant. Thus, we have Pope against Pope, and doctor against 
 doctor. I again ask my friend to produce a perfect and im- 
 maculate copy of the scriptures. I have shown you that he 
 cannot do so. Then we have to charge his infallible church, 
 either with having failed in her duty towards her people, in not 
 having provided a perfect edition of God's holy word ; or, on 
 the other hand, with inability to produce such a translation of 
 the scriptures. Let my friend adopt either alternative ; and I 
 ask, what becomes of the boasted infallibility of his church ? 
 He desired me to produce a perfect version of the Bible — I 
 affirm, that although we do not boast of infallibility, we have a 
 better version of the scriptures than his church can produce. I 
 need not here occupy your time in speaking of the extreme 
 pains and care, which were taken by men of the greatest talenta 
 and research, in preparing the present authorised version. 
 
 Dr. Geddes, who was, at least at one period of his life, a 
 Roman Catholic priest, a man of considerable literary attain- 
 ments, has spoken of the Protestant Bible in terms of the great- 
 est commendation. He observes, — 
 
 " The highest eulogiiims have been made on the translation of James I, 
 both by our own writers and by foreigners. And, indeed, if accuracy, 
 fidelity, and tlie strictest attention to the letter of ttc text, be supposed tc 
 
4B THE INFALLISILITY OP 
 
 form the qualifications of an excellent version, this, of all versic.is^ must m 
 general be accounted the most excellent. Every sentence, every v/oni, 
 every syllable, every letter and point, seem to have been weighed with the 
 nicest exactitude, and expressed, either in the text, or margin, with the 
 greatest precision. Pagnmus himself is hardly more literal ; and it was 
 well observed by Robinson, above 100 years ago, that *it may serve for a 
 lexicon of the Hebrew language as well as for a translation.' " 
 
 Hear the opmion of the celebrated J. K. L.* on the subject. 
 lie says, " The authorised version is a noble work, with all its 
 faults.'^ We see, therefore, from the testimony of Roman 
 Catholics, that our version of the scriptures is truly excellent ; 
 and in confirmation of its great value, I beg to remark, that 
 each succeeding edition of the Douay Bible approximates 
 nearer and nearer to the Protestant version. And is not this 
 circumstance an acknowledgment, that the Protestant version is 
 considered, even by the Roman Catholic hierarchy, as more 
 accurate than their own ? 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — I deny that our bible has approximated to 
 the English edition. I deny the fact — let Mr. Pope prove it, and 
 then show how, and in v/hat manner, it has been effected. The 
 apostle St. John is desired to write what he has seen " in a book, 
 and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia, to Ephesus, 
 and Smyrna, and to Pergamos, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, 
 and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea." So far the apostle is 
 commanded to write to the particular bishops of particular 
 churches, conveying particular information. But from this a 
 general conclusion is drawn by Mr. Pope that our Saviour com- 
 manded the New Testament to be written. The Apostle is 
 commanded to write to the angel of the church of Ephesus, and 
 from this Mr. Pope draws the unjust and illogical conclusion, 
 that a positive commandment has been given to write the New 
 Testament. I come now to his argument drawn from the Six- 
 tine and Clementine editions of the Bible. I may premise that 
 the Pope's infallibility is not a doctrine of mine, nor of any 
 Catholic. There are differences on the subject between the 
 French and ultra Montanists, but they are merely the private 
 opinions of private divines. The church has pronounced no 
 opinion on it. The church only pronounces on essentials. It 
 leaves the human mind free to discuss other subjects respecting 
 which infallibility does not shut out inquiry— but the authority 
 of the church is decisive in articles of faith, which cannot be 
 ascertained by human power. How could the mass of man- 
 kind be able to judge of the truth of the doctrine of the Trinity 
 or of justification by faith ? how could they reconcile with a 
 just God the doctrine of original sin ] And what is the human 
 
 * Right Reverend James Doyle, Bishop of Kildare and L^igbJin, 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 47 
 
 mind ? Is not the great mass of mankind composed of the ig- 
 norant and lower orders ? It is only when every man is allowed 
 to read and interpret the Bible, that 
 
 " A little learning is a dangerous thing." 
 Christianity is thrown overboard, and the church of Christ is 
 scoffed at. It was by such means that infidelity spread through- 
 out France and Germany. It is our duty to read the Bible, but 
 it must be under proper circumstances. I love the Bible — I 
 read the Bible — I believe it to be the infallible Word of God. 
 Christ will not allow his children to use good food, when, b} 
 the circumstances of the case, it might be converted into poison. 
 Would you give to a child food of an indigestible quality? The 
 Catholic church, knowing from experience the danger of an in- 
 discriminate perusal of th« scriptures, directs that the sacred 
 volume should not be read by any who want the due disposition. 
 The Catholic church is right in resisting the indiscriminate 
 reading of the scriptures. If the Bible be at all imperfect, as 
 Mr. Pope has been endeavouring to prove it, that would be a 
 strong argument that it should not be put into the hands of the 
 ignorant and illiterate without due caution. Mr. Pope quotes 
 the authority of Pope Sixtus, that the scriptures shall not be 
 altered from his edition, " 7ie in minima pariicula,^'' 
 
 The Catholic divines, who wrote the catechism of the court- 
 ed, state, that Catholic doctrine shall not be changed ne in 
 minima parlicula. Allusion is here made by the Pope to the 
 faith conveyed in the book, and not to matters of discipline. 
 In faith we yield to the authority of the church, which, as the 
 holy Fathers say, is the solution of ail difficulties. I will here 
 call on Mr. Pope to compare the Sixtine and Clementine editions 
 of the Bible with the Latin Vulgate, and see if he can find an)' 
 thing in them as to substance and faith different. He talks of 
 his Bible — it has undergone more substantial changes than any 
 book in the world. There have been upwards of 7000 correc- 
 tions made by Dr. Mills. Dr. Wharton was charged with 
 |)romoting infidelity, having made such a skeleton of the Bible. 
 Ward has proved the numerous corruptions in the Protestant 
 Bible. Take an example — in the nineteenth chapter of Num- 
 bers, Moses is directed to take the ashes of a heifer that has been 
 sacrificed, and to sprinkle them with the water of expiation — 
 lest this text might go to sanction holy water, it is translated the 
 *' water of separation" in the Protestant Bible — although in all 
 ancient copies, it is either the water of lustration, purification, 
 or aspersion. " A man," says Dr. Wall, another restorer of 
 the Protestant Bible, •' cannot forbear having a strong stomach 
 against our translators, who, with all the ancient copies before 
 them, must nevertheless go astray." 
 
48 THE INFALLIBILITY OP 
 
 Luther, quoting the words of St. Paul, 
 
 " For we believe that a man may be saved by faith, without the works of 
 the law," (alluding to the Jewish law) adds to the text the word ' only j' in 
 the German * allein.^ 
 
 And when upbraided with this sacrilegious addition, he replied, 
 
 ** Am I not an apostle, as well as Paul — and should any Papist object to 
 the word onhj, immediately oppose to him the loill of Dr. Martin Luther, who 
 is a doctor above all Popish doctors, and who asserts, that the Pope and an 
 ass are synonymous terms —quid unum et idem.'''' 
 
 I hold myself responsible for the Yulgate. I challenge him 
 to show me a material error in that translation. I receive it 
 upon the authority of an infallible church. Mr. Pope will 
 acknowledge no authority — he sets up his opinion not only against 
 the Catholic, but against the Protestant churches. The Catho- 
 lic church has preserved the authentic copy of the scriptures — 
 from it the Protestant church has received it. Mr. Pope, 
 however, denies any church possesses any authority to which 
 any man is obliged to yield. I shall read to you a passage 
 from St. Chrysostom. He says, — 
 
 "If you wage war against man you may conquer, or be overcome ; no 
 force shall overcome the church. The church is much stronger than the 
 earth — even stronger than heaven — for ' Heaven and earth shall pass uway,' 
 (Luke xxi, 33.) What words are these, ^the gates of hell shall not prevail 
 ugainst her 7'' (Matt, xvi, 18.) But if you doubt the word — give credit to 
 facts. How many tyrants have assailed ^he church of God — how many 
 torments — what persecutions — what fires? They could effect nothing." 
 Homihj de Expulsione sua, tome iv, p. 843. 
 
 And in his Homily, " Quod Christus sit deus-!'^ tome v, chap. 
 11 — he says, — 
 
 " * On this rock I will build my church.' — (Matt, xvi, 18.) Consider what 
 this means, and you will discover its evident truth, for it is not alone wonder- 
 ful that Christ built his church in all parts of the earth, but that he rendered 
 her impregnable, and invincible against all attacks — * The gates of hell shall 
 not prevail against her' — that is, no danger — not those that produce death, 
 and lead to hell. Have you witnessed this prediction? Have you beheld 
 the certainty and strength of the event ? Have you seen the words njanifesLod 
 in the fact, and the power, which without arms accomplished all things ?" 
 
 I now come again to the distinction which Mr. Pope has en- 
 deavoured to draw between the Catholic church and the Roman 
 Catho'c church — it is a mere play upon words ; the Fathers, 
 he asserts, did not allow the church of Rome to be the Catholic 
 church. I have already told you, that in consequence of the 
 separation of the Greek church, and the heresy of the Arians, 
 the Catholic church was then for the first time, and as a distinc- 
 tive mark, called the Roman Catholic church, and it included all 
 the churches in the west, and throughout the world, in com- 
 munion wuh the see of Rome. This is the church of which 
 St. Augustin says. Contra Evistolam Fundamenti — 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 49 
 
 **I would not believe the gospel, if the authority of the Cath lie church did 
 not move me thereto." 
 
 And in his book De Symbolo, 
 
 "Tliis is the holy church — the one church — the Catholic church — the true 
 church, which contending against all heresies may herself be assailed, but 
 cannot be overcome. AU heresies have gone out from her, like useless 
 branches cut off from the vine — she herself remaining fixed to the root — fixed 
 to the stock — fixed in charity, and against which the Agates of hell shall not 
 prevail.^ " 
 
 But as to the distinction between the church of Rome and 
 the Catholic church, it was unknown to St. Augustin, unless 
 when he happened to speak of the diocess of Rome. This I 
 have shown in a former quotation, where he holds a succession 
 from the chair of Peter, to whom Christ committed the care of 
 the whole flock, to be absolutely necessary. And St. Jerome, 
 in his letter to Pope Damascus, says, — 
 
 " To thee I know were given the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Who 
 ftoever ^athereth not with thee scattereth — that is, he that is not Christ's is 
 antichrist's." 
 
 And again he says, 
 
 " I could dry up all the streams of your argument with one ray of that sua 
 which shines upon the church." 
 
 Irenseus is equally strong upon the very same point. Mr. 
 Pope and I are at variance w4th respect to the interpretation ot 
 a particular text. Mr. Pope says that every man should fol- 
 low his private judgment. I maintain he should submit to the 
 authority of the church. Mr. Pope then appeals to the text. 
 Let him make the Bible speak. (Here Mr. Maguire laid his 
 finger upon the Bible.) It is a poor rule of faith, truly, if it 
 cannot decide. If he succeeds in making the Bible speak, 1 
 shall be converted to his opinions ; but if the Bible remain mute, 
 he should not set up as a rule of faith, a book which cannot 
 pronounce a decision. According to my principles, the church 
 .s to judge, that is to decide, upon matters of faith. The scrip- 
 fares are the rule of our conduct — the church interpreting the 
 scriptures is the rule of our faith. The scriptures we reverence 
 av d venerate, just as we do the images of Christ and his saints. 
 The royal prophet laughed at the gods of the Gentiles, because 
 tiiey could not speak ; those who make the scriptures the sole 
 judge of controversies, expose them to similar contempt, be- 
 cause at the best, they are but a dumb judge, and consequently 
 unable to pronounce. 
 
 Mr. Pope says, Catholics believe articles of faith which are 
 not in the scriptures, Protestants also believe many articles of 
 ^ith not to be found in the sacred volume. There are articles 
 of faith not explicitly revealed. Our Saviour himself tells his 
 
 5 
 
50 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 disciples, that he has many more things to say to them, which 
 they are not as yet able to bear ; but he promises at the same 
 time to send the Holy Ghost, who would instruct them in all 
 things. Their weak minds might have been shocked by the 
 too sudden revelation of divine truths. It' such was the caution 
 observed by Christ towards his apostles, how much more ought 
 it to be observed towards the pooi' and ignorant of mankind 1 
 Mr. Pope endeavors to gloss over the fooleries and fanaticisna 
 generated by the principles which he advocates. But it is evi- 
 dent that the ignorant, the unlearned, and the weak-minded, 
 who form the great majority of mankind, can alone proceed 
 safely, when conducted by a living guide. If they be allowed 
 to frame a rule of faith for themselves, embark without chart or 
 compass upon the wide ocean of opinion— if they are allowed 
 to think upon matters of faith as they please, the result will be, 
 they will give way to prejudice and passion, and substitute their 
 own judgment for the revelation of Jesus Christ. When Mr. 
 Pope hands the Bible to the poor and ignorant Protestant, how 
 can he know that it is the word of God. When the Protestant 
 arrives at the years of discretion he must receive it from his 
 parents, from some clergyman, or from Mr. Pope, and the only 
 reason he can assign for his believing it is, that he received it 
 from them or from Mr. Pope. Let the other rule be examined, 
 and let the common sense of mankind judge whether it is not 
 the better. The child receives the scriptures upon the authority 
 of that church in reference to which St. Augustin said, " 1 
 would not receive the gospels, unless upon the authority of the 
 Catholic church." I may here remark, that there were at one 
 ^ime in circulation nine spurious copies of the gospel of St. 
 Matthew, each pretending to be the true original. The apos- 
 tolical churches were then consulted, and the genuine copy 
 ascertained. The church pronounced her decision, upon which 
 St. Augustin rested his faith. If Mr. Pope insists upon the 
 scriptures being the sole rule of faith, then why does he not 
 ^•vash his neighbor's feet? As the Lord says to his disciples, 
 " If I, being Lord and Master, have washed your feet ; you also 
 ought to wash one another's feet." If he cannot show me that 
 this is not a commandment, let him show me why he does not 
 continue to obey it. Let him also justify from scripture the 
 change in the observance of the Sabbath. 
 
 Mr. Pope rose and said : — Gentlemen— my learned friend 
 lias asked, when we are individually all fallible, by what procesg 
 can we arrive at an infallible decision? I ask my friend the . 
 same question. He has told us, that he believes the Pope to be 
 fallible, and all the bishops and priests of the Romish church te 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 51 
 
 be fallible. Now, T should wish to know by what method they, 
 who according to Mr. Maguire's own confession are all fallible^ 
 can become infalUble ? He tells me, that if my doctrines be 
 admitted, a young child must remain an Atheist until he arrives 
 at years of discretion. Now, what do I find the scriptuies 
 raying on this subject? "Train up a child in the way he 
 should go, and when he is old he will not depart therefrom.'^ 
 The Psalmist declares, '* that out of the mouths of babes an<) 
 sucklings God has perfected praise :" and the Saviour remarks, 
 that " the things which are hidden from the wise and prudent, 
 are revealed unto babes." I readily admit, that, in the first 
 instance, in a great degree, the faith of the Protestant child, as 
 to the authenticity and inspiration of the scriptures, must rest 
 on the veracity of the parent. And I ask Mr. Maguire, is not 
 this the case with the children of Roman Catholics ? How can 
 a Roman Catholic child believe that the church of Rome is 
 infallible, or that she possesses any authority, unless the child 
 receives these opinions on the authority of the parent 1 
 
 Do we, in point of fact, find more Atheists among the children 
 of Protestants than among those of the Roman Catholic com- 
 munion 1 Let facts decide. But my friend says, I argue in a 
 vicious circle, because I prove the inspiration and authority of 
 the sacred scriptures by the right of private judgment, and 
 maintain the right of every man to exercise his judgment by the 
 authority of the scriptures. But this exercise of the judgment 
 is an inherent right, implanted in man by the God of Heaven, to 
 whom we are accountable. There is no other way given of 
 discovering truth. We possess a natural right to exercise our 
 judgments on the contents of any document purporting to be a 
 revelation from God. The Apostles themselves appealed to 
 the judgments of men. There is no other mode of deciding 
 upon the authority of the scriptures, but by the exercise of pri- 
 vate judgment. And a subsequent appeal to the inspired 
 oracles in confirmation of the right of private judgment, does not 
 militate against the laws of sound reasoning. 1 deny, there- 
 fore, that T argued in a vicious circle. But, on the contrary, I 
 assert, that this was the case with my friend, Mr. Maguire. 
 What were the arguments which he made use of to show the 
 authority of his Church 1 When asked to prove her authority, 
 he refers to the scriptures ; and when again requested to prove 
 the authority of the scriptures, he refers to the church. Just as 
 if I were (to give you a famihar illustration) to take two books, 
 and place the one up'^i the other — thus. — (Here Mr. Pope 
 taking two books gave a practical illustration of his meaning.) 
 The same part cannot be at once the superstructure and the 
 foundation. If the church gives authority to the scriptures. 
 
b% THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 then the authority of the church must be independont of the 
 scriptures ; and we cannot appeal to the scriptures in support 
 of her authority. If the scriptures give authority to the church, 
 the authority of the scriptures must be independent of the au- 
 thority of the church ; and we cannot appeal to the ohurch in 
 support of their authority. My learned friend has asked me 
 for my creed. I have given it ; and now return the question 
 j-pon himself. He would, no doubt, tell me that he beheved 
 whatever the church has decreed. This you will find is an 
 exceedingly indefinite reply. My friend agreed with Delahogue 
 in his Tractatus de Ecclesi^, that there are eighteen general 
 councils ; but he was not giiite certain as to the number, nor 
 did he attempt to specify the peculiar characteristics necessary 
 to designate a council as general. You perceive, therefore, 
 when I ask Mr. Maguire for his confession of faith, he has to 
 refer to general councils ; and yet at the same time he cannot 
 state, by what mark a general council can be distinguishcc^ 
 from others : while I appeal for my creed to certain well-defined 
 anicles, and to the Bible as the ground-work of the Christian 
 faith. Now, I would ask, whose creeds is the most defined — 
 mine, which is contained in the book of God, the Bible ; or 
 Mr. Maguire's, who refers you to general councils, of the 
 authority of some of which doubts are entertained ; and to the 
 unanimous consent of the Fathers, scattered through a miulti- 
 tude of ponderous folios'? I afiirm, that I do not difi^er in any 
 essential point of faith from the church of England, or from any 
 Protestant communion. I think, however, my reverend friends 
 of the Establishment will doubtless feel much obliged to Mr. 
 Maguire for his application of the Ark of Noah to the church of 
 England. Mr. Maguire has stated, that we cannot find any 
 authority in the scriptures for keeping the first day of the w^eek 
 jnstead of the seventh. I answer, that we find, that the disci- 
 ples assembled together on two successive first days, after the 
 Saviour rose from the dead. — (John, xx, 19, 26.) In Acts^ 
 XX, 7, we are told, that on the first day of the week the disciples 
 met together to break bread. And in 1 Cor. xvi, 2, the prac- 
 tice appears to be confirmed. Such then was the custom of 
 the Apostle and the other disciples, as recorded in holy writ. 
 We now follow their example. My learned opponent has 
 asked, if the Bible be the rule of fliith and practice, and that we 
 are bound to obey it, why do I not wash my brother's feet, as 
 commanded by our Lord to do so 1 Now, I reply, that were I 
 in an eastern country, t would do so with readiness. We ali 
 are aware, that in eastern countries, on account of the great 
 heaty it is regarded as an act of kindness to assist a guest who 
 may have travelled from a distance, in taki ig off his sandals, 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 53 
 
 and in presenting water for his feet : but as this climate is tem- 
 perate, my judgment leads me to suppose, that I am not called 
 upon to *' wash the feet of my neighbor." With respect to the 
 passages which I quoted from the Apocalypse, I beg to say, that 
 I did not quote them partially ; the quotations, when consulted, 
 will decide. I did not argue from a particular to a universal. 
 T merely showed, that there were distinct commands given for 
 writing at least portions of the word of life ; and these com- 
 mands are recorded for our instruction. With respect to the 
 Clementine edition, I assert, that the Douay version is from the 
 Clementine, and that consequently the translators have subjected 
 themselves to the penalties imposed by Sistus. 
 
 My friend has said, that neither he himself^ nor scarcely any 
 one else believes in the infalliUliiy of the Pope, Need I again 
 say, that the Italians believe implicitly in the infallibility of the 
 i^ope ? Cardinal Bellarmine says, 
 
 " If the Pope could or sliould so far err as to command the practice of vice, 
 and to forbid virtuous actionsj the church were bound to believe vices to be 
 good, and virtues to be bad ! !" — De Pontiff. Rom. lib. iv, cap. 5. injin. 
 
 Cardinal Zabarelli informs us, that 
 
 "The Pope can do all things, whatsoever he pleases, even unlawful thing"?, 
 and is more than God ! /" — De Schism. Sul. Serm. Script, p. 70. 
 
 Masonnus says, 
 
 "That the Roman Pontiffs cannot even sin without praise!!" — Lib. ii^,i 
 Vit. Johanni IX. 
 
 My friend told me, that the divines in the church of Rome 
 are allowed to exercise their private judgment on matters of 
 discipline. I am glad to hear it, and I trust the same privilege 
 will also be granted to the people. He asks me, how is a poor 
 man to decide, when I hand him the Bible, whether it is really 
 inspired or not? I briefly answer, when I hand the scripturcb' 
 to a person in the humbler walks of life, should he express any 
 doubt of their inspiration, I would say to him — "Read this 
 blessed volume, and you will discover in it proofs, that it has 
 come from God." 
 
 I now ask my friend in reply, how is the peasant to examine 
 the many ponderous volumes which contain the councils of the 
 church of Rome ? And without such examination, how can he 
 truly ascertain the opinions of his church? This question 
 appears to me infinitely more perplexing than that proposed by 
 Mr. Maguire. We do not assert that the authorized Bible is 
 in^.maculate, but maintain, that it fully gives *' the mind of the 
 spirit," guoad fidem et mores, as to matters of faith and morals. 
 We find the Saviour and his Apostles quoting from the Septua- 
 gint, which was not immaculate, a circumstance that may render 
 
 5* 
 
54 THE ixM\'.L:.:3i:.rrY of 
 
 us satisfied with translations, tliougli not absolutely perfect. 
 Sixtus speaks not only of Clausua and Periodiis, but also of wi- 
 nima particula. Compare the Clementine and Sixtine editions of 
 the scriptures, and it is clear the Douay doctors considered the 
 Clementine ths better of the two, since that is the edition which 
 they have followed. That discrepancies exist between the 
 Sixtine and Clementine editions, is a matter of notoriety 
 amongst theologians. With respect to justification by faith 
 alone, he refers to Luther ; but I would refer him to the epistle 
 written to the church which he claims as his own, the church of 
 Rome. In the third chapter of the Romans, and 2Cth verse, 
 *t is said, ^' We account a man to be justified by faith without 
 ti e works of the law." He charges me with denying the im- 
 portance of good works. I distinctly assert, that I desire to 
 witness the fruits of righteousness universally exhibited ; but I 
 hold that the only mode of laying the foundation of morahty, is 
 to proclaim justification by faith in the Son of God. No other 
 doctrine can touch the heart, or withdraw it from the love of the 
 world. A Christian lives not to himself, but to him Vvho died 
 and rose again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and 
 living. Fixing his eye on Calvary, he sees the evidence of his 
 own sin, and the redeeming m.ercy of his Saviour. Though 
 deeply feeling his own unworthiness, through the blood of Jesus 
 he is freed from embarrassing anxiety — and as an adopted son 
 — can pour out his soul before him ; for " God so loved the 
 world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever 
 believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life." 
 He desires to count all things but loss for the excellency of the 
 knowledge of Christ Jesus, and grounds his hopes of accep- 
 tance exclusively on his merits. He is enabled, in some humble 
 measure, to run in the way of his commandments, because he 
 feels himself not to be his own, but Christ's — by erection and 
 redemption, purchased by the blood of the Lamb, and therefore 
 bound, by interest as well as gratitude, to dedicate himself, 
 body, soul, and spirit, to the glory of God, which is his reasona- 
 ble service. 
 
 My friend has desired me to point out a passage in the Yul- 
 gate, in which there is a single error, or which differs in the 
 slightest particular from the originals. I shall refer him to 
 the passage in the 11th of Hebrews, where the Apostle says, 
 *hat " Jacob worshipped, leaning on the top of his staff," 
 ngogexvprjaev ettl to oacgov Ti]g kuviov qa^dov or, as the words are 
 in the Vulgate, " adoravit cacumen virgce ejus,^^ or, in the Douay 
 Bible, " adored the top of his rod." St. Jerome does not 
 agree with the interpretation received by the church of Rome. 
 — (Quajs. Hebr. in Genes. Erasm. Edit. vol. vi, p. 228.) In 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 55 
 
 proof that the church of Rome has not furnished an authorized 
 and immaculate commentary, hear the opinion of Dr. Doyle, in 
 answer to a question, before the Lord's committee. 
 
 " You consider yourselves pledged to all matters contained in these notes ? 
 — No, not by any means ; on the contrary, there were notes affixed, I beheve, 
 to the Rhemish Testament, which were most objectionable ; and, on being 
 presented to us, we caused them to be expunged. The notes carry, ii^ 
 orR editions of the bible, no weight ; for we do not know the writers 
 of many of them. If we find them clear enough in explanation of doctrine, 
 we leave them there ; but whenever we find any thing exceptionable, we put 
 them out, as we have done in the cases I have referred to." — Dr. DoyWi 
 Evidence before the House of Lords ^ p. 222. 
 
 I assert then, that we have strong proofs against the infalli- 
 bility of the church of Rome ; inasmuch as she has not been 
 able to furnish a perfect edition of the scriptures — nor a standard 
 commentary — except we choose to take the unanimous consent 
 of the Fathers, as contamed in the numberless and massy 
 volumes that have emanated from their pens ! My friend has 
 talked of a ray of light which would dry up all the streams oi 
 Protestant opinion — I wish he would now suffer that ray to 
 beam upon us. If he be able to produce such a light, is it not 
 uncharitable in my reverend friend to allov/ us any longer to 
 remain in the state of darkness of which he speaks ? But my 
 friend has also brought forward the numbers attached to his 
 church as a proof of her universality. Numbers, permit me to 
 say, are no proof of truth. If such, however, be regarded as a 
 proof of universality and infallibility, the church of Rome cannot 
 be the universal or infallible church. It has been ascertained, 
 that there are at present seventy-five millions of Protestants, 
 and, in addition, fifty millions belonging to the Greek church, 
 vv^ho also protest against the church of Rome. Now the aggre- 
 gate of these is one hundred and twenty-five millions ; while 
 the number belonging to the Roman Catholic church amounts 
 to but ninety millions. So that we perceive, even in point of 
 numbers, this wonderfully infallible and universal church, when 
 weighed in the balance, is found wanting. 
 
 Mr. Maguire has asserted, that the Bible is a dumb judge, 
 and unable to pronounce — yet we find that the Saviour consid- 
 ered it competent to decide ; for he again and again appealed 
 to the Old Testament scriptures — " Had ye believed Moses, ye 
 would have believed me, for he wrote of me." 
 
 It is worthy of observation, that Bellarmine (de Conciliis, 1, 
 i, ch. 6,) gives us a list of general councils /(ar//^ confirmed and 
 partly rejected; and (in c. v, and Rom. Pont. 1, iv, c. 11,) he 
 says, that several things in those councils allowed to be general, 
 were foisted in by heretics — he knows not how. My learned 
 OQDonent in correct, according to Delahogue, as to the numbers 
 
66 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 of general councils — but strange to say, Delaliogue himsell 
 admits, that there is a division respecting the council of Con- 
 stance — all Catholics, he observes, confess that as to some of ita 
 sessions it was ecumenical ; the Italians deny that it was 
 ecumenical as to all its sessions, while the French church 
 vigorously maintain the directly opposite opinion. — Tract de 
 Eccles. p. 451.) 
 
 Again, Delahogue (p. 452,) acknowledges the uncertaint)' 
 existing respecting the 5th Lateran council, and quotes the fol- 
 lowing passage from Bellarmine: 
 
 "It remains a question among Catholics to the present day, whether the 
 5th Lateran be truly a general Council." — (L. ii, de Cone. c. 13.) 
 
 I beg to remark, that Delahogue must include the .council of 
 Constance, or the 5th Lateran, in order to complete the number 
 of eighteen general councils. And yet with all the assistance 
 of an infallible church, he has not told us which of the two he 
 has adopted, not having prefixed any number to either. There- 
 fore, another infallible tribunal is called for, to determine which 
 councils are general, and which are not ; and an infallible 
 depository is required to preserve the councils, according to 
 Bellarmine, from the interpolations of heretics ! I would ask, 
 is it the character of the council which is to decide the ortho- 
 doxy of the doctrine, or the orthodoxy of the doctrine the char- 
 acter of the councin If the former, who is to decide upon the 
 characteristics of a general council 1 If the latter, why is not 
 the council of Tyra, held in the Cth century, received as 
 general, as well as the first council of Nice — both having been 
 summoned by imperial authority? Was not the 5th council 
 assembled at Constantinople in despite of the opposition of Pope 
 Yigilius ? Did not that council condemn as heretical, three 
 books, against the express prohibition of Vigilius — the one by 
 Ibas, Bishop of Edessa, the other of Theodorus of Mopsuestia, 
 and the other of Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus 1 And yet was 
 not that very council in the end approved of by the successors 
 of Yigilius, and, in fine, received throughout all the church as a 
 true and ecumenical council 1 (Yide Baronium in Justiniano 
 et Yigilo, tom. vii, et Sirmundum Preefat, in secund.) All this 
 doubt and confusion carry upon them prima facie evidence, that 
 the church of Rome is destitute of infallibility. 
 
 I now solemnly put it to Mr. Maguire's conscience, will he 
 stand to every thing which is decreed in general councils 1 I 
 am satisfied that he will not. In the 27th canon of the 3rd 
 Lateran council, the persecution of heretics is recommended. 
 It is decreed (3 Lat. council, can. 16,) that "oaths are to be 
 regarded as perjuries which militate against ecclesiastical utility 
 and the institutes of the holy Fathers." Will Mr. Maguire, I say, 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 57 
 
 fitand to such decrees 1 He cannot ; he will not. What then 
 becomes of the infallibility of general councils in his estimation? 
 Again — we have had contradictions the most opposite. The 
 council of Constance deposed three Popes and declared the 
 papal authority was subject to a council. We n)ay differ about 
 the signification of passages in the scripture, but we can appeal 
 to common sense — to the context — or to the analogy of faith — 
 but we cannot appeal to an infallible tribunal to decide — for the 
 existence of such a tribunal is the matter in debate. But facts 
 can speak — council is against council — Pope against Pope. 
 The church of Rome has not yet been able to decide as to the 
 seat of her supposed infallibility ; and, by referring me to the 
 unanimous consent of the Fathers to discover the doctrines of 
 scripture, bids me to waste my life in wandering through their 
 ponderous folios. Facts, such as these, lead me at once to 
 conclude, that the church of Rome is not infallible. 
 
 Mr. Maguire — I have first a few words to say in reply to 
 Mr. Pope. He has endeavored, but in vain, to get over the 
 difficulty which I called upon him to solve, namely, how a Pro- 
 testant child could receive the Bible as the inspired word of 
 God. The child could only receive the scriptures upon the 
 private judgment, or the authority of the minister. If he receive 
 the scriptures upon that authority, and that such authority be 
 recognised by Mr. Pope, then the question is settled. Mr. 
 Pope endeavored to illustrate his argument by placing one book 
 on the top of another, and he gets out of the circle in which he 
 is involved by upsetting both books. I defied Mr. Pope to 
 point out an error regarding matters of faith in the Latin Vul- 
 gate. He appealed to a passage in Hebrews where he asserts 
 it is said of Jacob, "adoravit cacumen virgae ejus." Now in 
 the first place, the quotafion is false and the Latin is bad — the 
 words are, " fastigium virgae ejus." — The controversy here is 
 about the Greek word ^Ttt, It signifies towards the top of the 
 staff*, as well as the top of the staff*. The latter is the better 
 translation — every man who knows Greek, knows the Greek 
 word will bear both meanings. This passage has been very 
 ably discussed by Dr. Lingard, who is fully qualified to sustain 
 it. I can assure the learned gentlemen, that he is very far, in 
 this instance, from proving the existence of an error in the Latin 
 Vulgate. I said that no Catholic is bound to believe in the 
 infallibility of the pope ; and I re-assert, that it does not from 
 an article of Catholic faith. Divines have had, and may still 
 have their private quarrels about it. But such differences from 
 no breach of communion, as the subject matter in dispute, forms 
 no artie'e of Catholic faith. "'Upon this roc k'V says our 
 
68 THE INB^ALLIBILITY OF 
 
 Saviour, "I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall no 
 prevail against her." Here is the infalhbility promised by oui 
 Lord, and claimed by the Catholic church, and not the infalli- 
 biliy ot^ the pope, which my learned adversary would cram 
 down the throats of Catholics, " velint nolint" — as an article of 
 Catholic faith. 
 
 I called upon Mr. Pope to produce any ecumenical council 
 which contradicted another in matters of faith. It is strange 
 that he should quote what he has quoted regarding the taking of 
 an oath. I affirm that every oath should be taken in truth and 
 justice, and in judgment. No man should swear to any thing 
 for which he has not the evidence of his senses, or a certainty 
 approaching to mathematical precision. A pe^-son who would 
 swear contra statuta patrum, would not, undoubtedly, have such' 
 evidence to sustain his oath. I repeat in the face of the learned 
 world, that what Mr. Pope has quoted from the councils, forms 
 no part of their decision upon matters of faith. When a council 
 decides upon matters of faith, it employs a certain invariable 
 form — " Si quis dixerit,^^ " If any person shall say," &c, — 
 '• anathema sit,^^ " let him be anathema." When this form is 
 employed, the decision is upon an article of faith — I told you 
 already there were eighteen ecumenical councils. — They never 
 issued an anathema in the above form, where an article of faith 
 was not concerned. But, in matters not connected with faith 
 or essential morality, a council may err. The infallibility of 
 general councils extends only to matters of faith and essential 
 discipline. The promise which Christ made to his church was, 
 that she should never teach error. Our articles of faith are well 
 known. I defy any one to produce me a general council which 
 has contradicted another general council in matters of faith. 
 
 Mr. Pope speaks vauntingly of seventy-five millions of Pro- 
 testants. Where are they ? They do not exist — unless, indeed, 
 you collect under the broad standard of Protestantism many 
 sects, who differ more from each other than I do from my friend, 
 Mr. Pope. I ask, when you separate all those jarring sects, 
 where are the millions of whom Mr. Pope speaks, with all the 
 artifice of a practised rhetorician? But Mr. Pope would rather 
 amuse us with powerful declamation, than descend to the vulgar 
 level of argument. Is it honourable to adduce against me the 
 Arian council of Basil ? Is the Catholic church to be account- 
 able for the conduct of those whom she had formally excommu- 
 nicated ? I have proved, that in the Catholic church exists the 
 authority to put down error. Other churches tolerate a super- 
 ficial conformity, and introduce into their bosoms vipers that will 
 gnaw their very vitals. See how the Puritans overturned the 
 established church, and kicked out the bishops of Scotland. It 
 
THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH. 59 
 
 is contiary (o the spirit of the Ptotestant church to condemn 
 error, and yet she retains the iVthanasian creed, which proves 
 that ill her nature she is not tolerant. But she prudently 
 ejihibits this species of toleration, for otherwise her churches 
 would be deserted, and the conventicles crowded to excess. If 
 the king of England has no choice, but must remain a Protes- 
 tant of the church of England, is not that a betrayal of con- 
 science, and an inroad upon the exercise of private judgment? 
 Is the Athanasian creed characteristic of that toleration of which 
 the church of England boasts ? The man who swears against 
 the doctrines of the Catholic church perjures himself, as the 
 council of Lateran declares. For it is not possible he can be 
 certain that the oath he takes is true. How can any man 
 swear, that the doctrines of the Catholic church are damnable 
 and idolatrous 1 The oath is not that he believes them so, but 
 that they are so for fact. 
 
 The declaration of his majesty, prefixed to the homihes, 
 declares, that the thirty-nine articles of the church of England 
 contain all things necessary ; and it strictly prohibits all differ- 
 ences from them : " we will not allow (it says) the least devia- 
 tion." The church of England, then, is not a particle more 
 tolerant than the church of Rome, though it evinces a great 
 variance in its practice. If the Protestant clergyman believes 
 that a church has been established by Christ, he should uphold 
 it — if he does not believe so, why should punishment be inflicted 
 on those who separate from the communion of the church of 
 England 1 Ought not the Protestant clergyman contend against 
 'those who rise in opposition to that church ? If they be the 
 successors of St. Peter, and if the Holy Ghost has endowed 
 their church with the spirit of grace, as they would make us 
 believe, she should exercise her authority, and not give the 
 sanction of her name to every spawn of the innumerable sects 
 that range themselves under the banner of Protestantism. 
 Johanna Southcote exercised the right of private judgment 
 when she announced herself as pregnant with the Messiah. 
 Every man of sense must allow, that by private judgment we 
 never can prove the inspiration of the scriptures. Why then 
 v*'ill Mr. Pope not receive them upon the authority of the Catho* 
 lie church, instead of resorting to the authority of frail and falli- 
 ble man? 
 
 I asserted that Christ never gave a positive command to write 
 the Nev/ Testament. If St. John, at Patmos, was ordered to 
 write to particular churches, that does not by any means prove 
 that a special command was given by our Saviour that the New 
 Testament should be written, particularly as St. John wrote 
 about facts, and not about doctrines to those particular churches. 
 
60 THE INFALLIBILITY OF 
 
 The truth is, nearly sixty years had elapsed from the death o' 
 Christ till the last of the New Testament was written. Wen 
 the people of God left in the meantime without a rule of faith 
 to guide and to direct them? Was it not the Roman Catholic 
 church that converted these islands from paganism — missiona- 
 ries sent from Rome to England rescued that land from idolatry 
 cind paganism. The Christian church was cemented in the first 
 ages with the blood of martyrs — thirty-four Popes in succession 
 after St. Peter became martyrs for the faith of Jesus Christ. 
 Forty-five others are canonized saints — Protestants also have 
 their saints ; and churches are dedicated to saints.. I may h^re 
 in passing, remark, that Catholics do not worship the saints — it 
 is a rank calumny, invented in order to fling dust into the eyes 
 of the multitude. 
 
 Mr. Pope has not yet attempted to answer my direct argu- 
 ment, both from scripture and the holy Fathers — he has indeed 
 advanced, and the task was an easy one, several captious objec- 
 tions. If a Catholic happens not to know the history of every 
 general council which has been held, the conclusion drawn from 
 such premises by Mr. Pope is, that the church of Christ is 
 proved not to be infallible. Has Mr. Pope quoted any texts of 
 scripture, direct, plain, and obvious, like those I adduced ? I 
 have here more than seventy passages from the Fathers upon 
 the subject, and I would read them to you if the time permitted. 
 In one of them the church is compared to the ark of Noah, out 
 of which no one shall be saved. I deny that we look upon all 
 Protestants as heretics — we consider Arius, Luther, Calvin, &c. 
 who have separated directly from the church, as heretics. But; 
 as St. Augustin says, we do not consider the children or de- 
 scendants of heretics, as formal heretics, unless they remain 
 obstinate and contumacious in their errors. I am opposed to 
 the doctrine of the Pope's infallibility. It is imposed upon me 
 by Mr. Pope — but I have already stated that it forms no part of 
 the doctrine of the Catholic church, and is not received by the 
 Catholics throughout the world. I may conclude this day'« 
 discussion by again asserting that Christ promised he would bf 
 ^vith his church teiching, preaching and baptizing until 1' c con- 
 summation of the world — my scripture proofs therefore 'V^*^ 
 untouched. 
 
THE DIVINE RIGHT or* i-Ri.. TE JUDGMENT. 0*1 
 
 Second Day. — Friday, April 20. 
 
 SUBJECT. — The Divine Right of Private Judgment to pt\»^ 
 nounce upon the Authenticity, Integrity, and Canonicity of 
 Scripture, and to determine its meaning in Articles of Faith, 
 
 At eleven o'clock the Chair was taken by Daniel U'Con- 
 NELL, Esq. and Admiral Oliver. 
 
 Mr. Maguire rose, and called on Mr. Pope for proofs to 
 sustain his rule of faith, which he (Mr. Maguirp) undcrsiood to 
 mean private judgment. 
 
 Mr. Pope — I shall preface my observations this day, by 
 assuring the present meeting, that I was under the fu" Cuiivic- 
 tion, that I should yesterday have had an opportunity of replying 
 to Mr. Maguire's last speech. Mr. Maguire spoke six times, 
 while my addresses were but five in number. In justice, 
 therefore, the right of reply was vested in me : but as the chair- 
 men were divided on the point, and as I felt that my arguments 
 against the infallibility of the church of Rome had been cogent 
 and satisfactory, I waved my privilege. I cannot avoid noticing 
 the bold, and, I must say, unfounded assertion of my opponents 
 that T did not touch one of his arguments. Gentlemen, you will 
 decide on that question. I regret that it is the fashion of many 
 advocates of the church of Rome, to substitute barefaced asser- 
 tion and high-sounding language for solid argument. 
 
 With respect to the proofs of the right of private judgment, I 
 shall first adduce negative evidence. If there be no infallible 
 tribunal, man is under the necessity of exercising his judgment. 
 I shall therefore make (partly in reply to Mr. Maguire) some 
 remarks on the infallibility of the church of Rome. And first, 
 I beg to say, that Mr. Maguire has not proved that the church of 
 Rome is the church of Christ. The passages, I maintain, which 
 he adduces from scripture, do not demonstrate the infallibility of 
 Oiny church — much less the infallibity of the church of Rome, 
 
 It is remarkable, that the church of Rome, which has defined 
 every thing, has never given a definition of herself! In the 
 conferences previous to the decrees of the eleventh session of 
 the council of Trent, Vincent Lunello, a Franciscan friar, pro- 
 posed that a d(!finition of the church and her authority should 
 precede the declarations of the disputed pomts of doctrine. 
 The motion was rejected. — (Sarpi^s History of the Council of 
 Trent, 1. ii, p. 155, Geneva, 1625.) If the church has not 
 
6S THE DIVINE RIGHi 
 
 defined herself, how are her votaries to discover the source from 
 which they are to derive their opinions. Mr. Maguire also 
 admitted, if I nnistake not, that in the priniitive ages tlie church 
 of Rome was nut looked upon as the Catholic church. 
 
 In reference to Matt, v, 13. — "But if the salt has lost its 
 SBvor," &c. I beg to observe, that Maundrell in his travels, 
 expressly mentions, that 
 
 "In the Valley of Salt, near Gebul, and about four hours' journey from 
 Aleppo, there is a small precipice, occasioned by the continual taking away 
 of the salt. In this, says he, you may see how the veins of it lie : I broke a 
 piece of it, of which the part exposed to the rain, sun, and air, though it had 
 he sparks and particles of salt, yet had perfectly lost Us savor, as in Matt, v." 
 
 Again — there was an asphaltic substance, which was used by 
 the Jews to salt their sacrifices, and which, if kept too long, lost 
 its flavour, and was thrown upon the floor of the Temple to 
 prevent the Priests' slipping. Hence the allusion — " Trodden 
 under foot of men,''^ These observations will, I trust, serve to 
 ^hovv that the Saviour in the passage which we are considering^ 
 could not have alluded to the infallibility of the Apostles. 
 
 Does my friend mean to say, that the Sixtine and Clementine 
 editions do not vary in minima particula ? I have a work now 
 oefore mc, " Home's Introduction to the Study of the Scrip- 
 tures," in which he gives us a specimen of the discrepancies 
 existing between the Clementine and Sixtine editions. As to 
 Jacob worshipping the top of his rod, as the Douay Testament 
 has it, I beg to observe, that the Apostle Paul quoted from the 
 Septuagint. The original Hebrew word in the 47th of Genesis 
 and 31st verse, to which St. Paul refers, according to the dif- 
 ferent pointing, signifies both " a rod and a bed." The Douay 
 Bible translates the passage (Gen. xlvii, 31,) thus : " And he 
 said, swear thou to me. And as he was swearing, Israel adored 
 God, TURNING TO the bed's head." The scholars, however, 
 can at once decide, whether " Jacob adored the top of his rod" 
 is not a gross mistranslation of the original text. 
 
 Mr. Maguire insinuated that the canons of the third council 
 of Lateran, (27 and 16,) relative to the persecution of heretics, 
 and to oaths which militate against ecclesiastical utility, are 
 matters of discipline ; but I insist that they relate to morals — 
 ^^ pertinent ad mores.^^ We all know, how Jesuits and others 
 interpret " Ecclesiastical utility." 
 
 It is a remarkable fact, that the pope may be the sole author 
 of the canons of a council, Dupin, in reference to the 70 
 canons passed in the fourth or great Lateran council, (vol. ii 
 p. 449,) writes, 
 
 "Matthew Paris says, that these canons seemed tolerable to some of the 
 pielates, biit grievous to others. Bis words are these, ' Facto prius ah ipse 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 63 
 
 ptpa exhortalioiiis sermone, recitata sunt in pleno concilio capihda septuaginia, 
 qwz aliis placabilia, aliis videbantur 07icrosay Let the case be how it will, it 
 is certain, that these canons were not made by the council but by Innocent 
 III, who presented them to the council ready drawn up, and ordered tlem .0 
 6e read ; and that the prelates did not enter into any debate upon theia but 
 ;hat their silence was taken for an approbation." 
 
 Is it not evident, therefore, that the canons were forced upon 
 ^he council by Pope Innocent IIH 
 
 The Rev. Dr. Murray, in his examination before the Com- 
 mon's committee, p. 223, when asked, 
 
 " Will you be so good as to explain the nature of the authority of the Pope?" 
 replied, " he is the executive power of the church ; his office is to enforce the 
 observance of the canons." 
 
 I would remark, that the Pope possesses also a dispensing 
 power. — The Maynooth class-book informs us, 
 
 " That the Pope may, according to circumstances, dispense even with the 
 laws of a general council, whenever a legitimate cause shall arise." — ^P. 360. 
 
 Mr. Butler states, 
 
 *'That, in the opinion of all Roman Catholics, it belongs to the Pope in 
 extraordinary cases to act in opposition to the canons." 
 
 Do not these statements sufficiently demonstrate the supreme 
 power exercised by the Pope, both in council and out of council ? 
 
 Mr. Maguire was offended by my reference to the council of 
 Basil. I ask, was the council of Basil ever regarded as a 
 general council? Bellarmine (de Eccles. Milit. c. 16.) remarks, 
 
 " That the council of Basil was at first a true ecumenical council and 
 infallible, but afterwards became a schismatical conventicle, and of no au- 
 thority at all !" 
 
 Again, Bellarmine says, (De "Roman. Pont. L ii, c. 11.) 
 
 "The council of Basil, by common consent, and with the legate's concur- 
 rence, concluded that a council is above the Pope, which is now rightly 
 judged erroneous." 
 
 It is a fact, that there is no standard of the Roman Catholic 
 faith in general use in this country. Dr. Doyle, speaking on 
 this subject, says, 
 
 "Besides the articles enumerated in the creed of Pius the fourth, there are 
 others to be received as of faith. These are defined in the sacred canons, of 
 which some are received entire, some in part, and of which no account can 
 be obtained from the formularies to which the Roman Catholic bishops have 
 referred to as authentic."- Dr. Doyle's Evidence before the House ofLordSj p. 1 80. 
 
 So much for Dr. Doyle's opinion upon the subject. 
 
 As we have seen that great uncertainty exists with respect to 
 general councils, I ask again, (as Mr. Maguire has not solved 
 the question) whether the character of the council is to decide 
 the orthodoxy of the doctrine, or the orthodoxy of the doctrmfe 
 to decide the character of the council ? If the former, who is to 
 
64 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 decide upon the characteristics of a general councin If the 
 orthodoxy of the doctrine is to decide the character of the 
 council, why is not the council of Tyre, held A. I). 535, 
 received as general, as well as the first of Nice, both having 
 been alike called by imperial authority? Mr. Maguire has told 
 us, that a council approved by the Pope is infallible. Then the 
 decrees were fallible before the Pope confirmed them. For 
 instance, the decrees of the council of Trent were fallible, until 
 they received the sanction of the representatives of the Pope at 
 *he council? It is admitted, that a council without the Pope is 
 fallible, and that the Pope per se is also fallible. Again Mr. 
 Maguire remarks, that the decrees of the Pope, assisted by a 
 >w bishops are infallible, when "received by the universal 
 church." I am desirous of knowing what is the meaning of 
 " the universal church." I presume that it signifies the Roman 
 Catholic hierarchies in Ireland, in Spain, and elsewhere. These 
 bodies are confessedly fallible. I wish then to know by wha 
 process decrees set forth hy fallible authority become infallible 
 when received by fallible bodies of men. Again, Bellarmine 
 speaks of general councils, which are to be altogether rejected 
 and of general councils partly to be received and partly to be 
 rejected ; and also remarks that several things in councils 
 allowed to be general, were foisted in by heretics. We must 
 therefore have another infallible tribunal to decide, what coun- 
 cils are really general, and what passages in them are the inter- 
 polations of heretics ! Some councils, according to Delahogue, 
 are but partially received in some countries, and wholly admitted 
 in others. For instance, that of Constance. Some doubt of 
 the ecumenicity of the first comicil of Lyons. (Delahogue, p. 
 448.) The fifth Lateran council has been doubted of, accord- 
 ing to Bellarmine, non quasdam sessiones, not as to some ses- 
 sions, but in toto, altogether. 
 
 Further — If I admit the church of Rome to be infallible, then 
 I must acknowledge its decisions as divine. But two divine 
 traditions, which must necessarily come from the same source, 
 cannot possibly contradict each other : yet the second council 
 of Lateran (Can. 6.) prohibits the marriage of ecclesiastics, on 
 the ground of immutable and inherent hohness. The canon 
 remarks — 
 
 " When they ought both to be, and to be called the temple of God, the 
 vessels of the Lord, the shrine of the Holy Ghost, it is unworthy that the} 
 should become the slaves of chambering and uncleanness." 
 
 Such is the language in which the council speaks of marriage. 
 But what says the scriptures ? 
 
 " Marriage is honourahle in all, and the bed undefiled, but whoremoncfera 
 and adulterers God will judge." Heb. xiii, 4. 
 
OF PRITATE JUDGMENT. 66 
 
 On this subject the Bible is directly at issue with the church 
 of Rome, therefore she cannot be infallible. — Again, permit me 
 to ask, were I to grant for the moment, that the church of Rome 
 is infallible — is there not much danger, lest mistakes should 
 occur in the interpretation of the meaning of her councils ] 
 
 We have argued on the claims of the church of Rome to 
 infallibility. I have appealed to scripture, reason, common sense, 
 and facts. How shall we decide, whether Mr. Maguire's opinion 
 on the subject, or mine, be correct ? If I find a church contra- 
 dicting itself, I have prima-facie evidence that she is fallible. — 
 The council of Constance deposed three Popes, who attempted 
 to sit together in the chair of St. Peter (which was well nigh 
 broken, as Fuller says,) and appointed another Pope. On the 
 other hand, the council of Florence and Trent have raised the 
 authority of the Pope above a council. Here is a palpable 
 contradiction on the authority of the Pope. — Again, the council 
 of Ephesus decreed — 
 
 " That it should not be lawful to utter, write, or compose any other faith 
 than that which had been defined by the Nicene Fathers ; and that, if any dared 
 to offer any other creed, if ecclesiastics ^ they should be removed from their office^ 
 alienos esse; if laics, that they should be anathematized.^^ — (Labb, et Cos®* 
 Cone. torn, iii, p. 668.) 
 
 Ilere you observe that the council of Ephesus deposed 
 ecclesiastics and anathematized laics who should compose any 
 other faith than that which has been defined by the Nicene 
 Fathers. Compare the Nicene Creed with that of Pope Pius, 
 and you will find the latter differing from the former in many 
 particulars, and containing many articles not to be found' in the 
 Nicene Creed. I, therefore, without hesitation conclude, that 
 we have " the church" of one age contradicting " the church" 
 of another age. Again — the second Nicene council declares, 
 that one reason for worshipping the image of Christ is, that he is 
 not sensibly present with us, but only in his Divinity ; — Act iv, 
 p. 305. And the epistle of Germanus, received by the council, 
 says, that he is not present " afo/jaTtxcug''^ bodily. It also anathe 
 matizes all who assert that Christ ivas not circumscribed as to hi& 
 humanity, I ask, are not these opinions plainly opposed to the 
 doctrine of transubstantiation 1 But the church of Rome now 
 receives the doctrine of transubstantiation. Again, therefore, 
 we have "the church" of one age against "the church" of 
 another age. Let these contradictions go before the world, and 
 that world will come to the conclusion that the church of Rome 
 is not infallible. Believe me, it is this claim to infallibility, which 
 will give the death-blow to the church of Rome. She dares not 
 alter a single tenet ; her doctrines are written as with a diamond 
 - -they are engraven on tables of brass, and she canna reform 
 
 6* 
 
66 THE iMVlNE RICHT 
 
 I therefore repeat that her vain assumption of iii^L ibility <vill, m 
 the dispensations of Providence, give her the death-blow by 
 which she shall fall. If then, there be no infallible tribunal in 
 existence, must we not hi under the necessity of exercising our 
 r>?ivj»t,(5 judgments. 
 
 ^Then we talk of the right of pri\ate judgment, it should be 
 understood that we mean no^ that every man is justified in putting 
 any explanation that fanc} may suggest on the word of God. 
 — We must exercise our judgments as accountable beings, 
 according to the rules of common sense, and the a*?\alogy of 
 scripture, with due submission to the moral restraints arising 
 from the opinions of men of sound understanding and piety,-^- 
 Do we say that a man who exercises his judgment on the con- 
 tents of any work which he may peruse, is justified in adopting 
 the idle imaginations of his own brain as the meaning of the 
 author 1 No — we instantly reject such an absurd opinion. But 
 in reading the scriptures we are not only to exercise our judgment 
 with the same care which we would bestow upon other volumes, 
 but as beings accountable to God, and as deeply interested in the 
 concerns of an eternal world. These are considerations by which 
 a man is solemnly called upon to exercise his judgment upon 
 the subject-matter of the inspired records — these are rules by 
 which, I conceive, he is to be guided in that exercise. The 
 misinterpretation of the law of the land is no justification for 
 the commission of illegal acts ; nor will the misunderstanding 
 of God's blessed word, on the great fundamental truths of the 
 Christian system, afford any security to error, but will expose 
 us to the wrath of the great Eternal. I now come to my direct 
 proofs of the right of private judgment. Truly it is an extra- 
 ordinary question ; Am I justified in employing my intellectual 
 faculties ? Why are faculties bestowed on men, if they are not 
 to be exercised? If I am not to exercise them, is not my 
 accoutitabihty destr^.^"«d? The church of Rome must allow 
 aer own votaries to exercise their private judgment on the jt?roo/5 
 of her authority. They must lay the foundation of their system 
 on private judgment ; and if they can lay the foundation, why 
 r.hould they not be competent to raise the superstructure 1 If 
 they must exai. ^ne the basis, why should they not be allowed to 
 exercise their fcculties upou the nature of the edifice which rests 
 upon it ] Religion is a personal matter. It is written in the 
 word of God : 
 
 " Every rnaa ehall bear his own burden." — Gal. vi, 6. 
 "Every one of us shall render an account to God for Ai/nse//."— Rom, 
 tiv, 12. 
 
 The idea of an infallible tribunal requires me to give up the 
 exercise of my facuUies, in opposition to the natural <JonstitutioD 
 
(&W PRIVATE JUDGMENT. GT 
 
 of the huLnaif. mind. I cannot believe any thing, except on 
 evidence. Who formed the mind? The Deity. If the exercise 
 of my judgment, therefore, coincides with the natural constitution 
 of the mind, then to exercise that judgment must be my noble 
 prerogative — must be my bounden duty. Gentlemen, put 
 together these observations, and you cannot avoid coming to the 
 plain and evident conclusion, that there is no infallible tribunal. 
 Are we not, therefore, thrown back upon our own judgments ? 
 Weigh the considerations in subservience to which the judgment 
 should be exercised — the moral accountabihty of man, the voice 
 of common sense and reason — and will you not join issue with 
 me, and assert, that the exercise of private judgment is the birth- 
 right of every son and daughter of Adam 1 
 
 [Jilr. O^Connell being obliged to retire upon jn^ofessional business^ the Chair 
 was taken in his stead by Mr. Hugh 0' Connor.] 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — Mr. Pope has commenced by making a 
 very long complaint that he had it not in his power to reply to 
 me yesterday evening. It was decided by the chair that he had 
 no right to reply ; and if the time specified in the regulations 
 was expired, why should he make the demand ? By what magic 
 could he transfer that right to himself, when chance gave me the 
 opportunity of speaking last? With regard to what has been 
 advanced by Mr. Pope from Fra Paolo, respecting the council 
 of Trent, I at once deny the authority of such a man. Mr. 
 Pope introduced yesterday much irrelevant matter, which had 
 nothing to do with the question of the infallibility of the church 
 of Rome ; and this day he has advanced but one or two reasons 
 for the faith which he himself professes. He says, that I have 
 not fjroved my church to be the church of Christ ; I already 
 said, that the question, then before us was, not whether the 
 Catholic church was the church of Christ, but whether Christ 
 had established a church on earth, and endowed it with the pre- 
 rogative of infallibility 1 The Protestant churches, divided as 
 they are upon the most essential points, can lay no claim to 
 infallibility. But one church claims to be infalhble, and but one 
 church possesses any pretensions to the title. No other church 
 has even the semblance or outward appearance of infallibility. 
 To prove that Christ established an infallible church, I quoted 
 "^rious texts of scripture. Mr. Pope seemed either to be afraid 
 r ashamed to recur to scripture on the subject of private 
 judgment. I showed yesterday that what was meant by the 
 church of Christ, was all the churches in the world holding 
 communion with the See of Rome, which was deemed the 
 mother and matrice of all Christian churches, as St. Cyprian 
 calls it. All the oiiurches m that communion form the generic 
 
68 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 term of the church of Christ. Mr. Pope again emleavoured to 
 draw a distinction between the Catholic church and the church 
 of Rome. I have already shown the term Roman was applied 
 to the Catholic church in order to distinguish her from the 
 churches which the heretics set up in opposition. The Deists, 
 Bi© doubt, will feel obliged to Mr. Pope for the argument he has 
 advanced relative to the salt. This argument was most vaunt- 
 ingly put forward by Yoltaire against the Divinitij of Christy and 
 the infallibility of his Apostles. That celebrated infidel, witl 
 blasphemous flippancy, declared, that Christ was a great block- 
 head to compare his Apostles to the salt of the earth, as ar- 
 argument of their infallibility, and undertook to prove that the 
 salt can lose its essence, and consequently that Christ iva^ 
 ignorant of chemistry, and his Apostles, by their Master's own 
 comparison, proved to be fallible. But his shallow and ridiculou.* 
 arguments were triumphantly refuted by Christian divines. 
 Now, if Mr. Pope can demonstrate that salt may lose its 
 savor, he will establish a position equally fatal to the infallibility 
 of the Apostles, and to the divinity of Christ himsef, Thua 
 will he elfectuate a cordial union between the representatives 
 of Yoltaire and the followers of the Rev. Mr. Pope. Catholics^ 
 however, despise the argument of the refined blasphemer, to 
 prove that salt may be decomposed, and abhor the system te. 
 which its origin is traced. — The Catholic has no need to examine 
 the definitions of general councils — there are few indeed who 
 could accomplish that task, If he be once satisfied that the 
 church of Christ cannot lead him into error, he, like St. Augustin, 
 rests with security his faith upon her authority. She proposes 
 the dogmas — he readily gives his assent. Now, in order to 
 convince himself of the infallibility of his church, he has only to 
 refer to the scripture. He finds multiplied in the sacred volume 
 evident promises, which, if they prove not infallibility, are words 
 without meaning or substance. Christ says to his Apostle. 
 
 "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates 
 of hell shall not prevail against it." — Matt, xvi, 18. 
 
 "The church is the pillar and the ground of truth." — 1 Tim. iii, 15. 
 
 "He that does not hear the church, let him be to thee as the Heathen and 
 the Publican." — Matt, xviii, 18. 
 
 " I will send you the Spirit of Truth, to teach you all truth." — John xvi, 13. 
 
 " I will send you another Paraclete, to abide with you for ever." — John 
 xiv, 16. 
 
 " I shall be with you all days, even to the end of the world." — Matt, 
 xxviii, 20. 
 
 If the Roman Catholic be not convinced from those texts that 
 Christ has established an unerring church to guide the ignorant, 
 and to whom her children are bound to yield obedience, I desire 
 to know how can private judgment enable him to decide upon Met' 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 6f) 
 
 texts of scrij/ture, not half so strong, and assuredly not half so 
 gbvioiis, 
 
 Mr. Pope says, that all Roman Catholics must examine vLe 
 various councils of his church, before he can prudently make an 
 act of faith. The reverse, however, is true. Mr. Pope might 
 just as well assert, that the lower order of Protestants should 
 not doubt of Catholic faith, unless they were able to prove from 
 the acts of council that the Catholic church is not infallible ; and 
 this, I imagine, he will scarcely admit. The faith of Roman 
 Catholics rest upon the promises of Jesus Christ to his church, 
 which promises they conceive are sufficiently expHcit to satisfy 
 the most sceptic mind. It is easier for a Catholic to ascertain 
 this simple truth, viz: — Did Christ promise that his church should 
 not fail 1 — than for a Protestant to inquire and scrupulously 
 examine into every doubt, and difficulty, and argument. The 
 private judgment of the ignorant Catholic leads him to yield his 
 assent to the authority of that church wliich has formed the largest 
 society of Christians since the coming of the Messiah. And 
 when he adds to the authority of this church, the corresponding 
 authority of the Greek church, which differs from his own in no 
 article of faith, save the procession of the Holy Ghost, he feels 
 his motives of credibility confirmed, and recognizes a safeguard 
 for his own conscious ignorance. On the contrary, how can 
 illiterate Protestants, thousands of whom cannot even read, 
 ascertain whether the New Testament be an inspired work 1 
 whether such a text were spoken by Christ himself, or by an 
 inspired disciple 1 Is every ignorant peasant able to know that 
 any particular book of scripture is inspired by the Holy Ghost? 
 Can the lower order of Protestants, {and it was for the poor 
 especially that Christ instituted his church) — can the ignorant and 
 illiterate amongst the Protestants, who cannot have recourse to 
 the authority of that church to which Christ gave the deposit of 
 faith — that church which, in what is called the dark ages, when a 
 single Protestant was not to he heard of, preserved the copies of the 
 Bible, and that noble translation which St. Jerome accomplished, 
 fourteen centuries before the Reformation— I ask, will the humble 
 Protestant, when deprived of such assistance, be able to prove the 
 word of God l If not, and it is plain he cannot, then ' vana est 
 praedicatio vestra, vana fides ejus' — ' vain is your preaching, and 
 vain his faith.' As soon as the Roman Catholic ascertains the 
 true marks of Christ's church, and finds those marks to belong 
 exclusively to the Catholic church, he is at once satisfied — he 
 believes it is inspired by the Holy Ghost, and he rests firm in 
 his faith. The Cathohc church has remained for 1800 years — 
 it has defied all the efforts of persecution — it has survived the 
 wreck and shocks of time, a-id will defy, till the erd of the world. 
 
70 ViiE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 all the heretic?^ who may rise in opposition to it. This proves 
 that is upheld by the finger of God alone. 
 
 Mr. Pope has said, that Innocent the Third forced the canons 
 upon the third Lateran council. He brought them ready framed 
 to the council, and because, after they ivere debated, they were 
 approved of by the council, therefore he is to be considered aa 
 having forced them on the council. According to this rule, any 
 one who should originate or introduce a measure in the House 
 of Commons that might afterwards happen to be passed into a 
 law, should be considered as having forced it on the house, 
 though the measure had been regularly debated and approved 
 of. It might as well be said that the regulations for this meetings 
 which had been framed by Messrs. Lawless and Singer, and 
 which were subsequently approved of by us, had been forced 
 upon us by them. 
 
 Mr. Pope's assertion, that the Pope is able to dispense with 
 the decrees of councils, is an unworthy quibble. He quotes 
 Delahogue to prove that the Pope has the power of dispensing 
 with the canons of councils, but these are canons which relate 
 to mere discipline. The council of Trent, for example, decreed 
 that no persons should marry within four degrees of kindred; 
 yet every bishop can dispense in that degree of consanguinity. 
 I have already explained to you, that the decrees of councils in 
 matters of discipline are not unalterable ; but they are immutable 
 in matters which regard the deposit of faith. It would be foolish 
 and ridiculous to contend that the head of the church should not 
 have it in his power to dispense with the rules and regulations 
 of discipline which may be enacted from time to time, and prove 
 expedient or otherwise according to circumstances. The Pope 
 is able to dispense with the ecclesiastical law ; but neither the 
 Pope nor a general council can change an article of faith. I 
 here challenge Mr. Pope to show me where any one of the 
 eighteen ecumenical councils differs from the remainder in a 
 single particle connected with faith ; I have already defied him 
 to do so, and he has not been able to discover a scintilla of 
 difTerence between them in matters of faith. He has had 
 recourse to the council of Basil ; that council was, at first, 
 regularly convened by the Pope, but when it had assembled to 
 determine upon doctrine, the emperor introduced into it a phalanx 
 of Arian bishops. The orthodox bishops refused to sit with 
 them, and adjourned to another place. The Arian bishops 
 proceeded to hold their cabal, and issued their decrees, and 
 fulminated censures agains the orthodox bishops. The council 
 was ecumenical in the commencement of its sitting, but it was 
 forced to adjourn on account of the rabble of Arians introduced 
 by the emperor. - 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 7? 
 
 Mr. Pope asserts^ that Dr. Doyle deems the noteo appended 
 to the Bible of no effect. Mr. Pope is under a palpable mistake 
 with regard to the commentaries affixed to the Bible. No 
 Catholic is called upon to agree with those notes, only as far 
 as his private judgment may lead him to do so. We are not 
 inimical to the exercise of private judgment, where matters of 
 faith are not concerned or endangered. We are allowed to 
 exercise our private judgment in other matters. Does it folio v, 
 because we acknowledge an infallible autho-rity to decide upo i 
 matters of doctrine^ that that authority should bind us down in 
 other matters, and decree, for example, at what particular tim^ 
 or place we should breakfast or dine ] The notes appended to 
 the Bible are merely intended to explain to the ignorant, matters 
 relating to faith and morality, which, of themselves, they are 
 unable to explain. They are intended to guide, not to lead the 
 judgment, and to assist the ignorant and unlettered. There are 
 copious notes and commentaries to the Protestant Bible. F 
 private judgment be their sole rule of faith, why are Protestants 
 obliged to have notes and comments ] If they be found useful 
 to the Protestant, why should they not be equally useful to the 
 Catholic, who admits an infallible authority in matters of faith, 
 but who can exercise his private judgment in matters unconnected 
 with faith? Mr. Pope has again told you that we have no 
 authorized version of the scriptures. I have already shown you 
 that we have such a version. I defy him to prove the ^Vulgaie^ 
 corrupt. He has not, he could not ; yet he repeats the assertion. 
 And if Mr. Pope's edition of the Bible be deemed a regular and 
 genuine one, I contend that ours is ten times more so. I insist, 
 that of all editions of the Bible, ours is the best. There may 
 be found some verbal inaccuracies — in that respect I do not say 
 it is immaculate. We have the Latin Vulgate, the genuine 
 translation of the Bible, made by St. Jerome, 1400 years before 
 Luther or Calvin were heard of. Mr. Pope inquires how we 
 can ascertain when a general council is regularly convened. It 
 is as easy to ascertain that matter, as it is when our British 
 Parliament is regularly convened. When the head of the 
 Catholic church regularly convenes a sufficient number of 
 bishops, that assemblage morally represents the church, and its 
 decrees are admitted by Roman Catholics as decrees of a 
 general council. When the council met at Jerusalem to decide 
 upon circumcision, they gave us an examplar of a council — *' it 
 appeared good to the Holy Ghost and to us." I never asserted, 
 that if the Pope approves of the decrees of a council, they are 
 therefore infallible. That is contrary to Catholic doctrine. 
 What I asserted was, that if the decrees of a council, though 
 not a general one, be admitted by the church dispersed, then 
 
72 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 they are infallible. When a general council was regularly 
 convened by the Pope, and when no violence was attempted to 
 influence or overawe it by Arian emperors, then we look upon 
 it as the collective body of the church, which decides according 
 to the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. Mr. Pope asks what is 
 the Catholic church? It is formed of all the Christian churches 
 throughout the world, in communion with the See of Rome, 
 which is the matrice of Christianity, as St. Cyprian called it. 
 St. Jerome, writing to Pope Damasus, says — 
 
 " From a pastor I beg the defence of a sheep. I speak to the fisherman's 
 successor, and to the disciple of the cross — acknowledging none but Christ 
 to be chief. I am joined in communion with your holiness — that is with the 
 chair of I'eter: upoi this rock I know the church was built. To thee I 
 know were given tho keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever gathereth 
 not with thee scattereth," &c. 
 
 Mr. Pope has recurred to the council of Constance, which 
 deposed three Popes. Now, the facts of the case are the 
 strongest proof that Christ watches over his church. One Pope 
 having been regularly elected, another was thrust into his place 
 through the cabal of secular power, and the real Pope driven 
 into banishment where he died. The surviving Pope was then 
 approved of, lest a schism should be created in the church. 
 The contest continued for forty years. The Pope regularly 
 elected by the cardinals was looked upon as the real and true 
 Pope. The other two Popes were called upon to resign by the 
 council, and submitted to the sentence rather than distract the 
 peace of the church. Could there be a clearer proof that Christ 
 has always continued to watch over his church. 
 
 Mr. Pope rose and said — I really regret to be obliged to say, 
 that there has been either misconception or misrepresentation 
 on the part of my learned friend. What I have advanced as to 
 the uncertainty of Councils, has not been built on Father Paul's 
 History of the Council of Trent, but on the testimony of Dela- 
 hogue, in his " Tractatus de Ecclesia," (which is the manual 
 of the college of Maynooth,) and upon the authority of cardinal 
 Bei^armine. Mr. Maguire says, that I have brought forward 
 :_o contradictions. Is this the case 1 When we find one council 
 ' ef osing three Popes as anti-popes, and setting up another in 
 1 eir place, and the power of a council over the Pope, practi- 
 ^•ally recognized in the approval of the measure by the general 
 church of Rome ; and when the councils of Trent and Florence, 
 on the other hand, decree that the Pope is above a council — is 
 there not council against council? Again — all who added to the 
 iVicene creed, were condemned by the council of Ephesus ; 
 vhile the creed of Pope Pius, which contains many articbs ot 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMKNT. 73 
 
 faith, not to be found m the Nicene croed, is received by tno 
 church of Rome. Here then is " the church" of one age 
 against " the church" of another. The second Nicene council 
 assigned as a reason for the worship of images, that Christ is 
 not sensibly present on earth, but onhj in his divinity ; and the 
 epistle of Germanus, received by that council, asserts, that 
 Christ is not present with us " bodily.^^ It also anathematized 
 all who declare, that Christ was not circumscribed as to his 
 humanity. Are not these declarations opposed to the doctrine 
 of transubstantiation; and do they not prove that " the church" 
 of one age has contradicted " the church" of another ? 
 
 My opponent has said, that I am afraid to meet him on the 
 grounds of scripture. I should rejoice, if we confined ourselves 
 to the law and to the testimony. In appealing to Fathers, 
 councils, and ecclesiastical writers, I am departing from my own 
 ground. If I weigh the church of Rome in " Divine Balance," 
 as St. Augustin calls the sacred scriptures, (De Bapt. cont. 
 Donat. 1. ii. c> 6,) the scale in which the church of Rome might 
 happen to be placed, would soon be raised aloft. With respect 
 to Judas, I stated that he was one to whom the Lord addressed 
 the words, " Ye are the salt of the earth," in evidence that he 
 did not thereby intend to describe the infallibility of the Apostles. 
 Far be it from me to deny, that the Apostles were infallible. As 
 to the expression " the pillar and ground of truth," I would ask, 
 when Basil, (in his 70th epistle) speaking of the persecution of 
 the churches in Cappadocia calls them " pillars and ground of 
 truth," did he mean to say that each church was infallible 1 As 
 to my friend's justification of the conduct of Pope Innocent at 
 the Lateran council, he should remember, that although ministers 
 often bring bills into Parliament, yet are the bills discussed 
 before they are passed into a law ; and it is well known, that 
 ministers do not always succeed in their measures. The canons 
 of the Roman Catholic church refer to matters of faith as well as 
 discipline. In the Class-book of Maynooth, and in Butler, no 
 exception is made with respect to the dispensing power of the 
 .Pope not relating to canons containing articles of faith. 
 
 One circumstance in addition to those which I have already 
 Advanced, shall now be considered, in order to show that the 
 church of Rome is not infallible. Where the spirit of truth is, 
 there shall we find the fruits of righteousness. Hermanus Von 
 Der Hardt informs us, that others besides divines and grave 
 secular men attended Constance during the council — to wit — 
 barbersj three hundred and six, players, jesters, three hundred 
 and forty-six, pastry-cooks, three hundred and twenty-five, and 
 harlots, seven hundred ! ! ( Yid. Herm. Yon Der Hardt de Rebu3 
 Universalis Concilii GGrMarittnensis, Tom. v, et Gerardi Dacheri 
 
 7 
 
74 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 Constantinensis Historiam Magnatum in Constan. Cone, ex 
 MSS. Vindobonensi Caesareo.) The character of the council 
 of Trent is drawn by one of its members, Duditheiis, bishop 
 of five churches, who writing to the emperor Maximillian II 
 gives this account : 
 
 " We daily saw hungry and needy bishops come to Trent ; youths for th« 
 most part which did begin to have beards, (grave and sage divines!) given 
 over to luxury and riot, hired only to give their voices as the pope 
 PLEASED. They were unlearned and simple yet fit for their purpose in regara 
 of their impudent boldness. 
 
 In one of the early sessions of the council, when there were 
 present only forty-eight bishops ; they decreed the authority of 
 the Vulgate, of tradition, and of the Apocrypha. — Father Paul, 
 who was never excommunicated that I am aware of, says : 
 
 " Some thought it strange that five cardinals and forty-eight bishops should 
 have so easily defined the most important and principal points of religion, 
 which till then, had never been decided ; giving canonical authonty to books 
 considered uncertain and apocryphal ; rendering authentic a translation, 
 differing from the original text, and instructing and prescribing the manner 
 of understanding the word of God. »N*or was there amongst the prelates any 
 one xoorthy of attention from his learning. There were some lawyers, learned, 
 perhaps, in that profession, but unskilled in religion — a few theologians, but 
 these of less than ordinary talent, the greater number gentlemen, or cottrtiers; 
 and as to their dignities, some were only titular — the greater part, bishops of 
 so small a place, that considering each to represent his own people, it could 
 not be said that one thousandth part of the Christian world were represented. 
 
 Is it not an insult to common sense to suppose, that you could 
 for a moment regard assemblies, composed of such characters 
 capable of deciding infallibly upon articles of faith, and oi 
 Oi lightening the world upon the great truths of salvation? No 
 — never can I entertain such an extravagant, such a monstrous 
 ;il>surdity. The light of the nineteenth century, believe me, will 
 pour its mighty rays upon the church of Rome, and expose it in 
 all its naked deformity to the world. 
 
 My friend has told us, that tvc may exercise our private judg- 
 ment upon the notes of the BiblCj provided they refer not to matters 
 cf faith. It is not always easy to distinguish between matters 
 of faith and other articles. But what shall we say as to morals ? 
 At a full meeting of the Roman Catholic board, held in Decem- 
 ber, 1816, the notes of an edition of the Douay Bible, which 
 had just appeared, were pronounced by a gentleman who has 
 just left the chair, as containing damnable doctrines. The same 
 indi\idual declared, that he would not continue within the pale 
 of the church of Rome, if those notes were not publicly disavowed. 
 The Roman Catholic hierarchy have not hcwever protested 
 against them. I would ask in this place, does not the opinion, 
 that notes are indispensably necessary for the right understanding 
 of the sacred volume, imply, that the word of man is more intel- 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 75 
 
 Iigibl(3 tnan the word of the living God? Mr. Maguire observed 
 that Protestants also have notes appended to their Bibles. 
 Surely a Protestant does not act inconsistently with his principles 
 when he consults a commentator. I may avail myself of the 
 light which a fellow-man throws upon a passage of scripture, 
 without deeming him infallible. My friend has again asserted, 
 that his translation is the genuine version. Is his version 
 genuine, when it contradicts the original? I submit to the 
 learned world, to decide, whether the Douay version be more 
 correct than the Protestant Bible. I have already referred to 
 the passage relative to Jacob w^orshipping his staff. Is "pen- 
 ance" a correct rendering of the word "^eTwyom," which 
 obviously signifies a change of mind 1 I shall be told, perhaps, 
 that the Vulgate renders " ijeiavoelv^^ " agere penitentiam." 
 But who is so ignorant of Latin, as not to know, that "agere 
 otium" signifies " to be at leisure ;" "Agere vitam," " to live ?" 
 and so I would translate " Agere penitentiam," " to repent." 
 
 It is worthy of remark, that Delahogue does not number 
 among the eighteen general councils, the council of Jerusalem, 
 as the Roman Catholic divines designate the assembly at Jeru- 
 salem. Let my friend adduce the same proofs of the inspiration 
 of councils, as those which the Apostles exhibited, and then shall 
 we bow down to their authority. I am asked how the poor man 
 is to decide whether the Bible be the word of God 1 I would 
 premise, that the right to do a thing and the poiver to io it, are 
 very different, I may have a right to go to the East Indies, 
 and yet be unable to undertake so long a voyage. Therefore 
 I again repeat, that the right to do a thing, and the 
 POWER to do it, are VERY DIFFERENT. I am asked, how 
 the poor man is to decide whether the Bible be the word of 
 God ? As to the poor Protestant or Roman Catholic, when I 
 present them with a copy of the Scriptures, they will probably 
 be found to be already in possession of some general notion of 
 its inspiration. I shall take a still more extreme case : I shall 
 consider the situation of a person in a distant country, who has 
 been previously altogether ignorant of the existence of the word 
 of life — illiterate, but capable of reading. I present him with 
 the sacred scriptures, and remark, that a perusal of their con- 
 tents will convince him that the volume has proceeded from 
 God. The man feels himself to be a sinner, and a depraved 
 creature ; he witnesses daily proofs of human mortality, but 
 unacquainted with the scenes which lie beyond the grave, 
 peoples them with the visions of his own distempered imagi- 
 nation. The inspired records meet the circumstances in which 
 he is placed, by making known peace and pardon through 9 
 Saviour's blood, and bv throwing a flood of light over \>^ pre* 
 
76 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 sent and evenusting destinies. Surely if we can discover the 
 existence of God from the works of his hands, we may doubt- 
 less expect, if the Bible have come from Him, that it contains 
 such proofs of its divine origin, that the sinner shall be con- 
 istrained to acknowledge " God has spoken of a truth," and to 
 say cf the Bible, as the woman of Samaria said of the Redeemer, 
 " Come, see a man that told me all that ever I did ; is not this the 
 Christ?" The inspired volume penetrates the inmost recesses 
 of the heart, lays open the secrets of the sou\. discovers a man 
 to himself, and carries its own witness that it has emanated from 
 the Fountain of Light. I would also remark, that the written 
 word is not the only means which God has provided for the 
 instruction of man. He has also appointed the preaching of 
 his Gospel. The individual who has received the knowledge 
 of salvation through the medium of oral instruction, finds no 
 difficulty in receiving the sacred oracles as an inspired volume. 
 He approaches them with a spiritual appetite, and experiences 
 the word of truth to be the life and comfort of his soul. " As 
 well," will he exclaim, " as well might you endeavour to per- 
 suade me, that there is no light nor warmth in the sun, as to tell 
 me, that no spiritual consolation flows from the doctrines con- 
 tained in this blessed volume." 
 
 This is an extrem.e case — I have met it; but permit me to 
 say, that there are innumerable proofs of the authenticity, 
 mtegrity, and canonicity of the inspired volume — and I am 
 jeady, when called upon to state them. I now ask Mr. Ma- 
 guire, by what mode he would prove to an individual in circum- 
 stances similar to those which we have been considering, that 
 the Bible is a divine revelation ? Mark this question Mr. Ma- 
 guire, and let me have an answer. 
 
 Is it, let me ask, the case, that infidels and atheists are chiefly 
 found among the Protestant poor ? Need I reply in the negative? 
 Vv'ho have been the authors of heresies ? Dupin informs us — 
 
 " If there be obscure and difficult parts in the Bible, it is not generally the 
 simple who abuse them, but the proud and learned who make a bad use of 
 them. For in fine it is not the ignorant and the simple who have formed 
 heresies in perverting the word of God. — They who do so, are generally bishops^ 
 priests, learned and enlightened persons. So that so far from knowing \iy 
 experience, that the reading of the scriptures is dangerous to the simple and 
 the ignorant, one may aay, that we learn therefrom that it seldom causes any 
 but the learned to fall into error, and that the simple have generally found there 
 nothing but what is edifying and instructive.''^ —Dissert prelim, siir la Bible, 
 B. i, c. 9. Par. 1701. 
 
 Cardinal Bellarnnne writes as iollows : 
 
 " Heresies originate with men of the upper rank rather than with persona 
 belonging to the inferior classes. Beyond a doubt almost all autJwrs of heresies 
 have been either bishops or presbyters (or as some would perhaps translate it, 
 priests.) Heresies are therefore to be considere I as the factions of leading 
 
CF PRIVATE /UDGMENT. 77 
 
 men, without whom there would be no popular revolts in the church." — De 
 Romano Pont. 1. i, c. 8, ultima editio ab ipso Authore Recocrnita. Colonias 
 fol. 1620, torn, i, p. 527. 
 
 The people, I maintain, are the safest depositaries of 
 God's blessed Word. Ecclesiastics may be tempted to per- 
 vert it ; the poor are not likely to suffer such a temptation. If, 
 therefore, the liability of the sacred scriptures to perversion, 
 furnish a just reason for withdrawing the inspired volume from 
 any portion of the community, it should be taken from ecclesi* 
 astics who have abused it, and put into the hands of the poor 
 and the unlettered. 
 
 The church of Rome, where she is dominant, may succeed 
 by the strong hand of ecclesiastical despotism in repressing the 
 outward expression of opinion. Have you never heard of Jews 
 abroad, in order to avoid persecution, entering the priesthood, 
 and while celebrating mass, cursing the power which obliges 
 them to act in opposition to their conscience ] The Rev. Joseph 
 Bianco White, who was chaplain to the king of Spain, now a 
 clergyman of the church of England, and who lived in the com- 
 munion of the church of Rome, twenty-five years in sincere 
 submission, and ten in secret rebellion against her authority, in 
 his " Evidence against Catholicism," 2d edit. p. 7, writes thus— 
 
 *^ At the end of a year from the preaching of this sermon — the confession 
 is painful, indeed, yet due to religion itself — I loas bordering upon atheism. 
 If in/ case were singular, if my knowledge of the most enlightened classes 
 Df Spain did not furnish me with a multitude of sudden transitions from 
 sincere faith and piety to the most outrageous infidelity : I would submit to 
 the Gambling conviction, that either weakness of judgment, or fickleness of 
 character had been the only source of my errors. But though I am not at 
 hberty to mention individual cases, I do attest, from the most certain know- 
 ledge,"that the history of my own mind is, with little variation, that of a great 
 portion of the Spaiiish Clergy. The fact is certain; I make no individual 
 charge ; every one who comes within this general description may still wear 
 the mask, which no Spaniard can throw o^ without bidding an eternal fare- 
 well to his country." 
 
 The church of Rome may look in some measure fair and 
 united ; but within, the system is full of dead men's bones and 
 ail uncleanness. 
 
 I now call upon Mr. Maguire to inform us, by what mode the 
 pooi man can know according to his views, tb^it the Bible is the 
 book of God. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — I wish Mr. Pope would afford me something 
 tangible to comment upon. I fling back his Protestant and 
 Huguenot authorities. I was not a little astonished to hear 
 Mr. Pope quote that a{ estate, Blanco White, as an authority 
 against the Catholic church. I assert that the man who lived 
 for ten years, according to his own testimony, an atheist at 
 
 7* 
 
/5 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 heart, is nc^. worthy of credence, when testifying against the 
 Roman Catholic church. Mr. Pope has again quoted from 
 Dr. Delahogue ; but when he proves that Dr. Delahogue has 
 written any thing contrary to CathoKc faith, he will certainly 
 have achieved much. Mr. Pope nas endeavoured to make a 
 point about the word /ustavoia. It is the Greek word for doing 
 penance, and it is used in the passage quoted from the sacred 
 volume, in reference to the men of Nineveh, of whom Christ 
 says " the men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this 
 generation, and shall condemn it ; because they did penance at 
 the preaching of Jonas :" the Protestant translation has it 
 " because they repented." Our Saviour in that passage alluded 
 to the repentance of the men of Nineveh — what was that repent- 
 ance 1 They did penance in sackcloth and ashes ; they fasted 
 for three days ; and they did not even suffer their cattle to eat 
 any thing during that period . and we find it recorded in the 
 sacred volume, that their repentance, or penance, disarmed the 
 wrath of God. Fasting and praying are thrown overboard now- 
 a-days, when we have the liberty of the gospel. Pampering the 
 body is now the plan, and good works are scouted as being 
 things of supererogation. It is only in the Catholic church we 
 find fasting and praying practised. 
 
 Mr. Pope says, that a number of harlots came to the council 
 of Trent, and he quotes Fra Paolo, an historian than whose 
 authority he could not produce worse. I could relate disgrace- 
 ful facts of another church, matters which rest not upon the ipse 
 dixit of a partial historian, but which are well known to have 
 occured. I shall not, however, insult this meeting, nor pullute 
 my lips with the recital of such filthy impurities. It was, to say 
 the least of it, a breach of good manners on the part of Mr. 
 Pope towards the ladies who are present, to introduce the 
 scandalous frabrication of thai faithless historian. I will not 
 disgrace my situation here and in the church, by descending to 
 such arguments. I could, if I pleased, quote much to you 
 about Henry the Eighth, and the Virgin Elizabeth. I could 
 tell you matters of fact with regard to those patrons of the 
 reformation — and, indeed, I might, by the relation of a few facts, 
 take ample revenge upon my antagonist. 
 
 Mr. Pope talks of there having been hungry bishops at the 
 council of Trent : — that is a charge that cannot be made against 
 the Protestant bishops of the present day, who have got the 
 tithes and the green acres. I would warn the Protestant 
 bishops and clergy, who are in possession of the good things,^ 
 how they allow the principle which Mr. Pope advocates to 
 spread throughout the land. If every man is to be allowed to 
 think for himself on matters of faith, it will then come to bo 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 79 
 
 asked, why do we pay j£r800,000 a year for the maintenance of 
 an useless clergy 1 " Let us fling away the tithes," it will be 
 said — these men have, on their own showing, no right to dictate 
 to us on matters of reUgion — and as we do not want them, why 
 should v/e bo so enormously taxed for their support." Such 
 will be the consequences, if the Protestant clergy, instead of 
 opposing, actually countenance and support the principles 
 advocated by Mr. Pope. What says a Protestant Clergymnr', 
 the Rev. Mr. O'Callaghan, upon this subject ? 
 
 " When Mr. Pope and Dr. Singer, men indeed of high character, and by 
 far the ablest advocates of the Bible Society, at least in Ireland — when men 
 of this description, dangerous in proportion to their great intellectual and 
 literary calibre, are led away by the prevailing delusion, and not ashamed to 
 tell the world that * the right of an ignorant labourer to read the Bible, involves 
 his right of interpreting it* — why is the church silent? Why does she not 
 address them in her proper organ, if such still exist, to the following effect: — 
 * Reverend brethren, your argument is fallacious, and it is our bounden duty 
 to tell you so. Most true it is that a poor labourer has a right to read the 
 Bible for the health of his soul, and to bathe in the sea for the health of his 
 body. His right to bathe is as clear as his right to read — his right to go into 
 the water also implies his right to swim ; but if he swim very imperfectly, or 
 not at all, we hope you will allow that his efforts to swim would be danger- 
 ous, nay, fatal, and that he should not proceed more than chin-deep. 
 
 " Y'ou friends of Christianity beware of Bible Societies every where — you 
 friends of peace and good-will among men beware of Bible Societies, and 
 other proselytizing associations, especially in Ireland? Remember their 
 great principle that has nearly extinguished Christianity in what is called 
 Protestant Germany — be wise in time, farewell! !" 
 
 Mr. O'Callaghan, a gentleman of talents and extensive inform- 
 ation says, that the right of private judgment is not recognised 
 in the church of England. Here we have a Protestant ecclesi- 
 astic arrayed against the doctrine which is preached up by Mr. 
 Pope, who is a Protestant, but not an ecclesiastic, Mr. Pope 
 has spoken of infideUty being a consequence of Popery. I 
 hold in my hand a sermon preached by the Rev. Mr. Rose in the 
 college of Cambridge, and dedicated to the bishop of Chester ; in 
 this sermon he thus describes the state of Protestant Germany : — 
 
 " From the state of Protestantism in Germany, a stronger, and perhaps 
 more important lesson is offered on that subject, which is said to form the 
 base and the boast of Protestantism — the right of private judgment. The 
 terrible evils resulting in the German church from its exercise, are the 
 strongest practical proof of the wisdom and necessity of restraining it. 
 Among the German divines it is a favourite doctrine that it is impossible there 
 could have been a miracle, and the words of scripture are examined and 
 forced into any meaning but their own. By some the miracles are said to 
 be, that mythology which must attend every religion to gain the attention of 
 the multitude; by some the common and well known ribaldry of the infidel 
 is unsparingly used ; by one or more, high in station in the church, some 
 artifice, and probably magnetism has been, even within the last ten years, 
 suggested ; others go so far as to attack the whole body of the prophets as 
 Impostors, in most outrageous and revolting terms. This doctrine is taught 
 by divine? from the pulpit — by professors from the chairs of theology — it is 
 
80 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 addressed to the old to free them from anc'ent prejudices, and to the young 
 as the knowledge which can make them truly wise. This abdication of 
 Christianity is not confined either to the Lutheran or Calvinist profession, 
 but extends its baneful and withering influence with baneful force over each. 
 It is curious to observe in what way they get rid of all miracles. Professor 
 Paulus, in his Critical Commentary assures us, that the man with the with- 
 ered hand had only a luxation of the shoulder, which Jesus perceiving, pulled 
 it into joint." 
 
 Professor Schultness explains this miracle as follows : 
 " The man had a severe rheumatism ; Christ observing that his blood was 
 much moved, by the indignation with which he heard the question of the 
 Pharisees, said to him in that favorable moment, "Stretch out thine hand;' 
 the man attempted to do it, and was healed because that extraordinary 
 excitement had removed the impediment under which he laboured. When 
 Christ restored sight to the blind man, the poor fellov/ had such weakness in 
 his eye-lids, that he could not keep his eyes open. Christ observing that h« 
 never made the attempt to open them, said to him, * Thou shalt open thine 
 eyes ;' the confidence of the man was so great, that making the attempt with 
 all his might, he opened his eyes. Christ never walked in the waves, but on 
 the shore, or he swam behind the ship, or he walked through the shallows. 
 The daughter of Jairus was not dead, because Christ himself said 'She 
 slcepeth.'" When Jesus said to Peter, 'Thou shalt catch a fish, and find in 
 his mouth a piece of money,' the meaning is, before you can sell it for so 
 much, you must open its mouth and take out the hook. At Cana in Galli- 
 lee, Jesus gave a nuptial present of very fine wine, with which, for a joke, he 
 filled the water-pots of stone. The paralytic was an idle fellow, who for 
 thirty years had moved neither hand nor foot. Christ asked him ironically, 
 'Perhaps thou wouldst be whole?' This irony stirred him up ; — he forgot his 
 hypocrisy." 
 
 But let us for .a moment look at home ; see the numerous 
 sects spread throughout the land — the Seekers, the Jumpers, 
 the Methodists, the Southcotonians, &c, &:c ; all differing more 
 from each other, than does the Catholic from the Protestant 
 church. They afford a rare specimen of that chaos of reform, 
 that Babel of interpretation, which is generated by the exercise 
 of private judgment. 
 
 A question has been put to me, as to the means by which I 
 would attempt to convert the pagan ; I will tell you in plain 
 terms the course I would adopt. I would present him wil-h the 
 Bible ; he would ask what book that was? I would tell him 
 that it was inspired by God, and left by him to man as a help 
 towards the salvation of his soul, and to instruct him in doctrine 
 and morahty. He would then inquire by what means I knew 
 that this was the book of God. I would, in reply, address him 
 as a rational man ; I would tell him that the author of that book 
 had descended from heaven — had takon upon him the figure of 
 mortal man — that he declared himself the Messiah of God, and 
 the Redeemer come to save the world, and that he proved his 
 divine mission by the most astonishing miracles that ever yet 
 were wrought. He would then ask, how did I know those facts 
 occurred, and that such miracles were performed. I would 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 81 
 
 appeal to the positive evidence of contemporary writers, whom 
 for the moment I should not consider inspired. I would appeal 
 to ttie scripture as an historical record. I would show that it 
 pos.sessed historical truth — that the Jews never controverted its 
 accuracy. I would, in fine, appeal to the common consent of 
 marikind, to the inhabitants of distant and different nations, 
 subject to different passions, manners, and habits, speaking quite 
 different languages, and having no communication, verbal or 
 v/ritien. I would ask him, was he ready to believe, that all 
 thos'i individuals, historians, and nations, had conspired to attest 
 a deliberate falsehood, to impose upon the whole world, and of 
 course upon their children, and children's children, a book 
 purporting to be the work of God, but in reality a book of lies, 
 falsehood, and false miracles ? iVs soon as I convinced him 
 that Christ wrought the miracles, attributed to him in that book, 
 (and how could he doubt these miracles, when they were admitted 
 botn by Jews and Gentiles ?) I would point out to him the 
 many clear, manifest, and obvious texts in scripture, by which a 
 church was proved to be founded and established by Christ, and 
 endowed tcith auihoi'ity to teach, and the most solemn assurances 
 that it would never teach error. I would prove from clear and 
 obv'v^'us texts of scripture, and more clear and obvious texts 
 could not be quoted in support of any doctrine of the Christian 
 religion, that the church of Christ could never teach error to 
 manldnd. He would then have only to examine these texts as 
 to thj alleged authority of the churCh, and, this one truth admitted, 
 all his doubts and difficulties upon these points would instantly 
 disappear. The quibbles and objections raised by the deists 
 agamst the sacred volume would vanish in a trice ; and con- 
 scious of his own incapacity, and having no alternative but to 
 eubuiit to authority, or by renouncing authority to reject alt 
 mysteries, he ivould follow the church, as a safe and certain guide- 
 But how would Mr. Pope convert the pagan. Mr. Pope woufd 
 tell liim that the Bible is the book of God. The pagan will 
 natuially ask him, how does he know it to be such ? Mr. Pope, 
 in reply, would appeal to a certain illumination of the spirit — a 
 rath'-.r uncertain standard, it must be allowed, for a poor ignorant 
 uncG'jiverted pagan. It is an argument, to say the least of it 
 ad ahsurdum, 
 
 Mr. Pope must then have recourse to authorities. This is al' 
 I want. If he receive the Bible as the work of God, upon 
 authority, then he establishes the necessity of authority in the 
 Chriotian world. If then, he says that he cannot otherwise 
 provv? the inspiration of the sacred scriptures : then I ask him, 
 how can an act of supernatural faith be founded upon human 
 fallible authority. The infidel, on the contrary, when converted 
 
62 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 by a Catholic, receives in baptism a divine habitual grace, 
 whereby he is enabled to believe in the authority of the church, 
 from the passages which I have already cited, and which prove 
 the existence of a church, and its infallibility. I defy Mr. Pope 
 to produce passages half so clear in support of any single 
 doctrine of Christianity. Did he produce any passage so clear 
 in support of his rule of faith] St. Paul tells us to avoid a 
 heretic, as "being condemned by his private judgment." Proprio 
 judicio condemnatus, is the language of the Latin Yulgate ; and 
 it is admitted by many learned Protestants, to be the best trans- 
 lation of the scriptures extant. Even St. John tells us not to 
 salute a heretic, " nee ave ei dixeritis." Will Mr. Pope convince 
 any one of the inspiration of the scriptures, but on human 
 authority alone. Now, " faith comes from hearing, and hearing 
 from the words of Christ." Mr. Pope's faith is therefore 
 grounded on human authority, and not on divine inspiration. 
 The Socinian comes to Mr. Pope, (and here I would solicit 
 your particular attention to this point,) and says, I agree with 
 you in your principle of private judgment — I agree with you that 
 the scriptures are the inspired word of God ; but you, Mr. Pope, 
 have corrupted the sense of the scriptures. You put upon them' 
 an interpretation which they will not, cannot bear. You admit 
 articles of faith which are opposed to the scriptures, and contrary 
 to common sense. You hold in common with me that there is 
 no way of judging or interpreting the sacred scriptures, except, 
 according to private judgment, or, in other words, common 
 sense. Again, you say, that a woman conceived an infant 
 through a supernatural agency. Here also is a romantic inter- 
 pretation, quite impervious to reason and to common sense. 
 Yon should, (concludes the Socinian,) you should understand 
 all those texts in a figurative sense. Mr. Pope will then recur 
 to various passages of scripture to prove the divinity of Christ ; 
 but when he urges his interpretation against that of the consistent 
 Socinian, the latter will contend for his equal right to interpret 
 them ; and he will justly inquire, is no man but Mr. Pope to be 
 allowed to exercise the right of private judgment 1 I have as 
 good a right to believe in the existence of an infallible church, 
 and the Socinian as good a right to maintain his own interpreta- 
 tion, and reject all mysteries, as Mr. Pope has to believe in his 
 principles. Wheu Mr. Pope endeavours to urge his interpreta- 
 tion on the Socinian he abandons his own principles. Mr. Pope 
 has no right to blame any man for having exercised his private 
 judgment. Or is that a privilege to be exercised exclusively by 
 the "saints" and the " elect?" Let Mr. Pope get out of the 
 predicament if he can. If he can clear up that difficulty, he 
 will indeed be a ' Magnus Apollo.' Let him quit quibbling 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 83 
 
 about councils and come directly to the word of God — "No 
 prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation." 
 2 Peter, i, 20. I challenge Mr. Pope to show how a Protestant 
 can make an act of faith. But the Catholic who beheves in 
 the church established by Christ, founds his faith upon the 
 authority of that church. All difficulties vanish before him, — 
 the atheist or the deist may start several objections which he 
 cannot answer, but " the church is the solution of all difficulties." 
 Mr. Pope inquires how I can get out of the vicious circle, in 
 which he says I am involved, by proving the existence of the 
 church upon the authority of the scriptures, and proving the 
 authority of the scriptures upon that of the church. 
 
 Mark my answer. — I prove the authority of the church by 
 passages of scripture, not denied by Mr. Pope, — by passages of 
 scripture which are held in common by all Christians. I 
 presume Mr. Pope believes in the four gospels : now I appeal 
 to the four gospels, and to the first epistle of St. Paul to Timothy, 
 to prove that Jesus Christ endowed his church with the glorious 
 privilege of infallibility. Mr. Pope admits the four gospels, and 
 St. Paul's epistle to be genuine. Having proved therefore the 
 authority of the church from those books of scripture acknowledged 
 by Mr. Pope ; I then prove upon the authority of that church 
 already established, the inspiration of the other books which are 
 not acknowledged by Mr. Pope. Where now, gentleman, is the 
 vicious circle 1 T have another method of breaking this magical 
 ring — of opening this vicious circle — I will reveal it, in the hope 
 that the " circle''^ will never be proposed as an argument against 
 the Catholic church again. I take the book of the New Testa- 
 ment in my hand, and for a moment, not considering it to be 
 inspired,! produce it as a genuine and faithful historical relation 
 of the occurrences of the times in which Jesus Christ lived. I 
 learn from this book that a man appeared then upon earth, who 
 called himself the Son of God : I find it there recorded that he 
 performed innumerable miracles in the open day, and in presence 
 of his most inveterate enemies — that he raised a man called 
 Lazarus to life, whose body was nearly rotten in the grave, and 
 that he performed many other and extraordinary miracles, "If I 
 had not (says our Lord,) done among them the works that no 
 other man hath done, they would not have sin in them." — (John 
 XV, 24.) I find from this historical relation that Christ established 
 a church upon earth, to which he made ample and extraordinary 
 promises — that he would remain with his church all days, even 
 unto the consummation of the world — that he would send the 
 Paraclete to guide it in the way — that he would build it upon a 
 rock — that it would be the pillar and the ground of truth, and 
 that the gates of hell shall never prevail against it. I take 
 
84 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 this as a mere history, and if we are to adrri history, I find it 
 there recorded, that Christ proved his mission by numerous 
 miracles. I thus prove the authority of the church upon the 
 authority of Christ" s miracles attested by the strongest historical 
 evidence— ^to wit, the historical evidence of the scriptures, and 
 I then prove that the scriptures are inspired upon the authority 
 of the church. There is the solution of what Mr. Pope calls a 
 vicious circle. But I feel confident, that Mr. Pope will find it 
 rather a hard matter to extricate himself from the circle in which 
 1 have him enclosed. 
 
 Mr. Pope — Mr. Maguire has not spoken of the Rev. Joseph 
 Blanco White in the most complimentary terms. I beg to 
 assure Mr. Maguire, that those who are personally acquainted 
 with Mr. White, describe him as a worthy and excellent man. 
 I could name a gentleman who is not very far distant from this 
 platform, a reformed priest, who has published the nature of the 
 conversation which, he asserts from his own knowledge, is 
 interchanged when priests meet together. I shall not pollute 
 my lips by mentioning it. As to the repentance of the people 
 of Nineveh, I would ask, is God satisfied with the external 
 expressions of sorrow ? Does he not say, " rend your hearts 
 and not your garments, and turn to the Lord your God ]'* 
 With the character of Henry the Eighth I have little to do. 
 Providence 'tis true, employed him as an instrument, for the 
 accomplishment of important purposes. Henry, indeed, denied 
 the Pope's supremacy ; but there is no reason to doubt that he 
 died a Roman Catholic in principle. Mr. Maguire has eulogized 
 Mr. O'Caliaghan. Mr. O'Callaghan, I must be allowed to say, 
 is not the organ of Protestant opinion. I grant that infidelity 
 exists in Germany ; but I would ask, what is the difference 
 between the state of society in that country and in Spain? 
 Infidelity in the latter country is afraid to give utterance to its 
 opinions ; '\a Germany it speaks out. Is it not more honorable 
 to profess scepticism, than to cloak beneath the garb of hy- 
 pocrisy an atheistical heart 1 I shall reserve my observations 
 on the divisions which Mr. Maguire remarks, exist among Pro- 
 testants, till we come to the subject of unity. In proof that the 
 Bible is the word of God, my friend closes it, and appeals to 
 external evidence — to the universal consent of mankind ; and 
 requires the individual to believe on his testimony, that the univer- 
 sal consent of mankind is in support of the inspired records. 
 In order to discover the universal consent of mankind, is the 
 pagan, I would ask, to read all the histories that exist 1 Does 
 not Mr. Maguire,, in truth, appeal to the private judgment »f th'a 
 man? Does he not adopt that node of reasoning which Le 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 85 
 
 professes to condemn 1 Is it not apparent that Mr. Maguire 
 will have a much more troublesome task than I shall have 1 I 
 have not to prove the infallibihty of any church. I let the Bible 
 speak for itself. Mr. Maguire ridicules the idea of an internal 
 illumination, and asks, how can a man know whether he pos- 
 sesses that inward light] I answer, 
 
 " The fruits of the Spirit are charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, 
 love, amity, mildness, faith, modesty, continency, chastity." — Gal. v, 22, 23. 
 
 Where the fruits of the Spirit are, there the Holy Spirit dwells, 
 
 " If any man will do the will of God, he shall know whether the doctrine 
 be of God or not," says the Saviour. — John, vii, 17. 
 
 My friend asks, how can a man make an act of faith upou 
 human authority ! I answer, T do not make an act of faith on 
 human authority, while I maintain that Mr. Maguire does so. 
 Mr. Maguire observes, that he would first regard the scriptures 
 merely as an historical record and that as such they will con- 
 vince his judgment that his church is infallible. I must be 
 allowed to assert, that in thus appealing to the gospels as merely 
 historical authority, and building upon them, as such, the infalli- 
 bility of the church of Rome, Mr. Maguire acknowledges that 
 her claim to infaUibility rests only upon human authority. So 
 that Mr. Maguire makes an act of faith in the infallibility of his 
 church according to his own views, merely upon human authority, 
 I am sure that the Roman Catholic Hierarchy will be much 
 indebted to Mr. Maguire for this disclosure. 
 
 As to grace being necessarily conferred at baptism, it is mere 
 assertion. In proof of the opposite opinion, we have only to 
 refer to the conduct of children. Do we discover every child 
 who has been baptized, evincing the influence of divine grace in 
 his temper and conduct? By no means. The existence of the 
 immoral practices of which children are guilty, is a direct refu- 
 tation of Mr. Maguire's position, that every child receives grace 
 at baptism. 
 
 Mr. Maguire says, that no doctrine is so clearly proved in 
 scripture as the infallibility of the church of Rome. Millions 
 are of a contrary opinion. Had God really revealed the infalli- 
 bihty of the church of Rome, we can scarcely imagine but that 
 he would have made it known in such broad and legible char- 
 acters, that he that runs might read it. I should like to know, 
 where the Pop 6 is mentioned in the Bible? 'Tis not an act of 
 saving faith, to believe merely that a book has proceeded frona 
 God. I exercise saving faith, when I exercise it upon the truths 
 of salvation contained in the scriptures. 
 
 I make an act of faith, not on the testimony of man, but on 
 the authority of God. I believe the blessed truth, "the blood 
 
 3 
 
86 THE iflVINE RIGHT 
 
 of Jesus Christ clcanseth from all sin," because I see such im. 
 intrinsic glory in the scheme ot redemption, as convinces me 
 that God is its author. With respect to the pagan, I have 
 shown you, that he can leceive the Bible as inspired, without 
 ihe aid of external evidence — the sacred volume itself bearing 
 witness of its own divinity, and having the impress of heaven 
 stamped upon it. 
 
 As to the question of the Socinian, it has been canvassed in 
 our letters, which are already before the public. When, 1 
 believe, that my view of a particular subject is correct, and that 
 of a fellow-man erroneous, I surely do not interfere with his 
 private judgment, in endeavouring by argument to effect a 
 change in his views. I appeal to his judgment, in order to 
 convince him of his error. I would not, I could not force his 
 judgment ; but I would endeavour by argument to carry con- 
 viction to his mind. An individual, surely, may be convinced 
 of the soundness of his opinion without laying claim to infalli- 
 bility. J believe, indeed, that the man who holds not the divinity 
 of Christ is in fatal error. I believe, that, if he continue under 
 its influence, he will perish ; and I would use my exertions to 
 reclaim him. Reason, we must remember, has its legitimate 
 province. A doctrine may be above our reason, and not opposed 
 to it. God has not revealed the modus of his existence ; that 
 we are not called upon to believe. He has simply revealed the 
 truth, that a trinity of persons exists in the one Godhead ; that 
 truth v/e are called upon to believe. Let us bear in mind the 
 infinite distance between the great Supreme and the narrow 
 capacity of man. Shall we, poor w orms of the earth, who know 
 out httle of ourselves, who are but of yesterday, shall we bring 
 to the bar of our finite intellects the nature of the infinite and 
 eternal Godl Study the revelation which Deity has given of 
 himself, and you will perceive that the Father, Son, and Spirit 
 respectively sustain, in the great scheme of redemption, offices 
 to which none but a divine person could be adequate. 
 
 How does Mr. Maguire endeavor to convince the Socinian 1 
 By the authority of his church. " I deny in toto," replies the 
 Socinian "her infallibility; how can I argue with you, who 
 refuse an appeal to common sense, to scripture, and to fact ; 
 for all these overthrow the supposed infallibility of your church?" 
 On the other hand, I entertain some hope, that arguing on the 
 principles of private judgment, I shall be enabled, under the 
 divine blessing, to convince the man who will not listen to Mr. 
 Maguire. I argue upon authority — the sacred sciiptures — 
 which the Socinian Admits ; Mr. Maguire argues with him on 
 ground ichich he will not acknowledge — *^'« infallibjlitj of the 
 f-burch of Rorpe. 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT 87 
 
 Mr. Maguire has asked, how couid an igiioriint ProtefetanI 
 perform an act of faith ? Blessed be God ; many poor can do 
 so. God hath chosen not a few individuals who are " poor in 
 this world, to be rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom." M». 
 Maguire has referred to a passage in Peter. It runs thus, 
 *' No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation." 
 Douay, 2 Pet. i, 20, (tcJta^ emlvaeMg^) or, as it may be trans- 
 lated, " no prophecy of scripture is its own intrepreter ;" we 
 are to intrepret prophecy by the analogy of scripture. Can we 
 imagine that St. Peter did not wish those whom he addressed, 
 to give attention to the scripture, when in the 19th verse he 
 says, " We have the. more firm prophetical word, whereunto 
 you do well to attend^ as to a light that shineth in a dark place ?' 
 Whom does the Apostle exhort 1 His epistle is not addressed 
 to ecclesiastics exclusively, but "to them that have obtained 
 equal faith with us in the justice of our God and Saviour Jesus 
 Christ." And it is worthy of notice, that in the second epistle, 
 in which the words that we are considering stand, there is no 
 mention whatsoever made of any ecclesiastical officer. 
 In the Apocalypse I find the following passage, — 
 "Blessed is he that readeth and heareth the words oHhis prophecyJ'^ 
 
 Mr. Maguire has referred to the Apocrypha. It is remarkabio 
 that Mr. Maguire and his church should, on the canonicity of 
 the Apocrypha, be at issue with those whose authority he pro- 
 fesses to venerate. In the fourth century, we have the cata 
 logues of Jerome, secretary to pope Damasits (in Praefat ad Libr. 
 Regum sive Prologo Galeato,) and 'of Rufinus, (Expositio ad 
 Symb. Apost.) most accurately agreeing with the Protestant 
 canon, and rejecting the Apocrypha. 
 
 Rufinus writes as follows : 
 
 " This, then, is the Holy Spirit, who in the Old Testament inspired tlio 
 .aw and the prophets, and in the New the gospels and the Apostles. Where- 
 fore the Apostle says, that 'all scripture is given hy inspiration of God, and 
 is profitable for doctrine.' — 2 Tim. iii, 16. It will not, therefore, be improper 
 to enumerate here the books of the New and Old Testament, which we find 
 by the monuments of the Fatiers to have been delivered to the churches as 
 inspired by the Holy Spirit. And of the Old Testament, in the first place, 
 are the five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deutero- 
 nomy. After these are Joshua, the son of Nun, and the Judges, together 
 with Ruth. Next the four books of the kingdoms, which the Hebrews reckon 
 two, the book of the Remains, which is called the Chronicles, and two books 
 of Ezra, which by them are reckoned one, and Esther. The prophets are 
 Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel, and besides one book of the twelve 
 prophets. Job also, and the Psalms of David. Solomon has left three books 
 to the churches, the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs ; with 
 these they conclude the number of the books of the Old Testament. Of the 
 New there are the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; the 
 Acts of the Apostles, by Luke; fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul ; two 
 epistles of the Apostle Peter; one of James, the brother of the Lord and 
 
eO THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 Apostle ; one of Jude ; three of John ; the Revelation of John. TKese are 
 the volumes which the Fathers have included in the canon, and out of which 
 they would have us prove the doctrines of our faitli. 
 
 " However, it ought to be observed, that there are also other books which 
 are not canonical, but have been called by our forefathers ecclesiastical, as 
 the Wisdom of Solomon; and another, which is called the Wisdom of the 
 son of Sirach, and among the Latins is called by the general name yf Eccle- 
 siasticus : by which title is denoted, not the author of the book, but the quality 
 of the writing. In the same rank is the book of Tobit and Judith, and ti^e 
 books of thi Maccabees." — In Symb. Apost. ap. Cyprian in App. p. 26, 27. 
 et ap. Hier:m. t. v. p. 141, 142. 
 
 St. Jerome, secretary to Pope Damasus, writes thus — 
 
 " The Hebrews have two and twenty letters ; and they have as many 
 books of divine doctrine for the instruction of mankind. The first book is 
 called by them Bereshith, by us Genesis ; the second is called Exodut the 
 third Leviticus ; the fourth Numbers ; the fifth Deuteronomy. Ti*^*^. are 
 the five books of Moses, which they call Thora, tlie Law. 
 
 " The second class contains the prophets, which they begin with tno oook 
 of Joshua, the son of Nun. The next is the book of Judges, with which they 
 join Ruth ; her history happening in the time of the Judges. The third is 
 Samuel, which we call the first and second book of the kingdoms. The 
 fourth is the book of Kings, or, the third and fourth book of the kingdoms, or 
 rather of the Kings ; for they do not contain the history of many nations, but 
 of the people of Israel, only consisting of twelve tribes. The fifth is Isaiah; 
 the sixth Jeremiah j the seventh Ezekiel j the eighth the book of the twelve 
 Prophets. 
 
 " The third class is that of hagiographa, or sacred writings : the first of 
 which is Job ; the second David, of which they make one volume, called the 
 Psalms, divided into five parts ; the third is Solomon, of which there are three 
 books; the Proverbs, or Parables, as they call them, the Ecclesiastes, and 
 the Song of Songs ; the sixth is Daniel ; the seventh is the Chronicles, con- 
 sisting with us of two books, called the first and second of the Remains; the 
 eighth is Ezra, which among the Greeks and Latins makes two books ; the 
 ointh is Esther. 
 
 " Thus there are in all two and twenty books of the old Law ; that is five 
 books of Moses, eight of the Prophets, and nine of the Hagiographa. But 
 some reckon Ruth and the Lamentations aniong the Hagiographa, so there 
 will be four and twenty. 
 
 " The prologue I write as a preface to all the books to be translated by me 
 from the Hebrew into Latin, that we may know that all the books which are 
 not of this number, are to be reckoned apocryphal: therefore. Wisdom, which 
 is commonly called Solomon's, and the book of Jesus, the son of Sirach, and 
 Judith, and Tobit, and the Shepherd are not in the c^non. The first book 
 of Maccabees, I have fe-md in Hebrew ; the second is Greek, as is evident 
 from the style." — In Prol. Gal. sen. Praefat. de Omnib. Libr. V. T. Tom. i, p. 
 317 — 322. ed. Bened. "As therefore, the church readeth Judith and Tobit, 
 and the books of the Maccabees, but does not receive them among the canon- 
 ical scriptures ; so likewise it may read these two books (the book of Jesus, 
 the son of Sirach, and the Wisdom of Solomon) for the edification of the 
 people, but not as of authority for proving any doctrine of rehgion "— Prce£ 
 in libr. Salom. t. i, p. 938. 939. 
 
 I state upon the authority of Josephus and Bellarmine that 
 the Jews never received the Apocrypha. — (Joseph. Cont. Apiou, 
 I. i, c. 8. ap. Euseb. Eccl. 1. iii, c. 9, 10. — Bellarm. Lib. i, De 
 Verbo Dei, c. 10.) It is also worthy of notice, that there are 
 coatradictions in the Apocrypha to the canonical books. I am 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 89 
 
 inclined to suspect, that one reason which induces the church 
 of Rome to admit the Apocrypha, is, that they contain n passage 
 or two which savor of purgatory. In Maccabees (1. vi, 16 — 2. 
 i, 16. ix, 28.) we are informed that king Antiochus died three 
 times over ! ! In 2 Mace, xiv, 42, suicide is commended. The 
 author of the second book of Maccabees concludes in the fol- 
 lowing manner : 
 
 *' I also will here make an end of my narration ; which if I have done well, 
 and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired ; but if not so perfectly, 
 it must be pardoned me." — xv, 39. 
 
 Does such language intimate that the author believed that he 
 had written an inspired book? External and internal evidence 
 will prove that the Apocrypha is not canonical. It is a well 
 known fact, that in the time of Jerome, the Roman church did 
 not receive the epistle to the Hebrews as canonical, while all the 
 churches in the East received it. — She receives it now. Wha 
 shall we think of her consistency? St. Jerome observes, that 
 
 " Although formerly all the churches in the east did receive the epistles tc 
 the Hebrews as canonical, yet it was not received as canonical in the Latin 
 (or Roman) church." — In Js. c. 6. Et Ep. 29. ad. Evag. Tom. iii. 
 
 Jerome did not submit to the judgment of the church of Rome. 
 He says, 
 
 "Although the Latin (or Roman) church doth not admit this epistle as 
 canonical, we notwithstanding do receive it." — Ibid. 
 
 My friend has referred to the passage of St. Augustin — 
 
 " I would not believe the gospel except the authority of the Catholic church 
 moved me thereto." 
 
 We are informed that St. Augustin, at the head of a number 
 of African bishops, wrote letters to the Pope of Rome resisting 
 the claim of appeals made by three Popes. — (Cone. Afric. apud. 
 Surium. p. 69.) We may rest assured, therefore, that in the 
 passage which Mr. Maguire has cited, Augustin did not refer to 
 the authority of the church of Rome, an authority which he him- 
 self opposed. Permit me to make a few observations on the 
 passage to which Mr. Maguire has called our attention. It is 
 probable that Augustin speaks hypothetically, not in reference 
 to his then state of mind, but as if he was yet halting between 
 Manichean principles, and those of the gospel, using crederem 
 t)ro credidissem, commoveret pro commovisset, a change of tense 
 not unusual with some of the fathers. I beg to give you the 
 views of some eminent Roman Catholic writers upon this pas- 
 sage : some refer the saying of Augustin, not to the present 
 church but to the church in the time of the Apostles. Thus 
 Durandus de St. Sourqain after having quoted the words of 
 Augustin, observes, 
 
 " This passage which treats o{ the approval of the ialpturcs by the church* 
 
 8* 
 
90 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 applies solely to the church in the times of the Apostles, which was filled 
 with the Holy Spirit, and besides saw the miracles of Christ, and heard his 
 doctrine, and on that account was a fit witness of the things which Christ 
 both did and said."— Durand in 3 Sent. Dist. 24, a. i, fol, 169, 
 
 Again, Gerson, commenting on this passage of Augustin, 
 observes : 
 
 " By the church, Augustin means the primitive assemblies of those who 
 had seen and heard Christ, and had been his witness." — De vita Spirit, 
 animar. Lect 2, corol. 7, part 3, fol. 322. 
 
 The view of the celebrated cardinal De Aliaco is as follows : 
 
 (In lib. Sentent. art. iii, fol. 49, 59.) After having observed that "the 
 principles of theology are the truths of the sacred canon, because from them 
 IS made the ultimate solution of theological discourse," 
 
 He remarks, in reference to this very saying of St. Augustin. 
 
 " It is not proved by the authoHty of St. Augustin, that he believed in the 
 gospel by the authority of the church as a principle of theology, by which it could 
 be proved theologically, that the gospel is true, but only as the first moving cause 
 which led him to the faith of the gospel. As if he or any other had said, I 
 would not trust in the gospel, if the sanctity of the church, and the miracles 
 of Christ had not moved me, in which saying, although there be assigned 
 some reason for a belief in the gospel, it is not entirely a first principle." 
 
 These quotations will serve, I trust, to throw some light upon 
 the passage. I would beg to remind my friend, that if it were 
 not capable of an easy and natural explanation, the Bible, and 
 the Bible alone is the religion of Protestants. The testimony 
 of St. Augustin is of no weight beyond the boundaries of truth. 
 I have shown, however, that the meaning of Augustin's words 
 is different from that which Mr. Maguire ascribes to them ; and 
 the comment of Augustin himself on the fourth chapter of John 
 (Tract xvi, 23,) seems beautifully to elucidate his meaning : — 
 
 " The woman first told the Samaritans, and they believed upon her testi- 
 mony, and asked the Saviour to remain with them. He remained two days, 
 and more believed. And when they had beheved, they said to the woman, 
 " We now believe, not for thy saying, for we ourselves have heard him, and 
 know that this is indeed the Saviour of the world," first, by report, after- 
 wards by the presence of Christ." — " Primum per famam, postea per prie- 
 sentiam." 
 
 Augustin adds : 
 
 " So now it happeneth with those who are out of the church and not yet 
 Christians. Christ is taught by Christian friends, as it were by the woman, 
 that is by the church's instruction. They come to Christ and believe by the 
 report ; and many more and with more confidence beheve, that he is the 
 Saviour of the world." 
 
 The mere testimony of man may be the first exciting cause 
 of drawing the mind towards the scriptures ; but does that testi- 
 mony therefore become infallible 1 Does a man, who receives 
 the record that God has given concerning his Son, though his 
 attention may have been first attracted to the inspired records by 
 tlie tf^stimony of a fellow-creature, exercise an act of faith on 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 9^^! 
 
 human authority ? By no means. Were all the churches and 
 all the inhabitants of the world to assert, that a particular volume 
 was a revelation from God, if that volume contained an immoral 
 code, palpable contradictions, or statements, plainly derogatory 
 to the character of God, I could not receive it as divine. 
 
 Mr. Maguire — My friend commenced by asserting tha4 
 Christ did not pronounce his Apostles infallible, because Judas 
 betrayed his master. This fact only proves that he did not pro- 
 mise them the quality of impeccability, but by no means proves 
 that he did not promise them infallibility in matters of faith. 
 Though Judas betrayed his master, he did not deny the faith — 
 he committed the sin for money, and he supposed that his master 
 would escape from his enemies. Though he betrayed his mas- 
 ter, he was guilty of no breach of faith. I called on Mr. Pope 
 to show how a Protestant, literate or illiterate, can make an act of 
 faith or of belief in the divine inspiration of the sacred scriptures. 
 Mr. Pope says that the language of the scriptures carries about 
 it internal evidence sufficient to convince. Are those, to whom 
 he gives the scriptures, learned enough to discover this fact? 
 He talked of an internal illumination, and how a person upon a 
 sudden comes upon the light of the gospel. Is there a scholar 
 present who does not feel that Mr. Pope has not approached 
 the difficulty ? How will the poor and the illiterate ascertain 
 the truth of scripture from the manner in which they are con- 
 veyed 1 May not the poor and ignorant man continue, as St. 
 Augustin did before his conversion, to laugh at the sacred 
 volume 1 But after his conversion, St. Augustin tells of the 
 veneration he paid to that noblest of all works, the sacred 
 scriptures. St. Augustin, be it remembered, was converted by 
 the preaching and teaching of St. Ambrose, and not by reading 
 the Bible. How will the new convert from Paganism receive 
 the grace of the Holy Ghost? The grace of the Holy Ghost 
 is not communicated until after baptism has been conferred. 
 Look at Cornehus the centurion. If in his moral habits and 
 good life he exhibited a portion of God's mercy, he did not 
 receive the visible marks of the Holy Ghost until after his bap- 
 tism. Nor did the Samaritans exhibit the marks of that divine 
 grace, till they were baptized. It would be more difficult to 
 bring home to the conviction of a pagan the proofs of that 
 internal evidence of the scriptures of which Mr. Pope speaks, 
 than the proofs of their inspiration. Mr. Pope wants to prove 
 the inspiration of the scriptures to the pagan, by a thing which 
 is in itself more difficult of proof. With regard to the Sociuian, 
 how does Mr. Pope act? "I lay down," says he, "certain 
 texts of scripture — they are wrongly interpreted by the Socinian ; 
 
M THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 but I did not force his judgment." Mr. Pope, thank God 
 cannot force the judgment of any individual ; but my observa- 
 tions was, that Mr. Pope could not urge any interpretation at 
 all upon the Socinian, without violating the principle of private 
 judgment. The Socinian may retort on Mr. Pope, and tell 
 him that his interpretation of the scriptures is false. The Soci- 
 nian may say, " I exercise my reason, and you surely will not 
 find fault with me for doing so. The position that three make 
 one, and one makes three, is perfectly above human cornprehen- 
 sioti. Do you require me to admit things which are quitt 
 inconceivable ? You do not, of course, desire that I should 
 abandon my reason, and as to internal evidence 1 — it is a thing 
 neither known to you, nor to any one else." Such would be 
 the answer of the Socinian to Mr. Pope. I, on the other hand, 
 might not be able to convert the Socinian, but he could not say 
 that I contradicted myself. I would deny to the Socinian the 
 right to interpret the scriptures by private judgment. That 
 would be leaving the word of God dependent on the whim and 
 caprice of every individual. The word of God, I maintain, 
 depends for its interpretation on the church — that church which 
 is the collection of the churches of the same communion, scat- 
 tered through the world — that church over which Christ appointed 
 St. Peter to preside, giving to him the keys of the kingdom of 
 heaven, promising that whatever he loosed on earth, should be 
 loosed in heaven, and whatever he bound on earth, should be 
 bound in heaven. Have all those churches conspired through- 
 out all ages to give a wrong interpretation to the scriptures ? 
 or have they conspired to give a false meaning to any particular 
 text ? See the unanimous consent of different and distant 
 nations on the subject. Is not that unanimous agreement, a 
 better proof of the truth of the interpretation, and of its having 
 descended from the Jlpostles, than the varying and capricious 
 judgment of each individuaH Mr. Pope does not say that he 
 is infallible, yet he endeavours with all the presumption of infal- 
 libility to force his interpretation of the scriptures on the Soci- 
 nian. Compare Mr. Pope's interpretation with the agreement 
 of all nations — with that ^ucd universa tenet ecclesia. Here are 
 many churches and different nations all agreeing in a particular 
 interpretation and specified articles of faith, for eighteen hundred 
 years. Are not their opinions more worthy of adoption, than 
 the whims and follies of individuals ? My friend has quoted 
 some of the holy Fathers — I would advise him to act as Luther 
 did, and throw them overboard. The Fathers, he will find, are 
 quite against him. I could quote thirty different Fathers, who 
 strongly condemn the exercise of private judgment. St. Au* 
 gustin, in his book Contra Faustum 11, tome vi, p. 183, says 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 93 
 
 "These, so many and so great ties bind the believing man to the Catholic 
 church. The consent of nations; the regular succession of bishops from 
 Peter, to whom Christ committed the care of his sheep, down to the present 
 bishop of Rome ; lasth', the name of Catholic itself But unless the aiithoritv 
 of this church induced me to it, I would not believe the Gospel. As thenl 
 obey those who say to me, ' Believe the Gospel ;' so why should I not obey 
 them when they say to me, 'Believe not the Manichgeans.' " 
 
 " This church, moreover, the divine authority commends, and as it cannot 
 deceive usj he who fears to be imposed on will consult the church, which 
 without any ambiguity, the scriptures establish." — Contra Cresconium Lib. 
 i, tom. 7, p. 168. 
 
 And again — "Do thou run to the tabernacle of God, hold fast to the 
 Catholic church ; do not depart from that rule of truth, and thou shalt be 
 protected in the tabernacle from the contradiction of tongues." — Ennarratio 
 tertia in psalmum 30, tom. viii, p. 74. 
 
 I quote from genuine editions of the Fathers. I do not 
 advance corrupted passages. Let Mr. Pope show me in a 
 genuine edition any passage in which St. Augustin refused to 
 hold communion with the church of Rome. Mr. Pope, in urging 
 his interpretation of the scriptures upon the Socinian, would 
 never succeed. The Socinian would say, '* I have as good a 
 right as you, Mr. Pope, to the exercise of my private judgment, 
 and reason is on my side." I might not be more felicitious in 
 my attempts to convert the Socinian. I would not, however, 
 contradict my own principles. I would refer him to the consent 
 of mankind through many ages. I would shame him, if he were 
 it reasonable man, into conviction. I would take the Socinian 
 by the throat — Mr. Pope could not even take him by the heels. 
 Has Mr. Pope explained how it happens that Protestants must 
 remain in many instances actual infidels, for several years after 
 they have arrived at the age of discretion. The Protestant child 
 cannot receive the Bible on the authority of Mr. Pope. When 
 he opens the sacred volume, he finds passages in it which may 
 make him believe it not to be the work of God. There are 
 more passages to be found in it of that description, than Mr. 
 Pope could point out in what he considers the Apocrypha. But 
 I hold the book in which they are found to be of divine inspira- 
 tion ; and if I cannot understand them, I resign my judgment to 
 the church. But the Protestant child must remain an infidel. 
 For to doubt of Christif nity, is absolute infidelity. ^The Roman 
 Catholic child, when baptized, receives the aid of the Holy 
 (jrhost. He promises at baptism to obey the church ; and 1 
 proved the object of his obedience entitled to it. But the illu- 
 mination of which Mr. Pope speaks, never can be proved. It is 
 adapted only to sublimated imaginations. It is unfortunate that 
 Mr. Pope appeals to the Bible to decide our controversy — for 
 Ihe Bible is a dumb judge. Our Lord says to his apostles — 
 
 "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations; baptizing them in the name of 
 the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to 
 
04 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 observe ail things whatsoever I have commanded you ; and behold I am with 
 you all da>s, even to the consummation of the world." — Matt, xxviii, 19, 20. 
 
 Again — "Go ye into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every 
 creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved j but he that 
 believeth not, shall be condemned." — Mark xvi, 15, 16. 
 
 Here our Lord plainly tells us, that he who receives th^ir 
 preaching, when baptized shall be saved. Where is the object 
 of Mr. Pope's faith? He cannot make the mere book the 
 object of his faith. He cannot invest the translators with 
 infallibility. He will not surely give that title to Beza, and 
 others. Every thing in the Protestant church, and in Mr. Pope's 
 lay church, is fallible. How can an immoveable structure be 
 raised upon a moveable foundation ? Mr. Pope illustrated one 
 of his arguments, by placmg one book on the top of another. 
 The illustration may be appropriately and happily applied in this 
 instance. Here are two books, which we shall suppose to 
 represent the scriptures and private judgment. The Protestant 
 child must read the scriptures upon the authority of private 
 judgment, and vice versa, he must sustain private judgment upon 
 the scriptures. He must capsize one to support the other. If 
 the Protestant church be liable to error, how can any man confide 
 his faith in it? And even if the church be supposed fallible, 
 would it not be cruel to deprive the poor and ignorant of their 
 only guide, they themselves being unable to investigate. Bui 
 the Catholic church being infallibk', the Catholic rests his faith 
 with security on its authority. The consent of mankind for 
 many ages is in support of the Catholic church. A single 
 witness may be suborned, but millions cannot be bribed. I 
 propose the following syllogistic argument to Mr. Pope, in 
 reference to his faith. That faith cannot be divine which is 
 founded upon human authority — now his faith is founded upoii 
 human authority, therefore it cannot be divine. There is a 
 wonderful coincidence between the opinion of Luther, and the 
 opinion of Mr. Pope, respecting the Apostles. They want to 
 do away with the infallibility of the Apostles, and they confound 
 impeccability with infallibility. Luther, in a German work, 
 which I hold in my hand, and in another translated into Latin 
 by Jonas Justus, at Luther's own request, speaking of the 
 Apostles and Fathers, says — " The Apostles were great sinners, 
 ignorant men, and precious rogues," or in the original. " Die 
 Apostel seynd auck grosse Siinder geweszt, unde gute, grobe, 
 grosse schaelck." He says, " Even Paul himself was not so 
 sure of his doctrine, and often doubted, whether he preached the 
 truth or not." " St. Jerome was a heretic" — " St. Chrysostom 
 was a prattler," and ridiculing the intercession of saints, le 
 dares to blaspheme his God : " I beseech you, oh I my deaf 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 95 
 
 little devil, that you intercede with God for me ; my dear little 
 devil, pray to God for me." 
 
 I now call on Mr. Pope to make the Bible speak, and thus 
 decide the difference between us. If he does not do so, accord-, 
 ing to his principles, Christ has appointed a dumb judge to 
 decide upon all differences between man and man. But our 
 Saviour knew human nature too well to leave every individual to 
 follow his own whim and caprice. If man be thus sent adrift 
 without any certain guide to direct him in the way of salvation, 
 it would be rather hard that he should be called to an account 
 on the last day. I ask if Mr. Pope had an estate at stake, 
 would he not employ a lawyer to direct him in his difficulties, 
 would he not, instead of exercising his own private judgment on 
 the Act of Parliament, leave it to the interpretation and decision 
 of his legal adviser? He wisely relinquishes his private judg- 
 ment and he saves his estate ; what does St. Paul mean when 
 he speaks of " captivating every understanding?" — 2 Cor. x, 5. 
 Innumerable are the evils which result from depriving the lower 
 orders of that authority upon which alone their faith can be 
 founded] Mr. Pope says that the declarations of Christ are 
 obvious and plain. I. wish to know by what means the Pro- 
 testant can ascertain that they are the declarations of Christ, Let 
 Mr. Pope quit the foolish doctrine of internal illumination. 
 Arius appealed to internal illumination — so did all the heretics — 
 so did, in latter times, the celebrated Johanna Southcote ; she 
 announced herself as pregnant of the Messiah, and a whole 
 swarm of English parsons were among her followers and be- 
 lievers ! This doctrine, which Mr. Pope advocates, tends to 
 the utter destruction of civil society and ecclesiastical regime. 
 I would rather endure the despotism of a Ferdinand, than admit 
 a principle so contradictory to common sense — a principle so 
 well calculated to rend asunder the ties which unite man to man, 
 and to disolve the social system altogether. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — My opponent, I must be allowed to observe, has 
 substituted assertion for argument. He has said, that it is more 
 difficult to prove the internal evidence of the scriptures, than 
 their inspiration. I brought forward the internal evidence in 
 proof of their inspiration. • Mr. Maguire has asserted that a man 
 must be baptized before he can receive the Holy Ghost. In 
 the 8th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, we read that Philip 
 before he acceded to the wish of the Ethiopian eunuch, who 
 requested to be baptized, said, ^ If thou beUevest with all thy 
 heart, thou mayest;" the eunuch answered, "I believe that 
 Jesuf Christ is the Son of God." A man cannot exercise an 
 act o^ fiith. before he receives the Holy Ghost ; for " no mac 
 
96 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 can say that Jesus is the Christ, but by the Holy Ghost." 
 eunuch, therefore, must have been under the influence of 
 Holy Spirit, when he made this act of faith. After he had madt 
 it, " they went down to the water, both Philip and the eunuch, 
 and he baptized him." He says, that it is contrary to my system 
 to urge any meaning of scripture against the conviction of the 
 Socinian, as it would interfere with the exercise of his private 
 judgment. I have already noticed his sophism, but the obser- 
 vation may truly be returned upon Mr. Maguire. Does not the 
 church of Rome act in contradiction to her principles, when 
 arguing with the Socinian 1 JVIust she not allow him to exercise 
 his judgment upon the proofs which she brings forward in support 
 of her claim to infallibility 1 My friend observes, that no man 
 can force the judgment of another. I am convinced of the truth 
 of the remark. But the church of Rome endeavours to force 
 the judgment, and calls on men to act inconsistent with their 
 reason? He says that I am opposed to the whole world. I 
 stand here as an advocate of the great principles which genuine 
 Protestants maintain in common, and as a protester against the 
 errors to which they are in common opposed. Athanasius 
 declared himself to be alone against the whole world, when 
 Pope Liberius signed the Arian creed, and the condemnation 
 of Athanasius. — (Dupin. Eccl. Hist. 2 vol. p. 62, 1697, Lond. 
 — Baron, tom. 1, 939, ad ann. 357, No. 46, Mayence 1601.) 
 My friend has stated that I brought forward corrupted passages 
 of the fathers. Was it honorable in him to make such an asser- 
 tion, particularly, when he will have an opportunity of cc»nsulting 
 the quotations 1 I beg to say, that I have examined in the 
 original with some care the passage from Augustin upon which 
 my friend has so long dwelt ; and I find that Augustin makes 
 use of the expression " Catholicis laudantihus evangelium" com- 
 mending the gospel — " vituperantibus ManichsBum" — expres 
 sions which throw considerable light upon the passage. My 
 learned opponent has asserted, that the Socinian never could 
 be converted on my principles. The fact is otherwise ; for 
 Socinians have been converted by the advocates of private 
 judgment. My friend has again repeated the position, that the 
 children of Protestants must remain atheists until they arrive al 
 the years of discretion. I beg altogether to deny the truth of the 
 assertion. Much, I admit, devolves on parents and pastors. 
 Their authority I recognize ; but authority is one thing 
 INFALLIBILITY ANOTHER. Is uot a Romau Catholic child 
 precisely in the same circumstances 1 I must be permitted tc 
 deny, that children always receive grace in baptism, and appea) 
 to scripture in support of my opinion. How does the Roiv.ab 
 ratholic child receive the doctrnes of his church, if not upon tht 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 97 
 
 statement of the parent or the priest, a child being quite incapable 
 of exercising its reason on the proofs of the infallibility oi' the 
 church of Rome? In first of Corinthians, 12th chapter, there 
 is a beautiful comparison. An analogy is there drawn between 
 the church and the human body. The members of the human 
 frame contribute mutually to each other's well-being : — 
 
 " The eye cannot say to the hand, I need not thy help ; nor again the head 
 to the feet, I have tio need of you. Yea, much more, those that seem to be 
 the more feeble members of the body, are necessary; and such as we think 
 to be the less honorable members of the body, about these we put more 
 abundant honour; and those that are our uncomely parts, have abundant 
 comehneSs. But our comely parts have no need ; but God hath tempered 
 tiie body together, giving to that which wanted the more abundant honour ; 
 that there might be no schism in the body, but the members might be mutually 
 careful one for another. And if one member suffer any thing, all the members 
 suffer with it; or if one member glory, all the members rejoice with it." — v. 
 21—26. 
 
 The poor believer, who is acquainted with a person of judg- 
 jient and piety, may derive useful information from him ; may 
 receive his testimony ; but in doing so, he does not acknowledge 
 his infallibility. Thus, each member of ihe church of Christ, 
 contributes to the edification of the whole body ; but I deny that 
 any part or the whole is infallible. 
 
 Mr. Maguire insinuates that a man cannot know whether he 
 is enhghtened by the Holy Spirit. The Apostle says, 
 
 "If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. — Rom. viii, 9, 
 Again, " Try your ownselves, if ye be in the faith : prove ye yourselves : 
 
 know you not your ownselves, that Ciirist Jesus is in you, unless perhaps 
 
 you be reprobates? — 2 Cor. xiii, 5. 
 
 Would the Apostle use such language, if it were not possible 
 lo discover whether we are influenced by the grace of God ? 
 
 My friend has reminded us, that " Faith cometh byhearing, 
 and hearing by the word of God." It is true that the reading 
 of tha scripture is not the only mean by which faith cometh, as 
 history and experience testify. The kingdom of God is promoted 
 by preaching also ; but preaching must he found to accord ivlih 
 the word of God, — otherwise there can be no saving faith produced. 
 It is the first time I heard that Beza was a translator of the Bible 
 in the time of James I. 
 
 Mr. Maguire, as occasion requires, asserts, that the Bible 
 supports the church, and vice versa, that the church the Bible. 
 There is no departure from my principles in first exercising my 
 judgment on the proofs of revelation, and subseqently appealing 
 to revelation in confirmation of the right of private judgment. 
 
 Mr. Maguire says, that it would be a pity to deprive the poor 
 man of his belief, that the Bible is the word of God, by telling 
 him that his church is not infallible. I ask, are poor Protes- 
 tants, who deny the infallibility of the church of Rome, as unac- 
 
 9 
 
98 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 quainted with the contents of the revelation as the poor be -^ging 
 to the church of Rome ; or do they doubt the genuine«< 9S, and 
 authenticity, and inspiration of the scriptures ? Let exptjrience 
 and fact testify and answer these questions. 
 
 Faith, we are again told, cannot be divine, if it rests upon the 
 testimony of man. On my principles, ray faith rests not upon 
 the testimony of man, but of God. Truth is revealed by God 
 in the sacred volume, and I exercise faith upon that truth. My 
 friend, on the contrary, would have us to exercise an act of 
 faith in the inftj^bility of the church of Rome upon the authority 
 of the scriptures, regarded merely as an historical narrative. 
 
 Mr. Maguire's quotations from Luther are probably of a 
 similar description with the extract which a Roman Catholic 
 Priest lately gave in a sermon, from the table-talk of Luther, 
 that " Moses was a hangman." The German word, in more 
 polished phraseology, signifies an " executioner ;" and it is 
 plain from the context, that by the word " Moses," Luther 
 intended to designate the JYIoral Laiv, which acts as an execu- 
 tioner to those who seek to he justified by their obedience to its 
 demands. 
 
 What was the conduct of the Apostles'? Did they domineer 
 over the faith of the primitive Christians ? 
 
 " Not for that, says the Apostle Paul, we have dominion over your faith, 
 but are helpers of your joy." — 2 Cor. i, 23. 
 
 When the Bereans contrasted with the scriptures the preach- 
 ing even of an *B.postle, are they condemned for not having 
 implicitly received his testimony] No, St. Luke, in the seventh 
 chapter of Acts, and eleventh verse, writes, 
 
 " Tliose were more noble than those of Thessalonica, in that they received 
 the word with all eagerness, daily searching the scriptures whether these things 
 were so" 
 
 Here we find the Bereans exercising their judgments on the 
 Old Testament, in reference to the preaching of an inspired 
 Apostle ; and not only is there no censure passed upon them, 
 but, on the other hand, a high eulogium pronounced upon their 
 conduct. My friend has quoted the passage — ** If an angel 
 from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that which 
 you have received, let him be accursed." Gal. i, 8, 9. Is 
 not this a direct appeal to us to exercise our judgment upon the 
 doctrines of a preacher, even though he should descend firom 
 heaven, irradiated with all the brightness of angelic glory? My 
 friend's analogy between an appeal to the church of Rome and 
 to Judges, to Parliament and to the house of Lords, falls to the 
 ground ; for neither Judges, nor Parliament, nor house of Lords 
 are infallible. Judges can only take cognizance of the outward 
 act, but the church of Rome would extend its contro' pver tlw 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 99 
 
 mind and conscience. Judges must not be paities in the causes 
 which come before them, lest they should be biased by interest. 
 But the Pope, and his undefined church are a party in the hon- 
 ours and emoluments which result from their claim of infallibility. 
 We perceive, therefore, that there exists no analogy. Mr, Ma* 
 guire has 'quoted, as if from scripture, the words, " captivating 
 the understanding." I do not remember such a text. My 
 friend has stated, that the principle of private judgment has led 
 to the deposing of monarchs. I have before remarked, that the 
 principle should be exercised in accordance w'dh sound sense. 
 On the other hand, I shall prove that Popes considered them- 
 selves justified in deposing sovereigns. I would ask, was it the 
 right of private judgment, or the pretension of infallibility, which 
 led Gregory Vll, to depose Henry, Emperor of Germany] 
 Gregory's decree runs thus — 
 
 " On the part of the Omnipotent God, I forbid Henry to govern the king- 
 doms of Germany and Italy. I absolve all his subjects from every oath which 
 they have taken or may take to him ; and I excommunicate every person 
 who shall serve him as king. — (Lib. v, Ep. 24.) 
 
 Gregory IX, made the following announcement in the thirteenth 
 century — 
 
 "Be it known to all, who are under the dominion of heretics, that they are 
 set free from every tie of fidelity or duty to them ; all oaths, and solemn 
 engagements to the contrary notwithstanding." — (Lib. v, Tit. 7.) 
 
 The Maynooth Class-book informs us, that — 
 
 " The Pope passed sentence against the Emperor Frederick upon a charge 
 of having violated a treaty of peace, and also upon a vehement suspicion of 
 netiisy. The words of the sentence were these : — 'Inasmuch as we, though 
 unworthy, do stand in the place of Jesus Christ on earth, and to us it was said, 
 in the person of the Apostle Peter, whatsoever thou bindest on earth shall be 
 bound in heaven,' we having previously used diligent deliberation with our 
 brethren and the holy council (the council of Lyons, received as general at 
 Maynooth) concerning the above, and many other nefarious excesses, do 
 declare the aforesaid prince to be bound in his sins, to be a cast-away, and 
 deprived of all honour and dignity ; we denounce him, and deprive him by this 
 sentence, absolving his subjects from their oaths of fidelity, and by our apos- 
 tolical authority, strictly enjoining, that no one shall hereafter obey him as 
 emperor or king." 
 
 Here are examples of the head of the church, by the exercise 
 of his authority, deposing kings ; and in one of the instances 
 adduced, asserting that the proceeding was sanctioned by a 
 general council. 
 
 On the other hand, I assert, that whenever an individual in 
 the exercise of his judgment has co-operated in deposing a 
 sovereign, he has abused the faculty. 1 argue not for the 
 abuses of private judgment. If I find the exercise of private 
 judgment to accord with the voice of the God of Nature and 
 of Revelationi T maintain that the charges c f my opponent are 
 
106 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 levelled not against me, but against the Lord of Lords and King 
 of Kings. Is it logical to argue from the abuse of a thing 
 against its use ? Every blessing may be perverted. Learning, 
 health, and liberty, may be abused ; but are we, therefore, to 
 prefer the iron grasp of tyranny to the sweets of freedom ; and 
 are ignorance and debility to be substituted in the room of 
 science and of health? One word more — the doctrine of infal- 
 libility militates against the promises of divine wisdom made to 
 them that seek it. The Psalmist says : 
 
 " Open thou mine eyes that I may behold wondrous things out of thy 
 law."-7-cxix Ps. 18. 
 
 " Thy word is a lamp to my feet, and a light to my paths." — cxix Ps. 105. 
 
 "If ye then being evil," says the Saviour, " know how to give good gifts 
 unto your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give his Holy 
 Spirit to them that ask him." — Luke, xi, 13. 
 
 " If any man lack wisdom," says St. James, " let him ask of God, who 
 giveth to all men hberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall be given unto 
 him."— i, 5. 
 
 If I am to bow implicitly to the dictates of the church of 
 Rome, why do I want wisdom ? Why should I exercise my 
 judgment by " proving all things and holding fast that which is 
 good ?" Monstrous contradiction ! In truth the very fact that 
 God has vouchsafed to us a revelation of his will and character, 
 evidently implies, that man should exercise his judgment upon 
 its contents. I would say in conclusion, therefore, let us ally 
 clergy as well as laity, vindicate the right of private judgment. 
 The priests, as well as the laics, must answer at the bar of 
 judgment. They cannot give account for us. Wo to those who 
 follow the direction of ecclesiastics implicitly. It is written, 
 
 "The blind and the leaders of the Wind shall both fall into the ditch." 
 
 I fear that quotations from the Fathers are calculated rather to 
 weaken the impression, which I trust has been made upon youi 
 conscience. As, however, a few minutes remain, I shall occupy 
 them by reading you a few extracts. St. Augustin says, that 
 
 " The manner of expression in which the holy scripture is framed, altliough 
 it is to be penetrated but by few, is accessible to all. Those plain things 
 which it contains, it speaks to the heart of the unlearned and learned, hke a 
 familiar friend, without disguise. That mind which is inimical to this doc- 
 trine, is either erroneously ignorant that it is most wholesome or loathes the 
 medicine from disease." — Epist. 137 ad Volusianum. 
 
 Again, " God has bowed the scriptures even to the capacity of babes and 
 rick lings, as he hath in another Psalm, he bowed the heavens and came 
 down." 
 
 For the exposition of passages which cannot be explained by 
 Q comparison with other parts of the sacred volume, Augustin's 
 rule is, not to consult an infallible church, but 
 
 "Let every one interpret according to his own sense," 
 "Prout quisque voluerit."— Lib. de unit Ecc. c. 16. 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 101 
 
 St. Chrysostom says, 
 
 " All necessary things are manifest." — Hmn. in 2 Thes. 2. 
 
 St. Basil says, 
 
 "The hearers that are instructed in the scriptures must examine the doo- 
 ^.rines of their teachers ; they must receive those things which are agreeable 
 lo scripture, and reject what are contrary to it." — In Mordium Regula 72, 
 in initio, 
 
 Mr. Maguire — This, perhaps, is the most important half 
 hour of the discussion. It remains for this assembly to say 
 whether Mr. Pope has at all attempted to get out of the diffi- 
 culty — to wit, how a Protestant child could make an act of faith 
 upon the inspiration of the scriptures. AH Mr. Pope's argu- 
 ments went to show that the scriptures are the word of God. Is 
 there an individual present who does not entertain a similar 
 opinion ? That belief is a common principle between us. I 
 only want to show that the Protestant child cannot know the 
 scriptures to be the word of God, by the rule which Mr. Pope 
 endeavours to establish. — Mr. Pope places the child under cir- 
 cumstances which render it impossible for him to make an act 
 of faith. Would it not be better for Mr. Pope to show how the 
 Protestant child could make an act of faith, than to treat us to a 
 sermon on the Bible, quoting St. Augustin as to its utility — a 
 thing which I surely never denied. I trust in heaven I shall 
 never forbid the reading of the holy Bible, under proper circum- 
 stances. St. Augustin speaks of the perusal of the sacred 
 scriptures being useful to children ; does he thereby constitute 
 them as infallible authorities to decide upon its meaning? The 
 man who recognizes an infallible authority, believes in articles 
 of faith which he could otherwise never ascertain of himself 
 whether they came from God, or were committed to writing by 
 men inspired by him. I have shown that Christ left a sure and 
 certain guide to direct mankind. If God had not appointed a 
 guide to direct man, he would have left the mass of mankind 
 involved in ignorance and error. If the Bible contain divine 
 truths, of what utility would it be to the ignorant, if they pos- 
 sessed not the means of ascertaining whether it be the work of 
 God ? Mr. Pope has not shown how the ignorant can ascertain 
 whether the Bible be the word of God. If the Bible exclusively 
 contains the word of God, will Mr. Pope show us from the 
 Bible, the procession of the Holy Ghost — baptism with the sign 
 of the cross — con substantiality — and that infants may be bap- 
 tized contrary to the practice of Christ and his Apostles'? I 
 understand that Mr. Pope indeed is a dissenter frc/m the church 
 of England on those points. But that fact alone proves that 
 there is no unity of doctrines amongst Protestants, and thai 
 
 9* 
 
102 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 while the Bible teaches one Protestant to believe one thing, it 
 teaches a second Protestant to believe another thing. There 
 are many articles of faith admitted by Protestants, not to be 
 found in the Bible. Will Mr. Pope show me from the Bible, 
 an authority for changing the Sabbath 1 Mr. Pope said the 
 Apostles broke bread on that day of the week. Why, the Apos- 
 tles broke bread upon every day in the week. That was an 
 extremely weak and foolish argument to introduce to justify 
 such a change. It appears that Mr. Pope imagined he had 
 caught me in an historical error. He says I have quoted Beza 
 as one of those who translated the Bible in the reign of James I. 
 I deny the fact — I accused Luther, Beza, and others, of wilfully 
 corrupting the Bible ; but not the Bible as translated in James 
 I's reign. Would Mr. Pope insinuate that there were no other 
 translations prior to that time ? Has he never heard of one by 
 Luther — one by Zuinglius — one by Qllcolampadius, &c, &c? 
 
 Latimer corrupted the text, and bid defiance to all authority — 
 so did Cranmer, and Henry VHI, — he who, after leading a bad 
 life, when his end approached, thought only of saving his soul, 
 and accordingly returned to that church where certainty and truth 
 were alone to be found. But Mr. Pope has given up Henry 
 VHI, Luther, and Cranmer, — he scarcely defended Beza ; and 
 he ventured not to whisper a word in support of Zuinglius, who 
 received his doctrine against transubstantiation t>om a spirit, as 
 he says himself, nescio ah albo, vel nigro. 
 
 Mr. Pope talks of a Catholic clergyman having misquoted 
 Luther, in asserting that Luther called Moses a hangman. Mr. 
 Pope says he only calls him an executioner. What is an exe- 
 cutioner but a hangman ? I deny that Mr. Pope interprets the 
 German text correctly. I have the original work of Luther, in 
 German, here on the table, and the celebrated Pichler says that 
 the word employed by Luther does mean hangman. 
 
 As to Mr. Pope's arguments respecting the deposing power 
 assumed by some pontiffs — I never said the Popes were infalli- 
 ble. Moreover, Christ did not combine the quality of impecca- 
 Dility with the prerogative of infallibility. Judas did not lose his 
 faith when he betrayed his master — and Christ says to Peter, — 
 
 " But I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not ; and thou being once 
 converted, confirm thy brethren." — (Luke, xxii, 32.) 
 
 Infallibility and impeccability are not then inseparable, as Mr. 
 Pope would maintain. Out of nearly three hundred Popes, 
 there are only eleven whose conduct and lives can be arraigned 
 as absolutely criminal. Who is there here that has not com- 
 mitted sin? Let him who is spotless throw the first stone. 
 We hear enough of " saints" in these days — but we know thiit 
 ou;' Saviour compared the Pharisees to white-washed sepulcl/es 
 
OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 103 
 
 It is ea&y enough to assume the appearance of sanctity, ajd to 
 put on a puritanical face. I again ask Mr. Pope how the Pro- 
 testant child can be led by internal evidence to make an act oi 
 faith, and that too upon the Bible, before he can know that it is 
 the word of God ? I repeat the question which I have already 
 urged respecting the Socinian. Does not Mr. Pope violate the 
 principle of private judgment when he endeavours to force his 
 interpretation of the scriptures upon the Socinian ? Has not 
 the Socinian as good a right to attack the private judgment of 
 Mr. Pope ? If I could not convince the Socinian of the divinity 
 of Christ by the authority of the church, I would not, at all 
 events, go in direct opposition to my avowed and well knoM^n 
 principles. I would force upon him the general agreement of 
 nations which ascribes to Christ the establishment of a church, 
 and of an infallible guide. As I said already, I would shame 
 him into conviction, by appealing to the consent of nations, all 
 differing from each other on other subjects, and yet agreeing in 
 this point — I would prove that the vox Popidi wa« here truly the 
 vox Dei. I would show him the voice of God in the church, 
 and that he was, therefore, called upon to obey. If I left him 
 unconvinced I would enjoy this advantage over Mr. Pope, that 
 he could not charge me with self-contradiction. But the diffi- 
 culties which Mr. Pope would have to encounter with the Soci- 
 nian are insuperable. The Socinian would say, that he could 
 not conscientiously believe that a God could suffer death — he 
 would not allow it, because he would say it was against reason. 
 In vain would Mr. Pope adduce against him the evidence of the 
 Bible. The Socinian would appeal to the grand charter of 
 gospel liberty, the right of private judgment. If the Bible can 
 be interpreted by private judgment, I should like to know from 
 Mr. Pope, with the aid of his internal illumination, what is the 
 meaning of that passage in Zacharias, where the prophet says, 
 " upon one stone there are seven eyes." I should also like to 
 know from him, why did God forbid fish to be offered by the 
 Jews in sacrifice ? And why did God command the Jews not 
 to wear drugget ? Can Mr. Pope interpret these difficult mas- 
 sages 1 Are there ten Protestants here who will give the same 
 interpretation to any one text of scripture ? Will it be said, that 
 the Holy Ghost can infuse the spirit of contradiction. Every 
 heretic may have recourse to this rule of private judgment, and 
 by it justify his errors. It is good for society that obedience be 
 rendered to human power — why not also to spiritual power ? 
 If a fallible authority is to be obeyed by man, when he is not 
 able to live by himself, a forliori, he should yield obedience to 
 an infallible authority in the great and important concern of his 
 salvation. If temporal power be not established in societv* 
 
104 THE DIVINE RIGHT 
 
 neither order nor regularity will exist. A similar authority 
 should exist in the spiritual society instituted by Christ. If it 
 be a fact, that the church of Christ could teach error, then the 
 more perfect dispensation of the Son of God, did not leave us 
 any thing equal to the Jewish synagogue, which, until his com- 
 ing, did not err in the faith. And yet Mr. Pope will have it, 
 that the church of Christ has erred. 
 
 Mr. Pope will not yield his assent to that which is borne out 
 by the general consent of many and different nations from the first 
 era of Christianity. The principle which Mr. Pope advocates 
 are those upon which Arius and Eutyches, Cerinthus, and all 
 other heretics, ground their defence. They are the principles 
 which inspired the wdld men and women in Germany, who 
 danced naked through the streets, shouting aloud that the king- 
 doms of the earth were given unto them, with an army of fifty 
 thousand to make good their claims. These are instances, I 
 will be told, of the abuse of private judgment, but they are abuses 
 necessarily flowing from the principle itself. I would ask, when 
 the principle is once granted, where is the guarantee against its 
 abuse. Is it to be unlimited in its nature ; or will Mr. Pope 
 venture to draw out the line of demarcation ? Or rather, will he 
 not — must he not, to be at all consistent, allow every individual 
 to do as he pleases ? 
 
 Jesus Christ is the real high priest — the corner-stone of his 
 church, and the Apostles and their successors are the super- 
 structure, teaching and preaching,* through the guidance of the 
 Holy Ghost, 
 
 " And I will ask the Father (says our Saviour to his Apostles) and he 
 shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever." — 
 John, xiv, 16. 
 
 I shall again put the question (which I have so often repeated) 
 in due form to Mr. Pope, and if he be a sincere lover of truth, I 
 expect an answer from him in plain and obvious terms. I call 
 upon him to point out in what manner a Protestant child, before 
 he arrives at the years of discretion, can make an act of faith, 
 or how he can ascertain the authority of the scriptures ? He 
 must remain a doubter, and consequently an infidel. But the 
 Catholic has but one single, solitary fact to establish, namely, 
 the authority of the church ; in arriving at that, he is at hberty 
 to exercise his judgment, but when he has once ascertained the 
 fact, he yields to the church unlimited obedience in matters of 
 faith. But the Protestant possesses no such means to enable 
 him to make an act of faith. All great writers have seen this 
 difficulty. It was acknowledged by Claude in the celebrated 
 discussion with Bossuet, and he endeavoured to throw it back 
 on Bossuet, as Mr. Pope has attempted to do with me. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 105 
 
 But I have shown that the Catholic can make the act of faith, 
 after he has ascertained the simple fact of the church's authority. 
 While the Protestant must ascertain that every single text of 
 scripture is inspired, and that all are preserved pure and un- 
 changed, as they were originally written by the Apostles. The 
 Protestant must travel through this impracticable inquiry, there- 
 fore it is impossible that he can make an act of faith. While, 
 on the contrary, the Catholic has simply to ascertain the author- 
 ity of the church, and then to yield obedience to it. It was for 
 that purpose Christ left us his church upon earth ; and St. Peter ' 
 says of the scriptures — 
 
 "In which there are some things hard to be understood, which the un- 
 learned and unstable wrest, as also the other scriptures, to their own perdi- 
 tion."— (2 Peter, iii, 16.) 
 
 It is manifest, then, that there must exist an authority to direct 
 us in the interpretation of the sacred volume. 
 
 1 beg to conclude this day's discussion, by apologizing for 
 the many disadvantages under which I labor. I am not able to 
 engage your fancy by language shining and sparkhng as a bottle 
 of champaign. I possess not the powers of oratory to catch the 
 feelings, and to lead captive the understandings of my auditory. 
 If truth did not combat on my side, how is it possible that a man 
 like me, who cannot boast of much learning — who has been for 
 years engaged in the laborious duties of the mission, and totally 
 estranged from the pursuits of^hterature, could meet and oppose, 
 by sound arguments, the reasonings of a man hke Mr. Pope, 
 who has devoted his life to the study of this subject, and whc 
 has nothing else to occupy his attention. 
 
 Third Day. — Saturday, April 21. 
 
 SUBJECT.—" The Doctrine of Purgatory^ 
 
 At eleven o'clock the chair was taken by Admiral Oliver 
 and John O'Brien, Esq., of Elmvale. 
 
 Mr. Pope rose, and called on Mr. Maguire for his^roofs oi 
 the doctrine of Purgatory. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — Gentlemen, I appear this day at the bar of 
 public opinion, to defend a doctrine in which we are all equally 
 concerned — that there do exist prejudices against that doctrine 
 amongst many of my Protestant countrymen, is too notorious 
 
106 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 to be questioned. If I should be happy enough to remove any 
 of them, it will be doing much for your salvation, and will afford 
 me sincere pleasure. If this doctrine of purgatory be once 
 removed, — if this most consolatory dogma be discarded, — you 
 must then resort to the dreadful alternative of believing that the 
 moment the soul is departed from the body, it is either plunged 
 Jbr eternity into the depths of hell, or borne triumphantly by the 
 angels of God into the realms of endless bliss. Is there any 
 person here so presumptuous as to say, that he expects with 
 confidence, the moment of his dissolution to appear before a 
 merciful but essentially just Judge, white as the snows of hea- 
 ven, and pure as the angels of God 1 I wish any man who may 
 possess it joy of such confidence — most assuredly it is not mine. 
 
 Before I proceed to my direct proofs of purgatory, (for I only 
 deal in direct arguments) I may here remind you, though per- 
 haps I am not strictly in order in so doing, that I proposed 
 yesterday three arguments to my learned friend, at which, as 
 appears to me, he has scarcely condescended to glance. I 
 asked him what was the last resolution of an act of faith in the 
 mind of a Protestant. I called upon him to explain to the 
 satisfaction of the meeting, how a Protestant on taking the Bible 
 into his hands, could make an act of divine faith upon the abso- 
 lute inspiration of the sacred scriptures. I called upon him to 
 show, by what means he could make any rational impression 
 upon the mind of the Socinian, who admits the scriptures, and 
 who also admits the right of private judgment in common with 
 Mr. Pope. I wanted him to show how he would impress upon 
 the mind of the Socinian, that fundamental doctrine of Chris- 
 tianity — the divinity of Jesus Christ. The moment Mr. Pope 
 attempts to press his particular interpretation on the Socinian, 
 the latter claims an equal right to choose his own interpretation 
 of the text — he tells Mr. Pope, that he is violating the principle 
 of private judgment, and that he should not monopolize and 
 appropriate to himself, that which was every man's birth-right. 
 He asserts, moreover, that his interpretation is more rational 
 than that of Mr. Pope, who proposes a doctrine (he will say) 
 opposed to human reason, and to common sense. When, there- 
 fore, Mr. Pope should propose to the Socinian, doctrines above 
 human co|pprehen3ion, he justly claims his own right of private 
 judgment* he weighs all mysteries in the scale of human reason, 
 and taxes Mr. Pope with a violation of his hereditary right. 
 
 I asked Mr. Pope, how he could, with the Bible in his hand, 
 convert the benighted pagan? The latter in search of truth, 
 takes up the scriptures, reads therein several passages, which, 
 lo a mind not endowed with spiritual light, may appear to sanc- 
 tion the most desperate crimes : he is besot on all sides by the 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORI". 107 
 
 objections of deists and atheists — of Yoltaire, Diderot, Rous- 
 Beau, Julian the apostate, Celsus, Porphyry, &c. And if St. 
 iliignstin had to write four large volumes to reconcile the four 
 evangf^ lists, is it not plain that the half-converted infidel must 
 have recourse to the authority of the church, to solve all his 
 difficulties, and remove his doubts? or, if he would not trust to 
 that authority, he must be able to explain away all the objections 
 of the deists — to compare and examine every passage in the 
 Bible ; he must prove the authenticity, the integrity and the 
 inspiration of the scriptures, — and here is a task, which I hum- 
 bly conceive Mr. Pope himself is not adequate to perform. 
 These are the three points which I have repeatedly urged upon 
 (he attention of Mr. Pope, and which he has not met to the 
 satisfaction of this meeting. 
 
 I now come to my direct proofs of Purgatory. I shall first 
 state what is the doctrine of the Catholic church on the subject. 
 According to the Roman Catholic faith, we believe that after 
 the Almighty God has forgiven the sins actually committed by 
 man, as to the eternal punishment a temporal punishment may be 
 annexed by God as the effect of sin, and may remain after the 
 eternal punishment has been remitted. This temporal penalty 
 may be inflicted in this life, or may be inflicted in the next. 
 Thus, after the fall of Adam, though his sin was washed out by 
 faith in a future Saviour's blood, still death remained as the tem- 
 poral punishment and consequence of the original sin of Adam. 
 
 When David was guilty of the double crime of adultery and 
 murder, and when the prophet Nathan announced to him, upon 
 the authority of God himself, that his crimes were forgiven by 
 the Lord of Hosts, he at the same time annexed to the forgive- 
 ness of the eternal penalty a temporal punishment, for he declared 
 to David that his adulterous offspring should not live. David 
 v/ept bitterly — he bedewed the sheets of his bed with tears, and 
 he besought the Lord that his child might live ; but the child 
 died, and this was a temporal punishment annexed to the sin, 
 after the eternal had been forgiven. Catholics do not hold that 
 there is any particular fire in purgatory. The church has not 
 taken upon herself to determine where purgatory exists ; — ail 
 she has defined in the council of Trent, which is very explicit on 
 the subject, is, to pronounce it an article of faith, that there 
 exists a third place, where the soul of some go after'death, and 
 where they are detained by Almighty God, till they are purified 
 and prepared for heaven. That, after a certain detention there, 
 through the mercy of God, and the prayers and suffrages of the 
 faithful on earth, they are received into heaven. This is a plain 
 dogma. It has nothing to do with racks, tortures, or fires, or 
 niany other thirigs with which, no doubt, in the minds of somo 
 
108 THE DOCTRINE CF PURGATORY. 
 
 present, the doctrine of purgatory has been heretofore associated. 
 It now remains with you to see what are the proofs of purgatory, 
 and what the motives of credibihty which induce CathoUcs to 
 beUeve in that doctrine. The first text I shall quote to you is 
 from St. Matthew, ch. v, ver. 25, 26. 
 
 " Make an agreement with thy adversary quTckly, whilst thou art in the 
 way with him ; lest perhaps the adversary dehver thee to the judge, and the 
 judge dehver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. A'men, I say 
 lo thee, thou shalt not go out from thence, till thou pay the last farthing." 
 
 It is very clear that the words here " whilst thou art in the 
 way," mean whilst in this life ; and that the expression which 
 follows, " lest thy adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the 
 judge to the officer, and thou be cast into prison,'^ from whence 
 there is no release till the last farthing shall be paid, means, lest 
 thou shalt be overtaken by death, who comes like a thief in the 
 night, and be cast into purgatory, where the last farthing shall 
 be paid — that is, all your sins rnust be expiated by suffering, 
 before you shall be released, and admitted into the regions of 
 bliss. I pretend not to give a particular description of the place 
 to which the sacred text alludes, but I leave the passage to make 
 its due impression upon the mind of every honorable Protestant. 
 The next passage I shall cit-e is from St. Matthew, ch. xii, ver. 
 32, 36. 
 
 " And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be 
 forgiven him ; but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not 
 be forgiven him, either in this world, or in the world to come. But 1 say 
 unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall render an 
 account for it in the day of judgment." 
 
 Here our Saviour makes the utterance of a single idle word a 
 sin to be accounted for at the day of judgment. Is the suppo- 
 sition violent that a man may suddenly expire after the expression 
 of an idle word. That idle word does not constitute a mortal 
 fcin sufficient to damn him for ever ; it is that species of sin to 
 which the prophet alludes when he says, that the just man falls 
 seven times a-day. He could not be a just man if these were 
 mortal sins. If then a man be suddenly carried off in an apo- 
 plectic fit, and cannot enter heaven on account of the utterance 
 of a single word, where does he go ? I beg leave to refer you to 
 the 1st Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, iii, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15. 
 
 " Now he who planteth, and he who watereth are one. And every one 
 shall receive reward according to his own labour. Now if any man build 
 upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble ; every 
 HKin's work shall be made manifest; for the day of the Lord shall declare it, 
 because it shall be revealed by fire j and the fire shall try every man's work 
 of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hatli built thereupon ; 
 he shall receive a reward. If any man's work burn he shall suffer loss; but 
 he himself shall be saved, yet so as by i^ire." 
 
 I may here remark, what I shall prove — that of seventeen 
 
THE DOCTRINL OF PURGATC RY. 109 
 
 holy fathers of the 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th centuries, from whose 
 works I shall hereafter give you ample quotations, there is not 
 one, with the exception of two, that does not refer to the foregoing 
 text in proof of the existence of purgatory. I shall only say 
 that if any passages shall be adduced from scripture, against 
 purgatory clearer than this text, which is manifestly in support 
 of that doctrine, I will then acknowledge that I am wrong. I 
 shall next refer you to 2d Corinthians, i, 11. 
 
 "You," St. Paul says, "helping withal in prayer for us; that for this gift 
 obtained for us by many persons thanks may be given by many in our behalf." 
 
 St. Paul here begs the prayers of the Corinthians — these 
 prayers, it is true, were for the living — and / therefore am not for 
 contending that this text is a clear one in favor of purgatory. 
 But if prayers for the living be justifiable and proper, I cannot 
 undersand why prayers for the dead should be condemned. 
 Again, 1st Peter, iii, 18, 19, 20. 
 
 "Because Christ also died once for our sins, the just for the unjust, that he 
 might offer us to God, being put to death indeed in the flesh, but brought to 
 life by the spirit. In which also he came and preached to those spirits who 
 were in prison ; who in time past had been incredulous when they waited for 
 the patience of God in the days of Noe, when the ark was a building; in 
 which few, that is eight souls, were saved by water. 
 
 Here we find a prison spoken of, into which Christ entered 
 and preached to the dead. Here is a manifest acknowledgment 
 of a third place. The creed says, that Christ descended into 
 hell — surely not into the hell of the damned — for it is recorded, 
 that Christ released those who were detained therein. Will it 
 be shown that the place referred to in this text, and into ivhlch 
 Christ entered has ceased to exist 1 
 
 Our Saviour says, Matt, xii, 32, 
 
 " And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be 
 forgiven him ; but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not 
 be forgiven him, neither in this world nor in the world to come." 
 
 Now as St. Augustin justly remarks, in commenting on this 
 passage, if no sin can be forgiven in the world to come, the 
 argument of Christ has lost its force ; and as in that case it 
 would be equally impossible to obtain forgiveness in the world to 
 come for sins against the Father and the Son, as for those against 
 the Holy Ghost, the passage would mean nothing. I shall add 
 to the quotations which I have already given, the following from 
 the 2d book of Maccabees, xii, 43. We find it there recorded, 
 that Judas Maccabeus 
 
 "Making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jeru- 
 salem for sacrifice, to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and 
 religiously concerning the resurrection." 
 
 And it is added, "It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for 
 the dead, that they may be loosed from their sins." 
 
 xo 
 
110 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORT, 
 
 I am well aware that we shall hear arguments urged against 
 the canonicity of this book. But I shall only use it as an 
 historical testimony for the present ; and as such it proves, that 
 Judas Maccabeus offered up prayers for the dead, '' deeming it 
 a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they 
 may be loosed from their sins." 
 
 As an historical record, it testifies that the practice of praying 
 for the dead existed among the Jews. When Christ condemned 
 the fables and inventions of the Pharisees, why did he not point 
 his indignant censure against this practice, and condemn this 
 portion of the public worship of the Jews as superstitious, or 
 unjustifiabie? I would wish much that Mr. Pope would adhere 
 to strict argument and logical deduction. It will be in vain for 
 him to meet direct arguments, drawn from Scripture, and from 
 the practice of the church during the first five hundred years of 
 the Christian sera, by an historical quihhle. Such a subterfuge 
 exposes the weakness of his arguments. 
 
 I shall now proceed to lay before you various quotations from 
 the fathers on the present subject, and I pledge myself to their 
 accuracy and authendcity. Tertullian says, De Corona Militum, 
 p. 209, 
 
 "Amoncr the Apostolical traditions received from our fathers, we have 
 oblations for the dead on the anniversary day — oblationes pro defunctis annua 
 die facimus." 
 
 In his treaties on Monogamy, cap. x, p. 555, he thus advises 
 a widow — 
 
 "Pray for the soul of your departed husband, entreating repose to him and 
 participation in the first resurrection — making oblations for him on the anni- 
 versaries of his death, which, if you neglect, it may be truly said of you, that, 
 as far as in you hes, you have repudiated your husband." 
 
 And addressing widowers, he says, exhortatio ad castitatem, 
 cap. ix, 
 
 "Reflect for whose soul you pray — for whom you make annual oblations. 
 Pro cujus spiritu postules — pro qua oblationes annuas reddas." 
 
 The holy Father and Martyr, Cyprian, who lived in the 2d 
 century, says, 
 
 "Our predecessors prudently advised, that no brother departing this life 
 should nominate any churchman his executor; and should he do it, that no 
 oblation should be made for him, nor sacrihce offered for his repose — of which 
 we have had a late example, when no oblation was made, nor prayer in his 
 name offered in the church." — Epist. i, p. 2. 
 
 And again — "It is one thing to be a petitioner for pardon, and another to 
 arrive at glory ; one to be c^st into prison and not to go out from thence till 
 the last farthing he paid, and another to receive at once the reward of faith 
 and virtue; one, in punishment of sin, to he purified by long suffering, and 
 purged long by fire — and another to have expiated all sins by (previous) 
 Euffering; one, in fine, at the day of judgment, to wait the sentence of the 
 Lord; another to receive an immediate crown from him." — Epist. cv, p. lOS. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORr. Ill 
 
 Origen (Homily 6. in Exod. tome ii, p. 148), says, 
 
 "He that is saved is saved by fire ; so that if he has in him any thing of 
 the nature of lead that the fire may purge, and reduce it till the mass become 
 pure gold. Gtui salvus fit per ignem salvus fit ut id ignis decoquat, et resolvat. 
 For the gold of that land which the saints are to inhabit is said to be pure, 
 and as ' the furnace trieth gold, so doth temptatation try the just.' — Eccles. 
 27. We must then all come to this proof, ' for the Lord sits as a refiner, 
 (Mai. iii, 3,) and he shall purify the sons of Levi.' But when we shall arrive 
 at that place, who shall bring many good works, and little that is evil; this 
 evil the fire shall purify as it does lead, and the whole shall become pure gold. 
 He that takes with him more of lead, sufTers the fire more, that he may be 
 refined, and what little there is of gold, after the purification, remains. But 
 should the whole mass be lead, that man must experience what is written : 
 *the sea covered them ; they sank as lead in the mighty waters.' — Exod. xv, 
 10. Sin in its nature is like to that matter which fire consumes, and which 
 the Apostle says is built up by sinners, who upon the foundation of Christ 
 build wood, hay, and stubble.' — 1 Cor. iii, 12. Which words manifestly show, 
 that there are some sins so light as to be compared to stubble ; to which, 
 when fire is set it cannot dwell long — cui utique ignis illatus diu non potest 
 immorari ; that there are others like to hay, which the fire easily consumes, 
 but a little more slowly than it does stubble ; and others resemble wood, in 
 which, according to the degree of criminality, the fire finds an abundant 
 substance on which to feed. Thus each crime, in proportion to its character, 
 experiences a just degree of punishment. 
 
 " When we depart this life, if we take with us virtues or vices, shall we 
 receive rewards for our virtues, and those trespasses be forgiven to us which 
 we knowingly committed ; or shall we be punished for our faults and not 
 receive the rewards of our virtues ? Neither is true : because we shall suffer 
 for our sins, and receive the rewards of our good actions. For if on the 
 foundation of Christ you shall have built not only gold and silver, and precious 
 stones, but also wood, and hay, and stubble, what do you expect, when tne 
 same shall be separated from the body ? Would you enter into heaven with 
 your wood, and hay, and stubble, to defile the kingdom of God ; or, on 
 account of those incumbrances, receive no reward for your gold and silver, 
 and precious stones? Neither is this just. It remains, then, that you be 
 committed to the fire, which shall consume the light materials ; for our God, 
 to those who can comprehend heavenly things, is called a consuming fire. 
 But this fire consumes not the creature, but what the creature has himself 
 built — wood, and hay, and stubble. Frst, therefore, we suffer on account of 
 our transgressions, and then we receive our reward." — Homily, xvi, in 
 Jerome, tom. iii. 
 
 I have here thirty-five quotations from Origen, all to the same 
 effect, and m every one of which he alludes to the text of St. 
 Paul relative to the hay, wood, and stubble, and the consequent 
 purgation by fire. 
 
 Eusebius of Coesarea, who belonged to the Greek church, 
 describing the funeral of the emperor Constantine the Great, 
 thus writes — 
 
 "In this manner did Constantius perform the last duties in honour of hia 
 father. But when he had departed with his guards, the ministers of God, 
 snrrounded by the multitude of the faithful, advanced into the middle space, 
 and with prayers performed the ceremonies of divine worship : the blessed 
 prince, reposing in his coffin, was extolled with many praises; when the 
 people in concert with the priests, not without sighs and teai % offsred prayers 
 to heaven for his soul ; in this manifesting the most acceptable service to a 
 
112 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 religious pnnce. God thus gave him a place near the bodies of the holy 
 Apostles, in order that he may enjoy their blessed fellowship, and in theit 
 temple be associated with the people of God. He would thus also be admitted 
 to a participation in the religious rites, the mystic sacrifice, and holy suffrages 
 of the faithful."— De Vita Constant. Lib. xi. 
 
 Arnobius, the master of Lactantius, and rhetorician at Sicca, in 
 Nuniidia, who lived about the end of the 3rd century, thus writes : 
 
 "Why were the oratories (of the Christians) destined to savage destruction 
 wherein prayers are offered up to the sovereign God ; peace and pardon are 
 implored for all men, magistrates, soldiers, kings, friends, and enemies, for 
 
 THOSE WHO ARJE ALIVE, AND FOR THOSE WHO HAVE QUITTED THEIR BODIES?" 
 
 St. Basil, 
 
 " The words of Isaiah, ' Through the wrath of the Lord is the land burned,' 
 (ix, 19,) declare, that things which are earthly shall be made the food of a 
 punishing fire to the end, that the same may receive favour and be benefitted.' 
 * And the people shall be as fuel of the fire.' — (Ibid.) This is not a threat of 
 sxtermination, but it denotes expurgation, according to the expression of the 
 apostle ; * If any man's works burn, he shall suffer loss ; but he himself 
 shall be saved, yet so as by fire.' — (1 Cor. iii, 15.) — Com. cap. ix, Isaiah, 
 Tome i, p. 554. 
 
 " ' Ana the light of Israel shall be for a fire.' — (Isaiah x, 17.) The operative 
 powers of fire are chiefly two — it enlightens and it burns. The first is cheerful 
 and pleasant — the second bitter and afflicting. The prophet adds, *and he 
 shall sanctify him in a holy fire, and consume the glory of his forest as grass.' 
 He here shows the nature of the fire — it enlightens and purifies. But how 
 does this fire purify, if it consumes ? Truly, since our God is called * a con- 
 suming fire,' he will consume the wood, and what vices arise from matter 
 which adheres to the soul in the flesh, not in the spirft. And when the fire 
 shall have consumed all the wood of sin, as it does grass, then that matter 
 being destroyed, which was fuel to the chastising fire, the prophet says, 
 *The burnt mountains shall repose, and the hills, and the thick forests, and 
 the consuming fire shall cease that fed upon them.' " — Ibid. p. 563. 
 
 I do not envy Mr. Pope, if he deem his private judgment 
 superior to the texts which I have quoted, and to the judgment 
 of the holy Fathers for five hundred years. I defy him to answer 
 the following syllogistic argument: — Either the Fathers, at the 
 period when they wrote, published that which was the established 
 belief of the Catholic church, or they did not? If they did 
 publish what was the doctrine in their time, then such doctrine 
 must have been true, since the church is acknowledged on all 
 hands to have been pure in the primitive ages of Christianity ? 
 If the Fathers published that which was not the established 
 doctrine of the church, why did not the pure church protest, and 
 not sanction error by her silence ; and why did not the heretics 
 protest, against whom those doctrines were advanced ? 
 
 Mr. Pope rose and said, — My learned adversary commenced 
 his observations by addressing himself to our fears. He spoke 
 of the dreadful idea of being hiprried instantaneously, either into 
 the presence of Infinite Holiness, or into the regions of eterna 
 wo. In order to alleviate those fears, he proposes to us the fire ol 
 
THE DOCTUINE OF PURGATORY. 113 
 
 purgatory; of that purgatory, in which the church of Rome tells 
 us, that some souls have licen confined for more than a thousand 
 years. My friend has adverted to the questions which he pro- 
 posed yesterday. As my answers are already before th * public, 
 who can decide whether they are satisfactory, I shall not follow 
 Mr. Maguire through his devious ramblings. I shall merely 
 observe, that he has this morning brought forward several argu- 
 ments, in addition to those which he advanced yesterday, employed 
 by infidels in their denial of the inspiration of the sacred scrip- 
 tures. How did Mr. Maguire act yesterday? Instead of 
 coming in a manly manner to the real question, he confined me 
 to an extreme case. He asked me, by what mode I could 
 convince an ignorant man that the Bible is the word of God ? 
 In reply, I enquired by what arguments he could convince him. 
 You have heard the answers of both. I remarked, that in de- 
 monstrating to the illiterate man, that the scriptures were divine, 
 I would appeal only to the internal evidence, which commends 
 itself to the conscience, as having the impress of divine truth 
 engraven upon it. I again ask, did not Mr. Maguire as well as 
 myself appeal to the private judgment of the individual 1 Mr. 
 PrIaguire would refer to the universal consent of mankind ! I 
 would ask, must not the ignorant man, in order to decide whether 
 this universal consent exists in support of the sacred volume, 
 must he not wade through the many tomes of the Fathers 1 I, 
 therefore, again submit, upon whose part the greater difficulty 
 exists, in convincing the illiterate person that the Bible is divine ? 
 In order to show, that, while the eternal punishment of sinjs for- 
 given, its temporal punishment may remain, my friend has referred 
 us to the cases of Adam and David. I readily admit, that while 
 the Lord forgives the sins of his people, he frequently chastens 
 them in this life, when they act inconsistently with their profes- 
 sion, and cause the adversary to blaspheme. The Lord says, 
 
 "When my people forsake my law, I will visit their transgressions with a 
 rod ; nevertheless my loving-kindness will I not utterly take from him, nor 
 suffer my faithfulness to fall. — Psalm Ixxxix, 30, 33. 
 
 " The lord chastens those whom he loves, and scourges every son whom 
 he receives." — Heb. xii, 6. 
 
 But I would ask, because God, in his infinite wisdom sees fit, 
 when his people depart from him, to visit them with trials in this 
 life, does this fact furnish any reason for supposing, that the 
 Deity will extend that punishment into another world 1 By no 
 means ; there is not the slightest ground in scripture for an 
 opinion, altogether so unworthy of the character of God. My 
 friend observes, that the church of Rome has not defined the 
 nature of the fire of purgatory. Cardinal Bellarmine, however, 
 states, that the damned, and the souls in purgatory are tormented 
 
 10* 
 
114 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 in the same fire, and yet Mr. Maguire has informed us, that the 
 doctrine of purgatory is a most comfortable doctrine ! ! The 
 Reverend Gentlen.an has quoted the fifth of Matthew and 26th 
 verse. It certain .y appears to me strange, that a doctrine of 
 such importance should, in the very first instance be made to rest 
 upon a parable, the very explanation of which, as given by Mr. 
 Maguire himself, proves that it is parabolic. I shall now examine 
 itj and set before you its true meaning. The passage runs thus, 
 
 "Make an agreement with thy adversary quickly, whilst thou art in the 
 way with him, lest perhaps the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the 
 judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Amen, I say 
 imto thee, thou shalt not go out from thence, till thou pay the last farthing." 
 
 I argue thus ; if the uttermost farthing be paid, then are the sins 
 of the individual noi pardoned ; for where the uttermost farthing 
 is paid, there can be no pardon wanting; and on the contrary, 
 if the sins ^xe pardoned., then is the uttermost farthing not paid. 
 My friend talks of the honesty of his views and intentions, 
 and of his candour in giving his opinions : I trust, that I can 
 appeal with equal confidence to the integrity of mij conduct. 
 My view of the passage before us is, that the punishment, of 
 which our Saviour speaks, is eternal in its duration. The Re- 
 deemer appears desirous of showing in the parable, that there 
 can be no hope of escape from that place, which he designates 
 " prison," to that individual who dies in the rejection of the 
 gospel. Several considerations are fitted to show us, that the 
 punishment of which the Saviour speaks, is everlasting. The 
 glory of God is infinite ; our debt, if not remitted, infinite ; the 
 sinfulness of sin, infinite. Even according to the standard of 
 this world, an ofience is considered to rise in magnitude, in 
 proportion to the dignity of the individual against whom it is 
 committed ; a libel upon the character of a private person, is 
 treason when committed against a sovereign. The God against 
 whom we have rebelled, is King of Kings, and Lord of Lords ; 
 our sins, therefore, being committed against infinite Majesty, 
 unless blotted out in the atoning blood of Jesus, must for ever 
 remain against us, and call down an interminable retribution. 
 I shall quote a passage from a note in the Douay Bible, which 
 fully justifies the view that I have taken of the expression, ^^ until 
 thou hast paid," which implies that it shall never he paid. The 
 comment is on Matt, i, 25. 
 
 " * Till she brought forth her first-born son.' — From these words, Helvidius 
 and others heretics most impiously inferred, that the blessed Virgin Mary had 
 other children besides Christ. But St. Jerome shows, by divers examples, 
 that this expression of the Evangelist was a manner of speaking usual among 
 the Hebrews, to denote by the word until, only what is done, without any r«- 
 gard to the future; Thus, it is said. Gen. viii, 6, 7, That J<*oah sent forth a 
 raven, which went forth, and did not return, until the waters were dried upon 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 113 
 
 the earth; that is, did not return any more. Also, in Isaiah, xlvi, 4, God 
 Bays, * / am till you grow oW Who dare infer, that God should then cease 
 to be ? Also, in the first book of Maccabees, verse 54 : ' Jlnd they went up 
 to Mount Siony wii,n joy and gladness, and offered holocausts, because not one of 
 them was slain, till they had returned in peace.'' That is, not one was slain 
 before or after they had returned. God saith to his divine Son, * Sit on my 
 right hand, till I make thy enemies thy fotstooV Shall he sit no longer after 
 his enemies are subdued ? Yea, and for all eternity ! !" 
 
 Mr. Maguire referred to the passage in Matt, xii, 32. 
 
 "Whosoever shall speak a vv^ord against the Son of Man, it shall be for* 
 given him ; but he that shall speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be 
 forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come." 
 
 Now, I beg to observe, that the phrase, " this world," and 
 " the world to come," was current among the Jews, and denoted 
 time in general. The Redeemer, I maintain, signified thereby, 
 that the sin should never be forgiven. We should compare 
 scripture with scripture, spiritual things with spiritual things, one 
 passage with another. Thus in Mark iii, 29, and Luke xii, 10, 
 we find the correspondent passages thus expressed : 
 
 "But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, shall never havj 
 forgiveness, but shall be guilty of an everlasting sin. And whosoever speak- 
 eth a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him ; but to him that 
 shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven." 
 
 The Jews expected under the Messiah a fuller dispensation of 
 pardon than under the Mosaic economy. Our Lord here informs 
 them of a sin, which, even under the privileges of the Christian 
 dispensations, (see Heb. x, 28, 29,) is evidently, according to 
 the text, unpardonable. The church of Rome has made an 
 unhappy distinction between the greatness of one sin and another 
 in the sight of God. It should be remembered, that "he who 
 offendeth in one point," is stated by St. James, " to be guilty 
 ofall."— xi, 10. 
 
 Mr. Maguire has observed, that nothing unclean entereth into 
 the kingdom of heaven. Granted ; but I maintain, that the true 
 purgatory is the fountain which has been opened for sin and for 
 uncleanness, in the atoning blood of Jesus. My opponent has 
 referred to the third chapter of the first Corinthians. We can 
 without difficulty prove, that this passage does not support 
 purgatory. When it is said, that " the fire shall try every man's 
 work ;" it is manifest that the fire is 'probatory^ and not purga^ 
 torial. There is not a being in existence who does not commit 
 those sins, for which, according to Mr. Maguire, men must go 
 through the fire of purgatory. Again — it is said, 
 
 " Every man's work shall be made manifest of what sort it is." 
 
 Whence it is evident, that the works of the good and of the evii 
 alike must endure the trying process. Does not this fact show^ 
 that the fire is a fire of trial, not of purgation. 
 
116 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATOHF. 
 
 Further — it is the work^ the doctrine of the individual, w fiich 
 is to be tried in this fire, and not his soul. The minister of the 
 gospel is not to add to its fundamental truths, but to preach it in 
 all its native simplicity ; while the man who corrupts it with 
 false philosophy, and builds upon it wood, hay, stubble, if he 
 holds the head Christ Jesus, will be saved, yet so as by fire ; that 
 is, with extreme difi[iculty. 
 
 My friend referred to the first of Peter, iii, 19, 20. 
 
 "Christ also died once for our sins, the just for the unjust, that he migl t 
 offer us to God, being put to death indeed in the flesh, but enhvened in the 
 spirit, in which also coming, he preached to those spirits which had been 
 some time incredulous, when they awaited for the patience of God, in the 
 days of Noe, when the ark was building, wherein a few, that is eight souls, 
 were saved by water." — Douay Bible. 
 
 Mr. Maguire is aware, that according to the church of Rome, 
 only two descriptions of persons go to purgatory ; those who die 
 in venial sins, or those who die absolved from the guilt of mortal 
 sin. In Roman Catholic catechisms, mortal sins are enumerated. 
 The character of those persons who perished in the flood, as 
 described in the book of Genesis, proves that they died in 
 mortal sin : 
 
 "God seeing that the wickedness of men was great on the earth, and that 
 all the thoughts of their hearts were bent upon evil at all times, it repented 
 him that he had made man on the earth." — vi, 5. 
 
 Again: — "The earth was corrupted before God, and was filled with ini-« 
 quity, and when God had seen that the earth was corrupted, for all flesh had 
 corrupted its way upon the earth, he said to Noe, * The end of all flesh is 
 come before me ; the earth is filled with iniquity through them, and I will 
 destroy them with the earth.' " — 1 1, 12, 13, and 14 verses. 
 
 My opponent cannot say that they received absolution ; they 
 despised Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and were over- 
 whelmed in the flood, the guilt of mortal sin being fixed upon 
 their heads. 
 
 Mr. Maguire says, Christ went and released those people out 
 of prison. Look to the text. Did we even suppose that the 
 passage referred to purgatory; it is merely said, that He preached 
 to the spirits, but there is no mention whatsoever made of their 
 having been delivered. My view of the passage is this : Christ 
 was raised from the dead by the power of the Holy Ghost, in 
 which spirit he preached to the Antediluvians ; to the spirits 
 ev (foXaxi, " in prison ;" (not which ivere in prison, as the Douay 
 Bible renders the expression,) either in the spiritual prison ot 
 ungodliness, when Noah preached, or else in the prison of hell, 
 when Peter wrote. Christ, through the instrumentality of Noah, 
 preached before the flood. The Holy Spirit, though not so 
 abundantly vouchsafed till the Christian dispensation, was always 
 with the church of God. The view of the passage entertained by 
 an authority which Mr. Maguire respects, coincides with mine 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 117 
 
 The venerable Bede, who lived more than one thousand years 
 ago, gives us the opinion of an early Father, perhaps Athanasius, 
 on this portion of scripture. 
 
 "He who in our time?, coming in the flesh, preached the way of life to the 
 world, even He himself also came before the flood, and preached to them who 
 were then unbelieving, and lived carnally ; for even he, by his Holy Spirit, 
 was in Noah, and in the rest of the holy men which were at that time, and 
 by their good conversation preached to the wicked men of that age, that they 
 might be converted to better manners." — Ful. in Loco. sec. ii, p. 806. 
 
 My friend refers to the second of Maccabees twelfth chapter. 
 I have already shown that this book is not canonical. I shall 
 again refer to the fourteenth chapter, 41st and 42d, verse in which 
 it will be seen, that suicide is commended. 
 
 ** Now, as the multitude sought to rush into the house, and to break open 
 the door, and set fire to it, when he was ready to be taken, he struck himself 
 with his swordj choosing to die nobly, rather than to fall into the hands of the 
 wicked." 
 
 Is the eulogy of such conduct in consistency with the spirit 
 and precepts of the word of God ? Consult another of the 
 Apocryphal books, and you will find one Apocryphal book con- 
 tradicting another. In the third chapter of Wisdom 1st to 4th 
 verses, we read, — 
 
 " But the souls of the just are in the hands of God, and the torment of death 
 3hall not touch them ; and their departure was taken for misery, and their 
 ^oing away from us for utter destruction ; but they die in peace. And though 
 in the sight of men they sufl?ered torments, their hope is full of immortality." 
 
 Would the writer of the book of Wisdom have intimated, that 
 their death wrs falsely taken for misery, if they must first pass 
 through the torments of a purgatory ? Would he have said, that 
 they are in peace ? Here is Wisdom against the second book of 
 Maccabees. I would ask, did the individuals mentioned in the 
 twelfth of Maccabees, for whom prayers were made, die in 
 mortal sin 1 I hope that my friend allows, that idolatry is a 
 mortal sin ; they were guilty of it. 
 
 " They found under the coats of the slain, some of the donaries of the idols 
 of Jamnia, which the law forbiddeth to the Jews, so that all plainly saw, that 
 for this cause they were slain." — 40. 
 
 Thus, regarding the Apocrypha, merely as an historical rela 
 lion, and meeting my learned antagonist on this ground, as they 
 contain palpable contradictions, why should they be made the 
 foundation for even an historical truth. I must, however, advert 
 to other matters. I am ready to prove the genuineness, authen- 
 ticity, and canonicity of the scriptures, if the question be pro- 
 posed to me in a manner becriming a scholar; but I have been 
 shut up, as is evident, to an extreme case, that of the poor 
 ignorant peasant. My friend has quoted largeiv from tlie 
 
118 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 Fathers. I beg to remark, that M. Trevern, lately promoted 
 from the bishopric of Aire to that of Strasburgh, (I need not 
 add, a Roman Catholic divine) honestly admits, that Jesus 
 Christ has communicated no revelation to us concerning purga- 
 tory, and observes — 
 
 " Had it been necessary for us to be instructed in such questions, Jesus 
 would doubtless reveal the knowledge of them ; he has not done so ; we 
 can, therefore, only form conjectures on the subject, more or less probable." — - 
 Discuss. Amic. Vol. ii, p. 242. 
 
 The celebrated Roman Catholic Bishop Fisher inform us,, 
 that— 
 
 "In the ancient Fathers, there is either none at all, or very rare mention 
 cf a purgatory: that by the Grecians it is not believed to this day; that the 
 Latins, not all at once, but by little and little, received it, " pedetentim," step 
 by step ; and that purgatory being so lately known, it is not to be marvelled, 
 that in the first times of the church there was no use of Indulgences, seeing 
 these had their beginning, after that men for a while had been affrighted with 
 the torments of purgatory. ^^ — Roffens Assert. Lutheran Confutat. Artie. 18. 
 
 Cardinal Cajetan observes — 
 
 " If we could have any cert air ty concerning the origin of indulgences, it 
 would help us much in the disquisition of the truth of purgatory; but we 
 
 HAVE NOT BY WRITING ANT AUTHORITY, EITHER OF THE HOLT SCRIPTURES, 
 OR ANCIENT DOCTORS, GREEK OR LATIN, WHICH AFFORDS US ANY KNOWLEDGE 
 
 THEREOF." — Cap. 2, de Indulg. 
 
 And Alphonsus de Castro writes, 
 
 ^"Many things are known to us, of which the ancients were altogether igno- 
 rant, as purgatory, indulgences,^^ <^c, — Adv. Hoeor. L. 12, Tit. Purg. f. 258. 
 
 We have Cyprian, Tertullian, and various other quotationa 
 from the Fathers, overturning those which have been adduced 
 by my friend, did time permit me to repeat them. But I would 
 briefly ask, why did Polycarp specially treat on the resurrection 
 of the dead, and yet wholly omit the doctrine of purgatory 1 
 (Epist. ad Philip. § 11, v, ii.) Why did Ignatius assert, that 
 only two states in the future world, a state of death, and a state 
 of life, are set before us ; so that every one who dies, goes to 
 his own proper place ; and why did he not make the slightest 
 allusion to a purgatory, if he believed in it ? — (Ep. ad Magnes. 
 § V.) Why did Athenagaras write a treatise on the Resurrec- 
 tion of the Dead, and yet make no mention of purgatory ? — De 
 Resurr. Mort. in Oper. pp. 143 — 219. Cyprian says— 
 
 " When once we have departed hence, there is no longer any place for 
 repentance — no longer any effectiveness of satisfaction. Here life is either lost 
 or held j here we may provide for our eternal salvation by the worship of God 
 and the fruitfulness of faith. Let not any one be retarded, either by sins or 
 by length of years, from attaining to salvation. ***** 
 To him who believes, a salutary indulgence is granted from the Divine pity ; 
 and immediately afte^' death he passes to a blessed immortality.^^ — Cyprian ad 
 Demetrian, p. 196. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 119 
 
 Tertullian counts it injurious to Christ to hold that such as 
 are called home by him, are in a state to be pitied. He says,— 
 
 " We wrong Christ, when we do not with equanimity hear of those who are 
 summoned hence by him, as if they were to be pitied." — Lib. de Patient, c. 9. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — You will easily perceive, gentlemen, that 
 this is an important discussion. My adversary has endeavoured 
 to explain away some of the texts — I shall only remark, that 
 with regard to these texts, he may have his private judgment, 
 and I have mine. There are two or three which we never shall 
 give up — in respect to the others, we shall not relinquish the 
 doctrine of the church for the first ages, and adopt the opinion 
 of Mr. Pope. He says, that a man will be detained in purga- 
 tory for one thousand years — that is not the doctrine of the 
 Catholic church, and I never said it was — it is absurd in this 
 manner to meet direct arguments by unfounded suppositions. 
 The church has pronounced no decision as to the length of time 
 that souls may be detained in purgatory. If a soul remain there 
 but for two minutes, the doctrine is as fully established, as if it 
 remained there for two thousand years. My arguments are 
 founded upon scripture and reason, and upon the authority of 
 ihe universal church. 
 
 Mr. Pope has asserted, that a Roman Catholic, in making an 
 act of faith, builds it upon private judgment. — The Catholic has 
 only to exercise his private judgment upon the scriptural proofs 
 of the authority of the church. That once established, the 
 Catholic is enabled to make an act of faith upon Divine authority 
 — the Protestant never can make an act of faith until he clears 
 up all the sophistries and cavillings of the deists. The Catholic 
 once admitting the authority of the church, rests satisfied — he 
 laughs to scorn the objections of the infidel, and founds his faith 
 upon the immoveable word of Christ. We exercise our private 
 judgment to ascertain the authority of the church. But the 
 moment we have that fact satisfactorily established, all our doubts 
 and difficulties vanish. Mr. Pope then, all this while has been 
 building castles in the air, and conjuring up the phantoms of his 
 own imagination, for the mere purpose of laying them again. 
 Similar arguments, to those which he has advanced, were urged 
 by Porphyry, and Julian the apostate — by Rousseau, Diderot, 
 and Yoltaire, who set their own private judgments against the 
 authority of the Catholic church, and some of whom, on their 
 death-beds, sought to be reconciled to her communion. Mr. 
 Pope has enlarged upon the wonderful blessing of being justified 
 through the merits of Christ. I trust, that I am a Christian from 
 conviction, and although the profession of it is not as frequently 
 on my lips as on those of others, I hope to be justified through 
 
120 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 the merits of Christ. I allow no merits but his. He is the 
 source aud fountain of all merit. That is the doctrine of the 
 Catholic Chuich, and it is a point of our doctrine, regarding 
 which Protestants are much misinformed. We do admit, that 
 the saints can beseech Christ, and interfere by their prayers in 
 our behalf — but we deny that they have any merits of their own 
 — they have none, except through the Redeemer, Jesus Christ — 
 he is the Divinity — the spring — the source whence every thing 
 must come. It was through his infinite merits he saved the world. 
 Does Mr. Pope, in the hearing of bishops, dare to stay the 
 arm of divine and omnipotent mercy, in his explanation of the 
 sin against the Holy Ghost? Are we not told, that whoever 
 invokes the name of the Lord shall be saved ? Is it impossible 
 that a man who has committed the sin against the Holy Ghost, 
 who has denied the known truth, may not, after the revolution of 
 sixty years, suppose, repent sincerely of his sins, obtain the par- 
 don of a merciful God, and be saved ? Shall it be said, that the 
 gates of heaven would be closed against a truly repentant sinner? 
 Tertullian was condemned for asserting, that the church had not 
 the power to absolve from the sin of apostacy, and from the sin 
 against the Holy Ghost. Tertullian was excluded from the 
 Catholic church in the second century, because he promulgated 
 such a doctrine. Mr. Pope says, that by paying the last far- 
 thing, is meant paying in this world. 
 
 [Mr. Pope.— What I stated was, that if sins be forgiven in 
 purgatory, the uttermost farthing cannot be 'paid there — if the 
 uttermost farthing he paid, sins cannot he forgiven in purgatory.] 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — You evidently say that the payment of the 
 uttermost farthing is confined to this world. By what r^ht can 
 you deny that it may not also be paid in purgatory ? If it be 
 paid in purgatory, then sins are forgiven there. If it be paid m 
 this world, then souls go direct to heaven, which I never denied 
 The necessity of purgatory to all, forms no portion of the beliel 
 of the Catholic church. Thousands may go to heaven without 
 going through purgatory. But if a man should die in venial sin, 
 God is too merciful to consign his soul to eternal damnation. 
 He will purify him, and take him to himself. God, in his mercy 
 «vill listen to the prayers of the faithful on earth, for those who 
 are placed in such circumstances. The Catholic church, there- 
 fore, receives the article of the communion of saints. I shall 
 not attempt to force it upon Protestants — but let them look i6 
 and examine it in the' creed. 
 
 My learned friend, Mr. Pope, has frequently referred to the 
 merits of Christ's blood. No one is more ready to plead tho 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY 121 
 
 efh^-acy of the Redeemer's blood than I am ; bul instead cf 
 introducing its glorious merits every moment in a public discus- 
 sion, I reserve it for more solemn occasions. When I behold 
 a sinner afraid to pray, I draw his attention to the infinite mercy 
 of God ; and when the unfortunate man, overwhelmed with the 
 weight of his sins, is on the point of sinking into despair, I 
 awaken his hopes, and arouse him to a sense of his duty, by 
 pointing to the blood of the Lamb, shed for the redemption of 
 man. Mr. Pope says, that the fire mentioned in scripture is 
 merely probationary. I am at a loss to know in that case what 
 our Divine Lord meant by casting into prison until the uttermost 
 farthing should be paid, which had not been remitted " while in 
 the way," that is, in this life, but which should be discharged 
 " in the prison," that is, in the next life. A confusion of ideas 
 seemed to pervade the mind of my friend while addressing him- 
 self to this point. To the man who sincerely seeks the truth, 
 the grace of God is given to guide and to direct him. But the 
 influence of grace would not have led my friend into the 
 erroneous interpretation which he endeavoured to affix to this 
 passage of the scriptures. 
 
 Mr. Pope has stated correctly the doctrine of the Catholic 
 church, with respect to the persons who go to purgatory. 
 The doctrine of the CathoHc church is this : — A. man who has 
 committed sin, but who has received absolution — whose heart is 
 penetrated with a sincere contrition for his sins — who has firmly 
 determined never more to offend, and is resolved to make resti- 
 tution to God and to his neighbor, — such a man may go to 
 heaven directly after his death. But those who have altogether 
 wasted their time here — who have neglected to perform the 
 necessary duties in the way of co-operation for the pardon which 
 they have obtained through the merits of Christ — must be purified 
 in a third place before they can enter the kingdom of heaven. 
 Mr. Pope has said, that Christ preached to those who were in 
 prison, but did not release them. I have heard the assertion 
 with astonishment. Surely, if Christ went to preach, he would 
 hot lose the effect of his mission. Christ went to announce to 
 the spirits in prison the glad tidings of redemption, to make 
 'known to them his victory over sin and death, and to bring them 
 with him to that paradise which he had promised to the thief 
 upon the cross. Where Christ is, there is paradise. The prison 
 was paradise while Christ was there. With regard to the private 
 opinions of theologians, which Mr. Pope has cited as making 
 against purgatory — even if they did so, (and I trust his quota- 
 tions are not unfairly taken) I shall merely say, that I am now 
 stating the doctrine of the Catholic church. Mr. Pope has 
 quoted the book of Wisdom., as if it contradicted' the book of 
 
 11 
 
122 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORI. 
 
 Maccabees. I shall just read to you the entire passage referred 
 to, and you will judge whether it is at all contradictory to the 
 book of Maccabees : 
 
 " But the souls of the just are in the hand of God, and the torment of death 
 shall not touch them. In the sight of the unwise they seemed to die, and 
 their departure was taken for misery, and their going away for utter destruc- 
 tion ; but they are in peace. And though in the sight of men they suffered 
 torments, their hope is full of immortally." — iii, 1 — 4. 
 
 Here the book of Wisdom merely states that the souls of he 
 just go to glory — and so they shall. Does that contradict the 
 doctrine of purgatory 1 Thousands may go to heaven without 
 going to purgatory — and those who go there, are only on their 
 passage to salvation — so there is here no contradiction whatever. 
 
 Mr. Pope has quoted a passage from the 2d book of Macca- 
 bees, as if it sanctioned murder. It merely eulogizes the soldiers 
 who died bravely in the defence of their country. Is it murder 
 the writer recommends, when he praises Judas for fighting 
 nobly? With regard to what Mr. Pope said respecting the 
 idols ; I grant that those who were slain had committed mortal 
 sin, but was it impossible for them to make an act of sincere 
 contrition before they expired, or in the paroxysms of death, to 
 look to the blood of the long expected Jesus 1 Was it not lawful 
 on that supposition, for Judas Maccabeus, who was a charitable 
 man, i^ offer up prayers for their repose 1 Granting that a 
 third place did exist, was his conduct inconsistent with that 
 doctrine ? It is quite impossible for Mr. Pope to prove that the 
 book of Maccabees is not canonical. He has quoted Bishop 
 Fisher against me ; It would indeed appear extraordinary if 
 Bishop Fisher, who died a martyr for the Catholic religion — who 
 was put to death by Henry YIII, along with the chancellor, Sii 
 Thomas Moore, because he would not deny the Pope's supre- 
 macy — should state what was contrary to the universally acknow- 
 ledged doctrine of the church. I shall not follow the example 
 of Mr. Pope, and volunteer unmanly allusions tn the established 
 church of England. I am not leagued with Ihose pretended 
 friends who conspire her overthrow. I would not conspire to 
 destroy even the temporalities of that church. In her spiritual 
 and apostolic claims, she comes nearest to our own. 
 
 Mr. Pope has asked me, why did not Polycarp, who was one 
 of the early Fathers, speak of purgatory 1 This is a curious 
 negative argument. I might as well conclude, that because a 
 certain historian has not mentioned a certain fact, therefore it 
 never occurred — though vouched for by several other credible 
 and contemporary narrators. There is no mention made by 
 any early historians (the Christian writers excepted) of the 
 miracles of* Christ, unless in one passage in Josephus. Thai 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORF. 123 
 
 |)dssage has been exploded by critics as not authentic ; — am I, 
 tiien, from such premises, to conclude that these miracles never 
 were performed ? 
 
 I shall now read to you the passages from the Fathers, in 
 reference to the doctrine which forms the subject of discussion 
 this day. 
 
 Tertullian says 
 
 " We have oblations for the dead in the anniversary day." 
 
 And to widowers he writes, 
 
 " Reflect for whose soul you pray — for whom you make annual oblations.' 
 
 St. Ephrem of Edessa, in a work entitled his Testament 
 thus proceeds : 
 
 " My brethren come to me, and prepare me for my departure, for mj 
 strength is wholly gone. Go along with me in psahns, and in your prayers j 
 and please constantly to make oblations for me (irpoaipopas.) When th^ 
 thirtieth day shall be completed then remember me; for the dead ark 
 HELPED BY THE OFFERINGS OF THE LiviNG. Now Hstcn with patience to 
 what I shall mention from the Scriptures. Moses bestowed blessings on 
 Reuben after the third generation. — (Deut. xxxiii, 6.) But if the dead are 
 not aided, why was he blessed ? Again, if they be insensible, hear what the 
 Apostle says, * If the dead rise not again at all, why are they then baptized 
 for them.' — (I Cor. xv, 29.) If, also, the sons of Mathias (2d Mace, xii,) 
 who celebrated their feasts in figure only, could cleanse those from guilt, by 
 their offerings who fell in battle, how much more so shall the priests of Christ 
 aid the dead by their oblations and prayers." — In Testament tome iii, p. 
 294, Edit. Vossil. p. 37 1, Edit. Oxonii. 
 
 St. Cyril, of Jerusalem: 
 
 " Then (during service) we pray for the holy Fathers and bishops that are 
 dead ; and in short for all those who are departed this life, in our communion, 
 believing that their souls receive very great relief by the prayers that are offer- 
 ed for them, while the holy and tremenduous victim lies upon the altar. This 
 we will shew you by an example. For I know there are many who say, 
 * What good can it do a soul which is departed out of this life, whether with 
 sins or without them, to be remembered in this sacrifice?' But tell me, I 
 pray you, if a king had sent into banishment some persons that had offended 
 nim, and their friends should present him with a crown of immense price, to 
 appease his anger, might not the king on that account, shew some favor to 
 the guilty persons ? So do we address our prayers to God for those that are 
 dead, though they were sinners ; not by presenting to him a crown, but by 
 offering up to him Christ, who was sacrificed for our sins, that so he, who is 
 so merciful and good, may become gracious to them as well as to us." — Mysti- 
 gog. Cat pp. 297, 298. 
 
 The fourth council of Carthage, canon 79, tome ii, p. 1206. 
 Also, the 29th canon of the preceding council of Carthage, ibi- 
 dem, p. 1171 : 
 
 "Penitents who have carefully submitted eo the laws of the heads of the 
 church, should they accidentally die on the road, or by sea, where no assis- 
 tance could be given, should be renumbered in the prayers and offerings of thi 
 faUhfui:' 
 
 St. Gregory of Nysa, (Orat. pro defunctis. T. ii, p. 1066 
 7, 8.) says — 
 
124 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 "In order that a man might be left to the dignity of free will, and evil at 
 the same time be taken from him, Divine will thus devised : He allows him to 
 remain subject to what himself has cho»en, that having tasted of the evil which 
 he desired, and learned by experience how bad an exchange has been made, 
 he might again feel an ardent wish to lay down the load of those vices and 
 inainations which are contrary to reason; and thus, in this life being renova- 
 ted by prayers and the pursuit of wisdom, or in the next being expiated by 
 the purging fire, he might recover the state of happiness which he had lost. 
 Man, otherwise, must inchne to that side to which his passions tend. But 
 when he has quitted his body, and the difference between virtue and vice is 
 known, he cannot be admitted to approach the Divinity till the purging fire 
 shall have expiated the stains with wnich his soul was infected. That same 
 fire in others will cancel the corruption of matter and the propensity to evil." 
 
 St. Ambrose having, in the preceding part of the chapter, 
 spoken of the effect of penal fire on what the Apostle calls silver 
 and gold, and hay and stubble, thus concludes ; 
 
 " ' We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one 
 may recei/e the proper things of the body, according as he hath done, whether 
 it be good, or whether it be evil.' — (2 Cor. v. 10.) Take care that you carry 
 not with you to the judgment of God, either wood or stubble which the fire-may 
 consume. Take care lest, having one of the things that may be approved, 
 you at the same time have much that may give offence. ' If any man's works 
 burn he shall suffer loss ; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.' 
 (1 Cor. iii. 15.) Whence it may be collected, that the same man is saved in 
 part, and condemned in part, {salvatur ex parte, et condemnatur ex -parte.) 
 Concious, therefore, that there are many judgments, let us examine all our 
 actions. In a man that is just loss is suffered ; grievous is the burning of the 
 same work : in the wicked man, wretched is the punishment." — Sermon 20, 
 on Psalm cxviii, t. 2. 
 
 And in his comment on the first epistle to the Corinthians — 
 
 *' ' If any man's work burn, he shall suffer loss.' False doctrine, which 
 4hall perish, is the work that is said to burn, for all bad things must perish. 
 To suffer loss is to suffer pain. And who that is in pain does not suffer loss ? 
 But * he shall be saved, yet so as by fire.' He will be saved, the Apostle tells 
 us, because his substance shall remain, whilst his bad doctrine shall perish. 
 Therefore he said, 'yet so as by fire,' — in order that his salvation be not under- 
 ilood to he without pain. He shows that he shall be saved indeed, but that he 
 shall undergo the pain of fire, and be thus purified ; not like the unbelieving 
 and wicked man, who shall be punished in everlasting fire." 
 
 In Obitu Valentini — he says, in an apostrophe to the departed 
 emperor, 
 
 "Blessed shall you be if my prayers can avail any thing. No day shall 
 pass in which I will not make honorable mention of you ; no night, in which 
 you shall not partake of my prayers. In all my oblations I will remembe; 
 you." 
 
 And for the emperor Theodosius, deceased, having mad^ u 
 solemn prayer, he thus proceeds : — 
 
 " I loved him, therefore will I follow him to the land of the living. I will 
 not leave him till by my prayers and lamentations he shall be admitted to the 
 holy mount of the Lord, to which his deserts call him. Da requiem perfectam 
 servo tuo Theodosio.''^ — Grant, O Lord, perfect repose to tliy servant Theo. 
 drsius." 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 125 
 
 Mr. Pope rose. — I shall endeavor rapidly to follow my Rever- 
 end antagonist through his observations. I shall prove upon his 
 own showing, that some souls were confined one thousand years 
 in purgatory ; for if those who had been overwhelmed in the 
 flood, were in the prison of purgatory when Christ died, he will 
 admit, that the flood was somewhat more than one thousand years 
 before the death of Christ. (Mr. Maguire here observed, that 
 they did not go at all to purgatory.) With respect to exercising 
 an act of faith, how can any one exercise it on the authority of 
 the church of Rome, without examining the proofs of that autho- 
 rity ? The church of Rome, we are informed, builds her autho- 
 rity upon historical, that is, human testimony. This is somewhat 
 like building castles in the air. My Reverend friend has stated, 
 that there are no merits but the merits of Christ. But, what says 
 the council of Trent ? 
 
 " If any one shall say, that the good works of a justified person are so the 
 gifts of God, that they are not also the the merits of the justified liimself; or 
 that the justified person, by the good works which, through the grace of God 
 and the merit of Jesus Christ, of whom he is a living member, are performed 
 by him, does not truly deserve an increase of grace, eternal hfe,and the attain- 
 ment of eternal life itself, (if he shall depart in grace) and also an increase of 
 glory, let him be accursed." — (Sess. vi, cap. xvi, can. 32.) 
 
 What does the doctrine of supererogation mean, if there be 
 no other merits but the merits of Christ 1 As to the sin against 
 the Holy Ghost, the adorable Saviour (not I) has said, that it is 
 unpardonable ; far be it from me, to limit the mercy of God ; as 
 far as my humble efforts reach, I would, if possible, preach the 
 gospel to the whole world, publishing free pardon through the 
 blood of the Lamb. My friend has asked, whether the payment 
 of the uttermost farthing refers to earth, or to a future state. 
 The Saviour in St. Matt, is exhorting us to be reconciled on tht 
 way^ that is, in this world. T admit, therefore, at once that " the 
 uttermost farthing" refers to the future state ; but I have shown, 
 that the passage speaks of everlasting punishment. With respect 
 to the 1st of Corinthians and 3d chap. ; I have already proved 
 that the fire is probatory not purgatorial, and that it is to try all ; 
 therefore, the Apostle does not speak of purgatory. My friend 
 has stated, that the mission of Christ to the spirits in prison, 
 could not have been ineffectual. I take him upon his own ground ; 
 I ask, did not Christ often preach, without any fruit resulting 
 from his labours 1 How few were actually converted by the per- 
 sonal ministry of Christ. The death of Christ was retrospective 
 as well as prospective. Abraham rejoiced to see his day. Many 
 through the vista of distant ages, beheld the rising of the star ol 
 Jacob, by faith discerned the manifestation of the Son of God, 
 about to offer an atonement for the sins of a ruined world. My 
 friend has said, where Christ ?s, there is paradise. Did Christ, 
 
 XI* 
 
126 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 in answer lo the prayer of the penitent thief say, " Yes, I y,\\] 
 remember thee ; I will go to purgatory for a few moments, but 
 shall leave thee there, to purge away thy sins." 'Tis true, where 
 Christ is, there is happiness, but in heaven happiness supreme • 
 there the Redeemer shines forth in all the effulgence of his per 
 sonal glories. I have shown that the book of Wisdom is against 
 the second book of Maccabees. He says, that the writer of 
 Maccabees commended bravery — " He struck himself with his 
 sword," is the. expression — I ask, was this dying nobly ? The 
 commendation is not that of bravery, but of suicide. (Mr. Ma- 
 guire here requested Mr. Pope to read the passage. Mr. Pope 
 complied) : 
 
 ** Now as the multitude sought to rush into his house, and to break open 
 the door, and to set fire to it, when he was ready to be taken, he struck him 
 self with his sword, choosing rather to die nobly^''^ &c, &c. 
 
 My friend has said, that the idolaters might have repented 
 before they died, I answer, had they repented, they would have 
 thrown their idols to the moles and to the bats : but we read, 
 that they were found under their garments. — (2 Mace, xii, 40.) 
 My opponent has said, that Bishop Fisher was a martyr. This 
 circumstance, I should have thought, would have given greater 
 weight to Bishop Fisher's authority, concerning the novelty of 
 purgatory. 
 
 My adversary has objected to the negative proofs from Poly- 
 carp and others, as if I brought forward no direct testimony. 
 Hear St. Clement Romanus : — 
 
 " When once we shall have departed this life, there is no room for us in 
 another, either to confess, or to repent." — Ep. ad. Cor. xi, § 8. 
 
 Cyprian :— 
 
 " The end of the temporal life being accomplished, we are divided into the 
 habitations, either of everlasting death or immortality."-^ Ad Demetrian. 
 sec. 16. 
 
 The author of the Questions and Answers, attributed to Justin 
 Martyr, writes thus : — 
 
 " After the departure of the soul out of the body, there is presently made 
 a distinction betwixt the just and the unjust : for they are brou;^ht by the 
 angels to places fit for them : the souls of the righteous to paradise, where 
 they have the commerce and sight of angels and archangels : the souls of the 
 unjust to the places in hell."— Resp. ad Orthodox, Cluaest. 75. 
 
 Athanasius says — 
 
 •* That is not death that befalleth the righteous, but a translation : for they 
 are translated out of this world into everlasting rest : and as a man would go 
 out of a prison, so do the saints go out of this troublesome life, unto those 
 good things that are prepared for them." — De Virgin. 
 
 Macarius saith — 
 ** When the holy servants of God remove out of their body, the chorus of 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 127 
 
 angels receive their souls into their own side into the purer world, and so bring 
 Ihem unto the Lord." — CEgypt. Horn. 22. 
 
 Acrain — " The Lord beholding thy mind that thou lightest and lovest him 
 with thy whole soul, separates death from thy soul in one hour, for this is not 
 hard for him to do ; for he taketh thee away in the minute of an hour, and 
 taketh thee into his own bosom and unto light, for he plucketh thee away 
 from the mouth of darkness, and presently translates thee into his own king- 
 dom ; for God can easily do all these things in a minute of an hour — this 
 provided only that thou bearest love unto him." — Hom. 36. 
 
 I need not referr to other quotations. Some of the passages 
 which my opponent has cited, permit me to say, merely speak of 
 oblations for the dead. At an early period in the history of the 
 church, thanksgivings were offered for those who had departed 
 this life in the faith and patience of Jesus Christ. I have followed 
 my friend through some of his ramblings. He talks of sophistry 
 and quibbling, and expresses his wish to come to strong argu- 
 ments. I would also like to come to strong argument. You 
 will decide whether the proofs of my opponent are fitted to sup- 
 port the quaking foundation on which he stands. I shall now 
 first refer to presumptive arguments against purgatory. It is not 
 probable that a doctrine which makes so wide a distinction 
 between the rich and the poor, should have come from that God 
 who is no respecter of persons, and who has chosen the poor 
 rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom. This doctrine also savors 
 of inhumanity. I would assist, as far as my ability would enable 
 me, my humblest neighbour, in rescuing from destruction his ox 
 or his ass ; but what shall we say of a system, which, believing 
 that masses can assist souls suffering in purgatory, refuses to 
 olfer them, until the ready cash is paid down ! Again 
 the doctrine of purgatory, viewed in the light of holy scripture, 
 is inconsistent with the revealed will of God. St. Paul asks — 
 
 " He that spared not his own son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall 
 he not with him also freely give his people all tilings ? — Rom. viii, 32. 
 
 " As the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them 
 that fear him." 
 
 " He knoweth our frame, he remembereth that we are but dust : like as a 
 father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him : the mercy 
 of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and 
 his righteousness unto children's children."— Ps. ciii, 11, 13, 14, 17. 
 
 Judgment he calls " his strange work ;" " He does not will- 
 mgly afflict the children of men ;" (Lament, iii, 33,) and, if his 
 people are called to taste the cup of sorrow, he sweetens it with 
 many a consoling ingredient by the word of God, and teaching 
 of his spirit. God loves his people with an eternal and unchang- 
 ing affection. And can I suppose, that He who for their sakes 
 j^pared not his co-equal and co-eternal Son, will consign them 
 to a place of suffering, when they shall have passed through the 
 miseries of this sinful world? Again this doctrine is derogatory 
 
128 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 to the sacrifice of Christ. If it be a fact, that the one oblation 
 on the cross is all-sufficient ; if the promise of the ntw covO' 
 nant runs thus, " thy sins and thine iniquities will I remember 
 no more," " the blood of Christ cleanseth from all sin ;" if it 
 be a truth that God " will not give his glory to another," doe* 
 not the doctrine of purgatory derogate from the sacrifice of Cal* 
 vary ? Hear the council of Trent — 
 
 " If any shall say, that after the grace of justification has been received, 
 the offence is so remitted to the penitent sinner, and the guilt of eternal pun 
 ishment so effaced, that there remains no guilt of temporal punishment to bf 
 suffered either in this world, or in the world to come in purgatory, before 
 admission can be obtained to the kingdom of heaven ; let him be accursed." 
 Sess. vi, cap. xvi, can. 30. 
 
 Oh, my friends, what blasphemy ijs such language against that 
 Redeemer who bowed the heav€iis and came down amongst us — 
 who lifted oflT the curse of heaven's violated law, and redeemed 
 the immortal soul by his own blood ! — David says, 
 
 " As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our iniquities 
 from us : who forgiveth cdl thy iniquities : who healeth all thy diseases." — 
 Ps. cii, 12, 13. 
 
 In Isaiah we read, 
 
 "I am, I am he, that blot out thy iniquities for my own sake, and I will 
 not remember thy sins." — xhii, 25. 
 
 "I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more." 
 Jer. xxxi, 34. 
 
 "Thou shalt sprinkle me with hyssop, and I shall be cleansed : thou shalt 
 wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow." — Ps. i, ix. 
 
 " If your sins be as scarlet, they shall be made white as snow: and if they 
 be red as crimson, they shall be white as wool." — Isaiah i, 18. 
 
 kr\d yet the believer, according to the church of Rome, 
 requires fire to make his sins whiter than snow ! 
 Do I not read, Isaiah xxxviii, 17, 
 
 "But thou hast delivered my soul that it should not perish: thou hast cast 
 all my sins behind thy back." 
 
 Do I not read, John i, 29, 
 
 "Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who taketh away the sins (jf the 
 world." 
 
 And again, 1 John i, 7, 
 
 " The blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanseth us from dl sin.'* 
 
 And at the 9th verse, 
 
 " If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and 
 to cleanse us from all iniquity." 
 
 In Colossians we read 
 
 •* You, when j'ou were dead in your sins, and the uncircumcision of your 
 fiesh, he hath quickened together with him ; forgiving you all oflences." — w, 14 
 
 What says the prophet Micah, \u^ 19. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 129 
 
 •■ He will turn again, and have mercy on us : he will put away our "iniqui- 
 ties ; and he will cast all our sins into the bottom of the sea." 
 
 We read that, 
 
 " Other foundation can no man lay save that which has been laid, which is 
 Christ Jesus." — 1 Cor. iii, 11. 
 
 The Apostle Paul speaks of confidence — 
 
 " Their sins and iniquities will I remember no more j now where remission 
 of these is, there is no more an offering for sin." 
 
 " Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood 
 of Jesus, by a new and living way which he hath consecrated for us through 
 the vail, that is to say, his flesh, and having an high priest over the house of 
 God, let us draw near with a true heart, in full assurance of faith, having our 
 hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience." — Heb. x, 19, 22. 
 
 Mr. Maguire would be justified in censuring confidence, if 
 the believer placed his dependance on his own works for salva- 
 tion : but confidence is warranted, when exclusively built upon 
 the foundation laid in Zion, the obedience unto death of the 
 Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. St. Paul says — 
 
 " God commendeth his charity towards us, because when as yet we were 
 sinners, according to the time, Christ died for us ; much more therefore, being 
 now justified by his blood, shall we be saved from wrath through him ; for if 
 when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, 
 much more being reconciled shall we be saved through his life." — Rom. 
 v, 8, 10. 
 
 What is the meaning of the Apostle's argument ? 
 
 ** If when we were enemies we were reconciled to God, by the death of hia 
 Son, much more^ after we have been reconciled shall ive be saved by his life." 
 
 I would argue, that if, when we were enemies, God reconciled 
 us to himself, surely he will not consign the sinner to such a place 
 of torment as purgatory, after he has become his adopted child. 
 
 "There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus," (says St. 
 Paul, Rom. viii, 1.) 
 
 " Amen, Amen, I sajr unto you, he who heareth m}r word, and believeth 
 him that sent me, hath life everlasting, and cometh not into judgment, but is 
 passed from death to life. — John, v, 24. 
 
 I say, if there be no condemnation to them that are in Christ 
 Jesus, surely the Deity, who is infinite in justice, would not 
 consign the believer, against whom there is no condemnation, 
 to the tortures of purgatory. St. Paul writes, 
 
 " Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect ? It is God that justi- 
 fieth. Who is he that condemneth ? It is Christ that di^d, yea, rather, that 
 is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh inter- 
 cession tor us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribu- 
 lation or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or 
 Bword : as it written, for thy sake we are killed all the day long, we are 
 accounted as sheep for the slaughter ; nay, in all these things we are w?^r« 
 than conqueroi s. through him that hath loved us. For I am persuaded, that 
 neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things 
 present, nor tilings to comp, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, 
 
130 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 shall be a hie to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesns out 
 Lord.— Rom. viii, 33, 39. 
 
 The Donay version of the commencement of the passage 
 which I have read, is absurd. To the question, *' Who shall ac- 
 cuse against the elect of God ?" the Douay Bible replies, *' God 
 that justifieth :" as if the God who justifies, was the accuser of 
 his elect. And again, to the question, " Who is he that shall con- 
 demn?" The Douay translation answers, " Christ Jesus that 
 died :" as if the Saviour condemned his people. By the way, 
 I may mention, that Griesbach beautifully elucidates the pas- 
 sage, by placing a mark of interrogation after the expression 
 " God that justifieth," and at the end of the 34th verse ; the 
 meaning of the passage will then be — who shall lay any thing 
 to the charge of God's elect? Shall the God who justifies them^ 
 lay any thing to their charge ? Who is he that shall condemn ? 
 Shall Christ condemn, Vho died, and having been exalted to the 
 right hand of the everlasting throne intercedes for his people ? 
 I say with Paul, " If God be for his people, who shall be against 
 them ?" If God acquits them, shall the church of Rome condemn 
 them to purgatory ? 
 
 I shall fill up the few minutes that remain, by reading to you 
 quotations from several Roman catholic writers, which clearly 
 show, that during the dark ages the state of things was sucli, 
 that opinions the most monstrous could with facility have been 
 introduced. 
 
 A bishop of the church, in year 900, thus complains: 
 
 " So great folly now oppresseth the miserable world, that at this day more 
 absurd things are believed by Christians than ever any could impose upon 
 the blind pagans." — Agoberd. Epis« Lug. Lib. de Grandi, &c. 
 
 Sabellius siaith, 
 
 " It is wonderful to observe, what a strange forgetfulness of all arts did 
 about this time seize upon men, insomuch that neither the Popes nor other 
 princes seemed to have any sense or apprehension of any thing that might be 
 useful to human life. There were no wholesome laws, no reparations of 
 churches, no pursuit of liberal arts ; but a kind of stupidity, and madness, 
 and forgetfulness of manners had possessed the minds of men." 
 
 And a little after, — " I cannot," says he " but much wonder from whence 
 these tragical examples of the Popes should spring, and how their minds 
 should come to be so devoid of all piety, as neither to regard the person which 
 thsy sustained, nor the place they were in. — Enead. 9, Lib. i, 900. 
 
 Phil. Burgomansis says — 
 
 " It happened in that age, through the slothfulness of men, that there was a 
 general decay of virtue, both in the' head and in the members." — (Ann. 906.) 
 
 I wonder who the Head was ? And again, 
 
 "These times, through the ambition and cruel tyranny of the Popes, were 
 extremely unhappy ; for the Popes setting aside the fear of God and his wor- 
 ship, fell into such enmities among themselves, as cruel tyrants exercise 
 towards one another." — (Ann. 908.) 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGAl'ORT. 131 
 
 And Platina, tLeir own writer, in his History of the Popes, 
 gives the following account of their barbarities to their prede- 
 cessors, though many years deceased. 
 
 "These Popes minded hothing else but how they might extinguish both 
 the name and dignity of their predecessors." 
 
 Sigonius, speaking of these times, about the commencement 
 of the 10th century, calls them — 
 
 "The foulest and blackest, both in respect to the wickedness of the princes 
 and madness of the people, that are to be found in all antiquity." — De Regn. 
 Ital. Lib. 6. 
 
 Genebrard, speaking of the same time, observes, 
 
 " This is called the unhappy age, being destitute of men eminent for wit 
 and learning ; as also of famous princes and Popes. In this time there was 
 scarce any thing done worthy to be remembered by posterity." — Chron, Lib. 4. 
 
 Gerbert, about the beginning of the eleventh century, gives 
 this brief character of the Roman Church, in his Epist. 40, 
 "The world stands amazed at the manners of Rome." 
 Werner gives this character of these times in these words : 
 
 " About the year of our Lord one thousand, there began an effeminate time, 
 in which the Christian faith began to degenerate exceedingly, and to dechne 
 from its ancient vigour ; insomuch, that in many countries of Christendom, 
 neitlier sacraments, nor ecclesiastical rites were observed ; and people were 
 given to soothsaying, and witlicrafts ; and the priest was like the people."— 
 Fac Temporum. 
 
 Strong indeed is the complaint of a great prelate. He says — 
 
 "In the west, and almost all the world over, especially among those who 
 are called the faithful, faith failed, and there was no fear of God among them. 
 Justice was perished from among men, and violence prevailing against equity, 
 governed the nations. Fraud, deceit and the acts of cozenage were grown 
 universal. All kind of virtue gave way as an useless thing and wickedness 
 supplied its place. The M^orld seemed to be dechning apace towards its even- 
 ing, and the second coming of the Son of Man to draw near: for love was 
 grown cold, and faith was not found on earth. All things were in confusion, 
 and the world looked as if it would return again to its old chaos. All sorts 
 ♦ * + **** were committed with the same freedom as if they had 
 been lawful actions ; for men neither blushed at them, nor were punished 
 for them. Nor did the clergy live better than the people ; for the bishops 
 were negligent of the duty of their place, &c, &c. In a word, men run them- 
 selves heatHong into all vice, and all flesh hid corrupted its way." — Bell. 
 Sacr. Lib. 1, cap. 18. 
 
 Such was the state of things in the dark ages, when princes 
 bowed their knee to the Pope — did any improvement afterwards 
 takes place 1 
 
 St. Bernard in the thirteenth century, complain thus, 
 
 " We cannot now say, as is the people, so is the priest ; for the people are 
 not so bad as the priests." — In Con v. S. Pauli. Ser. 1. 
 
 And again, "The bishops to whom the church of God is now committed, 
 are not teachers but seducers, not pastors but impostors, not prelates but 
 Pilates." 
 
132 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 Mr. Maguire — I agree probably with Mr. Pope in a grea\ 
 portion of what he has quoted from Scripture. When Mr. Pope 
 talks of a detention for one thousand years in purgatory, and 
 speaks of those who were overwhelmed by the deluge, I have 
 only to say, that as they died in mortal sin, they could not there- 
 fore get admission even to purgatory. The patriarchs departed 
 in peace with God, but I affirm that they were detained in prison 
 until our Saviour came to them after his death, to announce the 
 glorious tidings of salvation. For no man could enter heaven 
 unless through the infinite merits of Christ crucified. The patri- 
 archs remained in a third place until released by Christ. This 
 is a point of Catholic doctrine. The onus lies on Mr. Pope to 
 show that that third place has ceased to exist. 
 
 As to the text quoted relative to the sin against the Holy Ghost, 
 St. Augustine, St. Cyprian, and a variety of more recent com- 
 mentators, declare that it is to be understood, like the text con- 
 cerning the rich man, not of an absolute impossibility, but of 
 great, perhaps extreme difficulty; that is, the grace of repentance 
 must come from the Holy Ghost. Now he who attributes the 
 work of the Holy Ghost to the Devil, cannot receive such grace, 
 therefore his salvation must be a matter of great, of rare diffi 
 culty — since his repentance depends upon the spirit he blas- 
 phemes. But if the heart of the man who has even committed 
 such a sin shall, in the course of time, become Aoroughly 
 changed — if he shall sincerely and heartily repent, will Mr. Pope 
 say that our Saviour will not extend forgiveness to that man ? 
 That is the opinion of some Protestant Divines ; but it never 
 shall be mine. I said that there was no pain where Christ was. 
 My friend retorted, and affirmed that wherever Christ was pre- 
 sent, there were heaven and happiness. He concluded this 
 portion of his argment with an appeal to the feelings of the meet- 
 ing. I shall make no effijrts to excite your feelings or to bring 
 into play your prejudices and passions. My only appeal shall 
 be to direct and positive arguments. 
 
 Mr. Pope referred to what is said of Nicanor in the book of 
 Maccabees, in order to prove that that book was not canonical 
 or inspired. Do we not read in the book of Judges that Jepthe, 
 who is there recorded as the ruler of the people of Goland — who 
 is spoken of as a valiant man, slew his own daughter, in pursu- 
 ance of a vow made to God. Are we, therefore, to reject a» 
 uncanonical the book in which this is recorded ? Do we not reao 
 of Moses having murdered the Egyptian — of a father having 
 children by his own two daughters. Are the books in which 
 those facts are re ated to be discarded as uncanonical ? 
 
 Did Mr. Pope quote any passages to prove that the righteous 
 must g^ directly to heaven, without passing through purgatory J 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 133 
 
 If the just man fall seven times a day, is it derogating from the 
 merits of Christ to say, that that man must suffer for a tkne in 
 purgatory ] Did not our Saviour annex conditions to our obtain- 
 ing salvation, such as baptism, — without which the atonement on 
 the cross cannot be applied to us ? Christ will not redeem ua 
 unless we are washed in the waters of baptism. Does he any 
 where say, that man will be justified by faith only, without baptism? 
 
 With regard to the belief of the Greek church, on the subject 
 of purgatory, I have here the translation of Dupi 's Ecclesiasti- 
 cal History, by a Protestant, and from it I shall read the follow- 
 ing passage : 
 
 " It is evident from some very ancient records of the church, that it was a 
 custom among the christians, ub antiquo, to pray for the souls of the faithful 
 departed, in the dreadful mysteries. St. Chrysostom plainly tells us, that it was 
 decreed by the Apostles. It is certain, that it was in use about two hundred 
 years after Christ. This is proved from Tertullian. who thus speaks, * let th^ 
 faithful widow pray for the soul of her husband.' This we find practised bj 
 many of the most eminent Fathers of the church." 
 
 I have already proved by quotations from Tertullian, St. 
 Cyprian, and other most eminent Fathers, that during the firsi 
 five hundred years of the Christian era, it was the practice of 
 the church to pray for the dead. And I have shown in the 
 foregoing extract, what is. the opinion of the Greek church. 
 When Claude, the Huguenot, was engaged in the celebrated 
 conference with Bossuet, he went to the trouble of writing to 
 the Greek church, in order to ascertain their opinions on the 
 doctrines of transubstantiation, purgatory, and the invocation of 
 saints. A council of the Greek church was assembled, and the 
 bishops who attended solemnly decided, that they held the 
 doctrine of the real presence of Christ in the sacrament, the 
 doctrine of purgatory, and of the invocation of saints. 
 
 With respect to the character of the Catholic church, the fol- 
 lowing passage is taken from the works of the celebrated Dr. 
 Jeremy Taylor, whose orthodoxy will not surely be questioned 
 by Mr. Pope : 
 
 "There are many considerations in the Catholic church, which may retain 
 persons of much reason, and more piety, in its communion. They know it 
 to have been the religion of their for^efathers, which had possession of men's 
 understandings before Prctestantism had a name. First, its doctrines had a 
 long continuance and possession of the church ; which, therefore, cannot be 
 easily supposed in the present possessors to be a design, since they have 
 received it from so many ages. Its long prescription^ wnich is such a preju- 
 dice, as cannot with many arguments be retrenched, as relying upon these 
 grounds, that truth is more ancient than falsehood ; that God would not, for 
 so many ages, forsake his church and leave her in error. Then comes the 
 splendour and beauty of that church ; its pompous service, the stateliness and 
 solemnity of its hierarchy, its name 'Catholic,' the antiquity of its doctrines, 
 the continual succession of its bishops, and their immediate derivation from 
 the Apostles. Add to this the multitude and vari ^ty of people which are of 
 its persuasion, the consent of elder ages, the great consent of one part ivitb 
 
1S4 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 another, contrasted with the great diflerences which are commenced among 
 their adversaries. To this again add its happiness in being the instrument 
 in converting divers nations — the piety and austerity of its rehgious orders — 
 the single hie of its priests and bishops — the severity of its fasts — the great 
 reputation of its bishops for faith and sanctity — the known hohness of some 
 of its rehgious founders of orders — its miracles — the accidents and casualties 
 wliich have happened to its adversaries, the oblique acts and indirect pro- 
 ceedin;:^ of some of those who have departed from it, and above all, the name 
 of heretic and schismatic which the Catholic church has fastened on them. 
 Protestants commit themselves by the conduct of the new reformers — at first, 
 a few and of the lowest rank of the clergy, being made under ecclesiastical 
 censures, assisted against their spiritual superiors by some secular powers, 
 when both these and they were subject to that ecclesiastical hierarchy, which 
 they opposed." 
 
 The following passage is taken from Sir Edwin Sandys' 
 Relation of the Western Religion : — * 
 
 " The Catholic church was founded by the Apostles, with promise, that the 
 gates of hell should not prevail against it. It has continued on now, till the 
 end of 1600 years, with an honourable line of near two hundred and forty 
 Popes, successors of St. Peter, — both tyrants, traitors, pagans, and heretics, 
 in vain wresting, raging, and undermining it. All the general councils, that 
 ever were in the world have approved and honoured it. God hath miracu- 
 lously blc'^t it from above, so that many doctors have enriched it with their 
 writings; armies of saints have embellished it with their holiness ; martyrs 
 with tlieir blood ; virgins with their purity. Even at this day, amid the diffi- 
 culties of unjust rebellions, and the unnatural revolts of h^ nearest children, 
 yet she stretcheth out her arms to the utmost corners of the world, newly 
 embracing whoje nations into her bosom. In all other opposite churches 
 there are found inward dissensions and contrariety ; change of opinions, 
 uncertainty of resolutions, with robbing of churches, rebelling against gov- 
 ernors, and confusion of order. In the Catholic church there is undivided 
 unity; resolutions unalterable; the most heavenly order, reaching from the 
 height of all power to the lowest of all subjection ; all with admirable harmony, 
 and undefective correspondence, bending the same way, to the effecting of the 
 same work," &c. 
 
 The venerable and learned Earl Fitzwilliam, in his Letters 
 of Atticus, thus speaks of the Catholic church : 
 
 "How I am struck with admiration, when I come to consider the antiquity 
 of this venerable Roman church ; its vast extent ; the majesty, the magnifi- 
 cence, the symmetry of its edifice; its immutable stability amid all the perse- 
 cution which it has undergone ; its admirable discipline, which seems traced 
 out by the hand of supernatural wisdom; the impotence of its adversaries, 
 notwithsanding all their sophistry, invectives, and calumnies ; when I con- 
 template the dignity, the virtue, the talents of its apologists; the vices, the 
 dishonesty of its first assailants; the total extinction of so many sects, 
 v/hich have risen up against it ; the little consistency of the present sects ; 
 their variations on points of doctrine," &c. 
 
 The ministers of the French reformed churches, in a memorial, 
 which they presented to the government, in the 1750, express 
 themselves upon this subject, in the following manner : — 
 
 "We do not dissemble, that in the parallel, which we sometimes make 
 between your church and ours, the striking features, notwithstanding some 
 abuses, are on your side. You certainly existed before we did, since your 
 
 *■ S«e Note on this passajje appended to Mr. Pope's Second Speech on Fourth Dsy 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 135 
 
 origin is coeval with that of the Apostles. Whilst, as for us, we have not 
 yet existed three centuries: since in 1515, both your ancestors and ouri 
 communicated at the san>emass; celebrated together the feast of Easter, 
 and lived in perfect unanimity of sentiment. Moreover, the chain of tradition, 
 whose first link was attached by Peter and Paul to the church of Rome, has 
 been in such manner preserved amongst you, that, if the Irenseuses, the 
 Gregories, the Athanasiuses, the Chrysostoms, were now again to return to 
 the earth, it would be in the church of Rome alone, that they would find that 
 lociety, of which, once, they had been the members." 
 
 It was such considerations as these that induced Henry the 
 Fourth of France, to abandon the Protestant, and embrace the 
 Catholic religion. — 
 
 " When this illustrious hero, previously to his conversion, was induced to 
 study the Catholic religion, he proposed, through the medium of Sully, a 
 variety of questions to the Protestant ministers. Amongst others he proposed 
 the following: — * Whether it was lawful for him to become a Catholic?-' 
 Their reply v/as : — * That it was lawful for him to become a Catholic : seeing, 
 that salvation is attainable in the Catholic church.' They added, it is true, 
 
 * Our religion is the more perfect ; but still, the church of Rome is sufficient 
 for all the securities of future happiness.' This answer obtained, — the mon- 
 arch now consulted the Catholic prelates and theologians respecting the 
 security of salvation in the Protestant church. But, he could not find one 
 single mdividual amongst these, that would allow such benefit to exist in this 
 society. Whence, he reasoned in this manner with the Protestant ministers : 
 
 * You pretend,' he said to them, * that, by continuing in your communion, my 
 religious state is more perfect, than if I were to become a Catholic; whilst, 
 at the same time, you own, that I may be saved in the Catholic church. 
 Now, the Catholics, on the contrary, all maintain that salvation is not attain- 
 able in your religion ; but that it is confined to the church of Rome. So 
 that, by uniting myself^ to the church of Rome, I may be saved, both according 
 to your acknowledgment and theirs. Therefore, 1 should be the maddest of 
 men, if, in a business of such infinite importance, I did not take the safest 
 side ; consequently ^ I decide in favour of the church of Rome, in which, by the 
 acknowledgment of all the world, and even of the men who are the most 
 opposed to each other — my salvation is secure.' " 
 
 Such was the reasoning, and such the decision, of Henry. . 
 They were, alike, the dictates of good sense and prudence. 
 The declaration of the Protestant university of Helmstadt, in 
 the case of the Protestant princess of Wolfenbuttle, who was 
 destined to be married to the archduke of Austria, is similar to 
 the preceding one of the French reformed ministers, and presents 
 the same kind of inference. The members of the above univer- 
 sity, in the year 1707, were consulted, 
 
 " Whether in the consideration of the proposed marriage, the princess 
 might, in conscience, embrace the Catholic religion ?" 
 
 The answer, delivered in the form of a declaration, was to 
 the following effect : — 
 
 " First, that the difference between the Protestant and the Catholic reli- 
 gions is not fundamental. Secondly, that is therefore lawful to pass from 
 the Protestant to the Catholic church." 
 
 Mr. Pope, you will be pleased to recollect, drew a frightfa 
 picture of this same Catholic church, and described some of the 
 
136 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATOHYc 
 
 Popes in the dark ages as execrable characters. I will not 
 deny — indeed, I have already admitted, that there were some 
 bad characters among the Popes — but they were few in number. 
 Were there not bad she Popes in England ? 
 
 Mr. Pope spoke of the dissolute lives of the clergy, but ha 
 does not describe more faithfully than does Reeve, in his Eccle- 
 siastical History, the dissoluteness and neglect of morals which 
 brought on the Reformation. A reformation was decidedly re- 
 quired, but it was a reformation in morals. Such a reformation 
 as the Almighty would bring about, by the instrumentality of good 
 and virtuous characters. Mr. Pope quotes a passage from Da- 
 vid : " Wash me yet more from my iniquity and cleanse me 
 from my sin." Here is the strongest proof that David had been 
 already forgiven his sins, and his supplication to the Lord to 
 wash him still more^ shows that the temporal punishment of the 
 sin remains after the eternal had been remitted. David adds — 
 " For I know my iniquity, and my sin is always before me.'* 
 David well knew the effects of sin — he was aware, that thougfc 
 the eternal punishment due for his iniquities had, through the 
 mercy of God, been remitted, that still he had a further account 
 to render, and that a temporal punishment was still to be inflicted. 
 
 Mr. Pope has endeavoured to work upon the feelings of his 
 auditory, by continual appeals to the merits of the Redeemer's 
 sacrifice. Did I ever deny that the merits of Christ's blood 
 washed out all sin ? But who will deny that a moral martyrdom 
 will render us more acceptable in the eyes of the Redeemer? 
 Who will assert, that if Christ grants favours to us, we should 
 not labour to render ourselves, in a certain degree, deserving 
 of them ] Will not a master be more ready to grant favours to 
 a servant, in proportion as that servant becomes entitled to them 
 by his good and moral conduct? Though I am not, hke Mr. 
 Pope, always dwelling upon the merits of our Redeemer's blood, 
 which should never be introduced but with reverence and awe, 
 yet I am always ready to assert my faith in their infinite and 
 glorious efficacy. Mr. Pope has spoken of the confidence of 
 the true believers — I would remind those who possess such con- 
 fidence to beware. I would tell them, in the language of scrip- 
 ture, to " take heed lest they fall." The inspired writer says, 
 " that no man knovveth whether he be worthy of love or hatred," 
 and our Saviour says, " Learn of me, because I am meek and 
 humble of heart." If meekness and humility were more pre- 
 valent at the present day, this discussion had never taken place. 
 I have been upwards of nine years in the mission, and I never 
 preached a controversial sermon, unfil I found the Biblicals 
 assailing my flock in all quarters — until I saw wolves in sheep's 
 clothing, endeavouring to lead them from their faith, and car 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 137 
 
 rying on their operations with a tract in one hand and the money 
 in the other — I then found it necessary to stand forward and 
 protect the rehgious principles of that flock, over which I wag 
 appointed the spiritual guardian and guide. 
 
 The council of Trent never said, that the merits of the saintR 
 can avail any thing per se. They merely serve others througl 
 the blood of Jesus Christ. Christ is the door through which we 
 shall enter — He is the vine — we are the branches — and what- 
 ever good works we may perform, or whatever merits we may 
 possess, are not to be attributed to us, but to that divine tree 
 whence we spring, and from which we derive our life and nour- 
 ishment. LtJt every pastor take care of his flock — I do not, in 
 that respect, invade the rights of others. Mr. Pope may say, 
 that he is commissioned to preach to my flock, but I deny the 
 fact. I say that he has no ordinary mission to do so, and he 
 must prove an extraordinary mission by miracles, as Christ and 
 Moses did. If he have an extraordinary mission, let him give 
 us such proofs of it, and I am ready to join with him. 
 
 I merely wish on this occasion to employ argument, not 
 rhetoric ; and to appeal, not to your prejudices and passions, 
 but to the sober reflections of your understandings. If I shall 
 be able to remove the prejudices of the honest amongst my 
 Protestant countrymen, I shall consider myself as having 
 achieved much. 
 
 During the heat of the Reformation, it will be allowed that 
 expressions escaped from the exasperated parties on both sides, 
 which had better been forgotten. We Catholics may appeal to 
 the learned and honest Thorn dyke, who in his " Just Weights 
 and Measures," says, 
 
 " The worship of the Host is not idolatry, for the flesh and blood ol Cnrist 
 is no idol to Christians, wheresoever he is worshipped. He that worships 
 the Host beheves the Lord Jesus Christ to be the only true God, hyposta- 
 tically united to our flesh and blood ; which being present in the Eucharist 
 in such manner as he is not present every where, there is due occasion to give 
 it that worship in the Eucharist, with which the Godhead in our manhood is 
 to be worshipped with upon all occasions. Will any Papist acknowledge 
 that he honours the elements of the Eucharist for God ? Will common sense 
 charge him with honouring that in the sacrament which he does not believe 
 to be there ? This is a calumny by which Protestants lead the public by the 
 uose." 
 
 He subsequently adds, 
 
 " They, that separate from the church of Rome, as being idolatrous, are 
 thereby schismatics before God." 
 
 Mr. Pope has attacked the Catholic clergy for receiving 
 money for saying masses. The Catholic clergy depend for 
 support upon their flocks ; they possess not the tithes and green 
 acres, and the fat of th^ land. Give them a certain portion of 
 the tithes and glebes, and I promise you they will never look to 
 
 12^ 
 
l58 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORr. 
 
 the poor, even for the most trifling compensation We read 
 that the labourer is worthy of his hire, and that he who preaches 
 the gospel should live by the gospel. Surely Mr. Pope will not 
 assert the contrary. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — My opponen has acknowledged, that they who 
 perished in the flood, died in mortal sin. Therefore, according 
 to Mr. Maguire's own sho\^ ing, as those spirits were confined 
 in the prison spoken of by St. Peter, the prison could not have 
 been purgatcry. My friend says, that the onus lies on me to 
 prove that there is not a third place. I reply, that the onus rests 
 on Mr. Maguire to prove the existence of a third place, and 
 also to show, that that third place is purgatory. He asks, if 
 there was the disposition to repent, would not God forgive the 
 sin against the Holy Ghost? Every one who possesses repen- 
 tance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, is 
 accepted of him; but this sin, whatever it be, appears to inflict 
 the awful punishment of judicial blindness. Mr. Maguire has 
 himself admitted, that the sin is unpardonable. I do not decide, 
 whether this sin can be committed in the present day ; perhaps, 
 the commission of it was confined to the times of the Saviour — 
 Mr. Maguire alludes to the cases of Lot and -of Jephtha. I 
 answer, that the scriptures, as a faithful history of human nature, 
 must contain narratives of crime ; but yet, do we ever find the 
 sacred volume speaking of acts of depravity, in language of 
 sanction and commendation ? Does the question need a reply ? 
 The criminal act is either pointedly condemned in the immediate 
 context of the narration, or by the spirit and precepts of the 
 inspired volume. But what are we to think of the book oi 
 Maccabees, which not merely relates an act of suicide ; but pos- 
 itively commends it ; " Choosing rather to die nobly, Nicanor 
 struck himself with his sword 1" Is this the authority of inspi- 
 ration 1 Is this bravery, to fear to meet death by the arm of 
 another, and choose rather to fall on his own sword ? My friend 
 has alluded to circumcision and baptism. I would say of bap- 
 tism, what Paul said of circumcision : 
 
 " He is not a Jew, which is one outwardly ; neither is that circumcision 
 which is outward in the flesh : but he is a Jew which is one inwardly ; and 
 circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose 
 praise is not of men, but of God." — Rom. ii, 28, 29. 
 
 I believe that God will never exclude a sinner from heaven, 
 if his dependance be founded upon the blood of Jesus, though 
 ne be not baptized. Mr. Maguire appears to have a high 
 respect for the Established church. I would refer him to her 
 catechism, which says, that " the sacraments of baptism and the 
 Lord's supper, are genirally necessary to salvation." Sh^ does 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 139 
 
 not say, "absolutely and essentially." Mr. Maguiie has said, 
 that the Redeemer made salvation depend upon baptism as a 
 condition. " He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved, 
 he that believeth not shall be condemned." It does not say, he 
 that is not baptized shall be condemned. Taking him on his 
 own ground, I would ask, does he mean to draw a parallel 
 between baptism and the excruciating torments of purgatory, 
 even as conditions of salvation ? When the jailer at Philippi 
 asked, what shall I do to be saved 1 St. Paul simply replied 
 »' Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved ;•- 
 afterwards I admit, that he administered baptism as the initiating 
 right of Christian communion. My friend has referred to the 
 Greek church — the authority of the Greek church weighs but 
 little with me. The statement that the Greeks did not believe 
 'in purgatory, was a quotation from Fisher, the Roman Cathohc 
 bishop. I omitted to notice one of my friend's quotations from 
 scripture in support of purgatory. The omission was of little 
 consequence, as in truth, the passage is perfectly and altogether 
 irrelevant. I shall read to you the context. 
 
 "We would not have yofi ignorant, brethren, of our tribulation which came 
 to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of measure, above our strength, so 
 that we were weary even of life. But we had in ourselves the answer of 
 death, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God who raiseth the deaa, 
 who hath delivered, and doth deliver us out of so great dangers ; in whotn 
 we trust that he will yet also deliver us, you helping withal in prayer for us; 
 that for this gift obtained for us, by the means of many persons, thanks may 
 be given by many in our behalf." — 2 Cor. i, 8, 11. 
 
 The last verse which I have read, is that which my opponent 
 adduced. Here is nothing about purgatory or prayers for the 
 dead ; were the Apostles on earth, or in the world of spirits,- 
 when this verse was penned 1 Need I offer any further com- 
 ment to show that no connexion exists between this passage and 
 the doctrine of purgatory. 
 
 The verse is just as much connected with purgatory, as that 
 which is commonly used as the motto of purgatorian societies — 
 
 " Have pity on me, have pity on me, at least you my friends, for the hand 
 of the Lord hath touched me."— Job. xix, 21. 
 
 A short time since I placed in the hands of a Roman Catholic 
 a Douay Bible, and called his attention to the passage ; and 
 great indeed was his astonishment, when he found that it was 
 uttered by Job, when Job was on earth. My friend asked, why 
 David prayed for the forgiveness of his sins after pardon had 
 been announced to him by Nathan, if his sins were altogether 
 blotted out. I answer, the Christian is conscious that the just 
 man falleth seven times a day, and living by faith, requires every 
 moment to cry out. " Purge me with hyssop and I shall be cle-un,'* 
 
140 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 by reason of the guilt which he is continually, and I may per- 
 haps say, sometimes insensibly, contracting. Compare the 
 declaration of the council of Trent, on the merit of good works 
 already quoted, with the sacred volume. The Bible says, 
 
 " The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life, through 
 Jesus Christ our Lord." — Rom. vi, 23. 
 
 Here is the council of Trent against God himself. My friend 
 spoke about confidence ; the confidence of which I spoke was 
 built upon the blood of Christ. He desired those who stood to 
 take heed lest they fall. I pray that I may be enabled to com- 
 ply with the exhortation, God bestowing upon me an humble 
 spirit. My opponent has stated that the Apostle says, 
 
 " No man knows whether he be worthy of love or hatred." 
 
 I must confess that I have never met with the passage in the 
 sacred scriptures. 
 
 Mr. Maguire deprecates the idea of standing here this day. 
 Had I not seen the passage in the Register, which is regarded 
 as the organ of Roman Catholic proceedings, this meeting 
 would never have taken place. With respect to personaHties I 
 shalltake no notice of them. 
 
 A passage in the sixth JEneid of Virgil, as translated by Diy- 
 den, will serve to throw light upon the origin of purgatory. 
 
 " Nor death itself can wholly wash their stains, 
 
 But lon^ contracted filth even in the soul remains. 
 
 The relics of inveterate vice they wear, 
 
 And spots of sin obscure in every face appear ; 
 
 For this are various penances enjoined, 
 
 And some are hung to bleach upon the wind, 
 
 Some plunged in waters, others purged in fires, 
 
 'Till all the dregs are drained, and all the rust expires. 
 
 ****** 
 
 Then are they happy, when by length of time 
 The scruffis worn away, of each committed crime j 
 No speck is left of their habitual stains. 
 But the pure tether of the soul remains." 
 
 One would think that Virgil saw prospectively the purgatory 
 of the church of Ron>e. Here permit me to make a remark, 
 that I cannot discover, by what process fire, which is material, 
 can purify an immaterial essence. I proceed to demonstrate 
 from the sacred volume, in addition to the arguments which 
 have been already adduced in refutation of the doctrine of pur- 
 gatory, that the souls of believers pass after death immediately 
 to everlasting rest. If the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from 
 all sin, then assuredly the man, who has thus been cleansed, is 
 translated at once into the realms of eternal glory. 
 
 In the fourth book of Kings, (or, as we have it, the Becond) 
 and twenty-second chapter, it is written, 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORr. 141 
 
 " Therefore, T will gather thee to thy Fathers, and thou shalt be gathered 
 to thy sepulchre in peace, that thine eyes may not see all the evils which I 
 will bring upon this place." 
 
 I ask, would such a promise have been made to king Josiah, 
 if the soul was to pass from the trials of this world to the agoni- 
 zing sufferings of a purgatorial fire. In the second of Corin- 
 thians, chap. V, 1st to 8th verse, the Apostle writes : 
 
 " For we know, if our earthly house of this habitation be dissolved, that we 
 have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in heaven ; 
 for in this also we groan, desiring to be clothed upon with our habitation that 
 is from heaven ; yet, so that we be found clothed, not naked ; for we also 
 who are in the tabernacle do groan, being burthened, because we would not 
 be unclothed, but clothed upon, that that which is mortal may be swallowed 
 up by life. Now, he that maketh us for this very thing is God ; who hath 
 given us the pledge of the Spirit ; therefore, having all this confidence, know- 
 ing, that while we are in the body, we are absent from the Lord ; for we 
 walk by faith and not by sight ; but we are confident, and have a good will 
 to be absent rather from the body, and to be present with the Lord." 
 
 Would the Apostle have made use of such language, if he 
 believed that he had to pass through a purgatory 1 
 
 ** To be absent from the body" and " to be present with the 
 Lord," we find, are in the case of the believer, according to the 
 Apostle, synonymous expressions : and " in the body," and 
 " absent from the Lord," are likewise identified. The Apostle 
 says, in Phihppians first chapter 21st to 23d verse : 
 
 " To me to live is Christ, and to die is gain ; and if to live in the flesh, this 
 IS to me the fruit of labour ; and what I shall choose I know not ; but I am 
 straightened between two, having a desire to be dissolved, and to be with 
 Christ, a thing by far the better." 
 
 A passage which is still more direct, is found in the thirteenth 
 verse of the fourteenth chapter of Revelations : 
 
 " And I heard a voice from heaven, saying unto me, write. Blessed are the 
 dead which die in the Lord, from henceforth ; yea saith the Spirit, that they 
 may rest from their labours, and their works do follow them." 
 
 Why are those who die in the Lord, blessed ? Is it, that, 
 delivered from the toils of the flesh, they go to purgatory 1 Are 
 they blessed, if enduring the intensity of purgatorial firel No ; 
 but through the grace of God, when the summons goeth forth, 
 they are translated from the changes and sorrows of this mortal 
 scene to the regions of eternal felicity. Surely the child of God, 
 instead of in any degree looking forward to the period of his 
 dissolution as the commencement of eternal blessedness, if he 
 must first pass through the lake of purgatorial fire, would doubt- 
 less stand shivering on the brink. The people of God whether 
 they live or die, are the Lord's. Would the Apostle assert that 
 the Lord's people are blessed after death, if they had to suffer 
 in purgatory on their way to glory? I have spoked on Mr, 
 Maguire's arguments ; I have considered his quotations fronj 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 scripture, and proved that they do not support the doctrine of 
 purgatory : I have shown that such a tenet is inconsistent with 
 the character of God, and derogatory to the Redeemer's sacri- 
 fice. We have seen, upon the testimony of holy writ, that the 
 blood of Jesus Christ is perfectly compet^ent for the salvation 
 of sinners : we have seen Fathers against Fathers : I trust, we 
 shall no longer repose implicit dependance upon them. The 
 Bible, and the Bible alone, as the revelation of God, is the word 
 by\*vhich we shall be judged. That word directly shows us, that 
 thefsoul of the real Christian having been emancipated from the 
 body passes immediately to a state of felicity. We have also 
 seen, that the doctrine of purgatory carries on the very face of it 
 a contradiction to the sacred scriptures, in the distinction which 
 it establishes between the rich and the poor. And here I would 
 join issue with one who was well acquainted with the system of 
 the church of Rome, a converted priest : and if I use strong 
 expressions, I mean no offence to the feelings of my Roman 
 Catholic auditors — but I would endeavour to reach the judgment 
 and the conscience. The writer to whom I allude says, 
 
 " The doctrine of purgatory is of heathen origin, intended to cheat the sim- 
 ple out of their money, by giving them bills of exchange upon another world 
 for cash paid in this, without any danger of the bills returning protested." — 
 Meagher. 
 
 Spare your smiles, my friends: the subject is too momentous : 
 it is the salvation of the immortal and never-dying spirit, on 
 which we are discoursing ; it is the honor of Emmanuel's 
 atonement that we are vindicating. Will you not, in agreement 
 with scripture, give your universal verdict against a doctrine 
 which would rob the believer of his peace, which would throw 
 around the glorious attributes of heaven's sovereign, the funeral 
 pall of darkness and abscurity, which would transform a God of 
 love into a God of terror, mingle our paltry " satisfactions" with 
 the agonies of Calvary, and attach to the seamless robe of Christ's 
 righteousness, woven from Bethlehem to the Cross, the tattered 
 vestments of personal suffering 1 As to men of sense, I appeal 
 to the Roman Catholic clergy. Though we differ, still, as a 
 friend, I would say, " take care lest you are not bringing down 
 upon your heads the curses of innumerable immortal spirits.*' 
 We are all on our progress to an eternal world ; we must all 
 onward, whether we will or not, to our journey's end ; our pil- 
 grimage will soon terminate, and the exclusive objects of our 
 concern then will be the great realities of an eternal world. Let 
 us then, Protestant and Roman Cathohcs, while we are on the 
 way, look to Jesus, the only hope set before sinners ; let us kiss 
 the Son, lest he be angry, and the door of mercy be for ever closed. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 14fi 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — Gentlemen, after the very pathetic sermon 
 which you have just heard, the feehngs of many of you must be 
 in no small degree excited. I shall merely observe that I have 
 not come here to preach, but to argue — to examine evidence, 
 and expose sophistry. Mr. Pope has given us a history of 
 witchcraft in the tenth century. — It is but a few days ago that 
 several men were tried in Bible-reading England, for assaulting 
 and nearly killing a poor old woman under the impression that 
 she was a witch. She was supposed to have bewitched a colt, 
 and she was actually made to go under the colt's tail and pray 
 lor its health and prosperity ! This occurred in England where 
 there are ten Bibles for one head. Mr. Pope calls the sin 
 against the Holy Ghost an act of judicial blindness. Does he 
 hold that for a sin which a man has committed fifty years before 
 his death, artd for which he has sincerely repented, the gates of 
 heaven will be shut against him, and he will be condemned to 
 eternal reprobation ? Is Christ's blood to be of no avail to that 
 repentant sinner ? Is such the doctrine of Mr. Pope ? I be- 
 seech you all to examine the New Testament, and you will find 
 in almost every page of it, a contradiction to such a doctrine. 
 I may here beg to recall your senses which have been floating 
 upon that magical hemisphere created by the wonderful eloquence 
 of my friend, and direct your attention to the arguments he has 
 advanced. Mr. Pope says that the sacraments of the church 
 of England, namely, baptism, and the Lord's supper, are gener^ 
 ally necessary to salvation. Mr. Pope should understand the 
 word " generally," as theologians do, to mean that in some 
 instances the sacraments may be dispensed with ; for martyr- 
 dom, in the opinion of theologians, suffices as a substitute for 
 baptism. If Mr. Pope understands " generally," in that sense, I 
 quite agree with him. But if he denies that baptism is necessary 
 to all Christians who have the opportunity of receiving it, as a 
 requisite for salvation, I propose to him the distinct text of 
 scripture — 
 
 " Amen, I say unto you except a man be born again of water and the Holy 
 Ghost he cannot have life in him." 
 
 If the God of heaven thought fit to appoint a third place for 
 the purifying of souls from sin after their departure from this 
 life, is not Mr. Pope guilty of blasphemy, in thus calling the all- 
 wise God to an account 1 Christ does not derogate from the 
 efficacy of his own merits by the establishment of a third place ; 
 and the only question is, was there such a place de facto esta- 
 blished ? Mr. Pope has argued all through upon the assumption 
 that I believe that all souls should go to purgatory in the first 
 instance — I hope on the contrary, that many go direct to heaven, 
 
144 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 and a few comparatively to purgatory. Is it not evident, that 
 if many souls go directly to heaven, that does not militate against 
 the doctrine of purgatory. Because some souls should go di- 
 rectly to heaven, it would be foolish in the extreme to argue that 
 no such place as purgatory existed. I challenge Mr. Pope to 
 produce a single direct proof from scripture against purga.tory. 
 Every passage which he has quoted is perfectly consistent with 
 the existence of a third place. 
 
 Before I proceed further, let me read to you the following 
 passage from the pen of that candid Protestant divine, the learned 
 Dr. Thorndyke, in his " Just Weights and Measures." Speak- 
 ing of the doctrine promulgated by Luther, as to the justification 
 by faith only, he says, — 
 
 "Can it fall within the sense of a Christian to imagine, that he can be 
 restored by a *Lord have mercy on meV No, it must cost him hot tears and 
 sighs, and groans, and extraordinary prayers, with fasting and alms. Those 
 who assure sinners of pardon and the favour of God, with such means of true 
 repentance, whether it be themselves, or their false teachers, plainly murder 
 their souls." 
 
 Is not that a strong passage against the Lutheran and Cal- 
 vinistic doctrine of justification by faith only, which has been 
 adopted by Mr. Pope ? The inutility of good works is a pleas- 
 ing doctrine to promulgate ; — it ministers to the passions of 
 mankind, and encourages every species of immorality. 
 
 Mr. Pope talked of Job, and he stated that a Roman Catholic 
 was astonished on his telling him that Job used the following 
 words, while he was in this life : — 
 
 "Have pity on me, have pity on me, at least you my friends, because the 
 hand of the Lord hath touched me." 
 
 I now assert that generally speaking, learned commentators 
 agree, that Job there speaks in the spirit of prophecy of himself 
 when dead, that his language related to Jesus Christ, whose 
 death on the cross would redeem them, and that he therein 
 solicited the prayers of the friends about him when he departed 
 from this life. Such is the sense in which I find this passage 
 understood by the learned commentators. But I had never 
 quoted the text in support of the doctrine of purgatory, and Mr. 
 Pope is therefore only building castles in the air, for the purpose 
 of pulling them down. Is not the doctrine of Mr. Pope, on the 
 head of justification by faith, directly Calvinistici He has ap- 
 peared afraid to express the opinion which he evidently enter- 
 tains, that the blood of Christ is sufficient alone to save us ; as 
 if our Saviour himself had not annexed to the promise of salva- 
 tion, many co-operating conditions, the fulfilment of which is 
 necessary on the part of man — Hear what our Saviour says, 
 
 " But if thou wilt enter into heaven keep the commandments.^^ 
 
 " Unless you do penance you shall all likewise oerish." — Matthew, xix, 17 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 145 
 
 I have already proved that the word /usTavoia was used in 
 reference to the repentance of the men of Nineveh, and that 
 repentance we are told in scripture, consisted of the works of 
 penance, fasting, and similar mortifications. 
 
 I defy any Protestant, who, like Mr. Pope, manitains the right 
 of private judgment, to prove that the Bible is the inspired word 
 of God. The Protestant must take it upon trust from the 
 Catholic church. They receive the sacred scriptures from a 
 church whose authority they refuse to acknowledge. 
 
 Mr. Pope has again recurred to the origin of the present dis- 
 cussion, and repeated that the passage in the speech published 
 ia the Register, 'first gave occasion to it. Mr. Pope has spoken 
 t^o of that paper being the organ of the Catholic body — that 
 may be true, — but I will here say that the editor of the Register 
 had nothing to do with the speech in question. He should not 
 be held responsible for it, unless it had been given in by the 
 gentleman who furnishes the regular reports for that journal. 
 I have already disclaimed the accuracy of the report in question. 
 I have on the first day, stated to this assembly, how Mr. Pope's 
 challenge was sent round in green bags through my parish, and 
 that a copy of it was served regularly upon me at breakfast after 
 mass in the presence of several Protestants. Let Mr. Pope 
 employ what arguments he may think fit against my creed. I 
 shall not descend to personalities — even if he make a parcel of 
 crabs crawl across this table, and state that they are souls on 
 their journey to purgatory. I shall not accuse him of person- 
 ality. Mr. Pope forsooth has made a noble discovery. He 
 proves from a passage taken from the sixth book of YirgiPs 
 _^neid, that the Catholic church has stolen the idea of purgatory 
 from the pagan mythology. Virgil likewise speaks of hell. 
 Will Mr. Pope say that the doctrine of hell has been also stolen 
 from the mythology of the heathens ] I think I may make him 
 a full present of the notable argument which he has founded 
 upon the sixth book of the -3Eneid. 
 
 Mr. Pope says, that he cannot conceive how the fire of pur- 
 sgatory can act upon immaterial souls. This was precisely the 
 objection started by Voltaire against the doctrine of hell — namely, 
 /\hat fire could not act upon the human soul. That celebrated 
 infidel, therefore, contended that the soul must be annihilated 
 after its separation from the body ; and he ridiculed as incon- 
 sistent and absurd, the doctrine of future rewards and punish- 
 ments. The shade of Voltaire will, no doubt, feel extremely 
 obliged to Mr. Pope. 
 
 Mr. Pope eternally recurs to the merits of the Redeemer's 
 blood, in order to throw dust in the eyes of his hearers. There 
 is not a man on earth places more dependance than I do upon 
 
 13 
 
146 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 the sacred blood of our divine Redeemer. I feel that my eter- 
 nal salvation is a doubtful matter, but I hold, with the Catholic 
 church, that the merits of Christ's blood have out-balanced all 
 sin. I believe that millions will be blessed in the Redeemer's 
 nanne. Mr. Pope insists that the doctrine of the utility of good 
 works detracts from the merits of Christ's sacrifice. 1 1 remains 
 for Mr. Pope to show that sin is sanctioned by heaven : or that 
 because good works are rewarded by our Saviour, he therefor© , 
 derogates from his own infinite merits. We believe that all men 
 who are saved are saved alone through the merits of Christ. 
 As it is not derogatory to Christ to be an intercessor with the 
 Father, neither is it derogatory to Christ to have intercessors 
 under him. Mr. Pope's attempt to throw discredit upon the holy 
 Fathers does not look well for his cause. I beg you to recollect 
 the argument which I proposed respecting the Fathers — and 
 which argument, as Mr. Pope has not condescended to notice it, 
 I shall here repeat — either the Fathers in their writings published 
 what was the acknowledged doctrine of the church or they did 
 not. If they did publish the established doctrine of the church, 
 Mr. Pope must give up the first ages of Christianity, and the first 
 councils, and admit that there never was a period when such doc- 
 trine was not taught by the church. If the doctrines promulga- 
 ted by the Fathers were not those entertained by the church, w by 
 did not the church then disclaim them, and condemn their opin- 
 ions ? Why did not the heretics quote the Fathers, as opposed 
 to the Catholic church 1 Mr. Pope has given some quotations 
 from the Fathers. As soon as the substance of the present con- 
 troversy is drawn up and duly authenticated, I shall repair to the 
 library at Manchester, and there examine the genuine editions 
 of the Fathers, in order to ascertain the authenticity and correct- 
 ness of the quotations read by Mr. Pope. The quotations w hich 
 he has given are taken upon second hand authority. He has 
 had them, I believe ehsielricanie manu. 
 
 My quotations remain uncontroverted and incontrovertible. I 
 would recall the attention of all candid Protestants present to 
 this fact, that I have proved my doctrine by three distinct pas- 
 sages from scripture, which have not been explained by my op- 
 ponent — I have quoted Fathers who adduce the same texts of 
 scripture in support of the doctrine of purgatory. Were Jerome, 
 Augustine, Cyprian, Tertullian, and Origen, down to the fifth 
 century, all wrong in their opinions on this subject ? Will you 
 prefer the private judgment of Mr. Pope before the unanimous 
 consent of the holy Fathers and the authority of the church 1 
 
 Dr. Johnson, one of the greatest men that England ever saw, < 
 admitted the reasonableness of the doctrine of purgatory. IIu 
 acknowledged that it was a holy and reasonable doctrir f, and h« 
 
THE DOCTRIJNE OF PURGATORY. 147 
 
 Rcrordingly offered up prayers for the departed soul of his mother. 
 What Dr. Johnson held and acknowledged, few Protestants need 
 be ashamed of. 
 
 Negative proofs alone were those to which Mr. Pope has had 
 recourse. I have advanced no position in proof of the doctrine 
 of purgatory, which I have not founded upon at least two direct 
 and positive texts of scripture. I have also brought forward 
 the holy Fathers in support of the doctrine which I maintain. I 
 have proved that all antiquity concurred in giving the same mean- 
 ing which I now give, to the texts of scripture which I have 
 quoted. It must be acknowledged, even by Protestants, that 
 those holy Fathers, who lived immediately after the Apostles, and 
 many of whoni are canonized saints, form a great and powerful 
 authority, as to t^e doctrines of the church in the early ages o{ 
 Christianity. Mr. Pope will not admit the authority of the 
 church, nor will he give credit to the collective wisdom of the 
 holy Fathers. 
 
 We read, that God will render to every man according to his 
 works. If God plunges a man, for an idle word, into hell for all 
 eternity, where will a place be found for Antichrist, or for Nero, 
 Caligula, Domitian, and the other monsters of vice who have 
 disgraced the human form ] Where is a place of adequate pun- 
 ishment to be found for them, if a man be condemned everlast- 
 ingly for the expression of a single idle word 1 Yet we read in 
 St. John the words of our Lord, that 
 
 " Unless a man be born again of water, and the Holy Ghost, he shall not 
 enter the kingdom of heaven." 
 
 Is the doctrine propounded by Mr. Pope consistent with the 
 justice and mercy of God ? Protestants should beware of the 
 doctrine that asserts they must go directly and at once either to 
 heaven or hell. The alternative is a dreadful one, and obviously 
 does not consist with the goodness and mercy of God. 
 
 It is evident that the texts of Scripture are on my side. Has 
 Mr. Pope quoted a single text directly against the doctrine which 
 I advocate, or in contradiction to the texts whicn I have read to 
 you ] Weigh that fact in your minds. 
 
 Mr. Pope has attempted to cast discredit upon the utility of 
 good works. Now I ask him, how can a merciful God punish ?ne 
 eternally, for bad works, if he will give me no credit for my good 
 ones 1 I had been led to believe that the giving of even a cup 
 of cold water should have its reward. I have already stated 
 that good works avail not jter se, but through the infinite merits 
 of our Redeemer, who will reward the efforts of poor man, to 
 co-operate with divine grace, in the atonement for his manifest 
 Transgressions. 
 
148 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 Mr. Pope — As to the sermon which my learned opponent 
 accuses me of preaching, it originated from the fact, that there 
 were no arguments to which I had to reply. He has, indeed, 
 dealt in broad assertions, but not in argument, Mr. Maguire has 
 much objected to the expression, "judicial blindness." He 
 should ren ember, that the constitution of the mind is framed by 
 the God of mind. When we habitually resist the convictions 
 of our judgments, the darkness of the understanding is increased, 
 so that at length we cannot discover truth from falsehood : this 
 is judicial blindness. If it he the fact that so few go to purgatory^ 
 as JVfr. Maguire asserts, then I hope that the number of masses 
 for souls suffering in purgatory icill be in proportion diminished. 
 I brought forward the passage from Job, as equalling in irrelev- 
 ancy, Mr. Maguire's quotation from 2 Cor. i, 11. My opponent 
 has asserted, that we are indebted for the holy scriptures to the 
 church of Rome. I deny the position. Were there not various 
 churches beside the church of Rome? Has my friend never 
 heard of the Greek, the Abyssinian, the Chaldean, the Syrian, or 
 the Waldensian churches ? These all possessed the scriptures. 
 To employ an illustration, which I have used on other occasions. 
 If I desired a draught of water, and six or seven streams flowing 
 towards me, should go and plunge my vessel into the nearest 
 stream, I may be thus addressed by the proprietor of one of the 
 rivulets : — " Sir, you are entirely dependant on me for water, 
 but you shall not draw it from this stream ; it belongs to me." 
 I might reply, " I am not exclusively indebted to you or depen- 
 dant upon your fountain : there are five or six other streams at 
 hand ; youmay, if you please, debar me of access to your well, 
 but I can put my bucket into other sprhigs, and take a refresh- 
 ing draught.," 
 
 Mr. Maguire remarks, that my observation on the incompe- 
 tency of material fire to purge an immaterial spirit, coincides 
 with that of Voltaire. I hold, that although a spirit cannot suffer 
 from material substance, it can be taught to suffer by being 
 brought into contact with spirit. When the spirit is re-united to 
 the corporeal frame, then the body may suffer from material lire. 
 My opponent says, that the Fathers in the quotations, which he 
 adduced relative to purgatory, either gave the mind of the church 
 or they did not : if they did not, why did not the church protest 
 against them : if they did give the mind of the. church, why is 
 not the doctrine which he says they propound, received 1 In reply, 
 I say, that the quotations from the Fathers, which I have adduced 
 in refutation of purgatory, either gave the mind of the church, 
 or they did not : if they did not, why were they not protested 
 against ; if they did, why is not the doctrine received which they 
 suj>port? Therefore, we have Fathers against Fathers. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 149 
 
 My opponent asked questions in the last half hour yesterday 
 when he knew they could not be replied to. He has said that I 
 have not given my rule of faith. I beg to be permitted to deny 
 this assertion. I again and again stated, that the bibie is my 
 RULE OF FAITH. 1 never asserted that God suffered. Christ 
 suffered not in his divinity, but in his human nature : and the 
 union of deity with manhood, stamped an infinite value upon his 
 sufferings. I shall now proceed to prove the inspiration, canon- 
 icity, integrity, authenticity, and genuineness of the sacred vol- 
 ume. From the short time allowed, I shall be under the necessity 
 of condensing my remarks within a small compass. I would 
 first ask, how does the church of Rome decide upon these ques- 
 tions ? Is it by inspiration? My opponent, I am convinced, 
 does not entertain such an opinion. It is then on evidence ; 
 
 AND IS NOT evidence TANGIBLE TO OTHERS AS WELL AS TO 
 
 THE CHURCH OF RoME ] My friend has made an observation 
 to this effect, that I disregarded aggregate wisdom. The asser- 
 tion, permit me to say, is unfounded. I deny not, that in the 
 multitude of counsellors there is safety. Surely the wisdom of 
 a collective body may be serviceable, though not endowed with 
 the prerogative of infalHbihty. — As to the inspiration of the sys- 
 tem, revealed in scripture : all are convinced that we need a 
 revelation. The light of nature can in no wise discover to us a 
 plan, by which the Deity, in perfect harmony with his unchang- 
 ing perfections, can pardon guilty man. Socrates looked for 
 such a revelation. The law of opinion is continually fluctuating, 
 and does not furnish an immutable standard of morals. Do we 
 not want something to cheer and console us amidst the vicissi- 
 tudes and troubles of life 1 When we look beyond the portals 
 of the grave, do we not require a ray of truth to illuminate the 
 darkness of the tomb 1 By nature we know little of God, little 
 of ourselves, little of our destinies^ Here is a volume which 
 purports to be a revelation from heaven. I study it, and find in 
 it a sublime display of the divine perfections, a scheme of redemp- 
 iK>n perfectly adapted to my circumstances, a perfect code of 
 morals, a system whose tendency is to diffuse happiness on earth, 
 and to smooth the rugged brow of death ; so that the volume 
 bears upon its very front the broad impress of heaven. I find 
 that it has condensed the fragments of truth that are scattered 
 through the world, into a glorious whole. I find that it explains 
 the mazes and labyrinths of life, and brings glory to God in the 
 highest, and speaks peace on earth, good will towards men. Its 
 two great divisions, the Old and New Testament, contain prophe 
 cies which have been fulfilled in the destruction of kingdoms, 
 and in events which history has recorded. The Jews are scat- 
 tered throughout the world, and are still a distinct people. Lord 
 
 13* 
 
150 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 Chesterfield, with all his infidelity was obliged to say, that he 
 never could get over the state of the Jews as a testimony to the 
 truth of scripture. From what origin could such a system have 
 sprung? It could never have emanated from the schools of 
 antiquity. The schools were incapable of discovering the char- 
 acter of God, or of devising such a scheme of morals. Ancient 
 philosophers were, comparatively, children on the subject of 
 moral obligation. If philosophy could not impart such truth, 
 we must look to some other source, and I find — that source is 
 heaven. What object, I would ask, could the ♦ Apostles have 
 had m attempting to deceive mankind ? Was it temporal inter- 
 est? No — they exposed themselves to persecution and death. 
 When, therefore, I find the system which they have revealed, 
 according with the voice of nature, adapted to the circumstan- 
 ces of man, accurately describing his character, and palpably 
 embodying in itself the attributes of Jehovah, I cannot avoid 
 asking, 
 
 " Whence, but from heaven, should men unskilled in arts, 
 
 In different ages born, in different parts, 
 
 Weave such agreeing truths, or how, or why, 
 
 Should all conspire to cheat us with a lie. 
 
 Unasked their pains, ungrateful their advice, 
 
 Starving their gains, and martyrdom their price ?" — Drtden. 
 
 Having made these observations on the inspiration of the sys- 
 tem contained in the sacred records, I beg to remark, that the 
 man convinced that the system is divine, does not experience 
 much difficulty respecting the canon of scripture. The illiterate 
 person never troubles himself upon the subject. He finds a 
 balm for his sorrows in the word of life — a medicine for his soul, 
 drawn from the laboratory of truth, prepared by the great Phy- 
 sician of Souls. As to the canonicity of the sacred volume : 
 what is the evidence respecting any work, such as Virgil or 
 Horace, but the testimony of the ancients 1 This testimony is 
 infinitely more conclusive in support of the sacred scriptures. 
 We shall commence with the fourth century, (it being unneces- 
 sary to begin with the writers of a later period) and take you 
 through successive witnesses up to the first century, when we 
 have the five Apostolic Fathers. Allow me to trespass upon 
 your attention by mentioning the names of some of the writers. 
 In the fourth century, we have numerous quotations from the 
 New Testament in the writings of St. Athanasius, Ephiphanius, 
 Jerome, Rufinus, Augustin, Eusebius, and Cyril, Gregory Na- 
 zienzen, Philaster, Arnobius, Lactantius, and others. In the 
 third century, we find various passages from the New Testa- 
 ment, occurring in the writings of Novatus, Dionysius, Commo- 
 dian, Auatolius, Theognostus, Methodius, Phileas, \ictorinu.s, 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 151 
 
 Cyprian, Caius, and others. In the second century, Tertulhan, 
 Clemens Alexandrinus, Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras, 
 Irenaeus of Lyons, Melito, Tatian, Hegesippus, Justin Martyr, 
 and Papias, contain numerous references to the New Testament. 
 This chain of evidence brings us to the five Apostohc Fathers: 
 Barnabas, Clemens, Romanus, Hermas, Ignatius and Polycarp. 
 In the fourth century we have catalogues of the books of the 
 New Testament made by St. Athanasius, (39 Ep. Fest. t. i, p. 
 961, E. 962, C.) Jerome, (De Stud. Script, ad Paul in. ep. 50, 
 al. 103, t. iv, p. 2, p. 574, ed. Bened.) Rufmus, (Expos. Symb. 
 Apost.) Augustin, (De Doctr. Christ. 1. 2, cap. viii, n. 12, 13, 
 14, torn, iii, p. 1, Benedict.) and Epiphanius, (Panar. h. 76, p. 
 941.) most accurately agreemg with the present received canon. 
 If this evidence be sufficient to satisfy every candid man, as 
 to the canonicity of the books of the New Testament, that por- 
 tion of the sacred oracles will enable us to conclude respecting 
 the canonicity of the books of the Oltl. Almost all the books 
 of the Old Testament are quoted in the New, as may be seen 
 by consulting the short appendix to Canne's Bible. The Jews, 
 as I have already stated, did not receive the apocrypha. The 
 passage to that effect from Bellarmine, is as follows : 
 
 " Omnes libros quos Protestantes non recipiunt," &c. 
 " All the books which the Protestants do not receive, the Jews also do not 
 admit." — Lib. i, De verb. Dei. c. 10, principio et sect ad locum. 
 
 In the beginning of the sixteenth century, the Compultenstian 
 Polyglot was published by Ximenes, Cardinal and Archbishop 
 of Toledo, in Spain. In the preface to the reader, there is a 
 special admonition given, that the books of Tobit, Judith, Wis- 
 dom, Ecclesiasticus and the Maccabees, with the additions to 
 Esther, which are set forth in the Greek onlijj are not canonical 
 scripture. The words are these — 
 
 " But the books without the canon, which the church receives rather for the 
 edification of the people, than for confirming the authority of ecclesiastical 
 dogmas, are given in Greek only, but with a double interpretation." 
 
 About this time, the Vulgate Bible with Lira's commentary 
 and the ordinary gloss, was printed at Basil ; in the preface we 
 read as follows : 
 
 " Since there are many, who because they do not bestow attention upon the 
 sacred scriptures, suppose that all the books which are contained in the Bible, 
 are to be venerated with like respect, not knowing how to distinguish between 
 canonical and uncanonical books, (which the Jews reckon amongst the apoc- 
 rypha) from whence they often appear ridiculous to the learned, therefore, we 
 have distinguished and distinctly enumerated, first, the canonical books, and 
 afterwards the uncanonical ; between which there is as much difTerence, as 
 between that which is certain and that which is dubious ; for the canonical 
 books were composed by the dictation of the Holy Spirit, but it is not known 
 9t 10 hat time, or hy what authors the uncanonical^ or in fther words ^ the apocry^ 
 
152 THE DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY. 
 
 vhal bioks were set forth; but the canonical books are of so great autlioritj, 
 that whatsoever is there contained, the church holds as true, firmly and with- 
 out question." 
 
 Permit me to add, that the Redeemer, who pointedly censured 
 the Jews for making void the word of God by their traditions, 
 would still have strongly condemned them, if they had left out of 
 their canon any part of the word of God. 
 
 With respect to the uncorrupted preservation of the Old Tes- 
 tament, let us bear in mind the great care with which the Jews 
 preserved it. Philo Judseus informs us, that the Jews regarded 
 the Old Testament with such profound veneration, that they even 
 counted the letters, that they discarded a copy which contained 
 a single error, and would rather lose their lives than alter the 
 original in the slightest degree. — (Philo. ap. Euseb. de. Praep. 
 Evang. lib. viii, c. 2.) How could the Old Testament have been 
 adulterated previously to the Saviour ? The Jews were divided 
 into sects. The Talmudists and the Caraites would naturally 
 watch over their common scripture with jealousy. Could the 
 Samaritans have been prevailed upon to unite with the Jews in 
 corrupting the Pentateuch'^ After the commencement of the 
 Christian era, the Old Testament was in the hands of Christians 
 as well as Jews. Had the Jews left out any portion of the 
 Old Testament, would they not have omitted the passages which 
 condemned the conduct of their leaders, which speak of the 
 dolatries of the people as sanctioned by their priesthood, and 
 which predict tlieir treatment of the Messiah 'I but these are still 
 found in the Old Testament. The quotations from the Old 
 Te'stament in the Fathers coincide with the same passages as 
 they stand in our Bible : from this fact also we infer, that the 
 Old Testament has not been corrupted since their time. The 
 New Testament has been dispersed in different countries. The 
 ^^ariety of sects which have existed, watched it with such jealous 
 care, that none could have mutilated it. We have many ancient 
 translations. Drs. Kennicott and Bentley have examined 
 numberless manuscripts, both of the Old and New Testament. 
 Dr. Bentley, speaking of the various readings, says, 
 
 " I, for my part, and, as I believe, many others, would not lament, if out o\ 
 the old MSS. yet untouched, 10,000 more were faithfully collected ; some di 
 which, without question, would render the text more beautiful, just and exact; 
 though of no consequence to the main of religion . nay, perhaps, wholly syn» 
 onymous in the view of common readers, and quite insensible in any modem 
 version." — Piiilaleuth. Lipsieus. p. 90. 
 
 These are proofs which must satisfy every candid inquirer, as 
 to the canonicity and uncorrupted preservation of the sacred 
 volume. 
 
 I pass on rapidly to my proofs of the authenticity of scripture. 
 The primitive Christian Fathers, and others were competent 
 
THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE REFORMATION. 153 
 
 judges as to matters of fact. And can we believe, that so many 
 would have deserted the schools of philosophy, enrolled them- 
 selves amongst the persecuted disciples of Jesus Christ, and 
 have suffered martyrdom itself, if they had not been convinced, 
 upon sound evidence, of the authenticity of the facts recorded 
 in the inspired volume ? With respect to the genuineness of the 
 New Testament : contrast the several books ; mark the coin- 
 cidence between the history of the writers and their respective 
 writings ; observe the style of each — the gospel of St. Luke is 
 of purer Greek than the others — this circumstance is accounted 
 for by the fact, that Luke was a physician, and consequently 
 possessed, it is presumed, some share of learning. We have 
 many Hebraisms and Syriacisms in the New Testament, by 
 which we know that the writers were Jews ; for their thoughts 
 being transfused into Greek, the diction contracted a tincture 
 from the medium through which they passed. On the other 
 hand, but few of the Fathers knew any thing of Hebrew. 
 
 Allow me here to remark, that in thus appealing to the mere 
 evidence of historical testimony — I am not departing from my 
 principles. The " modus tradendi," the mode of handing down,, 
 and the " res tradita," the thing handed down, are altogether 
 different. Cardinal Bellarmine mentions the evidences by which 
 a book is known to be canonical, " first, from the testimonials ot 
 the ancients — secondly, from its likeness and agreement wirh the 
 other books — thirdly, from the common sense and taste of Chris- 
 tian people." — De Verb. Dei. 1. c. 10. 
 
 " He that is spiritual judgeth things," says the Apostle Paul, 
 1 Cor. ii, 15. Let the man of a spiritual mind, read the 
 apocrypha, and his taste and feeling will nauseate much that is 
 contained therein ; nor will he find the same spirit in them which 
 pervades the books of holv writ. 
 
 Fourth Day. — Monday, April 23. 
 
 SUBJECT. — " The Justification of the Reformation.''^ 
 
 Admiral Oliver and Christopher Fitzsimon, Esq., in 
 the chair. 
 
 Mr. Maguire rose, and called on Mr. Pope to justify the 
 Reformers. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — Mr. Maguire has called upon me for a justitica- 
 tion of the Reformers : but permit me to remind you, genilem'^iv 
 
154 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 tliiit 1 stand up on the present occasion to justify the separation 
 from the Church of Rome which took place at the commence- 
 ment of the 16th century. I wish it to be distinctly understood, 
 that I stand not here to vindicate every act of the reformers : it 
 is the separation fi'om the church of Rome which I am to justify. 
 If I were for a moment to admit (which I by no means do) that 
 the reformers were the most abandoned characters upon earth — 
 if, for argument's sake, I were to make this concession, it would 
 not interfere with the question before us, which is — were the 
 reformers justified in separating from the church of Rome in the 
 16th century? The reformers, His true, had their failings like 
 other men ; but this is to be accounted for, partly from the natural 
 weakness of human nature, and partly from the influence of the 
 system which they had just abandoned. It is difficult for a per- 
 son, long accustomed to habits of indolence and profligacy, 
 instantaneously to engage in the activities of life — at once to 
 shakQ^ oflT the chrysalis, and stand forth in all the beauty and 
 proportion of moral rectitude. Suppose that you had been con- 
 fined in a gloomy dungeon for twenty or thirty y«ars ; when first 
 you are led forth to enjoy the light and liberty of heaven, is it 
 not natural to think, that you could not for some time enjoy the 
 perfect exercise of your visual organs 1 
 
 I would justify the separation from the church of Rome upon 
 two grounds : the first is, the degraded moral character 
 OF THE CHURCH OF RoME at the time of the Reformation ; 
 and the second is, the unscriptural nature of the peculiar 
 DOCTRINES OF THAT CHURCH. As to the moral character of 
 the church of Rome, I might only refer you to the quotations 
 which I have already adduced ; but to these I beg to add some 
 others. You will bear in mind that they are the testimonies of 
 Roman Catholic writers. 
 
 Cardinal Baronius says, in the close of the 10th century : — 
 
 " What then was the face of the Roman church ? How very filthy, when 
 ihe most powerful and sordid harlots then ruled at Rome, at whose pleasure, 
 sees were changed, and bishoprics were given, and — which is horrible to hear, 
 and most abominable — their gallants were obtruded into the see of Peter, and 
 made false popes ; for who can say they could be lawful Popes, who were 
 obtruded 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 ancient traditions proscribed, — lust, armed with the secular power, chal- 
 lenged all things to itself. — ****** 
 ♦ ♦ * ** * * *. * ¥ 
 
 What kind of Cardinals, do you imagine, must be then chosen by those mon- 
 sters, when nothing is so natural as for like to beget like? who can doubt, 
 ut they in all thing.^ did consent to those that chose them ? Who will not 
 easily believe 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 judgement to take cognizance of ot 
 p'lnish their iniquities." — Annal. Tom. x, A. D. 912, Art. 8. 
 
THE REFORMATION. 155 
 
 Of the 11th century Baronius writes, — 
 
 " That it was by Dithmarus styled the iron age, because iniquity did then 
 abound, and that many did then discourse and beheve, that in this very age 
 antichrist was to come, and the world was to have an end : and the corrup- 
 tion of manners which then (saith he) was very great, especially among tht 
 ecclesiasticsj might easily persuade men that it would be so." — A. D. 1001. 
 
 In the 16th century, in the council of Lateran, under Julian 
 the Second, it is declared that, 
 
 " Oppression, rapine, adultery, incest, and all pestilent vices, did confound 
 all sacred and profane things, and that the same beat St. Peter's ship so 
 impetuously, that it vv^as almost drowned." 
 
 " What may we think," said Platina, " will become of our age, wherein our 
 snis are grown so great, that they have scarce left us any room with God tc 
 obtain mercy. How great the covetousness of the priests is, and especially 
 of such as rule among them ; how great the lusts of all sects : what ambition; 
 
 f)omp, pride, what ignorance both of themselves, and Christian doctrine, wha< 
 ittle religion, and that but hypocritical rather than true, what corrupt manners 
 to be detested even in lay people, I need not say ; when they sin so openly 
 and publicly, as if they sought for commendation thereby." 
 
 Nicolaus de Clemangis, an archdeacon in the church of Rome 
 m the 15th century, in his epistle, where he speaks of flying no. 
 only with our minds from Babylon but with our bodies also, 
 writes thus — 
 
 " Who can there safely live, where not only wicked things are lawful, but 
 all men are compelled by the severest punishments to believe, speak, and 
 follow the most wicked and ungodly things ; and to embrace them as things 
 just and laudable ; where they do not only not receive sound doctrine, bu* 
 bitterly persecute all those who do resist the madness of their wills ? * * 
 What is it, think you, to be drunk with the cup of Babylon, but from long 
 conversation with her to be so infected with the contagion of her, that follow- 
 ing the erring herd, you willingly embrace false things for true ; perverse, for 
 righteous, mad things for sound : and to desire rather to be mad with the 
 jnultitude, than to be wise alone with danger and derision ? He that is dif- 
 ferent in manners from them, ought not to live there, where the plague of 
 corruption hath so prevailed as to infect all men with its contagion." — -P. 177. 
 
 In his book of Simoniacal Prelates, he says, cap. 1 : — 
 
 " The church is now become a shop of merchandise, or rather of robbery 
 and rapine ; in which all the sacraments are exposed to sale. * * And, 
 therefore, you see such men admitted to the priesthood and other holy orders, 
 who are idiots, unlearned, and scarce able to read, though way wardly, and 
 without understanding one syllable after another, who know no more of Latin, 
 than they do of Arabic, who, when they read, pray, or sing, know not whethei 
 tiiey bless God, or blaspheme itim — men undiscipUned, unquiet, gluttons, 
 drunkards, praters, vagabonds, lustful, bred up in luxury, and in one word, 
 kII^, and ignorant." 
 
 I will not shock your ears by reading the passage which fol 
 lows. In his book of The Corrupt State of the Church, cap, 
 lii, he tells us, 
 
 " That she was defiled with the sink of all vices ; and might be fitly called 
 the Church of Malignants : that the saying of the prophet was now verified, 
 vhat from the least q' them to the greatest ev^ry one was given to covetousnes^ 
 
156 THE JUSTIFi\;ATION OF 
 
 that from the prophet to the pnest every one dealt falsely. * * * * Vi ^1 
 * preaches or declares the gospel? Who, either by word or deed, sho»irS Jie 
 v/ay to Ihe eternal ?" 
 
 Speaking of the Pope, he says — 
 
 *'That by taking from the diocesans and patrons the liberty of presentation 
 to their benefices, he had stoci^ed the church with ignorant and wicked men. 
 [Tow great a number of expectants from that time came in, not from their 
 fitudies or the schools, but from the plough and servile arts, to become parish 
 priests, and obtain other benefices, who knew little more of the Latin, than 
 the Arabic tongue; who could not read, and, which is a shame to speak of, 
 scarce kneio Ji from B, and yet their immorality loas greater than their igno^ 
 ranee; for, being educated in idleness, without learning, they followed nothing 
 but idleness, sports, banquetings, brawlings and vain talk: hence is it, that 
 in all places we have so many ignorant, miserable, and wicked priests." — 
 Cap. 13. 
 
 In the next place, he taxes the cardinals with avarice, unclean- 
 ness, simony, and other vices. He says, 
 
 " That by their means it came to pass, that no man learned in the scrip 
 tures ; no honest, just, and virtuous persons were advanced to high dignities ; 
 but only ambitious persons, flatterers, buffoons, and men corrupted with all 
 vices; so that they were wholly unlearned, or if they knew something of the 
 imperial laws, or gainful sciences, they never thought of God's law, or of the 
 spiritual learning, in which the people were to be instructed to life eternal — 
 that if any person happened to condemn their covetousness and injustice, if he 
 endeavoured by wholesome exhortations, and by preaching to gain souls, if he 
 meditated more on the laws of God, than those of men, presently every man's 
 teeth were whet against him, and ready to bite him ; and they proclaimed him 
 a fool, and one unworthy of the priesthood. So that now, (saith he) the 
 Btndy of the scriptures, and the professor of divinity are become ridiculous to 
 all men." 
 
 Of the Bishops : • 
 
 " That in most diocesses, the rectors or the parish priests paid them a cer- 
 tain price for keeping ***** 'f *. That no man was admitted 
 into the clergy or sacred orders, or any ecclesiastical degree, without rewards, 
 which, saith he, is intolerable ; that being youths without beards, and scarce 
 got from under the ferula, they obtained a bishopric, knowing as little of that 
 office, as of the mariner's vocation ; that by their filthy examples they led their 
 flocks into bye ways, which tended to their ruin." — Cap. 11, 12, 13. 
 
 Again, 
 
 "What should I speak, (saith he) of the learning of the priests, when it is 
 visible that scarce any of them can read? they know not words, and much 
 less things: he of them that prayeth, is a barbarian to himself If any man 
 is idle and abhors labour, if he loves luxury, he gets now a days into the clergjr, 
 and then presently he joins himself to the rest of the priests that are volup^ 
 tuous, and live according to Epicurus, rather than according to the laws of 
 Christ."— Cap. 25. 
 
 " Such (saith he) is the abundance of wicked men in all professions, that 
 there is scarcely one among a thousand, who sincerely doth what his profes- 
 sion doth require ; if there be any sincere, chaste, sober, frugal person, in any 
 college or convent, who doth not walk in the broad way, he is made a ridicu- 
 lous fable to the rest, and is continually called an insolent, mad, and hypo- 
 critical fellow ; so that many who would have been good, had they lived with 
 iiood and honest men, are drawn by wicked company into their vices, lest 
 ihey should suffer the fore-mentioned reproaches among their companions."— 
 Cap. 26. 
 
THE REFORMATION. 157 
 
 He then concludes with an apostrophe to the Roman church — 
 
 *^ What tliinkest thou of thine own prophecy, the revelations c/f St. John? 
 dost thou not think they do at least, in part, belong to thee ; thou hast not 
 surely so wholly lost all shame as to deny this; look, therefore, into it, and 
 read the damnation of the great whore sitting upon many waters^ and there con- 
 template thy famous fads, and future rwi/i." — Declarat. defect. Virorum Eccless, 
 
 James de Paradise, of Chartres, who wrote a little after the 
 Council of Basil, says, 
 
 They who have the presidency in councils on the Pope's behalf when they set 
 thai matters in the council make against their masters and them, what can be 
 expected from them but that they will loithstand the decrees of such councils 
 with might and main, either hy dissolving them, or sowing dissensions in them; 
 and so the thing shall remain unfinished, and we be driven to return to the old 
 wilderness of error and of ignorance. Every body knows this to be most true, 
 unless it be some one happily who is not experienced in times past. The tra- 
 gedy which was acted in our age in the council of Basil doth sufficiently prove 
 it, as they knew well who have laid down the story before our eyes. — De Sept 
 Stat. Ecclesiae. 1. ♦ 
 
 Of the 16th century, in which the council of Trent was held, 
 and more particularly of the proceedings there, the complaints 
 are still more grievous. 
 
 "Amongst most of the primate? ofour religion, whose example the ignorant 
 people ought to follow and be conformed to, there is," saith Picus Mirandula, 
 "either none, or very little service of God, no good life, no shame, no modesty. 
 Justice is declined into hatred or favour, piety is almost turned into supersti- 
 tion, and by all orders of men sin is so openly committed, that very often the 
 virtue of the honest man is made his crime, and vice is honoured as a virtue 
 by them who think the unheard of petulaijcy and long impunity of their vices 
 to be as walls and enclosures to them." — Orat. ad Loen. X, et Concil Lat. 
 habit. A. D. 1512, Oper. t. xx, p, 1826. 
 
 Staephylus, speaking of the destruction of the city of Rome, 
 which happened A. D. 1527, observes — 
 
 " Whence is it that this happened ? to loit, because all flesh had corrupted its 
 ways, we were all citizens and inhabitants not of the holy city of Rome, but 
 of Babylon, that wicked city; of which that of the prophet Isaiah is fulfilled, 
 
 * How IS the faithful city become an harlot.' Let no man think this prophecy 
 hath been fulfilled already, in the destruction of Babylon or of Jerusalem. 
 No ! future things were present to the prophet's eye, and this the prophet hath 
 declared to us, saying, * the daughter of Zion shall be left desolate, as in the 
 wasting of the enemy.' St. John doth in the Revelations tell us, the daughter 
 of Zion is not Jerusalem but Rome ; and his description of her makes it plain. 
 
 * For the woman which thou sawest (saith he) is that great city which hath 
 do'Tiinion over the kin^s of the earth,' that is spiritual dominion. She sits, 
 saith he upon seven hills, which properly agrees to Rome, which, upon this 
 account, is styled Septicolhs. She is full, saith he, of the names of blasphemy 
 —she is the mother of uncleanness, fornications, and abominations, which are 
 in the earth ; than which words no more parlicxdar demonstration of the city can 
 be requisite, seeing these iniquities do almost generally reign, yet here they 
 have their seat and empire. Orat. habit, ad auditores Rotae Maii 15, A. D, 
 
 I might adduce many other quotations, but I shall bring tut- 
 ward only two more. Johannes de Eych, Episcopus Eystatensis, 
 speaking of the corruption of the times of the Reformation, says 
 
 11 
 
158 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 " The perverted manners by which almost all the ecclesiastical order iff 
 stained, so cloud the senses of all, that not only they do not perceive the w^ord 
 of truth with their ears, but even despising; amendment of life, they resist their 
 own salvation even with arms." — Prima Epistola, P. M. 2. 
 
 Franciscus de Victoria, observes, that, 
 
 " The Church could neither bear her disorders nor their remedies." — Ec 
 clssia nee mala sua, ncc remedia, ferre posse. — Prelect 4, prop. 23. 
 
 In addition to these testimonies from Roman Catholic authori- 
 ties, I beg leave to observe, that at the time of the Reformation 
 as my friend is well aware, there was an universal cry for a 
 
 REFORMATION OF ABUSES. 
 
 I am now come to my second point, namely, the unscriptural 
 nature of the peculiar doctrines of the church of Rome. 
 First, as to Tradition. — 
 
 [Here Mr. Maguire interrupte'd Mr. Pope. I came here to 
 defend three points of my religious creed. I attack but three of 
 your's. I will not allow you to go into others. 
 
 Mr. Pope replied, that the question before them was the jus- 
 tification of the Reformation ; and in order to justify it, it was 
 necessary for him to enter briefly into the doctrines of the church 
 of Rome. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. You should defend yourself, and not attack 
 ine. I appeal to the written regulations. 
 
 Mr. Pope. I stand on my defence, and am to show that the 
 reformers were justified in separating from the church of Rome : 
 from the state of that church, both with regard to morals ana 
 doctrine. 
 
 Mr. Maguire appealed to the chair : and after a consultation, 
 Mr. Lawless stated the opinion of the chair, namely, that Mr. 
 Pope had a right to state whatever reasons occurred to his judg- 
 ment, as having called for the Reformation, and on the other 
 hand that Mr. Maguire had a right to prove the scriptural cha- 
 racter of the doctrines opposed, in order to show, that the 
 Reformation was not called for on that account.] 
 
 Mr. Pope resumed. — Gentlemen, I shall take a rapid view 
 of the doctrines of the church of Rome, in order to prove that 
 the reformers were justified in separating from her communion 
 on that ground. 
 
 TRADITION. 
 
 The church of Rome says — 
 
 " All saving truth not being contained in the holy scripture, but partly in 
 the scripture, and partly in unwritten traditions; scripture and tradition are 
 to be received and venerated with like piety and reverence, "pari pietatis 
 aflfectu ac reverentia." — Conril Trident. Scss. 4, Decret. de can. Script. 
 
THE REFORMATION. 159 
 
 The Douay Bible says — 
 
 "You shall not add to the word that I speak to you." — Deut. iv ch. 2. 
 
 " Every word of God is fire-tried ; add not any thing to his words, lest thou 
 be reproved and found a liar." — Prov. xxx ch. 5, 6. 
 
 " For I testify to every one that heareth the words of the prophecy of thia 
 book : If any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the 
 plagues written in this book." — Apoc. xxii ch. 18. 
 
 " The holy scriptures can instruct thee to salvation by the faith wliich is in 
 Christ Jesus ; all scripture inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to remove, 
 to correct, to instruct in justice : that the man of God may be perfect, furnished 
 to every good work." — 2 Tim. iii ch. 15, 17. 
 
 " You have made void the commandment of God for your tradition." — 
 Matt. XV ch. 6. 
 
 I find, therefore, that tradition is condemned, and that scrip- 
 ture is able " to instruct unto salvation, to teach, to reprove, to 
 correct, and to instruct in justice, that the man of God may be 
 perfect, furnished to every good work." I am desirous of know- 
 ing, if the scriptures be imperfect, by what process they can 
 make a man perfect in every good work ? 
 
 READING THE SCRIPTURES. 
 
 The church of Rome intimate, that it is not for the people to 
 read the sacred scriptures — Indiscriminata lectio sacrae scrip- 
 turse interdicte est — and her practice abundantly confirms the 
 information. Cone. Trid. Sess. 4, Decret. de can. Scrip : Ind. 
 lib. prohib. Reg. 4. 
 
 The Douay Bible says — 
 
 "Come near, ye Gentiles, and hear, and hearken ye people: let the earth 
 hear, and all that is therein ; the world, and every thing that cometh fortli 
 of it." — Isaiah, xxxiv, 1. 
 
 And adds in the 16th verse — 
 
 " Search te diligently in the book op the Lord and read." 
 " Search the scriptures." — John, v, 39. 
 
 Our next subject is 
 
 PRIVATE JUDGMENT. 
 
 Certainly my friend has thrown new light on the extent to 
 which the church of Rome permits the exercise of private judg- 
 ment : however, I cannot avoid thinking, that the doctrine of the 
 church is in substance this — beheve implicitly what the church 
 tells you. 
 
 The Douay Bible says, 
 
 "Prove all thing^s ; hold fast that which is good." — 1 Thess. v, 21. 
 " Try the spirits, if they be of God." — 1 John, iv, 1. 
 
 IMAGE WORSHIP. 
 
 "/« is lawful to express any person of the most holy Trinity by certain sipis 
 none being so rude as to think that the divinity is expressed by that image. 
 But let the pastors teach that by them are declared some properties or actions 
 which are attributed to God. The imao-es and relics of Christ and the saints 
 
160 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 are to be duly honoured and venerated ; and in this veneration, those ar« 
 venerated which are represented by them." — Trent Catech. part iii, ch. 2, p. 
 302, Dub. 1816. Cone. Trid. Sess. 25, de Invocat. 
 
 The Douay Bible says — 
 
 " Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven thing, nor the likeness of any 
 thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that 
 are in the waters under the earth ; thou shalt not adore them nor serve them." 
 — Exod. XX, 4, 5 : See Deut. iv, 15, 16. Acts, xvii, 29. 
 
 All I ask the church of Rome to do is this — to write the 2nd 
 commandment under every image and picture, which are objects 
 of worship ; and the common sense of the votaries of the church 
 of Rome will rise up and declare, that such a practice is directly 
 opposed to the Word of God. 
 
 MEDIATORS. 
 
 The church of Rome says, 
 
 "There are other mediators of intercession in heaven besmes Jesus Chnst; 
 such as angels and saints and especially, the Virgin Mary, who is the mother 
 of mercy and advocatress of the faithful ; and it is good and profitable to in- 
 voke them, and to have recourse to their prayers and help." — Cone. Tid. Sesa. 
 25, de Invocat &c. 
 
 The Douay Bible says — 
 
 " Jesus saith to him, I am the truth and the life ; no man cometh to tlie 
 Father but by me." — John, xiv, 6, see 13th verse. 
 
 " There is ONE Mediator of God and man, the man Christ Jesus." — 
 1 Tim. ii, 5. 
 
 " Jesus is able also to save for ever them that come to God by him, always 
 living to make intercession for us." — Hebrews, vii, 25. 
 
 We have already had the subject of purgatory brought before 
 us ; and I am inclined to think, that some who believed impHcitly 
 in that doctrine, are shaken in the implicit character of their 
 faith in it. 
 
 GOOD WORKS. 
 
 A canon of the church of Rome, quoted on a former day, 
 may be thus condensed — 
 
 "The good works of justified persons are truly and properly meritorious 
 and duly worthy of eternal life." — Cone, Trid. Sess. 6, cap. 16, can. 32. 
 
 The Douay Bible says, 
 
 "By grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is 
 the gift of Goa ; not of works, that no man may glory." — Eph. ii ch. 8. 
 
 "The wages of sin is death, but the grace of God life everlasting in Christ 
 Jesus our Lord." 
 
 Or more plainly, 
 
 "The gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord." — 
 Rom. vi, 23. 
 
 "When you have done all things /hat are commanded you, say: we are 
 unprofitable servants ; we have done that which we ought to do.''— LukCi 
 «vii, 10. 
 
THE REFORMATION. 161 
 
 I need not now speak on transubstantiation- -that will be our 
 subject of discussion to-morrow, you will then see that that 
 doctrine can obtain no support from Holy Writ. 
 
 I pray you to judge from this brief contrast, between the 
 doctrines of the church of Rome and those of the Bible, whether 
 the reformers were not called upon to separate from such a 
 com .n union. 
 
 But my quarrel with the church of Rome, like that of the 
 reformers, is touching that grand tenet which she has laboured 
 to set aside, justification by faith — acceptance at the bar of God 
 in dependance solely on the atoning blood of the Saviour. I 
 trace up the principal errors of the church of Rome to ignorance 
 or rejection of this fundamental article of the Christian religion. 
 Would she, for instance, hold that good works entitle to eternal 
 life, if she believed that " by the deeds of the law no flesh could 
 be justified," (Rom. iii, 20,) and that the sinner could be saved 
 only by the obedience unto death of the Lord Jesus Christ? 
 How could the church of Rome maintain the doctrine of supere- 
 rogation, if she acknowledged that " every mouth is shut and the 
 whole world brought in guilty before God," (Rom. iii, 19,) and 
 that "cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written 
 in the book of the law to do them?" — (Gal. iii, 10.) Did she 
 believe the sacrifice of Christ to be an all-sufFicient atonement, 
 would she think a purgatorial fire necessary? If she knew that 
 the blood of Christ cleanseth from all sin, would she hold that 
 the soul stands in need of an additional purgation ? Could she 
 for a moment entertain the notion of repeating the sacrifice of 
 Christ, if He were acknowledged by her as having made by 
 " one oblation of himself once for all," an end of sin, reconcilia- 
 tion for iniquity, and as having brought m everlasting righteous- 
 ness ? This grand doctrine the reformers proclaimed, and for 
 the maintaining of it they stood out from the church of Rome. 
 Luther deemed it the " articulus stantis vel cadentis Ecclesiae." 
 and I say, let this doctrine be preached in all its fulness, and we 
 shall plant a lever beneath the fortresses of Babylon ; and soon 
 shall we hear her sentence issuing from the throne of the Eter- 
 nal, " Down with her, down with her, even to the ground." 
 
 Such are the reasons upon which I vindicate the Reformation.. 
 It is not my intention to justify every act of the reformers. If 
 I should wish to recriminate, Mr. Maguire may be assured, that 
 I have it in my power, in turn, to place in the most awful point 
 of view, the characters of those who are recognized as the heads 
 of the church of Rome. There is, however, this wide distinc- 
 tion — I do not acknowledge Luther as the head of my church : 
 Christ, the Lord over all, is the head of his mystical body ; I 
 call no man master in the strict sense of the term, and therefore 
 
168 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 am not bound to follow men only so far as they follow Christ, 
 much less am 1 called upon to justify every net in the history of 
 their lives. These are the two grounds, on which I would justify 
 the separation from the church of Rome, which took place in 
 the sixteenth Century : — first, ihe/pfioral condition of the church of 
 Rome — and secondly, the unscriptural character of her doctrines. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — Before I proceed further, I beg leave here 
 to enter my solemn protest against the decision of the Chair, 
 and the line of conduct which has been adopted towards me. 
 I publicly and solemnly protest against it. It is an obvious and 
 complete departure from the understanding and principles upon 
 which this discussion was commenced. Before I came to Dub- 
 lin, I had expressly agreed and stipulated with Mr. Pope, that 
 he should select any three articles of the Catholic doctrine which 
 he pleased, for attack — that I should select three points against 
 him, and that we should thus act the parts of plaintiff and de- 
 fendant reciprocally. I appeal to the candour of my Protestant 
 auditors, if this were not the express stipulation upon the faith 
 of which I agreed to meet Mr. Pope in this public controversial 
 discussion. One of the points which I selected against Mr. 
 Pope, was a justification of the Protestant Reformation. I 
 admit he was free to bring forward every circumstance which he 
 could consistently urge in defence of that schism. ' But is he, 
 on this occasion, instead of confining himself to that single 
 point, to level his attacks against all and every one of the doc- 
 trines of the Catholic church? Am I, in the short period allotted 
 to me, expected to be able to defend all the doctrines of my 
 church, and to repel all the calumnies and misrepresentations 
 which Mr. Pope may Hiring forward against her. I can only 
 say that my confidence has been abused — that I have been any 
 thing but well treated. I shall, however, proceed to rebut the 
 scandalous charges advanced by Mr. Pope, and which he has 
 grounded upon the authority of Protestant historians exclusively, 
 with the exception of Baronius and Bellarmine, and upon the 
 testimony of historians, be it observed, deserving of little credit 
 upon this particular subject. I must also remark that instead 
 of there being only three points on each side for attack and 
 defence, mutually, I have only three points at present, to urge 
 against Mr. Pope, while he has put me on my defence for fifteen 
 or twenty. Before I proceed to defend the articles of my creed 
 against the rigmarole attack which has been levelled at them by 
 my opponent, I shall advert to one or two facts which it may 
 be as well for you to bear in memory. 
 
 Mr. Pope has lot at all answered my arguments respecting 
 the proofs of the authenticity, integrity, and inspiration of the 
 
I'HE REFORMATION. 163 
 
 sacred scriptures. With regard to the Sixtine edition, I deny 
 that but two copies of it are in existence. I have here the Six- 
 tine and Clementine editions. A Roman Catholic clergyman 
 of this city purchased a copy of it exposed publicly to sale in 
 the city of Rome. I will admit that Clement did not wish that 
 that edition of the Bible should be circulated. Orders had been 
 given by the council of Trent that a pure and perfect edition of 
 the Latin Yulgate, " quam emendatissime," should be prepared 
 by learned men under the sanction of the sovereign pontiff. 
 Many verbal corruptions were to be found in the edition then 
 in common use, arising either from the neglect of the copyists, 
 or from the ignorance of those who endeavoured to purify the 
 text. Now Sixtus Quintus had previously taken upon him not 
 only to make out a pure copy of the Bible, but to introduce 
 changes from the original Hebrew and Greek editions, which, 
 in the opinions of St. Jerome, St. Augustin, and Dr. Wall, a 
 Protestant bishop, were not so pure as the old Latin and Italian 
 translations. When Clement perused the edition of Sixtus, he 
 ordered that it should be purified according to the ancient Latin 
 and Italian translations. But I defy any man to point out a 
 substantial difference between the Clementine and Sixtine 
 editions. It is curious, too, that in the preface to the Sixtine 
 edition, that preface from which Mr. Pope quoted with such 
 triumph the phrase " ne in mimma particula,''^ it is pronounced 
 lawful to make verbal amendments and corrections, but upon 
 condition that they shall be introduced into the text, and not put 
 in the margin, ^'•ad offensionem populi vitandam,^^ — lest the people 
 should be scandalized, not distinguishing between verbal and 
 substantial alterations. The ne in minima particular it is obvious 
 relates to matters of faith. 
 
 Mr. Pope asserted that masses were said for the rich and not 
 for the poor. I have the Missal here on the table, and by refer- 
 ring to it, Mr. Pope will find that mass is offered up for all tho 
 faithful, living and dead, without any reservation whatever. In 
 the sacrifice of the mass we pray for all Christians, for all infidels, 
 heretics, schismatics — nay, for Mr. Pope himself. The charge 
 of taking money comes with a bad grace from the other side. 
 There is a Protestant clergyman in this city, who is called 
 chaplain to the Virgin Mary ; his income amounts to jC300 a 
 year, and if the leases were out, it would average jC3,000 per 
 annum. This was bequeathed, some centuries ago, in order to 
 have masses said for the departed ; the masses are not said, but 
 the Protestant parson pockets the money. 
 
 The important fact has been estabhshed of Mr. Pope's igno- 
 rance of the Bible. Though he has told us he has made the 
 Bcriptures his continual study, and though he professed a thorough 
 
/64 THE JUiTlFICATION OF 
 
 acquaintance, both with the Protestant and Catholic versions, he 
 acknowledged his ignorance on Saturday of the following text : 
 " And yet man knoweth not whether he be worthy of love or hatred." 
 I can inform him that it is to be found in the ninth chapter of 
 Ecclesiastes. Between the Protestant and Catholic versions of 
 this text, there is no substantial difference as it runs thus in the 
 Protestant Bible — " No man knoweth either love or hatred, by 
 all that is before him." — Mr. Pope talked of the Cathohc church 
 teaching that all truths are not contained in scripture. I have 
 already proved, that all truths are not contained in the scriptures ; 
 and I challenge Mr. Pope to produce proofs from scripture foi 
 five articles of the Protestant creed. But I should recollect 
 that he throws the Protestant church entirely overboard. I beg 
 leave to ask him, does he consider the existence of a church at 
 all absolutely necessary, under the Christian dispensation 1 He 
 holds, it appears, the opinion of justification by faith only. What 
 does St. Paul say? 
 
 "If I should have all faith, so that I could move mountains, and have not 
 charity I am nothing." — 1 Cor. xiii, 2. 
 
 There is an example of faith without charity. St. James says, 
 " What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but hath not 
 works ? Shall faith be able to save him? ii, 14. "For as the body without 
 the spirit is dead ; so also faith without works is dead." — Ibid. 26. 
 
 If every thing be contained in the scriptures, why has not Mr. 
 Pope shown me texts to prove the procession of the Holy Ghost 
 — baptism, with the sign of the cross, &c. Why was it decreed 
 by the Apostles, at the council held in Jerusalem, that it appeared 
 good to them to abstain from all blood 1 I believe Mr. Pope 
 has no objection to take some good gravy occasionally. In 
 doing so, he goes in opposition to a positive command of the 
 Apostles. I have produced a commandment of our Saviour for 
 washing the feet, which taken juxta tenorem verborum, is as posi- 
 tive a commandment as any to be found in scripture. Mr. Pope 
 has endeavoured to show, that this was applicable to hot coun- 
 tries, as if the commandments of the Lord were to be adopted 
 according to the different temperatures of different countries, 
 and not applied to all indiscriminately. Is it not obvious to 
 common sense, that Christ intended his commandments should 
 be observed in cold as well as in hot countries ? I called on 
 ray opponent to produce proofs from scripture, authorizing the 
 baptism of infants. But I should recollect that he throws bap- 
 tism overboard. He adheres to justification by faith only. I 
 wou- a agree fully in the dogma with him if the word " only" 
 were removed. For what, I would ask, did God give free-will 
 to man? And why did our blessed Redeemer enjoin the keep- 
 ing of the commardments as a condition for salvation? 
 
THE REFORMATION. 165 
 
 "But if thou vill enter into life, keep the commandments." — Matt, 
 chap, xiv, 17. 
 
 I now come to Mr. Pope's rule of faith. He will say, as he 
 has said, that it is contained in the holy scriptures alo.ie. I beg 
 to ask my opponent, if the scriptures alone be his rule of faith, 
 is it not necessary for us to examine all the inspired books which 
 have been written ] Does he believe it necessary to know the 
 whole Bible, or a portion of it, for salvation? If it be only 
 necessary to know a portion of the Bible, I call upon him to 
 produce his authority from scripture for that belief. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — It may be well to read and know the whole 
 scriptures, if a person have the opportunity ; but I believe that a 
 man can be saved without reading the whole Bible. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — Show me a text to justify that belief? 
 
 Mr. Pope. — When the Apostle was asked, what shall I do to 
 be saved l he answered — " Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, 
 and thou shalt be saved." Acts, xvi, 31. At one period, only 
 the Old Testament was written. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — When it only was written, no person was 
 called upon to found his sole rule of faith upon it. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — I conceive if a person have the opportunity, it is 
 right to know all the scriptures. But a person can be saved 
 without knowing the whole volume. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — So, if a person read the Old Testament 
 merely, and is not acquainted with the New Testament, he may 
 be saved l 
 
 Mr. Pope. — I will make no such concession. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — I would much rather you would give us texts 
 of scripture, and not mere assertion. I never heard of so loose 
 a doctrine. I shall now reduce Mr. Pope to a dilemma. — If 
 the scriptures alone be his rule of faith, I ask is it not necessary, 
 in that case, to examine all the canonical books that have been 
 written % Now, all the canonical books that have been written, 
 are not to be found in any part of the known world. God would 
 have preserved all the inspired writings, had he intended that 
 the scriptures alone should be the rule of our faith ; but God has 
 not preserved all the inspired books of scripture, for not less 
 than twenty have perished ; therefore God did not intend them 
 as the 07ilij rule of faith — Mr. Pope must admit, according to his 
 principles, that it is necessary to examine all the canonical 
 books — for if not, how could he ascertain his rule of faith ? there 
 
166 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 might happen to be in these books, which are lost, or which he 
 should pass over, texts opposed to his doctrine, and which per- 
 haps expressly taught that the rule of faith was not in the scrip- 
 tures alone. If, on the other hand, Mr. Pope shall contend that 
 it is only necessary to know a partion of the Bible, I call upon 
 him to prove that to me by a positive text of scripture. 
 
 Now, again, either all the inspired books that have been 
 written are necessary to form the rule of our faith, or only a part 
 is necessary. If Mr. Pope shall assert that all are necessary, 
 then the scriptures are no rule of faith, since all the scriptures 
 are not to be found. But if Mr. Pope say, that only apart is 
 necessary, let him produce a text of scripture to prove that as 
 we cannot take his bare xoord on matters of such importance ; but 
 I defy Mr. Popo to produce any such text, therefore the scripture 
 cannot be the sole rule of faith. A living authority must be left 
 to direct and decide on matters of controversy. 
 
 I shall now show you that we have not all the scriptures. In 
 the book of Numbers, chap, xxi, 14, we read thus : 
 " It is said in the book of the wars of the Lord." 
 
 Where is that book 1 Gone. 
 
 In the third book of Kings, (which Protestants call the first) 
 Chron. iv, 32, we read that 
 
 "Solomon spoke three thousand proverbs," and "his canticles were a 
 thousand and five." 
 
 Where are these ? What a small portion of them we have now. 
 In the second book of Chronicles, ix, 29, it is said — 
 
 "Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they not written in 
 the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah, and in the 
 vision of Iddo." 
 
 Where are all those books 1 
 
 The first book of Chronicles concludes with these words, 
 
 " Name the acts of David the king, first and last, behold be they not written 
 in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan the prophet, and 
 in the book of Gad the seer?" 
 
 All those prophecies are lost. 
 
 In St. Paul's epistle to the Colossians he commands them lo 
 read in the church the epistle to the Laodiceans — Where is that 
 epistle 1 Lost. 
 
 In St. YauVs first epistle to the Corinthians, v, 9, he says, 
 " I wrote to you an epistle." 
 
 Where is the epistle which St. Paul wrote to them before the 
 epistle which is now called ^rs^ .? It is not in existence. So 
 here we find two epistles of St. Paul lost. 
 
 St. Matthew (and here I may remark that the original Hebrew 
 gospel of St. Matthew is quite lost. I should hke to know undei 
 
THE REFORMATION. 16? 
 
 such circumstances, how a Protestant can found his faith 
 upon the gospel of St, JMattheiv, which is lost, unless he depena 
 upon the authority of an infallible translator) — St. Matthew, I say, 
 xxvii, 9, cites words as spoken by the prophet Jeremy, which 
 are not to be found in any part of Jeremy now extant. Where- 
 fore, part of Jeremy the prophet is lost, as Cotrzein in this place 
 proves out of 2 Chron. xxxv, 20. St. Matthew also, ii, 23, says, 
 " It was spoken by the prophets he shall be called a Nazarene." 
 The books of the prophets who spoke thus have also perished, 
 for we find Christ never called a Nazarene in all the prophets' 
 books at present extant St. Chrysostom on this place, (Homil. 
 ix, in Matt, i,) says, 
 
 " Many of the prophetical monuments have perished ; for the Jews being 
 careless, and not only careless, but also impious, they have carelessly lost 
 some of these monuments ; others, they have partly burnt, partly torn in 
 pieces." 
 
 Here we find twenty books of scripture lost. Will Mr. Pope 
 show that none of those lost books are necessary, when he ac- 
 knowleges no church, and asserts that the Bible is his sole rule 
 of faith] Mr. Pope talks much about his rule of faith, and yet 
 he cannot tell where it is to be found. If he say that the scrip- 
 tures are not to be had — that a portion of scripture is only 
 necessary for salvation, let him produce to me a positive text 
 of scripture to that effect — for I allow nothing but n positive text 
 of scripture to decide upon such a vitally important point. I 
 challenge him to show where his sole rule of faith is to be found. 
 But he cannot produce any text to prove that all the scriptures 
 are not necessary, or that a portion of them is sufficient, for 
 salvation. Mr. Pope has had recourse to the Fathers to prove 
 the authenticity of scripture, though he rejected their authority 
 when quoted by me in support of the doctrine of purgatory. 
 
 I have shown from seventeen holy Fathers down to the sixth 
 century, that the doctrine of purgatory was retained and professed 
 throughout the Catholic church. He has quoted St. Jerome in 
 proof of the authority and authenticity of the sacred scriptures. — 
 But when I quote Jerome and the other Fathers in support of 
 the doctrine of purgatory, they are very consistently rejected by 
 Mr. Pope. He talked of Hebrew. I venture to say he is un- 
 acquainted with the Hebrew points. He spoke of the original 
 Hebrew copies. Would it not be necessary for the ignorant 
 Protestant, according to the principles of Mr. Pope to compare 
 all the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin copies of the scriptures, before 
 he could be satisfied of their inspiration ? All the proofs which 
 Mr. Pope has advanced, of the inspiration of the sacred scrip- 
 tures, rest upon human authority, and no act of faith can be 
 built upon such a fowndat/oi. Mr. Pope certainly spoke of an 
 
168 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 internal evidence. Now, if that be admitted, it must be admitted 
 as a first principle. It is denied, and ridiculed by the learned 
 Chillingworth, a Protestant divine, who, in reply to the words 
 of his adversary, " That the divinity of a wTiting cannot be 
 known by itself alone, but by some extrinsic authority," says, 
 This you need not prove^for no wise man denies it,^^ 
 
 If it were a first principle and self-evident, as Mr. Pope would 
 liave it, who would deny it? The truth of first principles no 
 rational man ever doubted. But millions of Christians deny 
 the doctrine of internal evidence. The Arians, the Manichaeans, 
 the Marcionists, &c, all denied internal evidence. The Catholics 
 throughout the whole world for eighteen hundred years, could 
 not discover this inward lights but, on the contrary, have loudly 
 protested against the doctrine of internal illumination, since that 
 new system has been broached. It cannot, therefore, be a first 
 principle, which Chillingworth himself and millions of Christians 
 unequivocally denied. // is only a foolish and visionanj scheme, 
 to which those who have no better resort, to prove the inspiration of 
 the sacred scriptures, 
 
 Mr. Pope. — Gentlemen — I need scarcely observe, that my 
 friend on the opposite side of the table has been speaking on the 
 subject which belonged to the second day of the meeting. Mr. 
 Maguire has protested against the line of our present proceeding. 
 He has spoken much of obedience to authority ; and^ suVely, 
 when the chairmen decided, he was bound, according to his own 
 principles, to bow to their decision. I submit to every man of 
 common sense, whether the line of argument, adopted by me on 
 this occasion, was not perfectly justifiable — namely, to show 
 that the peculiar doctrines, held by the church of Rome, wero 
 anti-scriptural, and that the Reformers were, in consequence, 
 called upon to separate from her communion. How could this 
 charge have been substantiated without the consideration of the 
 doctrines themselves 1 My friend should remember, that not 
 satisfied with the abstract question of private judgment for the 
 second day, he selected two or three other topics of debate—- 
 the right of private judgment, to pronounce upon the canonicity, 
 integrity, authenticity, and interpretation of the holy scriptures. 
 The second day was the time set apart for the consideration of 
 those subjects. My friend seemed to state, that he held in his 
 hand the Sixtine edition of the Yulgate, but I say, that the edition 
 which he produced, is the Clementine. 
 
 [Here Mr. Maguire called upon Mr. O'Reilly, into whose 
 hands he said that he had given the Sixtine copy for the purpose 
 of bringing it to the meeting.] 
 
THE REFORMATION, 169 
 
 Mr. Pope. — I beg to remark, that so great is the scarcity of 
 the Sixtine Bible, that the Jesuit Fisher not merely denied that 
 ?iny were in existence, but stated, that Sixtus V, bad not pub- 
 lished any edition of the Yulgate whatever ! Masses, we are 
 told, are generally offered for rich and poor : but, if they be 
 offered in this general way, why, I would ask, why should the 
 Priests take money specially from the rich ? My friend brought 
 forward a passage, "Faith without charity is dead." The 
 Apostles, I admit, speak of such a faith ; but it was merely such 
 as enabled an individual to work miracles, and yet left him unin- 
 fluenced by the grace of God. The genuine faith of God's 
 people "purifies the heart," (Acts xv, 9,) works by love, (Gal. 
 V, 6,) and overcomes the world (1 John v, 4,) enabling the 
 Christian to act in consistency with his profession, and is there- 
 fore the grand germ of spiritual life, and the parent of Christian 
 morality. Although the difference may appear trivial between 
 being justified by faith, and by faith alone, in truth the distinction 
 is most important. If the scriptures, I am asked, be the only 
 rule of faith, are we not then obliged to be acquainted with all 
 the scriptures, lest one part should contradict another. I meet 
 the question, and say, God never contradicts himself; he never 
 varies, but is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever : that 
 which God speaks once, as to moral truth, is eternal and immu- 
 table. My friend has observed, that if all the scriptures need 
 not be examined, then all are not necessary, I answer, that it 
 is the duty of all men, if they have opportunity, to read all the 
 scriptures. Yet, provided they place their hopes on Christ, 
 (and in order to do so, they need the influence of the Holy 
 Spirit) they will be accepted through him at the bar of God, 
 though they may not have read every part of the sacred volume. 
 My friend has spoken about sundry books that have been lost, 
 which, he says, formed part of the inspired records, and has 
 directed our attention to passages of the Bible, which allude to 
 other writings. But the onus rests on him, before his argument 
 can carry any weight, to prove that the books of which he speaks, 
 ever belonged to the sacred canon — that they were the dictates 
 of inspiration, and not portions of mere ordinanj hisiory, which 
 recorded some particulars that might not have been mentioned 
 in the canonical writings. I would also beg to observe, that 
 my friend believes in tradition and infaUibility. Roman Catholic 
 Divines, assuming that the Jewish church waS infaUible, are in 
 the habit of arguing from analogy, that the chur<ih-t)f Rome is 
 gifted with unerring authority. Taking Mr. Maguire on this 
 ground, I would ask, what was the use of infallibility to the 
 Jewish church, if it could not succeed in \>reserving the canon 
 of the Old Testament, perfect and entire Further — the onus 
 
 15 
 
i70 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 rests on him to show, that cither the written tradition, or the 
 viva voce exposition of the church of Rome, has supphed the 
 portion which, Mr. Maguire say^, has been lotst, or perfectly 
 accords with it. Now I take the sacred scriptures which we 
 possess, and with them I contrast the traditions of the Roman 
 Catholic church, and finding that they are in opposition to the 
 oracles of truth, I conclude that they are not of God ; for God 
 cannot contradict himself. My friend did not hke that I should 
 refer to the Fathers on the canonicity and authenticity of the 
 scripfures. I admit their authority as credible testimony — but 
 not as infallible. We must be convinced, that when the scrip- 
 tures are quoted by very ancient writers, they must at least have 
 been coeval with the authors who cite passages from them. I 
 appeal to the Fathers, to prove by their historical evidence the 
 authenticity of the scriptures. This kind of evidence in support 
 of the scriptures, is much more powerful than that in favour of 
 any other ancient record. It matters not very much for my 
 argument, as to the antiquity of the sacred volume, whether the 
 character of the Fathers who quote from it, be good or evil. 
 Mr. Maguire has allowed the authority of the Fathers, as faith- 
 ful witnesses. 
 
 My friend on the opposite side has scouted the idea of in- 
 ternal evidence. If God has said, that his invisible attributes 
 are to be discerned by his works. 
 
 " For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly 
 Been, being understood by the things that are made, his eternal power also 
 and divinity." — Rom. i, 20. 
 
 And if it be true that " God has magnified his word above all 
 his name," (Ps. cxxxviii, 2,) may we not expect that the Deity 
 has stamped, in an especial manner, upon this page of Revela- 
 tion, the impress of his own divine character i Mr. Maguire 
 has observed, that, according to my showing, God has not 
 /)rovided for the spiritual wants of all mankind. I return the 
 argument — is not the poor man, according to his principles, in 
 a worse condition than he would be, according to mine ? Is 
 the poor man to have recourse to councils and Fathers ? Again 
 I stand on firmer ground. Mr. Maguire, in order to prove the 
 truth of the Bible, must, according to his principles, first prove 
 the authority of the church, and refer the poor man to innumer- 
 able folios. I have only to preach the Gospel, and to put the 
 sacred scriptures into the hands of those whom I address, at the 
 same time adding, if necessary, some arguments in support of 
 their internal evidence. One reason which may convince every 
 unprejudiced mind that God intended his word to rest for support 
 principally upon internal evidence, is the fact, that few would be 
 able to examine the general proofs in support of the ir spired 
 
THE REFORMATION. . 171 
 
 ▼olur.ie. God has chosen many of the poor of this world to be 
 bright gems in the Saviour's diadem ; and when we know that 
 the great bulk of mankind are doomed to labour, the fact fur- 
 nishes us with a presumptive argument in favour of the proofs, 
 which rest on internal evidence, as being open to every indi- 
 vidual who seriously examines the sacred oracles. My friend 
 has said, that I was afraid of the Fathers in reference to purga- 
 tory — permit me to say, that was I not afraid to meet him on the 
 grounds of the Fathers ; T had various other quotations from 
 their writings ; And here allow me to observe, that my opponent 
 quoted a passage from Cyprian's letter to Antonian — " It is one * 
 thing to be waiting for pardon, another to attain glory," &c, &c. 
 It has nothing to do with purgatory. The church had relaxed 
 some penitential censures against those who had fallen in per- 
 secution ; and St. Cyprian was defending this measure, and 
 proving that the state of the martyrs entering at once into glory 
 was so much superior to the miseries of the lapsed, who were 
 anxiously expecting re-admission into the church, and must feel 
 anxiety about a future state, that there was no danger to be 
 anticipated from the relaxation — this he shows by adding "it is 
 one thing to expect with anxiety the judgment of the Lord in the 
 day of judgment — another to be crowned by the Lord." Ri- 
 galtius, a Roman Cathohc commentator, gives this explant*tion. 
 Further, in reference to the Fathers.' Most of the quotations 
 adduced by Mr. Maguire do not, I imagine, support the doctrine 
 of purgatory : they refer to oblations for the dead ; but those 
 oblations for the dead were not offered for souls in purgatory. 
 In the primitive church a practice existed of making thanks- 
 givings and offerings for those who had departed in the faith. 
 As Mr. Maguire has quoted a passage from Sir Edwin Sandys, 
 he can have no objection to my reading an extract or two from 
 the same author. Sir Edwin gives us the following general 
 view of the church of Rome, p. 35 : — 
 
 " This being the main ground work of their policy ; and the general means 
 to build and establish it in the minds of all men ; the particular ways they hold 
 to ravish all aflfections, and to fit each humor (which, their jurisdiction and 
 power being but persuasive and voluntary, they principally regard), are well 
 nigh infinite ; there being not any thing either sacred or profane, no virtue 
 nor vice almost, no things of how contrary condition soever; which they 
 make not in some sort to serve that turn ; that each fancy may be satisfiedf, 
 and each appetite find what to feed on. Whatsover either wealth can sway 
 with the lovers, or voluntary poverty with the despisers, of the world ; what 
 honour with the ambitious ; what obedience with the humble ; what great 
 employment with stirring and mettled spirits; what perpetual quiet with 
 heavy and restive bodies; what content the pleasant nature can take in 
 pastimes and jollity ; what contrariwise the austere mind in discipline and 
 rigour; what love either chastity can raise in the pure, or voluptuousness in 
 the dissolute ; what allurements are in knowledge to draw the contemplative, 
 or in actions of state to possess the practic dispositions, what with the 
 
172 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 hopefii? orcrogative of reward can work ; what errors, doubts, and dangers 
 with t})/ fearful ; what change of vows with the rash, of estate with the incon- 
 stant; >/hat pardons with the fauity, or supphes with the defective; what 
 miracles, with the credulous ; what visions with the fantastical ; what gor- 
 geouf:n€3s of shows with the vulgar and simple ; what multitude of ceremonies 
 with the superstitous and ignorant ; what prayer with the devout, what with 
 the chajitable v/orks of piety; what rules of higher perfection with elevated 
 affections ; what dispensing of breach of all rules with men of lawless condi- 
 tons; in sum, what thing soever can prevail with any man either for himself 
 t> pur?ue, or at least- wise to love, reverence, or honour m another (for even 
 therein also man's nature receiveth great satisfaction), the same is found with 
 them, not as in other places of the world, by casuality blended without order, 
 and of necessity, but sorted in great part into several professions, counte- 
 nanced with reputation, honoured with prerogatives, facilitated with provisions, 
 and yearly maintenance, and either (as the better things) advanced with 
 expectation of reward, or borne with, how bad soever, with sweet and silent 
 permission. What pomp, what riot, to that of their cardinals ? what severity 
 of life comparable to their hermits and capuchins? who wealthier than their 
 prelateu? who poorer by vow and profession than their mendicants? On 
 the one side of the street a cloister of virgins, on the other a sty of courtczana 
 with public toleration ; this day all in masks, with all looseness and foolery: 
 to-morrow all in processions, whipping themselves till the blood follow ; on 
 one door an exconnnunication, throwing to hell all transgressors : on another 
 a jubilee, or full discharge from all transgressions. Who learneder in all 
 kind of sciences than their Jesuits? What thing more ignorant than their 
 ordinary mass-priests? What prince so able to prefer his servants and 
 followers as the Pope, and in so great multitude? Who able to take deeper 
 or readier revenge on his enemies? What pride equal unto his, making 
 kings kiss his pantofle? what humility greater than his, shriving himself 
 daily on his knees to an ordinary priest? Who difficulter in despatch of 
 causes to the greatest? who easier in giving audience to the meanest? Where 
 greater rigour in the world in acting the observation of the church laws? 
 where less care or conscience of the commandments of God? To taste llesh 
 on a Friday, where suspicion might fasten, were a matter for the inquisition ; 
 whereas, on the other side, the Sunday is one of their greatest market-days. 
 To conclude: never state, never government in the Morld so strangely com- 
 ])acted of infinite contrarieties^ all tending to entertain the several humours 
 of all men, and to work what kind of effects soever they shall desire; where 
 rigour and remissness, cruelty and lenity, are so combined, that, with neglect 
 of the church, to stir aught is a sin unpardonable ; whereas with duty towards 
 the church, and by intercession for her allowance, with respective attendance 
 of her pleasure, no law almost of God or nature so sacred, which, one way 
 or other, they find not means to dispense with, or at least-wise permit th^ 
 breach of, by connivance and without disturbance." — Page 34, et seq. 
 
 "Europae Speculum, or, a View or Survey of the state of P^-eligion in tht* 
 western parts of the world: wherein the Roman Religion, and pregnant 
 policies of the church of Rome to support the same, are notably displayed ; 
 with some other memorable discoveries and commemorations." — Lond. 1632. 
 
 Sir Edwin Sandys gives the following description of the state 
 of religion in Italy in his time : — 
 
 ''The whole country is strangely overflown and overborne with wickedness, 
 with fiithiness of speech, with beastliness of actions; both governors and 
 subjects — both priests and friars, each striving as it were with other in an 
 impudentness therein ; even so far forth, that what elsewhere would not be 
 tolerated, is there in high honour — what in some other places even a loose 
 person would be ashamed to confess, their priests and friars refrain not openly 
 to practise."— P. 19. 
 
THE REFORMATION. 173 
 
 Again, p. 160. "It doth grieve me to speak, yea, the thought of it mu8* 
 needs bring horror and detestation ; what a multitude of Atheists do brave it 
 in all places — there most, where the papacy is most in his prime — what 
 renouncers of God, blasphemers of his Son, villanizers of his saints, and 
 scorners of his service : who think it a glorious grace to adore the king of a 
 country; but to name or think reverently of the Creator of the world, to 
 proceed from a timerous base-mindedness and abjectness." 
 
 Sir Edwin Sandys also describes the state of religion in Spain 
 in his time. Though Mr. Maguire objected to the authority of 
 Mr. White, he cannot refuse to admit that of Sir Edwin Sandys. 
 
 " The next is Spain, reputed loholly the Pope's also, as having been a long 
 time governed by the most devoted king, and longer curbed in by the most 
 cruel inquisition that ever the world had for the upholding of that sway." * * 
 
 "For a kingdom that hath the sirname of Catb'^'''^ " n greater danger 
 in the world, either wholly or in great part to k^cloi on Christianity, unless 
 grace from above and better wisdom to stay the increase of those pestilent 
 cankers of Mahomedanism and Judaism, which threaten the final decay, and 
 eating out of Christianism." — Pp. 163, 164. 
 
 " There is in Spain a sort of people of the Marrany, as they term them, 
 who are baptized Jews and Moors, and many of them in secret withal 
 circumcised Christians. 
 
 " All which, although conforming themselves in some sort of outward show 
 unto the Christian religion, yet are thought in heart to be utterly averse from 
 it, and to retain an inward desire to return to that superstition, from which 
 their ancestors by rigour and terror were driven ; and the Jews will say in 
 Italy that there come divers Spaniards to them to be circumcised there, and 
 so away to Constantinople to plant in the east." — Pp. 164, 165. 
 
 I shall not occupy your time with other quotations. You will 
 doubtless ask, how could such passages occur in a work which 
 apparently advocated the church of Rome. Si?^ Edivin Sandys 
 gave the statement ivhick JMr. Maguire read from his ivorks merely 
 as the allegations of Roman Catholic ecclesiastics in support of 
 their system,^ You shall see whether this charge is not founded 
 upon fact. In page 24, Sir Edwin Sandys begins a sketch of 
 the arguments which Roman Catholics employ in advocating 
 the church of Rome ; and aftejr having given the sketch, he 
 adds in page 33 : 
 
 " This is the main course of their persuading at this day, whereby they 
 seek to establish that former foundation : in the unfolding whereof 1 have 
 been the longer, because trial hath taught me, that not by some men's private 
 election, but, as it should seem, by common order, direction, or consent, they 
 have reUnquished all other courses, and hold them to thisj as the most effec- 
 tual means, in the way of persuasion, to insinuate their desire, and to work 
 their design." 
 
 Here is " iniquitas quotationis." — Hear it gentlemen ! After 
 this expose, I ask, is Mr. Maguire justified in boasting, as he 
 has done, of his quotations having been taken from the originals ? 
 
 * A debate on the above quotation having- arisen, viz. whether Mr. Maguire quoted 
 it, as put hy^othetically, as it is in the work from which he took it, namely, Fletcher'.s 
 Comparative View, or not ; some gentlemen affirmmg that he did, and some that ha 
 did not— it was agreed that the tex* s'lould stand, and that this note should be added 
 
 15* 
 
174 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 I have brought him to one original, and you have now seeri^ 
 how ill his quotation bears the test of such an examination ! 
 
 I come more immediately to the question, and I call distinctly 
 upon Mr. Maguire to do so. He is, perhaps, reserving some 
 (seemingly plausible arguments for the last half hour, when he 
 knows that no opportunity will be afforded me of replying. I call 
 on him to relinquish this ruse de guerre. He may be satisfied 
 with the mancBuvre, in which he succeeded the first day, when, 
 by speaking at one time but a quarter of an hour, he deprived me 
 of the advantage of closing the business of the day ; while he 
 had an opportunity of addressmg the meeting in speeches ex- 
 ceeding by one those which I delivered. I now call on him to 
 come like a man ,o ..-c question : let him not raise a dust, and 
 then hide the subject behind the cloud which he has created. 
 
 I have shown that the reformers were justified in their separ- 
 ation from the church of Rome, by the debased moral condition 
 of that church as well as by the unscriptural nature of her doc- 
 trines. Mr. Maguire has asserted, that my quotations, as to the 
 immoial character of the church of Rome, were from Protestant 
 writers. 1 beg leave to state, that the authors whose testimonies 
 I brought forward, were Roman Catholics, Let Mr. Maguire 
 show that his church was not in error : let him show that her 
 doctrines were scriptural : and then I shall admit that the refor- 
 mers were not justified in separating from her communion. Mr. 
 Maguire will talk much of the evils of concession, of private 
 judgment, and fanaticism, which, he will maintain, were exhib- 
 ited at the time of the Reformation. We shall hear, doubtless, 
 of the character of Henry YHI, of Luther, and of others ; but 
 I now say to Mr. Maguire, come to the pouit^ and do not evade 
 the question. You stand before an enlightened assembly : the 
 PEOPLE of Ireland are becoming daily wiser; they will see, 
 believe me, on whose side sophistry exists, and will distinguish 
 empty unfounded assertions from solid proofs; nor will they suffer 
 boasts to pass for argument. Let Mr. Maguire then meet me on 
 the point at issue. I stand ready to vindicate the Reformation. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — I never before saw the superiority of close 
 argument so triumphantly displayed — has Mr. Pope ever glanced 
 at the questions which I put to him so repeatedly and so 
 pointedly 1 I inquired from him the scriptural foundation upon 
 which a Protestant can build an act of faith : / expected — ijou 
 expected^ no doubt, a distinct answer to the question — has he 
 dared to give it / Protestants and Catholics, I beseech you to 
 look to that. Let i\\efact he recorded and go forth to the world. 
 He has quoted from Fra Paolo, who was no Catholic, and whom 
 Uiflhop Burnett calls a Calvinistic heretic. The Jansenists have 
 
THE REFORMATION. 175 
 
 been condemned by the Catholic church, and it is not fair to 
 quote them against me. The only CathoUcs to whom he re- 
 ferred, were Baronius and Bishop Fisher. 
 
 Protestants and CathoUcs, I again beseech you to remark, 
 that my opponent has not attempted to answer the arguments 
 which I addressed to him relative to the scriptures : he has 
 indeed made an eloquent harangue upon the necessity of the 
 Reformation — I shall satisfy you on that subject before I have 
 done. It is foolish to endeavour to escape from my direct ar- 
 guments by such an artifice. I may remark to Mr. Pope, that 
 in quoting historians, he should resort to those of approved 
 character, and well established veracity. I repeat my challenge 
 to Mr. Pope to answer the arguments which I brought forward 
 relative to the scriptures. I spoke of the scriptures which have 
 been lost : Mr. Pope attempted to throw discredit on them, — 
 he said they were mere histories, and not inspired. I ask, 
 would they have been referred to as holy books, in the genuine 
 and inspired writings and recommended there, if they were not 
 equallij inspired 1 If they be mere histories, as Mr. Pope would 
 have you believe, then the inspired writers must have been guilty 
 of fraud in referring to them. Mr. Pope includes in his sweeping 
 denunciation, the two epistles cf St. Paul, which I proved to 
 have been lost. Will Mr. Pope say, that they too were mere 
 histories ? — Will he dare to dispute their inspiration ? — Mr. 
 Pope, one would think, wishes to convert religion and scripture 
 into mere history. I shall indulge in no rhetoiical manoeuvres ; 
 nor will I amaze you with high sounding language, instead of 
 defensive arguments — I shall adhere to close disputation. 1 
 appeal to the judgments of the candid and the impartial. Have 
 I not shown the fallacy of the few arguments advanced by my 
 Reverend opponent] Mr. Pope has put a curious interpre- 
 tation on the remarkable words of St. Paul ; " If I have all 
 faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, 
 I am nothing." Mr. Pope, says that this is merely a faith that 
 can work miracles. Surely, if the faith which could move 
 mountains, and work miracles, could not save a man unless he 
 had charity ; a fortiori, the faith which could not perform mira- 
 cles, would not save a man without charity. He says, that God 
 could not contradict himself; and he gave us an eloquent de- 
 scription of the wonderful attributes of the Deity — I never gave 
 utterance to the absurd and blasphemous opinion, that God 
 could contradict himself. Mr. Pope, I repeat, is only raising 
 castles in the air for the mere purpose of throwing them down 
 again. He has returned to his doctrine of internal evidence — • 
 he says, that God Almighty knev/ that the great mass of man- 
 kind would not be able to answer the sophistries of the Deists 
 
176 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 and Infidels ; that owing to their ignorttnce, their habits, and 
 their want of opportunities, they would be unable of themselves 
 to remove the objections, which the ingenuity of the unbeliever 
 would throw in their way. This is the most powerful argument 
 that could be urged, to prove that God did not intend this holy 
 book to form the sole rule of m.an's faith : God always, in his 
 infinite wisdom, adapts the means to the end — If Mr. Pope's 
 doctrine were true, would the Almighty have adapted the means 
 to the end? Mr. Pope's doctrine directly militates against the 
 attributes of the Deity. — I again call upon him to tell me what 
 particular portion of scripture is sufficient for salvation^ and to 
 found his opinion, not upon reasonings, but upon a positive and 
 direct text of scripture. 
 
 Gentlemen, in proceeding to discuss the Reformation, I shall, 
 at the outset, lay down two principles upon which I found my 
 arguments. My first principle is this — that God never, in any 
 instance, employed notorious characters, savage and ferocious 
 men, immoral, and self-degraded wretches, to reform religion. 
 My second proposition is, that the reformers of the sixteenth 
 century were men of that description. If I prove both these 
 propositions, and neither, I imagine, can be leasonably disputed, 
 I shall bring this argument to a speedy conclusion. Be pleased 
 to observe, that in all history we read of no reformers of reli- 
 gion but Moses and the prophets, Jesus Christ, and the Apos- 
 tles, who were the agents and instruments under Christ. Moses 
 may, in the strict sense of the word, be called the reformer of the 
 Patriachal religion. Keligion had been, preserved to his days 
 by the tradition of the patriarchs. If we revert to the patriarchs, 
 we will find God preserving religion, not through the instrumen- 
 tality of bad and proverbially corrupt men, but of such charac- 
 ters as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, &c. For the space of two 
 thousand years, religion was preserved by the patriarchs, before 
 a line of scripture was written. P.eligion was then wafled down 
 by Iheir tradiiiofi, pure, simple, and uncorrupted. But the time 
 arrived when the old religion was to be built upon a more per- 
 manent basis, to be reformed, and enlarged. Moses was selected 
 by God for that purpose, to combine the traditions of the patri- 
 archs into one settled law. Moses proved his extraordinary 
 mission by the performance of manifest and splendid miracles. 
 The prophets too proved their divine mission by unquestioned 
 miracles. VV^hen our Saviour came to perfect the Jewish reli- 
 gion, do we not read of the splendid miracles performed by him 
 in attestation of his character as a reformer? Did not the 
 Redeemer declare, that if he had not performed such miracles, 
 the Jews who disbelieved, would have had no sin in theml Did 
 he not emphatically sav, that if he had not performed such mira- 
 
THE REFORMATION. 177 
 
 cles, they would have been justified in putting him to death ? T 
 never said, that God granted infallibility to the Jewish synagogue, 
 but I affirm, that it never, de facto, erred till the prophecies were 
 accomplished, and the Redeemer came, who then established his 
 church, to which he promised infallibility in express terms. If, 
 then, the Jewish church, to which infallibility was not promised, 
 did not err till the coming of Christ, a fortiori, the church which 
 Christ established, and to which he expressly promised infalli- 
 bility will never err. Hear the words of Christ himself : 
 
 *• The church is the pillar and ground of truth."—" The gates of hell shall 
 never prevail against it." — " He that will not hear the church, let him be unto 
 Ihee as the heathen and the publican." — "I will send you the spirit of truth 
 to teach you all truth." — " I will send you another Paraclete, to abide with 
 Tou FOR EVER." — " Yc are the light of the world." — " Ye are the salt of the 
 earth." — '* A city built upon a mountain cannot be concealed." 
 
 It is Mr. Pope who would make the God of Heaven contra- 
 dict himself. As the poor and ignorant man could never of 
 himself ascertain the inspiration of the scriptures, nor discover 
 therein Mr. Pope's rule of faith — God appointed the living 
 authority of the church to guide and direct him, and which church 
 I have already proved to be infallible. 
 
 Mr. Pope has recurred to the mass, and quoted the apostate 
 Blanco White — a notable authority truly, to oppose the authority 
 and credit of the Catholic church. He might as well quote the 
 authority of Julian the apostate, against the Catholic church. 
 We are desired by St. Paul to avoid a heretic, as one condemned 
 by his private judgment — propria judicio condemnatvs — and St. 
 John forbids to even salute him, Mr. Pope says, that I make 
 him a heretic — I deny that, in the sense in which I used the word 
 heretic, Mr. Pope is one. He was born of Protestant parents — 
 I say with St. Augustin, that he is a heretic who goes out of the 
 church of himself and chooses a religion of his own. 
 
 Dr. Johnson, who was a Protestant, and whose orthodoxy 
 cannot be questioned — whose piety and devotion were well known 
 offered up prayers for his mother. 
 
 In the course of his observations, Mr. Pope has alluded to the 
 longer time which was granted me to speak on the first day. It 
 arose from the circumstance of my having sat down on my pre- 
 vious half hours too soon, and consequently, I was allowed a 
 few minutes at the close of the discussion to make up for that 
 deficiency. I had prop 3sed then that the discussion should be 
 carried on by interrogatory, and it strikes me that that would 
 be the better way of conducting it. By the interrogative mode, 
 you perceive, that I have already succeeded in making my 
 opponent give contradictory answers to two questions relative to 
 the circulation of the sacreJ scriptures ; while he supposed he 
 
78 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 nad confined me in an imaginary circle, I put a question to him 
 which he has not attempted to answer. He could not tell what 
 portion of scripture was necessary, to instruct unto salvation, or 
 what portion unnecessary. 
 
 It is rather strange, that Mr. Pope, who professes such vene- 
 ration for the Son of God, should make nothing of the promises 
 of our Saviour to his church, and endeavour to explain them 
 away by sophistry and absurd metaphysical distinctions. Let 
 that fact be marked — who then is the advocate of the Bible ? I, 
 who hold that the sacred word of the Redeemer, bears the stamp 
 of eternal truth, or he who attempts to explain away that eternal 
 word by allegories and metaphors ? This is the man, forsooth, 
 who pretends to believe nothing but what is contained in the 
 scriptures ! I insist that God has revealed truths which are not 
 in the sacred scriptures. I maintain that the word of God is 
 infallible, and I maintain that the promises made by Christ to his 
 church that she shall never err — promises so plain, so explicit, 
 and so obvious — promises which are dwelt upon and repeated 
 by the holy Fathers, are eternally true and can never fail. 
 " Heaven and earth will pass away, hut my words will never pass 
 aivay.^^ I have already read to this meeting, various passages 
 from the Fathers in support of the doctrines of infallibility, pur- 
 gatory, and the invocation of saints. 
 
 With regard to the reformers, I have laid down a clear princi- 
 ple — that God will never employ openly abandoned, proverbi- 
 ally vicious, self convicted, immortal men, as the reformers of a 
 pre-existing church, or of any rehgion. I have already proved 
 from the sacred volume, that the extraordinary ministers of his 
 sacred word shall have the broad seal of his mission, to wit, 
 miracles, affixed upon them. If it be proved that the ordinary 
 ministers of religion may be vicious and corrupt, it does not 
 follow that the extraordinary ministers of religion, who came 
 forward as reformers, should bear that character. Christ did 
 not preach his mission without exhibiting to the world the great 
 seal of divinity. 
 
 The mission to which Luther, and Calvin, and Cranmer pre- 
 tended, was not an ordinary one. If their mission were an 
 ordinary one, they should have remained in that church which 
 existed before them. They should have shown an extiaordinary 
 mission before they departed from that church, which consisted 
 of all the Christian churches in communion with the see of Rome, 
 where her visible head resided, showing forth the commission 
 granted by Christ to his church. Luther's commission (if any) 
 as a reformer of the Catholic church, must have been an extra- 
 ordinary one. Did he prove it by miracles ? It is said indeed 
 that Calvin, in order to prove his mission by a miracle, to remove 
 
THE REFORMATION. 179 
 
 the objections against him on that head, induced a man for a large 
 •sum of money to feign death, in order that he (Calvin) might 
 get the credit of raising him from the dead. The man, however, 
 literally rose no more, and Calvin took good care never to repeat 
 the exf)eriment. 
 
 I shall now proceed to give you the character of the Catholic 
 church, from writers, whose authority I suppose my learned 
 adversary will not be inclined to dispute. Every line which I 
 shall quote shall be from Protestant historians. Observe, I am 
 not about to quote from masked Papists against the Protestant 
 church, as my opponent has quoted from masked Protestants 
 against the Catholic church. 
 
 Dr. Spry says, 
 
 " From the facts which are recorded in scripture, and which other historical 
 testimony confirms, we infer that the Apostles, in the exercise of the power 
 vested in them, instituted that ecclesiastical polity which was maintained in 
 the church imtil the period of the Roformation." 
 
 Davis says, 
 
 " It is acknowledged on all hands, that the church of Rome, in its original 
 Btate, was Apostolical and pure. And even at the present day, it has per- 
 severed in all the fundamental articles of the true and Christian faith. And 
 the sacraments ordained by the Gospel are here administered by a priesthood 
 which derives its appointment, by an uninterrupted succession, from the Apos- 
 tles, and its authority from our Great Master,^* 
 
 No wonder, indeed, that these learned Protestant Divines 
 should so frankly and openly avow, that our doctrine and our 
 priesthood are derived from the Apostles, and our authority to 
 preach and teach, from our Great Master himself. For as they 
 received whatever is valid of their ordination from us, such con- 
 fession is absolutely necessary to prop up their own quaking 
 system, and to give even a specious colour to their claims. 
 
 Dr. Daubeny thus writes : 
 
 " The commission originally delivered by Christ to his Apostles, has been 
 \)anded down in regular succession. Under the authority of this commission^ 
 the religion of Christ was introduced into this country, at a very early period : 
 and the appointment of ministers under the sanction of the Divine Author- 
 ity, has been uniformly received and preserved in the church, wherever it has 
 existed, for 1500 years." 
 
 In the British Critic, we read, 
 
 ** The church government maintained by the church of Rome, has been 
 \raced without a single break in the chain^ up to the immediate successors of tht 
 Apostles : and the chain of the episcopacy was unbroken for 1500 yearsy 
 
 Dr. Tomline, in his Elements, says : 
 
 ** When the Reformation took place in England, the Bishops and clergy 
 were not consecrated and ordained again. They had received consecration 
 and ordination from men to whom the power of consecrating and ordaining 
 had been transmitted from the Apostles : and that power was not vitiated.'* 
 
180 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 Daubeny thus defines Schism : 
 
 " Wherever there is a wilful separation from the communion o^ the cnurcb 
 of Clirist, there, according to the original idea upon this subject, a division 04 
 Christ's mystical body takes place ; and there the sin of schism is to be found. 
 Schism ITien consists in a disunion of the members of the church, occasioned 
 by the want of obedience to the government which Christ by his Apostles 
 i?iittled in it ; and a consequent separation from its communion, in contradic- 
 tion to the divine plan of its establishment." 
 
 Mr. Pope — Gentlemen, I beg to observe that my quotations 
 nave been from Roman Catholic authors. Though I have 
 referred to Father Paul during the discussion, yet on this day I 
 have not quoted from his writings. I again ask, whether greater 
 difiiculties do not lie on the side of Mr. Maguire than on mine, 
 in providing for the spiritual wants of the poor. We are not to 
 dictate to the Almighty : we are not to reason from the line Oi 
 procedure which in our conceplions the Deity ought to adopt : we 
 are not to bring his dispensations to the bar of our erring judg- 
 ments : we are to draw our conclusions from what God has 
 done^not from what we may imagine. He ougM to have done, 
 I have not this day quoted the authority of Mr. White, although 
 I believe him to be a most respectable and conscientious man. 
 My friend says that I am not a heretic. I may thank him as an 
 individual for the admission ; but I beg to know by what authority 
 he makes the assertion 1 According to the doctrines of the 
 church of Rome, I need scarcely remark, that all who are with- 
 out her pale are heretics, infidels, or excommunicated persons. 
 It is well known, that exclusive salvation is her doctrine, except 
 in cases of invincible ignorance ; and invincible ignorance, I thank 
 God, can rarely be the lot of any Protestant in these countries. 
 With respect to Sir Edwin Sandys, I am perfectly satisfied that 
 a Roman Catholic and a Protestant clergyman should examine 
 the original work, and decide the question at issue between us. 
 [Mr. Maguire agreed to this proposal.] My friend has told us 
 that God never employed bad men to accomplish the Reforma- 
 tion of his church. Our question is not, whether the instru- 
 ments were good or evil, but whether the separation from the 
 church of Rome, which took place in the sixteenth century, was 
 justifiable. Mr. Maguire has referred to one or two authorities, 
 to show that there existed some immoral men among the reform- 
 ers, and particularly instanced Luther. In noticing these charges, 
 permit me to remind you that I am descending from the real 
 pomt at issue. I again assert, that the question before us has 
 not been met on the part of Mr. Maguire. I would impresa 
 this fact upon the minds of the population at large. My friend 
 has quoted from Protestant authorities in favour of the church 
 of Rome : but I would ask, did those quotations meet the charges 
 
THE REFORMATION. 181 
 
 brought against her at the time of the Reformation. One 
 of those quotations, referring to her doctrines, says, that she 
 retains all fundamental truths. Were 1 to grant this assertion 
 yet our charge is that she has added novelties to those funda- 
 mental truths, and by that addition nullified them. With respect 
 to the character of Luther, I beg to read you a quotation from 
 Maimbourg, a Roman Catholic historian, quoted in Fry's Church 
 History, p. 284. 
 
 ** He lived a moral life, and was not given, in the smallest 
 degree, to covetousness or any other vice." 
 
 My friend asserts that Moses, and the prophets, and our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, were moral men, and proved the divinity of their 
 mission by miracles. Need I say, that I admit the truth of the 
 observation 1 I shall meet it : you, gentlemen, shall judge 
 whether I do so successfully. Moses came to give perfection 
 to the preceding dispensation : so did the Lord Jesus Christ. 
 The reformers did not usher in a new dispensation, neither did 
 they add any thing to that which was at the time in existence : 
 they only returned to first principles : they dash to the grouna 
 the unscriptural superstructure which had been raised by the 
 church of Rome, and brought to light the fundamental truths of the 
 Christian system, in their native symmetry, beauty, and strength. 
 As they did not introduce a new dispensation, it was not, there- 
 fore, necessary that they should perform miracles. I find, that 
 under the Jewish dispensation, the Israelites were cautioned 
 against those, who even predicted events which actually came 
 to pass, but who endeavoured to lead the people into error : 
 
 " If there arise in the midst of thee a prophet, or one that saith he hath 
 dreamed a dream, and he foretell a sign and wonder, and that come to pass 
 which he spoke ; and he say to thee, let us go and follow strange gods, which 
 thou knowest not, and let us serve them ; thou shalt not hear the words of 
 that prophet or dreamer, for the Lord your God trieth you, that it may appear 
 whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul, or no ; follow 
 the Lord your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and his voice : 
 him you shall serve, unto him you shall cleave : and that prophet or forger of 
 dreams shall be slain, because he spoke to draw you away from the Lord 
 your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out 
 of the house of bondage, to make thee go out of the way which the Lord thy 
 God commanded thee : and thou shalt take away the evil out of the midst of 
 thee." — Deut. xiii, 1, &c. 
 
 Our Lord nimself, though he performed miracles, did not 
 merely refer to them, in proof of his mission, but to the Old Tes- 
 tament, to Moses, the Law, and the Prophets. I would ask, 
 did not the performance of miracles terminate, after the Chris- 
 tian dispensation had been established upon earth 1 — Christ him- 
 self cautioned his followers against deceivers, in the following 
 language : 
 
 16 
 
182 THE JUSTIFICATIOIS OF 
 
 " If any man shall say to you, Lo, here is Christ, or there, do not believ* 
 him ; for there shall arise false Christs and false Prophets, and shall show 
 great signs and wonders, intsoniuch as to deceive, if possible, even the elect: 
 beholdj I have told it to you bejorchand.''^ — Alatt. xxiv, 24. 
 
 Again, we are informed, that the working of signs and lying 
 wonders, is a characteristic of the Man of Sin. 
 
 " Whose coming," the Apostle says, " is according to the working of Satan, 
 ki all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and in all seduction of iniquity 
 tc them that perish, because they received not the love of the truth, that they 
 might be saved : therefore God shall send the operation of error to believe lying, 
 that all may be judged who have not beheved the truth, but have consented to 
 iniquity."— 2 Thess. ii, 9—11. 
 
 Again, the working of miracles is mentioned as a character- 
 istic of one of the beasts : 
 
 " And I saw another beast coming up out of the earth, and he had two 
 horns like a lamb, and he spoke as a dragon, and he executed all the power 
 of the former beast in his sight, and he caused the earth and them that dwell 
 therein, to adore the first beast, whose wound to death was healed ; and he 
 did great signs, so that he made also fire come down from heaven unto the 
 Garth in the sight of men, and he seduced them that dwell on the earth for the 
 signs vv'hich were given him to do in the sight of the beast, saying to them 
 ihat dwell on the earth, that they should make the image of the beast, which 
 had the wound by the sword, and lived : and it was given him to give life to 
 the image of the beast, and that the image of the beast should speak, and 
 should cause, that whosoever would not adore the image of the beast, should 
 be slain : and he shall make all, both little and great, rich and poor, freemen 
 and bondmen, have a character in their right hand or on their foreheads : and 
 that no man might buy or sell but he that hath the character or the name of 
 the beast, or the number of his name." — Apocalypse, xiii, 12 — 17. 
 
 You can now determine whether, if even the reformers had 
 been able to perform miracles, that power, per se, alone, would 
 have entitled them to act as divinely commissioned. 
 
 Mr. Maguire asks, by what means religion was handed down 
 to the time of Moses ? He should rem.ember, that the head of 
 each family of God's people was both patriarch and priest of his 
 own house ; that the great age of those who lived before the 
 flood, enabled them personally to communicate to their posterity 
 divine truth ; and, that their religion consisted of a few simple 
 principles. My opponent says, that the Jewish synagogue never 
 erred. I beg to remind him, that the Jewish church was of divine 
 origin, but that the synagogue was of human institution. I repeat 
 it — the synagogue was of human institution. If we refer to 
 scripture, we find that the leaders and priests of the Israehtes 
 erred. In Exodus, xxxii, 5, we read — 
 
 " They said, these are thy Gods, O Israel, Ihat have brought thee out of 
 Ihe land of Egypt. And when Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it, and 
 made proclanxation by a crier's voice, saying, ' to-morrow is the solemnity of 
 the Lord.'" 
 
THE REFORMATION. 183 
 
 1 wonder whether Aaron is deemed to have been infallible, 
 when he sanctioned idolatry ! Again, we read the following 
 description of the spiritual guides of Israel : 
 
 " His watchmen are all blind, they are all ignorant, dumb dogs, not able to 
 bark, seeing vain things, sleeping and loving dreams, and most impudent 
 dogs, they never had enough : the shepherds themselves knew no understand- 
 ing : all have turned aside unto their own way, every one after his own gain, 
 from the fi~st even to the last. Come, let us take wine and be filled with 
 drunkenness : and it shall be as to-day, so also to-morrow, and much more." 
 Isaiah, Ivi, 10. 
 
 In Malachi, we read, 
 
 *' The lips of the priest shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law 
 at his mouth, because he is the angel of the Lord of Hosts." 
 
 What follows 1 
 
 " But you are departed out of the way, and have caused many to stumble at the 
 law J you have made void the covenant of Levi, saith the Lord of Hosts ; therefore 
 have I made you contemptible^ and base before all people, as you have not kept my 
 toaySj and have accepted persons in the Zaio." — Chap, ii, 7, 9. 
 
 So much for the infallibility of the Jewish teachers. My 
 friend has observed, that the synagogue and ecclesiastical rulers 
 were infallible, till Christ came, and that infallibility was then 
 transferred to Jesus. I beg to know at what precise period the 
 prerogative was transferred from the Jewish synagogue 1 Was 
 it while the Scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses' chair, anci 
 while Jesus commanded the people to hear them ? Was infalli- 
 bility taken from them at that time 1 I have showed you from 
 Deuteronomy, that miracles per se, alone, were not sufficient to 
 prove that even the Saviour was divinely commissioned, unless 
 he also referred to the testimony of Scripture. I would ask, 
 was it not said of the Jewish hierarchy, "have any of the Rulers 
 or Pharisees believed on him ? — (John vii, 47.) 
 
 Mr. Maguire here interrupted, and said — T told you that the 
 synagogue did not err de facto until the coming of Christ, but I 
 did not say that infallibiUty was conferred upon it by God. 
 
 Mr. Pope — Gentlemen, Mr. Maguire has said, that, although 
 infallibility was not the privilege of the synagogue, yet it never 
 erred de facto until Christ appeared. Now Mr. Maguire looks 
 upon the synagogue as having been the representative of the 
 Jewish church, and Roman Catholics, by analogy founded on 
 the Jewish church, argue in favour of the infallibility of their 
 own. I assert that thi)se who believed that Jesus was the Christ, 
 and followed the Saviour, must have done so in opposition to 
 their rulers, and must ha/e exercised their own private }udgment9 
 on the proofs that Jesus was the Son of God. My friend asks, 
 IS one man to sei up his judgment against many 1 There are 
 
184 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 extreme cases when such a procedure may be absolutely neces- 
 sary. Such occurred, when, as I have already observed, accord- 
 ing to Vincentius Lirinensis, (Com. 1, cap. 6,) and Jerome, 
 (in Dial, contra. Lucifer,) the whole world had become Arian. 
 A Christian man, as Athanasius did, must at that period have 
 stood out against the whole world. Christ selected a few to 
 stand against the many, nor should the believer refuse to join 
 the persecuted ranks of the followers of Jesus, though the world 
 be against them. 
 
 In order to show that Luther was not the impetuous headstrong 
 person, which his enemies represent him to have been, permit 
 me to read you a passage from his writings : 
 
 " We allow that in the Papacy are many good things ; and all those good 
 things we have retained. What we affirm is this ; that the Popes have in 
 many instances corrupted the Apostolic church; and have preferred their 
 own laws and ordinances to the laws and ordinances of Christ. Therefore, 
 all that accumulated mass of human contrivances, which is of Satan's sug- 
 gestion, and contributes to the destrucion of the church of God, rather than to 
 its edification, we entirely disapprove and reject: but stop here. We would 
 not imitate the man who on seeing his brother in the utmost danger of being 
 killed by a wild boar, instantly pierced both the boar and and his brother with 
 one thrust of his spear. Perhaps Gome Papists will accuse me of flattering 
 the Pope in this instance: My answer is ; if the Pope will bear such flat- 
 tery as this, I will become his obedient son ; I will be a good Papist and will 
 recant all that I have said to ofl?end him." — Com. de Luth. ii, xl, 13, 14. 
 
 In other words, if the errors of the church of Rome were 
 removed, Luther says, that he would return to her communion. 
 
 I shall also give you the opinion of a learned and grave Ro- 
 man Catholic divine, which will show you, at whose door is to 
 be laid the cause of separation. Cassander was appointed by 
 the two emperors Ferdinand and Maximillian, to endeavour to 
 heal the breach which had taken place between the reformed and 
 the church of Rome. He observes, 
 
 " Yet I cannot deny, but that, in the beginning, many, out of a godly zeai 
 and care were driven to a sharp and severe reproof of certain manifest abuses ; 
 and that the principal cause of this calamity and distraction of the church is to 
 be laid upon those, which being puffed up with a vain insolent conceit of their 
 ecclesiastical power, proudly and scornfully contemned and rejected them, which 
 did rightly and modestly admonish their reformation. Wherefore, my opinion 
 is, that the church can never hope for any firm peace, unless they make the 
 beginning, which have given the cause of this distraction : that is, unless those 
 which are in place of ecclesiatical government, will be content to remit some- 
 thing of their too much rig-our, and yield somewhat to the peace o7the church, 
 and hearkening unto the earnest prayers and admonitions of many godly men^ 
 will set themselves to correct manifest abuses according to the rule of divin^ 
 scriptures, and of the ancient church from which they have swerved,'''* — X^onsult 
 pp. 56, 57. 
 
 My friend has told a long story about Calvin, I could relat« 
 several strange stories ; for instance, about St. Anthony preach 
 ing to the fishes, and various other ludicrous anecdotes. 
 
THE REFORMATION. 185 
 
 I beg to make an observation, relative to a passage from a 
 Protestant writer in reference to the church of Rome being 
 apostoUc. The church of Rome, I admit, was pure in the apos- 
 toHc times, when Paul addressed his epistle to her : but I now 
 protest against her, as having departed from her great original, 
 and as having added various doctrines and ordinances to those 
 revealed in the sacred scripture. Mr. Maguire will, doubtless 
 ask me, where was the church before Luther? I am prepared 
 to answer him. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — Mr. Pope has asserted, that the poor man is 
 placed under worse circumstances as to making an act of faith, 
 according to my priciples, than according to the principles which 
 he advocates. I imagined I had satisfactorily proved that it is 
 utterly impossible for any ignorant Protestant to make a prudent 
 act of fiiith in the insph'ation of the sacred volume, unless he were 
 able to examine every passage, compare every text, reconcile 
 every apparent contradiction, and be prepared to solve every 
 doubt, and satisfy his own conscience touchng the various and 
 multiplied objections of the Atheist, the Deist, and other infidels. 
 Now as this is impossible for an ignorant Protestant ; hence it is 
 impossible he can make a y)rudent act of faith. Look, for 
 instance, at what are called the lies of the patriarchs ; examine 
 the description and dimensions of Noah's ark — how would the 
 ignorant Protestant show that two of every species of animal 
 were contained therein, since, according to the dimensions given, 
 two whales alone could scarcely find accommodation. On the 
 other hand, the poor Catholic has but one simple solitary fact to 
 ascertain, viz. — has Christ estabUshed an unerring church, with 
 authority to teach and judge for her children. The moment this 
 one fact has been ascertained by him, he can make an act of 
 faith explicitly in the authority of that church, and every other 
 article of Revelation which she proposes to his belief. He submits 
 with certainty to the authority of that church, and he laughs to 
 scorn the accumulated objections of the deists. He may not, 
 I will admit, be able to solve all the doubts and difficulties 
 collected by infidels, but he relies upon the express promises of 
 Jesus Christ to his church, and believes in all articles which that 
 church professes to have received from her Divine Founder. 
 
 I am surprised that Mr. Pope has never essayed to answer 
 the questions which I put to him touching those articles of 
 Protestant faith which are not to he found in any part of the sacred 
 scriptures. 
 
 In defence of the Protestant Reformation, he quotes Dryden 
 the poet, as an authority of mighty importance. As the gentle- 
 man deals S9 largely in fiction, 1 cannot blame him for having 
 
186 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 recourse to the evidence of the poets. In the present instance 
 however, he has been singularly unfortunate, for Dryden, deeply 
 deploring that he had ever said or written any thing against the 
 Catholic church, to which he subsequently became a convert, 
 had recourse to the tribunal of Confession, as the ordinary means 
 appointed by Christ to obtain forgiveness of sins. He was en- 
 joined by his confessor to exert those rare talents which it pleased 
 God to bestow upon him, in defence of the truth. He therefore 
 translated the life of Francis Xavier, an Indian Roman Catholic 
 Missionary, equally esteemed by Protestants and Catholics, not 
 only for the extent of his missionary labours, but the simplicity 
 purity, and self-denial which he manifested throughout his whole 
 life. Dryden also wrote that curious poem called ' the Hind and 
 Pvinther,' in which he describes the church of England as a hun- 
 gry, ferocious and prowling wild beast, pursuing with open mouih 
 and merciless avidity the Catholic church, which he denominates 
 a spotless Hind. So much for the authority of Dryden against 
 the doctrines of the Catholic church. 
 
 I appeal to all candid Protestants to say whether Mr. Pope 
 has, in the remotest degree, approached the irrefragable argu- 
 ment which I brought forward as to the books of scripture ivhich 
 have been lost, I called upon him to say, if all the books of scrip- 
 ture were necessary. Supposing that he answered in the affir- 
 mative, I have proved that we have not at present all the books of 
 scripture, there being full twenty of them lost, I then placed him 
 in the other alternative, and called upon him to show, that a por- 
 tion only of the scripture would be sufficient for salvation, and 
 to establish his opinion by a direct and positive text of scripture. 
 Mr. Pope has quoted a text from St. Paul, where wrhing to 
 Timothy, he says, that the scriptures are " profitable to teach, to 
 correct, to instruct in all righteousness." 
 
 Is there here a proof that your sole rule of faith is to be 
 founded upon any certain portion, or upon the ivhole of the scrip- 
 tures ] I again repeat the question, whether or not it is neces- 
 sary for salvation to know^ the whole scriptures, or a portion of 
 them 1 and I require an answer from scripture to the question, 
 Mr. Pope has, in the above extract, quoted St. Paul when he 
 was writing to Timothy, who was not a layman, but a bishop 
 and metropolitan of Asia. It was the duty of Timothy to know 
 the holy scriptures, in order to teach them to others. Was a 
 bishop bound to teach and instruct in the holy scriptures ? If he 
 was, was he not bound to know them ? 
 
 In order to prove the scriptures to be the sole rule of faith, 
 Mr. Pope has asserted, that the Old Testament was ordered tc be 
 read in many places. But he should recollect, that it was to be 
 interpreted according to the synagogue. 
 
THE REFORMATION. 187 
 
 No wonder a bishop is to understand the scriptures, when ho 
 is obHged to preach and expound them. Such must be the pro- 
 vince of the bishops and clergy, or every man may assert for 
 himself the right of preaching. I ask, in the presence of Pro* 
 testant bishops, whether it be the right of every tinker and low 
 ignorant mechanic to take upon them to " teach, to preach, to 
 correct, and instruct?" 
 
 Our Saviour said, "search the scriptures." It is perfectly 
 right to do so. The Redeemer appealed to the common sense 
 of the Jews to decide upon the proofs of his divine mission. To 
 what else should we appeal, but to the common sense of a man 
 before he '^ecognizes authority ? I have already informed you, 
 that every man is to employ his common sense to discover the 
 marks of the church of Christ. But when he discovers those 
 marks of the true church, he at once submits his judgment to her 
 authority. Immediately after the text, "search the scriptures," 
 as quoted by Mr. Pope, the Saviour adds, " for in them you 
 think you have eternal life." This is a manifest proof, that 
 eternal life is not to be found in them alone, otherwise Christ 
 would not have said, "for in them you think.^^ 
 
 I should much wish that the advocate of unlimited private judg- 
 ment would not endeavour to force his own opinions upon others. 
 
 Mr. Pope has quoted passages from Catholic writers regard- 
 ing the promoting causes of the Reformation. All allow that a 
 reibrmation was required, but it was a reformation of morals and 
 discipline, and not a change in religion. If any man will say 
 that a reformation in the doctrines of the church of Christ was 
 required, I shall only remind him of the words of St. Paul : 
 
 "But though I or an angel from heaven preach a gospel to you, besides 
 that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema." 
 
 The doctrine then of the church of Christ never was to he 
 changed. There was to be no other doctrine. Will it be said 
 by my opponent that the promises of Christ to his church failed 
 —that she fell into error — that all had become heretics, and that 
 therefore Luther and Calvin were justified in adding to, and 
 reforming the doctrines of the church 1 
 
 The despotic conduct of the clergy proves nothing, when 
 adduced to show that a reformation was required in doctrine- I 
 admit that it was principally bishops and ecclesiastics who 
 broached heresies, and erected heretical churches, and not the 
 poor — but that only proves the danger which arises from reading 
 and interpreting the scriptures without the due dispositions ; and 
 strongly illustrates the effects which would flow from an indis- 
 criminate circulation of the sacred scriptures without note or 
 comment. If those who had devoted their lives to the study of 
 the scriptures, should happen to be led into error, how much 
 
188 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 more might we expect that the poor ignorant man would, m 
 perusing them, adopt erroneous opinions 1 Mr. Pope not only 
 charges error to the account of the Catholic church, but he 
 admits that the church of Hyigland is wrongs for he protests against 
 twenty-one out of her ihirty-nine published articles of belief. Con- 
 sequently he must believe that the church of England teaches 
 that which is not true. And I have no doubt but I myself am a 
 better church of England man than my friend Mr. Pope. Mr. 
 Pope has said that our Saviour did not come to reform the 
 Jewish church. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — What I said was, that he came to give perfec 
 tion to the Mosaic dispensation, by the establishment of the full 
 Christian economy. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — What is perfecting a law, but reforming it ? 
 I affirm that Christ came to reform the law of Moses, as Moses 
 reformed the religion of the patriarchs. One of the tenets of the 
 Jewish rehgion was, that a man may turn away his wife, on any 
 pretext, and take another. This, with many other points of the 
 moral code, has been altered in the dispensation of Christ. I 
 therefore affirm that Christ came to reform the Jewish law ; and 
 he himself tells th-e Jews, that if he had not done the works 
 which he performed, those who refused to believe in him would 
 have no sin in them. 
 
 Here our Saviour directly appeals to miracles in proof of the 
 truth of his mission. I believe that the Son of the Almighty God 
 performed those miracles in order that the Jewish people might 
 have no excuse left them. Christ appealed to miracles — surely 
 that will not be denied. Mr. Pope says that our Saviour came 
 to restore the Mosaic law. Would God have punished the man 
 with death who departed from that law, if he intended that such 
 an authority should lead into error 1 Mr. Pope will say that the 
 synagogue rejected Christ. I assert that the synagogue did not 
 err till the coming of the Redeemer was proved by manifest mira- 
 cles, and the mission of him established of whom Moses said, 
 
 " The Lord thy God will raise up to thee a prophet of thy nation, and of 
 tliy brethren, like unto me : hear ye Aim." 
 
 When Christ did come, the three kings from the east, who 
 sought him, called on Herod to know where was the promised 
 Messiah to be found. Herod relied not on his private judgment; 
 he sent to the Scribes and Pharisees who sat in the chair oj 
 Moses, and they all agreed it was in Bethlehem of Juda, that 
 the Redeemer was to be born ; and they quoted the words of the 
 prophet. The Jews, therefore, who refused to believe in Christ 
 had no excuse ; they were inexcusable for not believing in his 
 
THE REFORMATION. 189 
 
 mission, respecting which all the predictions of the prophets 
 concurred. I have proved to you that Christ reformed the 
 Jewish religion ; but I do not say that he introduced a perfectly 
 new religion. As our Saviour then appealed to miracles when 
 he came to reform the law of Moses, we are justly entitled to 
 call for miracles on the part of Luther and Calvin, who pretended 
 that they came to reform our church, which had continued from 
 the days of Christ for fifteen hundred years. Will it be said by 
 any man, that the reformers of the sixteenth century, referred to 
 miracles in proof of their mission? 
 
 I call upon Mr. Pope to produce any Catholic historian of 
 established credit, who admits that any other reformation was 
 required than that of morals and discipline. Erasmus, who 
 wrote more licentiously on that subject than any other Catholic 
 with whose works I am acquainted, did admit a reformation in 
 morals and discipline — but decidedly not in doctrine, I insist 
 that I have established the fact, that till the coming of Christ, 
 the Jewish synagogue did not err in doctrine ; or, in other words, 
 that it was infallible. — Our Saviour says to his disciples — 
 
 " The Scribes and Pharisees have sat in the chair of Moses. All, there- 
 fore, whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do ; but according to 
 their work do ye not." 
 
 Here our divine Lord, though about to introduce a more per- 
 fect dispensation, refers his disciples to the authority of the 
 established teachers, until he had revealed the object of his mis- 
 sion. Did the soi-disant reformers do so l Christ, therefore, 
 referred the Jews to the existing authorities, nor did he recall 
 that advice till he had established his own church on the basis of 
 innumerable miracles, Christ als-o gave to his Apostles the power 
 of working miracles, in order to the diffusion and establishment 
 of his church on earth. I suppose Mr. Pope will admit that 
 miracles were wrought in the primitive church. As to the argu- 
 ment which he deduced from the conduct of some Popes, I have 
 already shown to you that there is a wide diflerence between 
 doctrines of faith and morality, between infallibility and impec- 
 cability. The Apostle Peter sinned, but he could not err in 
 fliith, for he was inspired. Infallibility is the attribute of the 
 body of the church in globo — it does not exist in the individual 
 members, but in the collective body of the faithful. There are 
 many qualities which belong to the body corporate^ and which aro 
 not found in the individuals composing that body. For exam- 
 ple, the vote of a single individual in Parliament avails nothing, 
 but the votes of the collective body, form the law of the land. 
 
 Mr. Pope says, that Aaron is to be charged with the worship 
 of the golden calf — I did not say, that Aaron was infallible — 
 but 1 affirm, that Moses was a greater authority than Aaron- 
 
199 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 Aaron had only an ordinary — Moses an extraordinary mission. 
 When Moses was speaking with God on the mountain, he inter- 
 ceded with the Ahnighty for the IsraeHtes, and prevailed upon 
 God to forgive them. He prayed to God if he should not for- 
 give them, to blot his name out of the book of life. God dia 
 forgive them, and remitted in a wonderful measure the punish- 
 ment decreed against them. 
 
 Our divine Lord came to establish an authority above that of 
 the Jewish synagogue, and he performed miracles to give an 
 undoubted assurance to his mission. John the Baptist referred 
 to the miracles which he knew Christ would perform, and Christ 
 appealed to the prophecies of John the Baptist. This perhaps 
 will be called by Mr. Pope a circulus vitiosus, and yet he cannot 
 doubt the reality of the miracles of Christ. My reverend oppo- 
 nent has asked whether the Scribes and Pharisees, who sat in 
 the chair of Moses, did not oppose Christ ? Certainly — but it 
 remains to be shown, that they publicly condemned Christ until 
 their authority was superseded by a greater authority sent from 
 God, Christ Jesus his Son. 
 
 Mr. Pope has referred to the times of the Arians, and has 
 quoted St. Jerome, as saying the world was astonished to find 
 itself Arian at once. I admit this hyperbole on the part of St. 
 Jerome ; but it is one that can be easily explained. Liberius, 
 Mr. Pope informs us, signed the confession of Sirmium. Dr. 
 Cave, a greater man than Mr. Pope, in his Life of Athanasius, 
 declares that it is not known whether it was the confession at 
 Sardica or Sirmium, which was signed by Pope Liberius. Now, 
 as it is a matter of historical doubt, which Mr. Pope himself 
 cannot clear up, and which the learned Dr. Cave was unable to 
 decide, am I not at Hberty to doubt, whether Liberius signed 
 either the one or the other 1 But admitting the fact, I deny that 
 it necessarily follows, that Liberius became an Arian. I believe 
 1 can easily show, that the very reverse is true. Liberius, a 
 good and pious man. according to Dr. Cave, was banished into 
 Thrace by the Arian emperor, because he refused to sign a 
 formulary of faith which had been previously subscribed by the 
 Sirmium bishops. In this state of exile he continued for two 
 years, suffering such hardships and privations as our modern 
 saints would scarcely endure. He was at length permitted to 
 return, if we may believe Theodoret, at the intercession of the 
 Roman ladies, who, making a very imposing appearance, waited 
 upon the emperor, as he entered their city, and obtained hh 
 consent, that their venerated pontiff should return to the dis« 
 charge of his duties. Granting, I say, that at his return he was 
 prevailed upon to sign the Sirmium confession, it remain? foi 
 Mr. Pope to show that this confession icas Arian. 
 
THE REFORMATION. 191 
 
 Now, I affirm, in the face of a learned body of men, that the 
 formulary subscribed by the bishops at Sirmium was purely 
 orthodox ; and that the only objection to it was, that it did not 
 contain the word ojnovaioy, which was introduced at the council 
 of Nice. But in all other respects it condemned and anathe- 
 matised the Arian heresy^ as may be seen by the most superfi- 
 cial observer, by glancing over the confession itself. Liberius, 
 therefore, might justly conclude that the word o^ovuiov was not 
 essential to our orthodox formulary of faith, especially as it was 
 wholly unknown to antiquity. The Arians, finding that this 
 formulary had been signed by many truly orthodox bishops, 
 immediately cried out, that the Catholic prelates gave their 
 solemn sanction to Arianism. The people who were not pre- 
 sent, but who had heard of the subscription, were alarmed and 
 astonished at the reports so industriously circulated ; and hence 
 St. Jerome used that well-known expression, that the whole 
 world was astonished to find itself Arian. But the falsehoods 
 of the Arians were shortly detected, and the faithful restored to 
 confidence and peace. So much for the hyperbole of the great 
 and good St. Jerome. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — Gentlemen : as to Pope Liberius, Dupin, to 
 whom I have already alluded, admits, that it is doubtful whether 
 he subscribed the first or second confession of Sirmium ; but 
 there is no question as to his having signed the condemnation 
 of Athanasius, (2 vol. p. 62, 1697, 3d. ed. Lond. fol.) From 
 his letter as given in Baronius and Hilary, it is evident that he 
 ratified the sentence passed by the Arians against Athanasius. — 
 Baron. Tom. i, p. 939, ad. ann. 257, No 46, Mayence, 1601.— 
 Liberius's letter is given in the fragm. of St. Hilary, vi,- — Ex. 
 oper. Hist. p. 1335, Benedict, edit. I ask my friend, if a 
 Christian man, in the days of Liberius, vvas not called upon to 
 stand alone against the whole word ] Mr. Maguire h^s stated, 
 that, according to my principles, the poor man is in a worse 
 condition, than if his principles were adopted. He remarked, 
 that if he could prove to the poor man the infallibility of his 
 church, all his difficulties would immediately vanish? I reply, 
 that in order to induce the poor man to believe that the church 
 of Re me is infallible, Mr. Maguire must appeal to the Bible : 
 and if the poor man should make objections to the inspired 
 records, Mr. Maguire must explain to him every difficulty with 
 which he may happen to charge the sacred page ; so that my 
 opponent must convince him, that the Bible is the book of God, 
 before he can possibly succeed in proving that (he church of 
 Rome is infallible. As to the poor Protestant v.ho has received 
 the knowledge of divine truth, though he may not be able to 
 
192 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 explain every difficulty, yet is he convinced that the sacred 
 scriptures have proceeded from heaven, because he himself has 
 experienced in his own soul their sanctifying influence, and has 
 the witness to their truth in himself. In the passage relative to 
 Timothy's having known the scriptures, Mr. Maguire has omit- 
 ted the words, " that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly 
 furnished unto every good work." Now, I would ask, was 
 Timo.hy a clergyman while a child ? Was he a learned divine 
 when he was a little boy ? Was he like those which we have 
 heard described, beardless boys, exercising spiritual jurisdiction 
 in the church of Rome, and arrogating authority over the bodies 
 and souls of men 1 Timothy read the Old Testament scrip- 
 tures — R fortiori the scriptures of the New Testament should be 
 read ; for, confessedly, the Old Testament is the more difficult 
 portion of the sacred volume. If St. Paul commends Timothy, 
 that " from a child," " ano ^gecfovg,^^ he knew the scriptures, 
 does not this fact supply us with an argument for placing the 
 inspired records in the hands of the young 1 But I must not 
 forget that Mr. Maguire has said, that Timothy read the scrip- 
 tures, as they were interpreted by the synagogue. Permit me 
 to observe, that if Timothy had understood the scripture accord 
 ing to the interpretation of the synagogue, he would have rejected 
 the Messiah! 
 
 My friend's comment on the w^ords " in them you think you 
 have eternal life," is evidently at variance with the object which 
 the Saviour had in view in making the observation : he intended 
 to charge the Jews with practical inconsistency: — "Ye search 
 the scriptures — in those scriptures ye believe that eternal life is 
 contained, and they are they which testify of me, and yet, not- 
 withstanding, ye will not come unto me, that ye may have life." 
 Mr. Maguire has acknowledged, that a moral reformation was 
 called for in the church of Rome, but says that I could not prove 
 from Roman Catholic authorities, that a reformation in doctrine 
 was required. It is altogether unreasonable to expect, that such 
 an acknowledgement should be found in Roman Catholic di- 
 vines. They judged according to their own standard of faith ; 
 and if they were consistent, they could not reject any doctrine 
 advocated by the authority of their church. 
 
 Cassander, indeed, remarks, in the passage already referred 
 to, that 
 
 " Ecclesiastics should set themselves, to correct manifest abuses according 
 to tht rule of divine Kriptures, and the primitive churchy from which thet 
 HAVE SWERVED." — Consult. pp. 56, 57. 
 
 Mr. Maguire has again said, no man can reform the church 
 of Christ without performing miracles. He has again begged 
 the question, by identifying the church of Rome with the church 
 
THE REFORMATION. 193 
 
 of Christ. This day her doctrines have been contrasted with 
 those contained in the sacred volume, and you will decide 
 whether they accord. My opponent has observed that the 
 Saviour stated, that the Scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses's 
 scat, and that he exhorted thie people to hear them. But I 
 would asl:, were they, therefore, infallible ? Let any man ex- 
 amine the gospels, and he will find that the outcry and opposition 
 against the Redeemer were principally raised by them. They 
 were to be heard, while reading the books of Moses, but not 
 when uttering their own traditions, which the Saviour so pointedly 
 condemned. The Jesuit Maldonate explains the passsage in 
 the same way ; indeed, it cannot with any possibility be other- 
 wise expounded — 
 
 " When Christ (saith he) bids observe, and do what the Scribes and Phari- 
 sees say, while they sit in Moses' seat, he speaks not of their doctrine, but of 
 the dock-ine of the law, and of Moses. For it is, as if he should say, all things 
 that the law and Moses shall say unto you, the Scribes and Pharisees rehears- 
 ing it, observe and do, but after their works do not." — Maid, ad Matt, xxiii. 23. 
 
 . Mr. Maguire has adduced the opinion of Erasmus — now, as 
 he died a Roman Catholic, Mr. Maguire will, perhaps, admit his 
 opinion of Luther as a theologian : 
 
 " There is more sound theology in one passage of his (Luther's) commen- 
 taries than in many large volumes of the schoolmen and other such writers." 
 Arid again, 
 
 "I am more instructed and edified by one pagv. '^f Luther, than by the 
 whole woj-k of Aquinas." 
 
 My opponent has remarked, that friars and priests by their 
 learning became the authors of heresies. I would ask, is it the 
 wish of my opponent that none should be learned, because 
 learning has been abused ? I repeat a former observation, if 
 the abuse of the scriptures furnish a reason on account of which 
 they should be withheld from any portion of mankind, they should 
 he taken from priests and friars^ ivho have perverted them, and 
 given to the people who have never abused them. My friend has 
 told us, that Christ came to reform the church. He came to 
 give a fuller developement to revealed truth. The shadows of 
 the Mosiac dispensation were to flee away, and the rays of 
 divine light, which had pointed to Christ, were now to be con- 
 centrated in him, as the sun of the system. The reformers, oa 
 the other hand, were not to unfold a fuller dispensiation, but to 
 return to original principles. It was their's to remove the rub- 
 bish which nearly overwhelmed the edifice of truth, and to lay 
 it open to our view in the beauty of its original proportions; 
 To employ an illustration, which has elsewhere been used — 
 suppose a number of individuals had bound themselves by cer^ 
 tain laws, a copy of which was hung up for the view of the per- 
 «ons who composed the society. Abuses nowever grad lUy 
 
 IT 
 
194 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 crept in, and the larger portion of the members succeeded in 
 removing the table of laws. Should not the minority demand, 
 that the code of regulations should be again produced, and thai 
 the system should be modelled afresh by the standard of recti- 
 tude and truth? Mr. Maguire has again introduced the doctrine 
 of infallibil'ty. Suppose that I should grant for a moment, for 
 argument's sake, that a man is convinced that the church of 
 Rome is infallible, (though I am most thoroughly persuaded that 
 no infallible tribunal exists) of what benefit can .he supposed 
 infiUibility of the church of Rome be to her votaries, if the 
 instrument or medium of conveying its decrees to them be not 
 infallible also ? The priest, in the interpretation of decrees and 
 councils, must distinguish between what is to be rejected and 
 what is to be received, and, if not infallible, may himself err. 
 And, again, the individual to whom the priest addresses himself, 
 may, if not infallible, misconceive his meaning, even though the 
 priest should deliver the mind of his church aright. Mr. Maguire 
 has referred to the Old Testament, to prove that disobedience to 
 the voice of the priest was punished with death. My opponent 
 should remember, that in Judea the law of God was the law of 
 the land, Moses having dehvered as well the political as the 
 moral law to the chosen people of God. The Jewish priest- 
 hood were specially set apart for the study of that which at once 
 was the religious and the civil polity of the Jews. In difficult 
 cases the magistrate therefore appealed to their opinion, and 
 their verdict decided the question. Government invests its 
 judges with authority to put to death : we do not argue that they 
 are consequently infallible. Though it be distinctly written, 
 ** the powers that be are ordained of God, and he that resisteth, 
 shall receive to himself damnation," (Rom. xiii, 1,) it does not 
 follow, that " the powers that be," are infallible. As to Herod's 
 appeal to the priests, we may suppose that he was not acquainted 
 with the prophecies. Did the Jewish teachers merely offer their 
 own opinion on the subject of his inquiry? No, they referred 
 to the words of the prophet. 
 
 [And applied them, observed Mr. Maguire ] 
 
 Mr. Maguire has talked of the miracles of Xavier. I suppose 
 that they may be paralleled with one recorded by a cardinal. 
 We are told — 
 
 "As St. Anthony was disputing concerning the truth of the Lord's body in 
 the Eucharist with a heretic, the heretic required of Anthony this sign : Says 
 the heretic, " I have a mule, to which I shall give no meat these three days. 
 After the three day's end, come thou with the sacrament, and 1 will conie 
 with my mule, and will pour out provender before it ; if the mule leave his 
 provender, and come and venerate the sacrament, I will believe.' These 
 conditions were accepted, and after three days, St. Anthony approached, 
 bringing the sacrament. The mule for£;etting his provender and his hunger, 
 
THE REFORMATION. 195 
 
 went forthwith towan/s the hand of sainted Anthony!!" — Bellarmine de 
 Sacra ra. Euchar. hb. iii, cap. 8, prope finem. . 
 
 In reference to laymen, T would suggest to my friend, that in 
 speaking of the superiority of Moses to Aaron, he should bear 
 in mind that Moses was a layman. We are told that Moses 
 interceded for the people, so did Paul ; but though while they 
 were on earth, they did so, does it follow that they do so now in 
 heaven ; if, while they could be seen, and while men could in 
 person request them to pray in their behalf, they complied with 
 their solicitations, does it follow that they pray for us now in 
 heaven, or can hear our petitions there. I did not say that our 
 Saviour did not refer to his miracles ; I stated that he appealed 
 to the written word, as well as to his works, and not exclusively 
 to the latter. I am asked, .where was the church of Christ 
 before the Reformation ? I answer, the church of Christ is not 
 confined to any one denomination. I hope that even now some 
 of its members are to be found in the church of Rome : but I 
 would say to any such that may remain within her pale, 
 
 " Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that 
 ye receive not of her plagues." — Apocalypse, xviii, 4. 
 
 The members of Christ's body were found protesting against 
 the church of Rome long before the Reformation — the Wick- 
 liffites in England, and the Bohem.ians and the Waldensea 
 abroad. We shall show, upon Roman Catholic testimony, thai 
 the principles of the Reformation were only the tenets of the 
 Waldenses revived. Ecchius reproached Luther with renewing 
 the heresies of the Waldenses. Lindanus, Roman Catholic 
 bishop of Ghent, (1650,) terms Calvin " the inheritor of the 
 doctrine of the Waldenses." Mezeray, the celebrated historio- 
 grapher of France, in his abridgment of Chronology, says — 
 " The Waldenses held nearly the same opinions as those who 
 are now called Calvinists." 
 
 Let us now determine the antiquity of the W^aldenses upon 
 Roman Catholic authority. Reinerius Saccho, an inquisitor, 
 and the most inveterate enemy of the Waldenses, gives the 
 following account of them : 
 
 " Inter omnes has sectas, quae adhue sunt, vel fueruut, non est perniciosior 
 ecclesiae quam Leonistarum ; et hoc tribus de causis ; prima est, quia est 
 diuturnior; alique enim dicunt, quod duravit ^ tempore Sylvestri; aliqui 5 
 tempore Apostolorum. Secunda, quia est generalior ; fere enim nulla est 
 terra, in qua haec secta non est. Tertia, quia cum omnes aliae sectse, imma- 
 nitate blasphemiarum in Deum, audientibus horrorem inducunt, haec magnum 
 habet speciem pietatis, eo quod coram hominibus justi vivant, et bene omnia 
 de Deo credant, et omnes articulos qui in symbolo continentur ; solummodo 
 Romanum Ecclesiam blasphemant et clerum." 
 
 " Among all the sects (there were sects, you perceive, before the Reforma- 
 tion,) which still are, or have been, there is not one more pernicious to the 
 church than that of the Leonites ; (a name by which the WaMcnses were 
 
196 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 sometimes called) and that for three reasons. The first is, because it is tha 
 oldest, for some say it hath endured from the time of Pope Silvester ; othera, 
 from the time of the Apostles. The second, because it is more general, for 
 there is scarce any country where this sect is not. The third, because when 
 all other sects beget horror by their blasphemies against God, this of tne 
 Leonites hath a great show of piety, because they live justly before men, ard 
 beheve all things rightly concernmg God, and all the articles contained in 
 the creed." 
 
 What then was the head and front of their offending? Reine- 
 lius adds, 
 
 "Only they blaspheme the church of Rome and the clergy." — (Ron. 
 Saccho. edit. Gretzer, O. S. J. cap. iv, p. 54.) 
 
 I shall lay before you another testimony. When some car- 
 dinals and prelates accused the Waldenses in Merindol and 
 Cabriers, of grievous crimes, and urged Lewis XII, to root 
 them out; the Waldenses, having notice thereof, sent their 
 deputies to his majesty to declare their innocence. The pre- 
 lates were instant upon the king, not to give them any audience ; 
 but the king answered, that if he were to make war against the 
 Turk, he would previously hear him. The king accordingly 
 sent Adam Fume, his master of requests, and doctor Parvi, b's 
 confessor, to search and inquire both into their life and religion. 
 The commissioners visited those places, and upon their return, 
 reported to the king the result of their examination, namely — 
 
 " That men were baptized — the articles of faith, and the ten command- 
 ments were taught — the Lord's dayobseived — the word of God preached, 
 and no show of wickedness or fornication to be perceived amongst them : 
 but that they found not any inmges in their churches, nor any ornaments 
 belonging to the mass." 
 
 The king hearing this report of the commissioners, said, (and 
 he bound it with an oath) " That they were better men than he, or 
 the rest of his Catholic subjects.^^ 
 
 " Tumrex etiamsi, inquit, nihi in Turcam aut diabolum bellum suscipiendum 
 ?sset cos tamen prius audire vellem." — Wesembecii Oratio de Valdens, u. 
 418, extat in Joach. Camerarii Histor. Narrations de Fratrum. Orthod. Ecc' 
 in Bohemia. 
 
 "lUi ad regem referunt, illis in locis homines baptizari, articulos fidf <:i 
 decalogum doceri, dominicos dies religiose coli, Dei verbum exponi, venefic'a 
 et stnpra apud eos nulla esse. His auditis rex, Jurejunando addito, me, 
 inquit, et cetero popula meo Catholico meliores illi viri sunt." — Ibid. p. 419. 
 
 "Ceterum se m ipsorum temphs neque imagines neque ornamenta mis?TB 
 ulja reperisse." — Ibid. 
 
 When, therefore, I am asked, where was your religion before 
 the days of Luther, though I might point to the Bible and answN;;r 
 ** in the Bible," — as God did not leave himself without witnesses, 
 [ can refer to the Waldenses, and trace their origin up to a 
 period, when, comparatively speaking, the church was in a stale 
 of purity. Faber, in his Difficulties of Romanism, has chal- 
 lenged any Roman Catholic divine, undertaking to show froni 
 
THE REFORMATION. !97 
 
 the early Fathers, that the doctrines of the primitive church were 
 in accordance with the doctrines of Protestantism. 
 
 I have called upon my friend to bring forward his proofs 
 against the justification of the Reformation — now, perhaps, we 
 shall have a flourish of trumpets. I have stated, that the separ- 
 ation was imperatively called for by the moral debasement and 
 unscriptural doctrines of the church of Rome — still I would say 
 come to the question ; disprove, Mr. Maguire, if you can, the 
 immoral condition of the church of Rome, and the unscriptural 
 character of her doctrines. On these grounds, I repeat, the 
 reformers were justified in separating from her communion ; 
 show that they were not justified in that separation. I am con- 
 vinced that you will not be able to do so. Then let the empire 
 give in its verdict, that the Reformation was called for by the 
 moral degradation, and by the anti-scriptural doctrines of the 
 church of Rome. 
 
 Mr. MAtiUiRE. — Mr. Pope has talked of a challenge published 
 by a Mr. Faber. I imagined they had not a greater man to 
 produce on the other side than Mr. Pope himself; and when I 
 joined issue with him, I supposed that I had to contend against 
 the best advocate of their cause. I may remark, that I have 
 not stood up here for the infallibility of the Pope. If Liberius 
 did ^ign the confession of Sirmium, which Mr. Pope has not 
 proved, it was on being freed from long confinement, and from 
 suffering. Mr. Pope has not extricated himself from the dilemma 
 in which I involved him, as to the power of an ignorant Protestant 
 to make an act of faith upon the inspiration of the scriptures. 
 How can the Protestant free himself from doubts 1 He has no 
 means of solving all the difficulties connected with the scriptures. 
 He must remove them through the instrumentality of private 
 judgment, or be a deist, or an atheist. When I produced the 
 authority of the holy Fathers of the early ages, to prove that the 
 Bible is the word of God, I did not contradict my principles ; 
 but Mr. Pope violates his principles, when he adduces authority 
 to satisfy the doubting Protestant. I have put certain queries 
 to Mr. Pope, and I cannot prevail upon him even to attempt an 
 answer to them. Mr. Pope has talked of the Son of God having 
 left the perfect scriptures to man. I have to complain, that Mr. 
 Pope puts into my mouth doctrines, which I by no means enter- 
 tain. I consider that the scriptures, as far as they go, contain 
 a rule and system of perfect morality. The scriptures I study 
 and revere : but I abhor the principle which would convert the 
 scriptures into instruments of infidelity. I maintain, that we 
 should not be allowed to abuse those scriptures which Christ 
 left to his church. Christ did not leave them to be interpreted 
 
 17* 
 
198 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 by the varying and capricious judgment of each individual, but 
 to be read according to the interpretation of his church. Every 
 man possesses a divine right to read the scriptures in the three 
 languages in which they were originally written, viz ; Hebrew, 
 Greek, and Latin. These were the channels through which the 
 pure scriptures were transmitted. But is a man to adopt the 
 translations of Luther, of Calvin, and of other heretical reformers? 
 Or does it follow that the same divine right to read the scriptures 
 in the originals, can be transferred to varying and variable trans- 
 lations ? I could prove that OEcolampadius corrupted the scrip- 
 tures in more than one thousand places. Again, if Luther and 
 Calvan were justified in their conduct, the same principle would 
 justify Alius, Cerinthus, Eutychius, Manicheus, Montanus, the 
 Mugirletonians, &c, &c. The same principle would justify 
 Mr. Pope in reforming the church of England — taking away 
 twenty-one out of her thirty-nine articles, demolishing her spiritual 
 authority, abolishing her prelates and pastors (whose succession 
 is derived from the church which Protestants refuse to acknow- 
 ledge) and, in fine, a similar principle would justify Mr. Pope in 
 tearing up the church of England by the roots. But it would 
 be an endless task, to endeavour to enumerate the sects and 
 divisions to which that principle has given, and must continue 
 to give origin. These endless sects were well described by 
 Bossuet, in his History of the Protestant Variations. He says, 
 " The raging sea is not furrowed by more waves, nor does the 
 uncultivated land produce more thistles and thorns, thac the 
 Reformation has produced religions, since the epoch of its 
 introduction." 
 
 If the principle, that every man has a right to reform ^he 
 church be once proclaimed, a reformation of the church of 
 England will necessarily follow. It will be soon discovered 
 that she can be approximated to a more perfect standard of 
 evangelical perfection — I, by the same principle may commence 
 reformer of the church of England, by asserting that her scrip- 
 tures are not all pure, and I may strike off several books from 
 the canonical list, and would I not have as clear and as undoubted 
 a right to do so, as Mr. Pope has to reject what he calls the 
 Apocrypha. In fine, if one man rejected one part, and another 
 another part, would not the consequence be, that the ivhole Bible 
 would become guesiionable at last. 
 
 Mr. Pope talks of some loose and immoral characi'ers, mem- 
 bers of the Roman Catholic church. Have I not forborne to 
 to mention a quondam Protestant Bishop of Waterford, and 
 another bishop of more recent notoriety. 
 
 Suppose I proclaim a complete reformation of the church of 
 England, what right would Mr. Pope possess to cal! me to a» 
 
THE REFORMATION. 199 
 
 account? I would say, that her rich, and gorgeous, an J pam- 
 pered hierarchy, ill accorded with the doctrines of the humble 
 Redeemer — I would say, that in this country particularly, she 
 took every thing from the poor, and gave them nothing in return. 
 Would Mr. Pope call me to order? Every man according to 
 his principles, has a right to preach. Here is Mr. Pope himself, 
 almost a layman, teaching and preaching to ecclesiastics. 
 
 r shall now give you Luther's character as drawn by himself. 
 He sketches his own portrait in better and truer colours, I fancy, 
 and more to the life, than if he had sat for it to the best literary 
 limner in existence. I have here the German text, and it is 
 from the translation of it, I shall select the following passages : 
 
 "I, Martin Luther, as to those matters (matters of faith) am, and wish ta 
 be deemed obstinate, contumacious, and violent j and let tliis be my creed, I 
 yield to no man." 
 
 " I am a doctor above all doctors, and an unworthy evangelist of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ. I, Martin Luther, by the grace of God, evangehst of Wittem- 
 bergh. 1, Doctor Martin Luther, am your Apostle, I am a prophet, I am 
 Isaiah, to the honour of God and to the confusion of the devil. A second 
 John the Baptist — a great hero — a most rare man — such as has not existed 
 for many ages — I am a saint of God. My mouth is the mouth of Christ 
 
 — I AM NOT FAR FROM THINKING MYSELF A GoD ! !" 
 
 " May thunder and Ughtning — hell's fire and brimstone, plagues, and every 
 dirty and filthy evil fall upon the two twins of the devil, the Pope and his 
 cardinals." 
 
 He calls Henry the eighth of England, 
 
 "A fool" — "a madman" — "a lunatic" — a monster of insanity" — "an 
 ass" — "a hog" — " a log" — "a knave" — "a devil" — "an imp" — "a robber." 
 
 He calls Henry, Duke of Brunswick, 
 
 "A buffoon" — "a blackguard" — "an idiot ' — "a lecher" — and "an 
 effeminate." 
 
 He sacrilegiously added the word "only" to the text of St. 
 Paul, respecting justification by faith ; and when upbraided with 
 the corruption, he replied, 
 
 " If any papist shall start up against this word only, immediately oppose to 
 him the will of Dr. Martin Luther, who asserts that the Pope and an ass are 
 one and the same thing, (quid unum et idem) and who is a doctor above all 
 Popes and doctors." 
 
 Again, he says, 
 
 "In studying the scriptures, follow this rule — if you perceive any command 
 in the scriptures about performing good works, understand such command 
 to be a prohibition against the performance of good works, for this reason, that 
 every man is incapable of doing a good work." 
 
 Again, of these words of Christ to his Apostles — " Ye are the 
 light of the world." Luther makes the following version^ — vos 
 estis stircus in laterna — "Ye are filth in a lantern." Again, 
 
 "Christ, in the hearts of papists, is nothing but a mere fiction — a pagan 
 idol. He who believes in Christ, will be damned according, to papists. If 
 Christ be truly Christ, then monks and nuns cannot be Christians." 
 
200. THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 "In two years' time, my gospel will be so diffused, tha the Pope, and hw 
 bishops, and priests, and monks, and nuns, and bells, and towers, and cells, 
 and the mass, will be no more heard of; in short, there \yill be an end of 
 Popery altogether." 
 
 "A pious man sinneth in every good work. A good work, no matter 
 
 HOW WELL PERFORMED, IS, NEVERTHELESS, A DKADLY SIN. He who be- 
 
 lieveth, can neither be a sinner, nor an adulterer. I find nothing pure or holy 
 either in myself, or in all mankind, and all our good works are hke lice on 
 an old skin.'* 
 
 To his wife Catherine, whom he seduced from her three vows 
 of poverty, chastity, and obedience, he says, 
 
 " Ats it is not in my power, who am a man, to become a woman, nor in 
 your power, who art a woman, to become a man ; so neither is it in my 
 power to do without a woman, nor in your's to do without a man." 
 
 As to his contradictory doctrines, the following are a few, out 
 of many hundred specimens : 
 
 " I believe in purgatory, and I know it to be true that souls are tortured 
 there, and may be relieved by prayers, fasting, and alms." 
 
 And in another place, he says, 
 
 " I confidently assert that purgatory, with all its ceremonies and mimio 
 worship, is a diabolical crime, as being diametrically opposed to that cardinal 
 a! tide, that the salvation of souls rests upon the merits of Christ, and nol 
 of men." 
 
 Again, he says, 
 
 "Whoever preaches against the doctrine of pontifical indulgences, let him 
 be accursed." And — 
 
 " The indulgences which are practised in the Roman church are execrable 
 frauds." 
 
 "Above all things it is necessary, and the scripture itself plainly teaches, 
 that God wishes all voivs to be fulfilled." Again — 
 
 "I wish I could persuade all mankind that all vows of whatsoever descrip- 
 tion, should be despised, and that every person should enjoy the liberty of 
 the gospel." 
 
 "Let us abstain from all sins, but in particular from all good tvorks, for all 
 the good works we perform are dead." 
 
 "It is impossible for us to resist the slighest temptation to sin, and the scrip- 
 tare itself teaches that we are slaves of the devil, and as it were the subjects 
 of God our prince." 
 
 ".^ vow of chastity is worse than adultery and impvrity." 
 
 " It is not so much my desire to demonstrate how chastity is to be observed, 
 but that it is impossible, and ought not to be observed." 
 
 " If any one shall correct you for speaking smuttily, let this be your reply 
 — What then? If the whole world be oflfended, we must obey necessity." 
 
 "If Huss was a heretic, I will be ten times a greater one." 
 
 "I am often in doubt whether I teach the truth or not," 
 
 "This thing (the Reformation) neither commenced on God's account, rci 
 will it end on God's account. 
 
 He had also the sacrilegious audacity to corrupt the Apostles 
 creed, where, instead of " I believe the Catholic church," he 
 substitutes, " I believe the Christian church," well judging tha? 
 he had no cl&im to Catholicity. 
 
THE REFORMATION. 201 
 
 He also confesses, that he eat a bushel of salt with the devil 
 — that he slept oftener with him than with his wife Catherine — • 
 thit when he had not the devil appended about his neck, he was 
 a mere dry theologian. — Vide Le Roy Labyrintho, cap. 13, et 
 ipsum Lutherum, de Missa Angulari, Colloquia mensalia, et 
 Tomun— 7 vol. 228. 
 
 If the foregoing extracts from Luther's works be genuine, and 
 I challenge inquiry on the subject, T put this single question — 
 Mould the Almighty and all- wise God employ such an instrument 
 to reform his church? 
 
 Again in his book De Missa Prii ata, (von der Winckelmesz,) 
 he acknowledges and describes at large his famous conference 
 with the devil, in which he confesses to have been prevailed 
 upon by his satanic majesty to abrogate private masses — the 
 arguments employed by the devil were five in number. The 
 work in which this conference is to be found, was written in 
 German by Luther's own hand, and translated into Latin at 
 Luther's own request, by Justus Jonas. See also Tanner in 
 his Anatomy of Luther. 
 
 Such, Gentlemen, were the doctrines of this arch-reformer, 
 and Protestant Apostle, derived, if we can believe himself, from 
 the devil, the father of lies. My learned friend sometimes differs 
 from Luther — Luther from my learned friend — which of them 
 will you follow ? 
 
 Luther thus, thrasonically, expresses himself elsew*iere — 
 
 ^•Here I stand — here I sit — here! remain — here I boast— here I triumph- 
 here I insult the papists, the Thomists, the Henrycists, the Sophists, and all 
 the gates of hell — yea, and all the words of men, no matter how sanctified. 
 The divine Majesty has enabled me to set at nought a thousand Augustin's, 
 a thousand Cyprians, though they should stand up against me." 
 
 The two following brief quotations from Luther I dare not 
 translate : 
 
 "Clui Diabolum novit Confidenter ei dicit, Zamic, mihi nates; — crepitus 
 ventris longius fugat Diabolum quam sacra scriptural !" 
 
 The above are to be seen by any inquirer in the original 
 German. 
 
 Dr. Heylin, a most learned Protestant historian, gives the 
 following account of the introduction of the new Luther-dn doc- 
 trines into Dantzick (in his Cosmogony, p. 148 :) 
 
 " Dantzick was the first town in the kingdom of Poland which gave en- 
 trance to the doctrines of Luther, Anno 1525, but in so tumultuous a manner, 
 that they who favoured his opinions, deposed the old common-council men, 
 and created new ones of their own — prophaned the Churches, robbed them of 
 their ornaments, and shamefully abused the priests and religious persons — 
 abolished the mass — and altered all things at their pleasure. But by the 
 commg of the King, they grcTV somewhat quieter, leaving the convent of 
 Rlack Friars to two nuns, who still enjoy the exercise of their religion." 
 
202 THE JUSTIFICATION OF 
 
 The same writer says, (Ibidem, Book II, page 36.) 
 "Whilst the Lutherans were thus playing their game, there started up 
 Another party, begun at first by Zuinglius, amongst the Switzers. These, 
 not communicating councils, went two different ways, especially in the pointa 
 of consubstantiation and the real presence. Not reconciled in their times, 
 nor like to be agreed upon by their followers. For Calvin, rising into the 
 esteem and place of Zuinglius, added some texts of his own to the former 
 doctrines, touching predestination, free-will, &c, by which the differences 
 were widened, and the breach made irreparable: this course being followed 
 on each side with great impatience, as if they did not strive so much for truth 
 as victory.^^ 
 
 Again, the same writer says, (page 136.) 
 
 "In the year 1528, religion being altered, in a tumult of the people in the 
 Canton of Berne, near adjoining to Geneva, Viret and Farrellus, two Zuing- 
 lian preachers, did endeavour it in Geneva also. But finding that the bishop 
 and clergy did not like their doings, they screwed themselves into the people, 
 and by their aid, in a popular tumult, compelled the bishop and his clergy to 
 abandon the town. Nor did they only in that tumult alter the doctrine and 
 orders of the church before established, but changed the government of the 
 state also, disclaiming all allegiance both to duke and bishop, and standing 
 on their oxon liberty as a free commonwealth. And though all this was done 
 by Viret and Farrellus, before Calvin's coming to that city, which was not 
 till 1536, yet, being come, no man %o as forwarder than he to approve the 
 action. And that rather than their discipline should not be admitted, and the 
 episcopal government destroyed in all the churches of Christ, they were 
 resolved to depose kings, ruin kingdoms, and to subvert the fundamental con- 
 stitution of all cicil states." 
 
 It cannot be inappropriate to give a short account of these 
 principal reformers. Luther was taken suddenly ill after eating 
 a hearty supper, and died in the night. Zuinglius was killed in 
 a rebellion excited by himself and his party, against the Catholic 
 cantons, anno 1531. (Ecolampadius was found dead in his bed, 
 before Luther met his fate ; the latter did not hesitate to declare, 
 that he was strangled by the devil. — (Lib. de Miss. Priv. et 
 Unit. Sacr. Tome vii, p. 250.) Calvin, in the year 1564, died 
 of a dreadful complication of distempers, which Catholics and 
 some Protestants assure us he bore so ill, that he expired in 
 despair, blaspheming God, and invoking the devils. See Bol- 
 seck, in his book of Calvin's Life. — Schlusselburgh, a learned 
 Lutheran, in Theol. Calviniana, printed anno 1594, p. 72. — 
 Herenius, a Calvinistic preacher, declares, that he was an eye 
 witness of Calvin's tragical end, and that he died in despair, of a 
 most filthy and stinking disease. — See his Liber, de vita Calvini. 
 
 The following testimony is given by Melancthon to the char- 
 Ttcter of the reformers. It is taken from his Commentary on 
 St. Matt. 6th ch. 
 
 " It is plain, that in these countries (he speaks of the countries which em- 
 braced Luther's reformation) men's whole concern is almost about banquet- 
 ting, drunkenness, and carousing. And so strangely barbarous is the people, 
 that most men are persuaded that if they do but fast one day, they must die 
 the following night." 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 203 
 
 So you perceive, gentlemen, fasting was not then exploded. 
 I may remark, in reference to some arguments of Mr. Pope on 
 the subject, that the Albigenses and Waldenses retained to the 
 last the sacrifice of the Mass. They, therefore, cannot be 
 legitimately numbered amongst the reformers. I could quote 
 many foul and scandalous passages from the works of Calvin, 
 and other reformers, in proof of the happy improvement in 
 morals and religion, which they introduced by throwing off the 
 yoke of what they called a superstition, and giving full scope to 
 the licentious and desolating principles of the Reformation. 
 
 Jacobus Andreas (in Luke 21) says, 
 
 " The other part of the Germans, viz ; the Protestants, give due place to 
 the preaching of the word of God ; but no amendment of manners is found 
 among them ; on the contrary, we see them lead an abominable voluptuous 
 beastly life ; instead of fasts, they spend whole nights and days in revelry and 
 drunkenness." 
 
 Cranmer was a good example of the celibacy of the reformers — 
 he brought his wife over with him in a chest to England, but 
 through a mistake in the landing it, the sailors turned up the 
 wrong end of the chest ; the consequence was, that its fair 
 inmate was forced to cry out for relief, and the hypocrital hus- 
 band was obliged to expose her to the public view. I have many 
 other quotations here ; as to the character of the modern reform- 
 ers, but I find I have not time at present to read them to you. 
 
 Fifth Day — Tuesday, April 24. 
 
 SUBJECT. — " The doctrine of Transuhstantiatton.'' 
 Admiral Oliver and John Dillon, Esq., in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — I beg to call upon Mr. Maguire for proofs of the 
 doctrine of Transubstantiation. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — Gentlemen, as it was agreed upon yester- 
 day, not to recur to the question of the Reformation, I shall at 
 once proceed to the very important subject of this day's discus- 
 sion — namely, Transubstantiation. It is a question of the most 
 solemn complexion, and I trust that although my friend Mr. 
 Pope will be obliged, by his established principles to difier from 
 me on this occasion, that he will indulge in no useless and pro- 
 PHANE sarcasms against a doctrine which I shall prove to havp 
 been openly established for eighteen hundred years. I sincerely 
 trust, that in the course of this day's discussion, my friend will 
 
204 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTAN TIATION. 
 
 not make use of any expression, which would be, according to 
 my principles, an absolute blasphemy against the Son of God. 
 If the doctrine which I undertake to defend be that which was 
 vreached by the Apostles and received by them from Christ, then 
 it would be manifest blasphemy to utter any sarcasm against 
 this great and fundamental tenet. Before 1 enter upon my direct 
 proofs, I shall beg leave to draw your attention to one important 
 fact. We are told that Melchisedech, a priest of the Most High, 
 " made an offering of bread and wine ;" and St. Paul assures 
 us that Christ " was a high priest for ever according to the ordtr 
 of JMelchesidech,^^ Now, if the. same offering or sacrifice be 
 not continued till the consummation of ages, Christ could not 
 be a priest ybr ever according to the order of Melchesidech. I 
 could prepare your minds with further prefatory observations, 
 but the dogma which I maintain is so clear and so sustainable, 
 that I proceed at once to my direct arguments. 
 
 First, then, I refer you to the sixth chapter of St. John, where 
 our Saviour draws a comparison between the bread which he 
 promised to bequeath for the life of the world and the manna 
 which came down from heaven to feed the distressed Israelites. 
 
 "The bread (said he) that I will give you, is niy flesh for the life of the 
 world. Your Fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead ; if any 
 man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever." 
 
 Our Redeemer here extols what he was about to give at his 
 last supper, far beyond the bread which we know descended 
 from heaven. Now, in my mind, the latter would have been 
 far superior to the former, if our Saviour had left us nothing but 
 a bit of bread and a drop of wine. Many of those who were 
 present, and some of them his disciples, were shocked at the 
 expression, and they asked how was it possible that he could 
 give them his flesh to eat ? What was the conduct then of our 
 Lord who came to instruct all unto salvation, and who neither 
 could deceive nor be deceived 1 Instead of representing to them 
 their mistake or correcting their error, if it were one, he says, 
 
 " Amen, Amen, I say unto you ; unless you eat the flesh of the Son of 
 Man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you." 
 
 At this, many of his disciples who followed him through all 
 dangers and persecutions, all those who were about him from 
 Capernaum, ivent back, and walked no longer with him. Would 
 he, the benign and beneficent Jesus, who had descended upon 
 earth to lead man from sin, and who was about to offer himselt 
 upon the cross for man's redemption, would he suffer those per- 
 sons to depart, believing that he spoke of a reality, and not 
 explain to them their error, if indeed, it were an error 1 Would 
 he have suffered them to fall innocently into error, when he could 
 have so easily corrected their misapprehension? I ask any 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TR VNS CJBSTANTIATION. 205 
 
 reasonable man, had not the people of Capernaum, in whose 
 vernacular language (the Syriac) our Lord then spoke, a better 
 opportunity of knowing the meaning of the words of our Saviour 
 on this occasion, than we who live at the distance of eighteen 
 hundred years, whose habits and language are confessedly dif- 
 ferent ? When our Lord declared, " the bread that I will give is 
 my flesh for the life of the world," they then understood Jesus 
 to speak of real flesh and real blood; and accordingly they walked 
 no longer with him. He did not correct their error, if such it 
 were. What more easy for him than to say, (if that were his 
 meaning) that he did not intend to give them his real flesh and 
 blcx)d — that he only spoke in a figurative sense? But Jesus 
 made no such correction. If it were not his real body and 
 blood of which Christ then spoke, he led those people into error: 
 but that supposition is manifest blasphemy. Hence I conclude, 
 that the Jews were right when they understood him to speak of 
 his real body and real blood. It may be said that the error of his 
 disciples, and of the people of Capernaum, was one which Christ 
 was not obliged to correct. But, as St. Augustin remarks, 
 though the Jews in a gross and carnal manner understood him 
 to mean that he would give his flesh to them like meat taken 
 ^rom a hutcher^s stall, yet they understood him to speak of a 
 reality ; and if he did not mean to give them his flesh really, the 
 error could have been easily corrected. But Christ was not 
 called upon to tell them how it would be really given — that being 
 a secret not to be communicated till the period of redemption 
 was arrived. That, indeed, would be exposing the mysteries of 
 heaven before the time. This argument appears to me to be 
 insuperable. I will be told, in the language of Christ : " It is 
 the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing." I will 
 show greater authority for my interpretation of those words than 
 they can, who endeavour to explain away the words of our 
 Saviour. I can produce the passages in the holy Fathers, in 
 which they quote those identical words in order to show their 
 meaning. We, who admit the real presence, hold, that those 
 who receive Christ in the sacrament of the altar, if they do not 
 receive the sacrament worthily and with the proper dispositions, 
 do not receive with it the spirit of God — that though they receive 
 the substance of the sacrament, the flesh doth not profit them. 
 Hear what St. Paul says, 
 
 "He that eateth and drink eth unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment 
 to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord." 
 
 But it is behind the sacred words of eternal truth, fulfilled and 
 verified by Christ at the last supper, that I take my stand. Upon 
 them I erect irrefragable proofs. — What Christ promised in the 
 sixth chanter of St. John, he fulfilled at his last supper. When 
 
 IS 
 
206 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 solemnly seated at the board with his chosen twelve, he took 
 bread, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to them saying, " Take 
 ye and eat, this is my body.-' — And presenting them with the 
 chalice, he said, " Drink ye all of this, for this is my blood of 
 the New Testament, which shall be shed for many for the 
 remission of sins." What Christ then promised in the sixth of 
 John, he here fulfilled to the letter, and must we not take his 
 words in their natural and obvious sense ? Shall we resort to 
 tropes, and figures, and metaphors, in order to explain away the 
 word of the Lord ? If Mr. Pope exercises his private judg 
 ment on the passage, and pertinaciously adheres to his inter- 
 pretation of the words, it is impossible we could agree upon the 
 matter. I adhere firmly and steadily to the doctrine of the 
 church. Look to the primitive ages of Christianity — examine 
 the successors of the Apostles, who believed and taught what 
 was believed and taught by the Apostles themselves, and who 
 transmitted the doctrines to their successors. They are all in 
 support of the doctrine of transubstantiation. I shall first quote 
 the passage from St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in his Mystagog. Cat. 
 4, where taking as his text the words of St. Paul, " For I re- 
 <:eived of the Lord that which I also have delivered unto you," 
 speaks thus of the real presence and of transubstantiation. 
 
 "This doctrine of the blessed Paul may be sufficient to satisfy you con- 
 cerning the divine mysteries which you have received, that you have been 
 made partakers of the body and blood of Christ ; for he now says, that our 
 Lord Jesus Christ in the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread, 
 and gave it to his disciples, saying, *Take, eat; this is my body.' And 
 taking the chalice, and giving thanks, said, *Take, drink ; this is my blood.' 
 Since Christ himself, then, did so affirm, and say of the bread, *This is my 
 body,' who shall from thenceforth presume to make any doubt of it ? And since 
 he affirms and says, *This is my blood,* who, I say, shall doubt, and say it is 
 not his blood? He once changed water into wine (which has some likeness 
 to blood) in Cana of Galilee, by his own power; and shall he not be thought 
 worthy of belief in changing wine into blood ? Being invited to an earthly 
 marriage, he wrought this stupendous miraclej and shall we not much rather 
 confess, that he gave his own body and blood to the children of the bridegioom ? 
 Therefore, with full assurance let us receive the body and blood of Christ. 
 For under the type (or appearance) of bread the body is given unto thee, and 
 under the type of wine the blooa ; that receiving the body and blood of 
 Christ, thou mayest be co-partner with him of his body and blood; so -sliall we 
 be Christephori, carriers of Christ, when we receive his body and blood into 
 our members ; and by this means (as St. Peter saith) be made partakers of 
 the divine nature. Do not consider them as naked bread and naked inine, for 
 it is the body and blood of Christ, according to the M'ords of our Lord himself. 
 For though your senses should suggest this to you, yet let faith confirm you.— 
 Judge not of the thing by the taste, but rather be more certainly assured by 
 faith, so as to leave no room for a doubt but that the body and blood are 
 given to thee. This knowing, and of this being assured, that what appears 
 W) you bread is not bread, but the body of Christ, although the taste judges it 
 to be bread; and that the wine which you see, and which has the taste ofwine^ 
 i$ not wine, but the blood of Christ — ' Taste and see how sweet the Lord m.* 
 Think you, now, that you arp requirc(' to discern t'lis by the sense of taste | 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 201 
 
 No, by no means, but by the testimony of faith, which is certain, and leaves 
 no doubt. — For when you take them, you are not commanded to take bread 
 and wine, but under the appearance of these, to take the body and blood of 
 Christ." 
 
 St. Chrysostom, in his 83d Homily on the 26th chapter of 
 Matthew, tome 7, maintains the same doctrine. 
 
 "Let us, (says he) believe God in every thing, and not gainsay him^ ahhough 
 what is said may seem contrary to our reason and our sight. Let his word 
 overpower both. Thus let us do in mysteries^ not looking only on the things 
 that lie before us, but holding fast his words ; for his word cannot deceive, 
 but our sense is very easily deceived. That never faileth — this often. Since, 
 then, his word says, * This is my bodyy* let us assent and believe and view it 
 with the eyes of our understanding. Christ left to us nothing sensible, but 
 \hings intellectual^ under sensible forms. Thus the blessing of baptism is 
 given by water, which is corporeal ; but what is done by it — namely, regen- 
 eration and renovation, is incorporeal or intellectual. If you were incorporeal, 
 lie would have bequeathed to you gifts purely incorporeal ; but as your soul 
 is united to a body, those gifts are to be comprehended under corporeal signs. 
 How many persons are heard to say, I would willingly behold his figure, his 
 shape, his attire ! But thou seest him — thou touchest him — thou receivest him 
 into thy breast ; yet thou desirest to see his garments. He gives himself to 
 Ihec, not to be looked upon only, but to be touched, to be eaten, to be admit- 
 ted into thy breast. These are not the works of human power. He who in 
 that supper made these things himself, now also does them for you. We hold 
 the order of ministers, but the sanctijier and changer of them is Himself; who 
 will give us of his flesh that ive may be filled. — (Job, xxxi, 31.) This Christ 
 has done — not only allowing himself to be seen, but to be touched too, and 
 to be eaten, and teeth to pierce his flesh, and all to be filled with the love of 
 him. Parents often give their children to be nourished by others ; not so I, 
 says Christ ; but I nourish you with my flesh, and I place myself before you. 
 I was willing to become your brother ; for the sake of you I took flesh and 
 blood, and again I delivered to you that flesh and blood by which I became 
 Bo related."— (Hom. 24, in Joan, i, 5, p. 292.) 
 
 " What sayest thou, O blessed Paul ? Wilhng to impress on the hearer, 
 and making mention of the tremenduous mysteries, thou callest them the cup 
 of benediction." — ( 1st Corinth, x, 16.) 
 
 " That terrible and tremendous cup^— that which is in the cup is that lohich 
 Howedfrom his side, and we partake of it. It is not of the altar, but of Christ 
 himself we partake ; let us therefore approach to him with all reverence and 
 purity ; and when thou beholdest the body lying before thee say to thyself, by 
 this body I am no longer earth and ashes. This is that very body lohich bled, 
 which was pierced by the lance,'''' — (Hom. 24, in Ep. ad Cor. i, 10.) 
 
 " He that was present at the last supper, is the same who is now present, 
 and consecrates our feast : for it is not man who makes the things lying on the 
 altar become the body and blood of Christ, but that Christ who teas 
 crucified for us. The loords are pronounced by the priest, but it is the power 
 and grace of God that consecrates them. He said, * this is my body,' thfse 
 loords make the change.'''' — Hom. De Frodit. Judaj. t. v. page 415.) 
 
 " As many partake of this body, as many taste of this blood, thint it 
 nothing different from that which sits above, and is adored by angels." — 
 (Hom. 3, ad Ephs. Tome 10.) 
 
 " This fa6/e supplies the place of the manger ; for even here shall lie ih© 
 body of our Lord, not wrapped in swaddling clothes, as then, but surrounded 
 on all sides by the Holy Spirit. They that are initiated understand these 
 things. The magi, or wise men did nothing but adore ; but thou, if thou 
 comest with a pure conscience, wilt be permitted to take him to thyself.'' 
 (Orat De S. Philogonio t. ii, p. 337.) 
 
208 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 " The servants of Job, to show their love for him, said, * who will give ua 
 of his flesh that we may be filled.' — (xxxi, 31.) In like manner Christ gave 
 us hisjiesh that with it, we may be filled and inflamed with the love of hiniu 
 This body lying in the manger, the wise men reverenced, seeing no such thing 
 aa thou seest ; thou dost no see him in the manger, but on the altar — nor dost 
 thou only see him, but moreover thou touchest him — thou eatest him, and 
 retumest home with him in thy breast ; cleanse then, thy soul from all defile- 
 ment, and prepare thyself to receive these mystenes." — (Hom. 24, In 1, 
 Cor. i, 10.) 
 
 " Wonderful ! ! The table is spread with mysteries, the Lamb of God ia 
 slain for thee, and the spiritual blood flows from the sacred table. Tho 
 spiritual fire comes down from heaven ; the blood in the chalice is drawn from 
 the spotless side, for thy purification. Thinkestthou that thou seest bread ?-- 
 that thou seest wine ? — that these things pass off' as other foods do ? — far be 
 it from thee to think so. But as wax, brought near to the fire, loses its for- 
 mer substance, which no longer remains ; so do thou thus conclude that the 
 mysteries (the bread and wine,) are consumed by the substance of the body; 
 wherefore approaching to them, think not that you receive divine body from a 
 mrn, but fire from the hand of a seraphim." — Hom. De Panitione sue de 
 Euchar. in Encoeniu. t. v, page 489. 
 
 " Christ was not content to be made a man — to be scourged — but reduced 
 us, as I may say, into one mass or lump with himself, and* this not only by 
 faith, but in very deed, maketh us his own body. What ought then to be 
 purer than he who shall partake of the sacrifice. What rays of the sun ought 
 not those hands to exceed in brightness which handle this crown — that mouth 
 which is filled with spiritual fire — that tongue which is bloody with this admi- 
 rable blood! Call to mind with what honour thou art dignified, of what table 
 thou partakest. For we are fed icith that thing which, when the angels behold^ 
 they tremble. Neither can they without fear see, by reason of the glory which 
 Cometh from thence; and we are reduced into one mass with him, Christ's 
 body being one and his flesh one ; who shall declare the power of the Lord- — 
 who shall make known his praises ? What shepherd ever fed his sheep with 
 his own members ? Many mothers, when they bring forth their children, 
 give them to other nurses, this Christ would not do, but feeds us with hisoi*jn 
 proper body, and joins, and, as it were, glues us to himself" 
 
 The following passage is taken from St. Augustin, in his 
 Enarration upon the 33d Psalm, commenting upon these words 
 of the Septuagint : — " Ferebatur in manibus suis," he says as 
 plain as words can make it, that though David could not carry 
 himself in his own hands, according to the letter^ yet the prophecy 
 was accomplished literally in ihe person of Christ." The holy 
 Father observes — 
 
 " * Ferebatur in manibus suis.' — Hoc vero fratres quomodo possit fieri in 
 homine ? Cluis intelligat ? Quis enim portatur in manibus suis ? Manibus 
 aliorum potest portari homo — manibus suis nemo portatur. Gluomodo intelli- 
 gatur in ipso Da vide secundum literam noninvsnimus, in Christoauteminrcni- 
 m.us. Ferebatur enim Christus in manibus suis quando commendans ipsum 
 Corpus suum, ait, hoc est Corpus meum — ferebat enim illud Corpus in mani- 
 bus suis. * He was borne in his own hands.' * How this could be done by 
 man, brethren, who can comprehend ? For what man is carried in his own 
 hands? Man can be carried in the hands of others — in his own hands no 
 man is carried. How this can be understood of David to the letter we do 
 not find, but in the person of Cj;irist we find it lite^'ally. For Chri&t was borna 
 in his oion hands when commending his own proper body, he said, '• this is ra;y 
 
 body,' FOR HE CARRIED THAT BODY W1 Ms OWn httvds.^^ 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBTANTIATION. 209 
 
 Some polemical smatterers have endeavoured to evade this 
 manifest argument, by observing that Christ might carry his body 
 in his hands, as a king or prince might carry his own picture ; 
 but the difference between these feeble disputants and St. Augus- 
 tin is, that St. Augustin held and believed Clirist to have carried 
 in his hands, his own true, real, and substantial body, which he 
 affirms, no mere mortal could eij'eciuate ; whereas, according to 
 those gentlemen, Christ only did what every man could easily per- 
 form — carry about his body figuraiivehj — representatively, &c. 
 
 St. Augustin Concione in Psalmum, 33, thus writes : — 
 
 " There was, you are all aware, first the sacrifice of the Jews, which con- 
 sisted in victims of cattle, and that in a mystery. The sacrifice of the body 
 and blood of our Lord which the faithfiil know who read the gospel, but 
 which all do not know, and which it were to be wished some did not know to 
 their condemnation, was not then instituted, which sacrifice is now established 
 all over the world." 
 
 Again in Lib. 22, De Civit Dei. cap. iii, he relates the follow- 
 ing fact : 
 
 " A certain man called Hesperius of the Tribunitial order, who still liveth 
 convenient to us, hath a little farm called Zubedi in the territories of Fusali, 
 which he having believed by the injury done his servants and cattle to be haun- 
 ted with evil spirits, besought my priests in my absence that one of them 
 should go thither and expel them by prayers ; one accordingly went — offered 
 there the sacrifice of Christ's body, praying with all his might that this evil 
 would cease, and by the mercy of God it did cease." 
 
 The above passage, you will perceive, establishes not only the 
 doctrine of Transubstantiation, but also the holy sacrifice of the 
 Mass. — Were a priest of the present day to offer up the sacri- 
 fice of the Mass for the expulsion of evil spirits, and the preser- 
 vation of cattle, what an outcry would be raised by the " Saints" 
 against him, as if the practice were idolatrous, superstitious, and 
 damnable. 
 
 *' Christ took upon him earth from the earth, because his flesh is from the 
 flesh of Mary, and because he here walked in this flesh, even this same flesh 
 he gave to us to eat for our salvation : but no one eateth this flesh without 
 h&VmgJirst adored it : and not only do we not sin by adoring it, but we sin 
 by not adoring it. But is it the flesh that quickeneth ? The Lord in exalting 
 this" earth to us, informs us that it is the spirit that quickeneth— the flesh profiteth 
 nothing. Wherefore, in abasing yourself and in casting yourself down before 
 any matter whatever, consider it not as matter, but consider in it that holy one 
 of whom the body which you adored is the footstool. For it is for his sake 
 that you adore it"— In Psal. 98. 
 
 " The man Jesus Christ, though in the form of God, he receive sacrifice 
 with his Father, yet in the form of a servant he chose rather to be himself a 
 Bacrifice, than to receive it — thus he is the priest, himself offering, and himsell 
 the victim."— De Civit. Del. Lib. x. 
 
 Speaking of the Jews converted by St. Peter, he says, 
 
 ** They were converted, they were baptized, they approached the table of 
 the Lord, and now believing they drank that blood which in their rage the^ 
 had shed." — Sermo 76. De verb. Evan<iel. I, v, Ed. Bened. 
 
 18* 
 
210 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUB3TANTIATI0N. 
 
 " We receive with a faithful heart and mouth, the Mediator of God «Lti<l 
 man — the man Christ Jesus, who has given us his body to eat, and his blood 
 to drink ; although it may appear more horrible to eat the flesh of a man than 
 to destroy it, and to drink human blood than to spill it." 
 
 St* Hilary in his eighth book on the Trinity — 
 
 " Therefore, If Christ did truly take to himself the flesh of our body, and 
 that this man who was born of Mary is truly Christ, and that we truly take 
 under a mystery or veil the flesh of his body, and by this will be one with him 
 because the Father is in him, and he in us ; how is the unity of will asserted, 
 jince the natural propriety by the sacrament is a sacrament of perfect unity ? 
 We must not speak with human or worldly sense of the things of God. Let 
 us read the things that are written and understand what we read, and then we 
 shall discharge the office of perfect faith. For what we say of the natural 
 truth of Christ in us, unless we learn it from himself, we foolishly and impi- 
 ously say. For he saith, ^wy flesh is truly food and my blood is truly drink ;* 
 there is no room left to doubt of the truth of his flesh and blood : for now 
 both by the declaration of our Lord himself and by our faith, it is truly flesh 
 and truly blood." 
 
 St. Augustin, in his 27th tract upon St. John, commenting on 
 the words, " the flesh proiiteth nothing'' — thus argues : 
 
 " What means *the flesh profiteth nothing? It profits nothing as the Jewt 
 understood it — as it is torn in pieces in a dead body — {quomodo in cadavere 
 dilaniatur aut in macello venditur,) or sold in the shambles. But it profits as 
 quickened by the spirit ; for if the flesh profited nothing the Word would not 
 have been made flesh that he might dwell in us." 
 
 I have quoted St. Augustin's opinion to you ; I could, if time 
 permitted, refer you to eighty-seven Fathers, of whom all agree 
 in giving the same interpretation to the passages referred to. If 
 ever there was an era in the Christian church when transubstan- 
 tiation was not received and acknowledged as the doctrine of 
 the church, there should be some public formulary of prayer — 
 some public and well established Liturgy, out of which that 
 doctrine was excluded. I will prove (for I have the Liturgies 
 here,) that this doctrine has been inculcated in all of them from 
 the first era of Christianity down to the period of the Reforma- 
 tion. I have here also the Liturgy even of Nestorius. After 
 he broached his heresy in the east, he framed a Liturgy for his 
 followers, in which he professes his belief in the doctrine of 
 transubstantiation. Simeon, of Thessalonica, who flourished 
 before the council of Florence, and who was in great repute 
 among the Greeks, says, 
 
 " When the priest or deacon has said with a loud voice ra ayia rois ayion 
 * holy things are for the holy.' When the bishop, the priests, and the deacons 
 have received, and when the body and blood are mixed together in the chalice 
 for the communicants, the priest or deacon carries the sacred relics of the 
 divine bread in the sacred chalice. He shows them to all the people ; that 
 is, he shows Jesus Christ, and that which is his proper body and his true 
 blood, which he has sacrificed for us, his purchased people, which he gives 
 us, and permits us to taste, to see, and to feel : where the holy people see 
 him with the soul, they adore him and ask of him whatever is necessary for 
 their s/ilvation." 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUES IAIN TIATION. 211 
 
 And a little after he says, 
 
 " They ought to prostrate themselves on the ground, and to adore Nvith all 
 fheir souls the living bread, which, with the blood, is in the chalice." 
 
 Mr. Pope — Gentlemen, Mr. Maguire's first and direct proof 
 of transubstantiation is taken from the priesthood of Melchise- 
 dech, who, he informs us, offered up bread and wine. The 
 Douay version translates the 18th verse of the 14th chapter of 
 Genesis, thus : 
 
 " But Melchisedech, king of Salem, bringing forth bread and wine, for h« 
 was priest of the Most High God, blessed him, and said" — 
 
 The expression, you perceive, is, " brought forth bread and 
 wine," not " offered up bread and wine." Pererius, a Jesuit, 
 says, that 
 
 " There is nothing here concerning oblation, but the bringing forth of bread 
 and wine, not to God, but to Abraham, as is proved by reference to Augustin 
 and Ambrose." 
 
 There is a strange alteration in the text of the Douay Bible. 
 It is said, for he was the priest of the most High God. Pererius 
 informs us that the Hebrew, literally rendered, should be, " and 
 he was," and not " for he was." Melchisedech blessed Abra- 
 ham ; the blessing Abraham, and not the bringing forth of bread 
 and wine, was characteristic of the priesthood of Melchisedech. 
 Cardinal Cajetan states, " That which is introduced, touching 
 the priesthood of Melchisedech, is a separate clause." 
 
 Christ, because he lives for ever, has an unchangeable priest- 
 hood , and therefore needs not transfer it to others. The woid 
 " priest," is a corruption of the French word " petre," which is 
 derived froin the Greek, " nqsa^viEqog^^^ signifying an elder. 
 I here challenge Mr. Maguire to produce a single passage in the 
 New Testament, where the minister of the gospel is designated 
 
 ^IBQBVg 
 
 My friend has brought forward, in support of the doctrine of 
 transubstantiation, passages from the gospel of John and from 
 the words of our Saviour, in the institution of the Lord's supper. 
 I put it to every rational man, whether such a doctrine as transub' 
 stantiation, which contradicts reason, and the senses given to us by 
 God himself, — the very evidence on which the resurrection is estab* 
 lished, — should not be built upon plain, decided, and ungztestionablt 
 passages ^ 
 
 I shall quote to you the opinions of a number of Roman Catholic 
 ecclesiastics and writers, acknowledging that the scriptures do 
 not evidently prove the doctrine of transubstantiation. Bellar- 
 mine, (De Euch. 1. 3, c. 23,) Suarez, (in 3 dis. 49, qu. 75, sec. 2,) 
 and Vasquez (in 9 part. disp. 180, qu. 75, art. 2, c. 15,) admit, 
 that Scotus acknowledges that this doctrine cannot be proved 
 cleai }y from scripture. Bellarmine allows that this opinion is not 
 
212 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATIC .f 
 
 improbable ; and Suarez and Vasquez confess, thai Durandua 
 made a similar statement. — (in Sent. 1. 4, dist. 11, qu. 1, n. 16.) 
 Ocham, another celebrated schoolman, expressly rem^irks, that 
 
 " The doctrine which holds that the substance of bread and >nne remains 
 after consecration, is neither repugnant to reason nor to scripture." — (In 4, 
 Sent. a. 5, et auodl. 4, a. 3.) 
 
 Gabriel Biel, another great divine of the church of Rome, 
 freely declares, that — 
 
 " As to any thing expressed in the canon of the scriptures, a man may 
 believe that the substance of bread and wine doth remain after cx>»isccration." 
 
 And therefore he ascribes transubstantiation to some other 
 revelation beside scripture, with which he supposes the church of 
 Rome was favoured. — (in Canon Miss. Lect. 40.) 
 
 Cardinal De Allaco, of Cambray, plainly informs us, that — 
 
 " The doctrine of the substance of bread and wine remaining after conse- 
 cration is more easy arid free from absurdity^ more rationaly and no ways repug" 
 nanl to the authority of scripture^ 
 
 Nay more, that for the other doctrine, viz. of transubstantiation, 
 
 " There is no evidence in scripture.^^ — (In 4, Sen. Q.. 6. Art. 2.) 
 
 Cardinal Cajetan confesses that, 
 
 " The gospel no where expresses that the bread is changed mto the body 
 of Christ ; that we have this from the authority of the church." 
 
 Nay he goes further, 
 
 " That there is nothing in the gospel which enforceth any man to under- 
 stand these words of Christ, ' this is my body,' in a proper and not in a meta- 
 phorical sense ; but the church having understood them in a proper sense, 
 they are to be so explained." — (In Aquin. 3, part. Gtu. 75, Art 1.) 
 
 I might add several quotations, to show that it is the opinion 
 of many other Roman Catholic divines, that the doctrine of tran- 
 substantiation is not supported by holy writ. My friend has 
 referred us to the 6th of John. He has dwelt on the superi- 
 ority of the bread of which Christ speaks, to the manna which 
 supported the Israelites in the wilderness ; and contends, that if 
 that bread be not literally the body of Christ, it possesses no 
 superiority above the manna. I ask, what was it that came down 
 from heaven ? "I am the living bread that came down from 
 heaven." Was it the body of Christ 1 Was it the sensible, 
 corporeal .framed I put this again to you. No — the body was 
 received from the Virgin Mary : but Christ in his divine nature 
 came from above : Christ in his divine nature is the bread on 
 which his people feed, spiritually, not carnally : they are nour- 
 ished by the truths in which they believe. In this consists the 
 superiority of the bread of life above the manna in the wilderness. 
 
 My friend has asked, would the Saviour have allowed the 
 people of Capernaum to lie under a mistake ? It ill becomes 
 
THE DOCTRJ..E OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 213 
 
 US lo pry into the mysterious proceedings of infinite Wisdom. 
 ' Unto you," said Christ to his disciples, " it is given to know 
 "he mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them that are 
 ivithout in parables." I am told not only that the Jews murmured 
 it his language, but that some of his disciples departed from him. 
 They that were not his real followers, and had not been taught by 
 ^im, is manifest by the fact that they misunderstood the spiritual 
 meaning of the Saviour's words, and by their departure from him. 
 If Mr. Maguire adduces this chapter in support of transubstari- 
 tiation, it proves too much. In the same chapter it is said, 
 " He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life." 
 If such passages prove transubstantiation, then every individual, 
 whatever his character may be, who partakes of the outward 
 elements, is in possession of everlasting life ! Our Saviour 
 throws light upon the import of his language when he says, 
 
 " He that cometh to me, shall never hunger, and he that believeth on mo 
 shall never tliirst."— (v. 35.) 
 
 My friend will acknowledge, that believing is a spiritual act ; 
 and yet the Saviour distinctly says, " He that believeth on me 
 shall never thirst." In strict accordance with this view is the 
 remark of Augustin : 
 
 " Why preparest thou thy teeth and stomach ? BeVievt, and thou hast eaten 
 !«."— Tract 25. 
 
 Such is the language of Augustin. Does not the Redeemer 
 himself say, 
 
 " The spirit quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing ; the words that I have 
 spoken to you, are spirit and Ufe." — John, vi, 46. 
 
 And when he asked those disciples who remained with him, 
 " Will ye also go away 1" — they replied, 
 
 " To vv'hom shall we go ? Thou hast the toords of eternal life, and we have 
 Defleved and known, that thou art Christ the son of God." 
 
 Christ also, in reference to Judas and the disciples who 
 departed from him, says, 
 
 " There are some of you that believe not For Jesus knew from the begin- 
 ning who they were that did not believe, and who he was that would betray 
 him." — 65, v. 
 
 Origen thus speaks : 
 
 " There is also in the New Testament a letter, which kills him who doth 
 not spintually understand "jhose things which are said : for if we take accord- 
 ing to the letter that which is said, except ye can eat my flesh, and drink my 
 blood, this letter kills." — (Homil. Levit. chap. 10.) 
 
 Augustin, in his Treatise de Doctrina Christiana, says : 
 
 " If the speech be a precept forbidding some heinous wickedness or crime, 
 or commanding us to do good, it is not figurative ; but if it seem to command 
 any heinous wickedness ir crime, or to forbid that which is profitable or 
 
214 THE DOCTRINE OB^ TRANSUBSTANTI ATION. 
 
 beneficial to others, it is figurative. For example, * except ye eat the flesh ul 
 the Son of Man and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.* This seems to 
 command a heinous wickedness and crime ; thereforeit is a figure; command- 
 ing us to communicate of the passion of our Lord, and with df light and 
 advantage to lay up in our, memory (mark it is not the body of Christ in our 
 bodies, but to lay up in our memmies) that his flesh was crucified and wounded 
 for us. ' — Lib. iii, torn, iii, p. 53, Edit. Basil, 1596.) 
 
 Mr. Maguire has referred to the Saviour's words at the insti- 
 tution of the Lord's Supper, •' this is my body," I ask, may we 
 not interpret the expression figuratively 1 Did the Redeemer 
 always speak literally ? Does he not say, " I*am the door," 
 (John, X, 9.) " I am the vine?' (John, xv, i.) If the Redeemer 
 spoke even once figuratively, he may have spoken figuratively 
 on this occasion. There is a figure in the following passage, 
 "This is my blood of the New Testament." Here the chalice 
 is the blood of Christ : the material substance of the cup is 
 according to the letter the very blood of Christ. The Saviour 
 speaks, we perceive figuratively in the very context. Now, if 
 one part of the Saviour's words at the institution of the Eucha- 
 rist is to be taken literally, why not the rest? But are we to 
 suppose that the cup is transubstantiated into the blood of Christ ? 
 I would also ask Mr. Maguire, is there not another specimen of 
 figurative language in the expression, " this is my blood which 
 is shed ?" Was the Saviour's blood shed when he said, " it is 
 shed ?" Was his body broken, when he said, " it is broken ?" 
 My friend has threatened us with a great number of quotations 
 from the Fathers ; permit me to call your attention to a few, 
 Tertullian says — 
 
 " God, in your gospel, has so revealed the matter, calling the bread his own 
 body, that you may hence understand how he gave bread to be the. figure 
 of his own body ; which body, conversely, the prophet has figurativeli 
 called bread, the Lord himself being afterwards about to interpret this sacra- 
 ment."— Adv. Marcion. Lib. iii, § 12, 13, p. 209 
 
 Arguing against the sceptics, who denied the certainty of sense, 
 he says — 
 
 " We must not call our senses in question, lest we should doubt respecting' 
 their fidelity even in the case of Christ himself Because, if we question the 
 fidelity of our senses, we might peradventure be led to say, that Christ delu- 
 sively beheld Satan precipitated from heaven, or delusively heard the voice of 
 his Father, testifying of him, or was deceived when he touched Peter's mother- 
 in-law, or smelt a different odour of the ointment which he received for his 
 sepulture, or tasted a different flavour of the wine which he consecrated in 
 memory of his blood." — De Anim. in cap, de quinque sens. oper. p. 653. 
 
 Cyril of Jerusalem says, 
 
 " With all assurance, let us partake as of the body and blood of Christ : 
 for under the type of bread. His body is given to thee, and under the type of 
 wine his blood is given to thee ; that so thou mayst partake of the body and 
 blood of Christ, being one body and one blood with him." — Catech. Mystag. 
 iv, p. 217, 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 2lj 
 
 Chrysostom says, 
 
 " Under the name of fl^sh scripture is wont alike to set foith themy&teriea 
 and the whole church : for it says, that they are each the body of Christ." — 
 Comment in Epist ad. Galat. c. v, oper. vol. ix, p. 1022. Commel. 1603. 
 
 Again, 
 
 " Wherefore let there approach no Judas partaking of the poison of iniquity ; 
 for the Eucharist is spiritual food." — De Prodit. Jud. Serm. 30, oper. vol v, 
 p. 464. 
 
 Augustin says— 
 
 " The Lord, when he ^ave the sign of his body, did not doubt to say, thi- 
 is my body." — Contr. Adiman. c. 12, oper. vol. vi, p. 69, Colon. 1616. 
 
 Again- — 
 
 " In the history of the New Testament, so great and so marvelous was the 
 patience of our Lord, that bearing with Judas, though not ignorant of his 
 purpose, he admitted him to the banquet, in which he commended and deliv- 
 erea to his disciples the figure of his own body and blood." — Enarr. in Ps. 
 iii, oper. vol. viii, p. 7. 
 
 Again, 
 
 " Christ instructed his disciples, and said unto them — * it is the spirit that 
 quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing : the words which I speak unto you, 
 are spirit and life ;' as if he had said, understand spiritually what I have 
 spoken : you are not about to eat this identical body which you see, and you 
 are not about to drink this identical blood, which they who crucify me, will 
 pour out ; on the contrary, I have commended a certain sacrament unto you, 
 which will vivify you if spiritually understood, though it must be cele- 
 brated visibly, yet it must be understood invisibly." — Enarr. in Ps. xcviii, 
 oper. vol. viii, p. 397. 
 
 Pope Gelasius is of the same opinion. — De Duab. Nat. Christ. 
 Cont. Nestor, et Eutych. in Biblioth. Patr. vol. 4, p. 422. 
 
 I now meet my friend's challenge as to ancient liturgies. In 
 different liturgies, even after the words of consecration, and after 
 some prayers, the priest beseeches God to make this bread the holy 
 bodij of Christ, and this cup the precious blood of Christ, These 
 are the words used in the formulary called the liturgy of James, 
 and the like prayer after the words of consecration occurs in the 
 liturgies of Mark, John, Chrysostom and Basil. Is it not an 
 article of faith in the curch of Rome, that when the words of 
 consecration are once pronounced, no bread or wine remains, 
 but the real body and blood of Christ ; and is not the Host 
 immediately elevated and adored ? If the authors of these 
 liturgies held the same doctrine, is it not absurd, that they should 
 offer a prayer to God, to do that which they believed had been 
 already done ; to make the bread and wine the body and blood 
 of Christ, a thing which they believed had been already done, if 
 they were of the same opinion with the church of Rome ? 
 
 The authors of the Mass did not themselves believe in tran 
 substantiation ; they oflen call the Eucharist an image, a pledge. 
 (ex Miss. Sar. et Ro ) Why should they call it an image, a 
 
216 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 pledge, if they believed it to be the thing itself? The Sarum 
 Missal (Fer Quat. Temp.) confesses that, 
 
 " God would have his sacraments consist of the fruits of the earth :" they 
 plainly acknowledge of the sacrament, " Cibavit eos ex adipe frumenti," he 
 fed them with the flower of wheat ; wherefore by their own acknowledgment, 
 the sacrament which is eaten, is the fruit of the earth, and the flower of wheat 
 (Ex horis de 5, Sacr. impr. per Sac. Keruer, Paris, Ann. 1570, et in Ro. Miss, 
 in solen. Sacratis. Corpor. Chri. in princip.) 
 
 In the Post-communion, after every bishop-confessor, the 
 Roman Missal, and the Missal of Sarum, in the Post-commu- 
 nion prayer (Feria Sixta) say, 
 
 " We beseech thee, Lord, that giving thanks unto thee for these gifts which 
 we have received, we may receive better giftsJ^ 
 
 But if Christ be substantially present, what better gift could 
 they desire than the Saviour himself ! In another place they 
 pray, 
 
 " That which we have received with our mouths, Lord, grant that with pure 
 minds loe may also take, that of a temporal gift it may be made an eternal remedy.^* 
 (In can. Miss, et Ro. Br. Fer. 5, post po. passionis.) 
 
 Christ's body is not a temporal, but an everlasting gift and 
 remedy. Again, 
 
 " That which we have received in the image of the sacrament, grant we may 
 receive by manifest participation.''^ 
 
 After the same manner they pray again, 
 
 *' Let thy holy sacraments perfect, Lord, that which they contain, that which 
 v>e do now in show, we may receive in the certain truth of things themselves." 
 |ln Fest. S. Swythen. in Post-compignus vitae aeternse in miss. Sar. 
 
 They confess that they do it in show. I ask, if the body and 
 blood of Christ were actually present, would they have used this 
 expression 1 
 
 Again, in the Post-communion of the Mass of the Virgin 
 Mary, they call the sacraments the helps of our salvation, salutis 
 nostrse subsidia ; but if they were the body and blood of Christ, 
 it would be blasphemy to call him the help of salvation, who is 
 salvation itself. — (Miss. Sar. in Post. Com. in Miss. Bea. Yirg. 
 Mar.) In the secret of the office of the dead, they say, receive 
 O Lordf for the soul of thy servant, the Host which thou didst 
 offer to God the Father for us bountifully. — (Miss. Sar. in offic. 
 mort.) If the Host be the very body of Christ, then to offer 
 Christ to himself would be most absurd. In the canon they 
 pray, that God would accept the things offered, as he accepted the 
 sacrifice of his holy child Ahel^ the sacrifice of Mraham, and that 
 which JMelchisedech offered. I ask, would it not be blasphemy to 
 compare the sacrifices of Abel, Abraham and Milchisedech. 
 howe^ cr holy, with the body and blood of Christ ? 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 217 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — If my friend, Mr. Pope, would be in any 
 manner consistent with himself, this controversy would have a 
 speedy termination. It is no difficult matter for puny man 
 limited as he is in understanding, to raise objections against holy 
 mysteries. The very same objections which Mr. Pope has 
 urged against the doctrine of transubstantiation, the Socinian 
 may urge against the Trinity — as being a mystery incompre- 
 hensible to human reason. Hear the words spoken here on the 
 second day of the discussion by Mr. Pope, in regard to the doc- 
 trine of the Trinity, as given in the Morning Register : 
 
 "I remember that reason has its legitimate province. If God has revealed 
 the fact that three persons are one in the Divine essence, but not how that 
 essence is formed, 1 believe the statement, I am not called upon to believe 
 how it is effected. It is not for us to bring before the bar of natural reason 
 the great Being who makes the statement. If we are convinced that this is the 
 book of God, we must be convinced that the three divine persons are in one. 
 It is above reason, but not opposed to reason, and we are bound to receive it." 
 
 I shall answer Mr. Pope's objections by his own arguments. 
 Confining myself to the language of Mr. Pope, I affirm, that if 
 it be revealed in scripture, that the sacred body and blood of 
 Christ are bequeathed to us as a legacy, it is not for us to bring 
 the God of heaven before the bar of natural reason. If we are 
 convinced that the statement has been made, we must be con 
 vinced of the fact. It may be above reason, but it is not con 
 trary to reason. In comn»on consistency, therefore, he is bound 
 to receive the doctrine. 
 
 Mr. Pope has recurred to Melchisedech ; I did not bring 
 forward Melchisedech as a direct proof, though perhaps it is 
 tantamount to a direct one. The onus lies on Mr. Pope to 
 show where or when Melchisedech did offer a sacrifice, if not 
 in the instance to which reference has been made. Melchise- 
 dech is called a priest of the Most High. If in this instance 
 Mr. Pope will have it that Melchisedech merely gave bread and 
 wine to Abraham, I call upon him to show where, in any other 
 mstance, Melchisedech is recorded to have offered sacrifice to 
 the Lord ; and if he cannot, why is Melchisedech called a priest 
 of the Most High? 
 
 I prefer to Mr. Pope's version of the scriptures that of St. 
 Jerome, who spent fourteen years in Palestine, and the com- 
 mentaries of Dr. Wall, which are in my possession. Mr. Pope 
 quotes Catholic authorities to show that there is not evident 
 proof derivable from scripture, for the doctrine of transubstan- 
 tiation. There is not mathematical evidence, such as 2 and 2 
 rhake 4 ; for what is evident cannot be contested. But the 
 proof approaches very nearly to an evident one, when our Saviour 
 emphatically says, '* this is my body," " this is my blo(Td 
 That surely is a very close approximation to evidence 
 
 19 
 
218 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTI ATlON. 
 
 Mr. Pope has not been able to produce any Catholic divines 
 who contradicted the doctrine of trarisubstantiation. I am ready 
 to admit, that there is no self-evident proof for the doctrine of 
 transubstantiation ; but Christ has pronounced the words " this 
 is my body — this is my blood," and I therefore believe. 
 
 Let Mr. Pope produce any passage equally clear upon the 
 doctrines of the Trinity — the Incarnation, or any other doctrine 
 of Christianity. Mr. Pope says, that Christ came down, not in 
 his body, from heaven. I assert that he did come, as to his 
 humanity, from heaven, when Mary was overshadowed by the 
 Holy Ghost ; the Saviour's body came direct from the power 
 and finger of God, and was formed of the substance of a pure 
 immaculate virgin. 
 
 My Reverend opponent says, that the Redeemer was in the 
 habit of speaking in parables. Whenever Christ made a reve- 
 lation of an article of faith, did he speak,in parables 1 When- 
 ever such a revelation is made, I do not believe our Saviour 
 propounds it parabolic ally. When some of the disciples of 
 Jesus became shocked at his expressions at Capernaum, and 
 when he saw the Jews alarmed and debating with themselves, 
 and he himself becoming uneasy about this fact, as is evidenced 
 by his subsequent question to the Apostles, " Will you also leave 
 me 1" It would be most strange that, if he had been only speak- 
 ing metaphorically, he should have, as it were, confirmed them 
 in their error, by adding this strong expression — 
 
 "Amen, I say unto you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and 
 drink liis blood, you shall not have life in you." 
 
 It is a melancholy instance of human infirmity to find such 
 objections raised against that which has been so obviously and 
 evidently revealed. It is the doctrine of the council of Trent, 
 that he who receives the body and blood of Christ unworthily, 
 eats and drinks perdition to himself, not discerning the body 
 of the Lord, 
 
 Therefore, when the doctors of the church speak of spiritual 
 things, they mean that the sacrament may be really received by 
 a man without its accompanying spiritual graces. No man will 
 deny, that baptism is a representation of Christ's death and re- 
 surrection, by regenerating man from a spiritual death to a spir- 
 itual life — and yet it is acknowledged to be a real sacrament, 
 and to confer real grace. Mr. Pope may deny the fact if he 
 choose, but I have all the Protestants of the church of England 
 with me on the subject. Christ's body and blood are a reality, 
 and a figure at one and the same time — they are not given in 
 their natural and gross manner, but as the fulfilment of the type 
 in the old law. The Pascal Lamb was the figure of Christ's 
 body^ and blood, and if the body and blood be not present, there 
 
THE DOCTRINE OP TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 219 
 
 is no fiilfilinent of the type in the new law. If the sacramenl 
 be mere bread and wine, it is impossible to conceive how a man 
 who receives unworthily can eat and drink damnation to himself. 
 Our Saviour says ** I am the door ; I am the vine ; 1 am the 
 good shepherd." Mr. Pope concludes, that because he speaks 
 figuratively in one instance, he does so in all. When our Re- 
 deemer said, he was the door and the vine, was there a man ot 
 common sense listening to him, who did not know that he spoke 
 metaphorically? The expressions were not violent or unnat- 
 ural, they were in accordance with the general tenor of the 
 language of the day. But if he had taken a vine in his hand, 
 and said, " I am this vine" — or, if he took up a door and said, 
 " I am this door" — or, if taking hold of a shepherd he said, " I 
 am this shepherd ; then would the metaphor appear extravagant 
 and absurd. But when he took the bread, and blessing it said, 
 " THIS IS MY body" — there evidently was no metaphor intended. 
 Had he said, " this bread is my body," such an expression 
 would b® truly metaphorical, but " this is my body," clearly 
 supposes a change of substance. 
 
 VVhen, at the marriage of Cana of Gallilee,our Saviour changed 
 water into wine there was a real transubstantiation. If he had 
 then said, " this water is wine," it would be a metaphor ; but if 
 he said, " this is wine," there was no metaphor, as a real tran- 
 substantiation had taken place, and there was no water there. 
 When Moses changed his rod into a serpent, if he said, " this is 
 a serpent," that would not be a metaphor ; but had he said, 
 "this rod is a serpent," there he would speak metaphorically 
 When Christ therefore said, " this is my body," it is plain and 
 evident that he did not speak metaphorically. If a person asked 
 for some good wine, and that in reply another said to him, "take 
 Ihis bottle," the metaphor is natural and obvious ; but if he said, 
 handing him a bottle of milk, "this bottle is wine," the metaphor 
 would then indeed be foolish, extravagant and unintelligible. 
 Mr. Pope has quoted the words, " this is my blood which is 
 shed for many for the remission of sins." This is one of the 
 strongest proofs in support of the doctrine of transubstantiation. 
 If the expression was, " shall be shed," it might seem to militate 
 against that doctrine. But the expression " is shed," proves that 
 Christ offered himself to his Father before he had actually sui- 
 fered, and applied the graces annexed to the sacrament before 
 he had actually suffered on the cross. The graces which were 
 to flow from that offering he here applied in the sacrament, for 
 if not, there was no sacrament instituted. NoW, if he applied 
 the graces before his death in the sacrament, I am at a loss to 
 know why the action, having taken place previously to his dei^th, 
 should form any bar to the doctrine of transubstantiation. 
 
220 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 St. Cyril of Jerusalem has been quoted by my friend. You 
 shall hear him again, and you can then decide whether it be not 
 extremely foolish to introduce that holy Father as opposed to 
 transubstantiation. After quotino- the words of St. Paul, "1 
 have received of the Lord that which I also have delivered unto 
 you," he proceeds to say : 
 
 " This doctrine of the blessed Paul may be sufficient to satisfy you con- 
 cerning the divine mysteries which you have received, that you have been 
 made partakers of the body and blood of Christ. The bread and wine, which 
 before the invocation of the adorable Trinity were nothing but bread and 
 wine, became after this invocation the body and blood of Christ. The Euchar- 
 istic bread, after the invocation of the Holy Spirit, is no longer common bread, 
 but the body of Christ. — Wherefore, I conjure, my brethren, not to consider 
 them any more as common bread and wine, since they are the body and 
 blood of Jesus Christ, according to his own words ; and although your senses 
 might suggest that to you, let faitih confirm you. Judge not of the thing by 
 vour taste, but by faith assure yourself, without the least doubt, that you are 
 honoured with the body and blood of Jesus Christ. That which appears 
 bread is not bread, though the taste judge otherwise — the wine which you see, 
 and which tastes like wine, is not wine, but the blood of Christ." 
 
 Here St. Cyril impresses on us to believe the real presence 
 of Christ in the sacrament, though the doctrine may appear con- 
 trary to some of our senses. Every thing which St. Cyril here 
 says, makes for the doctrine which I now advocate ; and Mr. 
 Pope will perform a greater miracle than transubstantiation 
 itself, if he shall demonstrate that St. Cyril was opposed to that 
 doctrine. I wonder why all those Fathers should take such ex- 
 traordinary pains to impress upon the minds of their hearers the 
 absolute necessity of believing contrary to their seeing, touching, 
 and tasting, if there were nothing in that sacrament but the ele- 
 ment of bread and wine._ 
 
 M.y friend has quoted St. Augustin likewise. From what 
 1 have quoted already, touching the sacraments, from this great 
 Father of the church, you can easily perceive that he speaks most 
 plainly of transubstantiation. On the 33d Psalm we find, that 
 he even calls this mystery the sacrifice of the body and blood of 
 our Lord. I shall give you his original words : 
 
 "Erat autem, ut nostis sacrificium .Tudaeorum in victimus peccorum secun- 
 dum ordinum Aaron, et hoc in mysterio; nondum erat sacrificium Corporis 
 et sanguinis domini quod norunt fideles et qui evangelium legerunt, quod 
 Bacrificiura nunc difFusum est in toto orb^ terrarum." 
 
 "There was ye are aware, first, the sacrifice of the Jews, which consists 
 in victims of cattle, according to the order of Aaron ; and this in a myster}. 
 The sacrifice of the body and blood of our Lord was not yet instituted, which 
 the faithful know, and those who read the gospel, which sacrifice is now es- 
 tablished throughout the whole world." 
 
 If there be nothing in the sacrament of the Eucharist but m«re 
 elements of bread and wine, it could not, nor ought it to be called 
 a sacrifice. But St. Augustin styles it the sacrifice of the body 
 and blood of our Lord. It is manifest then that he held a total 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 221 
 
 change of the elements into the body and blood of Christ. 
 When therefore he speaks of the sacrament as something spir- 
 itual, he only draws a distinction between the body and blood 
 of Christ in a carnal or gross sense, and between the body and 
 blood of Christ in a true, substantial, but sacramental sense. 
 The first was the error of those at Capernaum, as St. Augustin 
 himself describes it. " Quomodo in cadevere dilaniatur, aut m 
 macello venditur." The second is the true and orthodox sense, 
 as the same Father explains it. " Quomodo spiritu vegetatur." 
 This, I think, most satisfactorily reconciles St. Augustin's ap- 
 parent discrepancy. I here request that you will reflect upon 
 the passage of St. Augustin, where he describes one of his 
 priests offering up the sacrifice of the mass for the servants and 
 cattle of Tribune. 
 
 I could quote several other passages from St. Augustin, if 
 his authority were called in question, on that subject. I have 
 sixty or seventy Fathers, (Ignatus, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, 
 Tertullian, Origen, Hyppolitus, and Cyprian, &c, &c, &c,) 
 whom I could also quote if time permitted. The extracts are 
 here on the table. I take not their words mutatis mutandis, but 
 I am ready to read whole passages from them, where they treat 
 on this subject professedly. St. Augustin, you will remember, 
 in his Commentary on the words of the 33d Psalm, " ferebatur 
 in manibus suis," says that our Lord carried his body in his own 
 hand, at his last supper. After such passages, it is idle and 
 foolish in the extreme to quote St. Augustin as opposed to the 
 doctrine of transubstantiation. 
 
 I shall now proceed to notice the other objections advanced 
 by Mr. Pope. The book of Gelasius is doubted by many 
 critics, and it is uncertain whether it was written by Pope Gela- 
 sius, or by Gelasius Cyzinicus. But even supposing it to have 
 been written by Pope Gelasius, I am here ready to show that it 
 proves nothing against the doctrine of transubstantiation, as 
 Hawarden has plainly demonstrated. Mr. Pope has quoted the 
 ancient Liturgies to show that prayers were offered to God to 
 change the elements after the words of consecration had been 
 pronounced. Dr. Brett, a Protestant, and who was by no means 
 favourably ir'clined to Popery, translated all the ancient Litur- 
 gies from the original Greek. I am ready to prove from every 
 one of them, that the sacrifice of the Mass and transubstantia- 
 tion were derived from the Apostles, and believed throughout the 
 church, both eastern and western. In the Liturgy of St. James, 
 which has been quoted by Mr. Pope, after the words : 
 
 " This is my body which is broken and given for you, for the remission of 
 Bins." "This is my blood of the New Testament, vhich is shed and gi^en 
 tor you and for many, for the remission of sins." 
 
 19* 
 
2U2 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 And, after some prayers, he thus addresses himself to Al- 
 mighty God, 
 
 "Send down, O Lord, this thy most holy spirit upon us, and upon these 
 holy gifts here set before thee : that by his holy, good, and glorious presence 
 he may sanctify and make this bread the body of thy Christ, and this cup the 
 precious blood of thy Christ" 
 
 It was here objected that the Greeks did not believe in tran* 
 substantiation, because after the words of consecration they 
 prayed : *' Make this bread the holy body of thy Christ, and this 
 cup the precious blood of thy Christ." But this objection was 
 fully answered by the Greeks themselves in the council of 
 Florence, who by the mouth of Isidorus, metropolitan of Syria, 
 and legate of the patriarch of Antioch, and one of the seven 
 deputed by the Greek prelates to dispute with the Latins, replied 
 that the Greeks did unanimously believe the consecration to be 
 valid, and the change to be effected by the words of Christ : — 
 " This is my body — this is my blood ;" and that they differed 
 from the Latin church, merely as to the manner of explaining 
 themselves. But that having found the above prayer in the 
 missals of Saints Basil and Chrysostom, which they then used, 
 and which were extant without any alteration, long before the 
 time of their separation from the Latin church, they did not think 
 fit to discard it. I shall give you the words of Isidorus himself 
 as they were taken down by the interpreter of the said council : — 
 
 "Hoc Missale quo utimur est traditum a Basilio et beato Chrysostomo: 
 utebamur autem eo ante tempus schismatis, nee aliqua facta est mutatio; 
 tamen occidentalis Ecclesia nunquam (^ hoc verbum fecit, videhcet cum 
 fuerimus Concordes, et ad eundem finem tendentes; secundum rem dicimus 
 idem, etcredimus id quod conficit mysterium esse sermonem Domisii, et Domi- 
 nicam vocem esse eifectricem divinorum munerum, et ilia vox semper explicatur 
 a sacerdote, et suscipit sacerdes quod vox replicata aptetur, et sit cadem vox 
 cum voce Domini ; et ut ita aptetur, invocatur spiritus sanctus et supplicat 
 Bacerdos, ut per virtutem spiritus sancti concedatur gratia ut vox repetita 
 efficiatur ita effectiva, ut verbum Dei fuit ; et ita credimus consummativa 
 fieri per illam orationem sacerdotis. Dominicse voces habent operationem ut 
 scmina, quia sine semine non potest effici fructus; ita in hoc dominica voce: 
 tamen ubi cadet semen, eget aliis instrumentis ut. sacerdotis, altaris, oratio- 
 num, undo credimus per hoc vobiscum esse Concordes." 
 
 " This Missal which we use was delivered to us by St. Basil and St. Chry» 
 Bostom, and it is the same we used before the time of the schism : nor is there 
 any change made in it; yet the Latin church never made any exception on 
 thio head, inasmuch, as we were of one accord, and tending to the same end. 
 We in reality say the same thing, and believe that that which completes the 
 mystery is the word of the Lord, and that the word of our Lord produces tiie 
 divine gifts, and that the word is always expressed by the priest, and the 
 priest takes care that the word repeated should be adapted to, and be the 
 same with the word of our Lord ; and that it may be so adapted, the Holy 
 Ghost is invoked, and the priest prays that by virtue of the Holy Ghost 
 grace may be granted, that the repeated word may be made as effective as 
 llie word of God was. And so we believe that it becomes consummated by 
 tliat prayer of the priest, I'he words of our Lord are operative like seed. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 223 
 
 Tor as fruit cannot be produced without seed, so it is in this word of our Lord, 
 yet where this seed falls it requires other instruments, for example a priest, 
 an altar, and prayers, whence we beheve that in this matter we substantially 
 accord with you." 
 
 Mr. Pope. — Mr. Maguire, in maintaining the doctrine of 
 transubstantiation, observed, that it is such a mystery, that we 
 are not to pry into it, and endeavoured to institute a comparison 
 between it and the doctrine of the Trinity. I deny altogether 
 that any parallelism exists. On the doctrine of the Trinity we 
 are incapable of exercising our senses. Man, by the mere 
 exercise of sense, cannot find out the Almighty. An infinite 
 distance exists between the Divine nature and my faculties. 
 But my senses, in their legitimate province, are a divine reve- 
 lation, and the direct inlets of knowledge to the mind. Though 
 Ihey cannot investigate the nature of God, for it is above their 
 reach, I can bring one and all of them to bear upon transubstan- 
 tiation ; and their united testimony is, that the bread is bread, 
 and the wine is wine. Hence no parallel can be drawn between 
 transubstantiation and the doctrine of the Trinity. 
 
 My friend has said, that the onus rests on me to show, that 
 Melchisedech made an offering, in order to demonstrate the 
 priesthood. I answer, that it is quite sufficient for me, that God 
 has called him a priest. I have already referred to Roman 
 Catholic authority to show, that the word translated " brought 
 FORTH," is properly rendered, the original expression having no 
 reference to oblation ; that the word rendered ''^for^'' in the 
 Douay Bible, does not signify '^'^for^'' but " and^'' and that the 
 latter part of the eighteenth verse is a separate clause. 
 
 Mr. Maguire has told us, that two and two make four. Does 
 he mean to introduce this arithmetical calculation to illustrate 
 the proposition, that thai xohich has all the properties of bread is 
 flesh? Such a position I maintain, is absurd, opposed to the 
 common sense of mankind, to the testimony of our senses, and 
 contradictory to the doctrines of holy writ. 
 
 My friend has said, that the body of Christ came down from 
 above in consequence of his preternatural generation, through 
 the power of the Holy Ghost. I would refer him to the language 
 of the Athanasian creed, which Mr. Maguire has subscribed. 
 That formulary, speaking of the Saviour says, "God of the 
 substance of the Father, begotten before the world, and man of 
 the substance of his mother, born in the world." So much for 
 Mr. Maguire's theological accuracy. 
 
 My friend has said, that the council of Trent holds, thaf 
 although man may partake of the body and blood, soul and 
 divinity of Christ, yet, if he possesses not the grace of God, he 
 s^hall perish. 1 v\ ould ask a simple question. Why should the 
 
224 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIA TION. 
 
 council of Trent take one part of our Saviour's words literaily 
 and in other passages, where the scripture militates against the 
 views of the church of Rome, reject the literal sense? 
 
 Mr. Maguire has said, if the Saviour took the door in his 
 * hands and said, "I am this door;" or if he took the vine in hi^ 
 hand, and said, " I am this vine," the case would have been 
 different — but methinks transubstantiation is still more absurd ; 
 for he supposes Christ to intimate, " Here am I, sitting with you 
 nt the table, circumscribed as to mv humanity, and this bit of 
 bread which I hold in my hand is my body ; I grasp this body 
 within the palm of my hand, and I give this body from myself 
 to you. I give myself from myself, to be partaken of before my 
 eyes." My friend has referred us to the marriage-feast. I am 
 glad that he has reminded us of a sensible transubstantiation. I 
 imagine that the guests saw that the water was changed into 
 wine, and from their taste also, were conscious of the change. 
 My friend perceives, that they had only to exercise their senses 
 to discover, that that which had been water, with all the proper- 
 ties of water, was now wine, with all the properties of wine. 
 
 If Mr. Maguire allowed his flock to exercise their senses 
 they too would find, that after consecration the bread is still 
 bread, and the wine still wine. Mr. Maguire has made an 
 extraordinary statement, that Christ offered himself up, before 
 he offered himself up ! He should be loath to throw out insin- 
 uations against the correctness of my quo&itions — I have already 
 exposed him. Was he not detected yesterday in a quotation 
 from a work, to the original of which I referred you? He says, 
 that he quotes from originals — I will not charge my friend with 
 an intention wilfully to mislead us, — he was, I will admit, him- 
 self deceived, having implicitly confided in the quotations placed 
 in his hands; but I say, Mr. Maguire should be cautious. I have 
 several other quotations. St. Augustin says upon the words : 
 
 " * Me ye have not always.' He speaks of the presence of his body ; ye 
 shall have me according to my providence, according to majesty and invisible 
 |p;race ; but according to the flesh which the Word assumed, according to 
 that which was born of the Virgin Mary, ye shall not have me ; therefore, 
 because that he conversed with his disciples forty days, he is ascended up 
 into heaven and is not here." — Tract 50 in Joan. Edit. Basil. 1596. 
 
 Yet the church of Rome says, that the body of Christ is od 
 every altar ! In the 23d epistle — 
 
 "If the sacraments (says he) had not some resemblance of these things 
 whereof they are sacraments, they would not be sacraments at all ; but from 
 tliis resemblance they take for the most part the names of the things which 
 they represent ; therefore, as the sacrament of the body of Christ is in some 
 manner or sense Christ's body, and the sacrament of his blood, is the bloo«^ 
 of Christ, so the sacrament of faith (meaning baptism) is faith."— 23d Episf 
 Tom. ii, p. 93. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 225 
 
 In this passage St. Augustin shows the meaning of the word* 
 employed to designate the Eucharist, and explains many of the 
 strong expressions to be found in Mr. Maguire's quotation?. 
 
 St. Clement of Alexandria, who lived in the second century 
 
 says, 
 
 "Inasmuch as Christ declared, that the bread which I give you is my f. esh, 
 and inasmuch as flesh is irrigated by blood, therefore the wine is alleg )ri- 
 CALLY CALLED blood.— Psedag. Lib. i, c. 6, p. 104. For the word is aile- 
 GORiCALLT DESIGNATED by many different names, such as meat and flesh, 
 and nourishment, and bread, and' blood, and milk ; for the Lord is all things 
 for the enjoyment of us who have believed in him. Nor let any one think we 
 speak strangely, when we say that milk is allegoricallt called the blood 
 of the Lord, for is not wine likewise allkgorically called by the very 
 same appellation ?" — Paedag. lib. i, c. 6, p. 105. 
 
 Again, 
 
 " The scripture, then, has named wine a mystic symbol of the holy blood." 
 —Ibid. lib. ii, c. 2, p. 156. 
 
 Again, 
 
 ''Be well assured, that Christ also himself partook of wine, inasmuch a< 
 lie also was a man. He moreover blessed the wine, saying, take, drink 
 this is my blood, the blood of the vine. The consecrated liquor of exhilara 
 tion, tiieretore, allegorically represents the Word, who poured himseb 
 out on behalf of many for the remission of sins." — Ibid. lib. ii, c. 2, p. 158. 
 
 I have various other quotations to the same effect, but my 
 time is too precious to be expended in reading them ; you can 
 judge whether they are not stronger than those which my friend 
 has cited. I am convinced that the quotations which I have 
 read, are correctly given. My opponent has doubted that pas- 
 sage of Pope Gelasius : 
 
 " Certainly the sacraments of the body and blood of the Lord which are 
 received, are a divine thing, because by these we are made partakers of the 
 divine nature ; nevertheless the substance or nature of the bread and wine 
 ceases not to cxist^ and assuredly the image and similitude of the body and 
 blood of Christ are celebrated in the action of the mystej-ies." — De duab. 
 Christi J^atur. Cont. J^est. et Eutych. in BiUioth. Patr. vol. iv, p. 422. 
 
 My friend tells me that this book is doubted ; but there is 
 stronger reason why my passages should be genuine than his. 
 Protestants have no index expurgatorius to which the Fathers 
 must be subject — *' Solius est Dei adorari" is purged by that 
 index from the index of the works of Athanasius and Augustin — 
 and if a doctrine of that nature could be purged, is there any 
 reason to doubt that the passages which remain untouched^ aie 
 the genuine sentiments of their originals..— Adorari solius Dei 
 est : (adoration belongs to God alone) deleatur ex. ind. oper. 
 Athanasii Indice lib. Prohib. et Expurg. p. 52. Madrit. An. 
 1627. Item ex In. Oper. St. August, ibid. p. 56. 
 
 Mr. Maguire has produced passages from Luther. I ask him 
 in the face of the world to produce the places froni which they 
 
226 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUESTANTIATION. 
 
 are taken. They carry upon the face of them their own refuta 
 tion. I arn satisfied that many of them were never uttered by 
 that eminent and intrepid reformer, the great and mighty Luther. 
 As to the hturgies to which I referred^ in order to meet my oppG- 
 nent on his own ground^ they have little weight with me ; but 
 they show the opinions of the individuals who used them, upon 
 the subject. The Greeks gave, I imagine, but a lame and 
 confused account of them at the council of Florence, and these 
 liturgies were composed one thousand years before that council. 
 If transubstantiation, which, the church of Rom.e says, takes 
 place as soon as the words of consecration are uttered, was held 
 by those who used these liturgies, it would be inconsistent, that 
 the prayer should be subsequent to the words of consecration, 
 and that even after consecration they should continue to call the 
 elements gifts, I admit, that the expression is strong, (but 
 remember, that it was used after consecration) namely, that God 
 would make this bread, the holy body of Christ. We have 
 learned from Augustin, that the names of the things signified 
 are often employed instead of the names of the signs. My 
 friend has not met me respecting the authors of the mass not 
 believing in transubstantiation. I am convinced that he cannot 
 controvert my proofs, that they did not beheve in that doctrine. 
 To proceed with my arguments — I have shown that the Saviour, 
 even in the very place which describes the institution of the 
 sacrament, as well as elsewhere, employed figurative language. 
 What reason have we for thinking that there is not figurative 
 language in this passage also? I shall assign to you my reasons 
 for believing that the expression, " this my body," is to be taken 
 in a figurative sense also. Our Saviour says, " do this for a 
 commemoration of me." — (Luke, xxii, 19.) I ask, if the real 
 body and blood of Christ — if Christ himself, be substantially 
 present, how the Eucharist can be observed as a commemorative 
 act? The commemoration of a person betokens that the per- 
 son commemorated is absent, not present. " As often as ye eat 
 this bread, and drink the chalice, ye shall show the death of the 
 Lord till he come." — (1 Cor. xi, 25.) There are innumerable 
 figurative expressions in holy writ. "The seven full ears «r6 
 seven years of plenty, the seven lean kine are seven years of 
 famine." — (Gen. xli, 26, 27.) " The seven candlesticks are the 
 fc^even churches." — (Apoc. i, 20.) " The seven heads are seven 
 mountains." — (Apoc. xvii, 9.) In the passover itself, we have 
 the expression, "it is the Lord's passover," (Exod. xii, IL) or 
 as the Douay version renders it, " it is the phase of the Lord." 
 The auxiliary verb, in the sense of" represent," is usual to the 
 sacred writers. Recollect too, that the words, " this is my 
 body," were addressed to Jews, who were accustomed to this 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSI^BSTANTIATION. 227 
 
 Style of language at the feast of the passover. Justin Martyr 
 tells us, that the form of words, used at the passover from Ezra's 
 time, was, " this passover is our Saviour and our refuge," — 
 (Dial, cum Tryph. p. 297. Ed. Paris, 1639.)— that is, this 
 passover represents him, who is our Saviour and our refuge. 
 Bear in mind, therefore, that our Saviour addressed himself to 
 men who were prepared to understand him in a figurative sense. 
 Further — the Jews were forbidden to eat blood ; (Lev. xvii, 10, 
 11, 12.) would not the feehngs of the Apostles have been 
 shocked, if they believed that the Saviour had commanded them 
 to partake of it. The prohibition was not subsequently repealed ; 
 for, as my friend has observed, the council of Jerusalem, as he 
 terms it, enforced an abstinence from blood. Again, if the 
 Saviour's words are to be taken literally, they would do away 
 with the nature of a sacrament, and contradict the prophecy 
 which says, " Thou wilt not suffer thy Holy One to see corrup- 
 tion." — Psalm XV, 10. 
 
 Sacred Writ says, that the body of Christ shall not see corrup- 
 tion : but the elements, even after consecration, are corruptible ; 
 therefore, we argue, that they cannot have been transubstantiated 
 into that body, which does not see corruption. Mark the con- 
 sequence of rejecting the testimony of sense : that which proves 
 the truth of Christ's resurrection, proves the falsehood of tran- 
 substantiation ; but if the testimony of sense is to be refused, 
 then we weaken the evidence for the Christian revelation. St. 
 John, in his first epistle, first chap, says, 
 
 "That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we 
 Iiave looked upon, and which our hands have handled,, of the word of Life ; 
 for the hfe was manifested: and we have seen and do bear witness, and 
 declare unto you the life eternal, which was with the Father, and hath appeared 
 to us: that which we have seen and have heard, we declare unto you, that 
 you also may have fellowship with us, and our fellowship may be with the 
 Father and with his Son Jesus Christ" 
 
 When Thomas doubted, the Saviour said to him, 
 
 " Put in thy finger hither, and see my hands, and bring hither thy hand, 
 and put it into my side ; and be not faithless but believing." — John, xx, 27. 
 
 The Saviour, 'tis true, added, " Blessed are they that have 
 not seen, and yet have believed." But he did not say, *' Blessed 
 are those who have seen^ and yet have not believed ;" the blessing 
 v/as not to those, who having the opportunity of seeing, disre- 
 garded the testimony of their senses, but to those who not seeing, 
 yet believed — who, when the evidence of sense was wanting, 
 yet believed. I would ask, what is the use of this irrational and 
 extraordinary doctrine 1 I will tell you — to make demi-gods of 
 the Roman Catholic priests — to raise them in the estimation of 
 the i>eople, and to cause the multitude to look up to thom as men 
 
2f8 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 who C'Jin create their God. In the dark ages, an account of 
 which I read to you, when the priests domineered over the 
 intellects of men, when abuses and fictions were introduced, was 
 this monstrous doctrine established. You have heard the story 
 of the mule — the heretic was convinced — he exercised his senses 
 on the miracle. Now, if he exercised his senses on the miracle, 
 why should he not have exercised them on transubstantiation 
 itself? Permit me also to add, that the Saviour most probably 
 spoke in the Syriac language — and, as in that tongue there is 
 no word signifying " to represent," was under the necessity of 
 employing the auxiliary verb. I now call upon Mr. Maguire to 
 meet me upon the question like a man, and not to beat about 
 the bush — to use a vulgar phrase. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — I hope, gentlemen, you wish to hear more 
 than one side of the question ; if you are sincerely anxious to 
 know the truth, you will hear both with equal attention. My 
 friend has called upon me to follow him step by step, I thought 
 my forte throughout this discussion was the use of argument, and 
 from the first day up to this moment, I could never keep my 
 friend from preaching sermons, and confine him to the question 
 at issue. He denies that any parallelism exists in the cases of 
 the mysteries of the Incarnation, the Trinity, and Transubstan- 
 tiation. But he there calculates without his host — has he 
 attempted to show that these doctrines are not mysteries? Has 
 he quoted texts of scripture against me, as I have against him ? 
 Has he brought forward a single direct text from scripture 
 against me ? One thing is clear, by rejecting transubstantiation, 
 because it is a mystery, this gentleman overturns all mysteries, 
 and is become a professed Socinian. He has quoted the evi- 
 dence of the senses against transubstantiation. But even if tha^ 
 doctrine contradicted the senses, he should recollect that the 
 senses have nothing to do with regard to a mystery. St. Paul 
 says, " Faith then cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word 
 of Christ." I call on Mr. Pope to prove that transubstantiation 
 is not a mystery — I call upon him to show, that we are not to 
 believe the doctrine because it appears opposed to the evidence 
 of some of the senses, though we are told that " faith cometh 
 by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ." We fmd that 
 St. Paul here excludes all the senses as judges of mysteries, 
 save the sense of hearing only. If the senses be not constituted 
 as the proper judges of mysteries to pronounce upon their truth, 
 then all his reasoning as to the evidence of the senses falls to 
 the ground. St. Cyril of Jerusalem brings forward arguments 
 to shew, that the evidence of the senses may be contradicted in 
 a mystery, and I have quoted St. Augusiin, where that holy 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 229 
 
 Father says, that " Christ held his body in his own hands." It 
 was absurd, then, on the part of my opponent, to press St. Au- 
 gustin into an opposition to this doctrine. He has enlarged upon 
 the senses as the bulwark of our faith. The senses often contra- 
 dict themselves — or rather contradict facts ; thus, Joshua seeing 
 an angel, mistook him for a man. The woman at the sepulchre 
 saw two young men at the tomb, and yet the scnpf^re tells us 
 they were angels, and God appeared in the form of man, and 
 yet was taken for a mere man. Here, then, the senses contra- 
 dicted themselves. Again, if you immerse a straight stick in 
 water, you would almost swear, were you to believe your sight, 
 that the stick was crooked. In natural things it is very common 
 to see the senses contradicted. In the strict sense of the word, 
 it is true they are not contradicted, for it is not the business of 
 the senses to pronounce judgment according to the principles 
 of philosophy ; they are to convey the impressions made upon 
 them to the mind — to relate merely what appears to them. In 
 respect to the angel and the stick, they merely relate to the 
 mind what appears as a fact to them. When a man sees what 
 is called a wafer, he tastes and smells it ; and here I grant these 
 senses contradict his faith. But to the senses we oppose the 
 express promises of Christ, and believe with St. Paul that faith 
 Cometh by hearing ; and that our Lord bequeathed to man, as a 
 test of his love, a most extraordinary but mysterious legacy. As 
 Mr. Pope argues that the testimony of the senses is fatal to 
 transubstantiation, it remains for him to show, either that it is 
 not a mystery, or that faith cometh not by hearing, for no sense 
 is allowed to judge of mysteries, but the sense of hearing. Christ 
 said, " this is my body." The Apostles heard the words pro- 
 nounced, and their sense of hearing was the only judge. We 
 have it upon their testimony, that Christ spake the words, con- 
 sequently our faith must come from hearing. How will my 
 friend prove the doctrine of the Trinity? It contradicts all the 
 senses, save that of hearing, so does the doctrine of the Incar- 
 nation. If that be the case, if angels be taken for men, and that 
 the senses are thus led astray, it is absurd to say that a mystery 
 is not to be believed, because it contradicts the senses. Mr. 
 Pope has recurred to Melchisedech. I challenged him to show 
 that Melchisedech ever offered up sacrifice but on one occasion, 
 and yet he is called a priest of the Most High. And Christ is 
 called by the royal prophet -md by the Apostle Paul, ** a priest 
 for ever according to the order of Melchisedech." Melchisedech 
 could not be a priest without offering up a sacrifice. This he 
 did when he offered the bread and wine ; why were they intro- 
 duced ] Evidently to show that he made an offering. Jerome's 
 testimony on this matter is preferable to that of Mr. Pope. I 
 
 20 
 
230 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBST A.NTIAT10N. 
 
 care uoi for the Hebrew originals, as they are called. It ifS 
 admitted by two Protestant divines, Doctors Wall and Mills, 
 that the old Itahan version is the purest copy extant of the Bible 
 I have all the Lutheran churches against Mr. Pope on this 
 matter, and all the heretics till the days of Berengarius. He 
 first denied the doctrine of transubstantiation ; but he died a 
 convert, and was heartily sorry for his fatal error. After him, 
 it is an admitted fact, that Zninglius, in his comment on the 
 words, *» Hoc est corpus meum," substituted the verb " repre- 
 icniaV^ for the verb '' e^/,'* so that the sense would run, " This 
 represents my body." And this doctrine he confesses to have 
 received from a spectre ; but he adds, " Nescio an albo, an 
 nigro," " I know not whether it was hlack or white." Luther, 
 vn the most ferocious manner, attacked Calvin on the subject. 
 He maintained the doctrine of the real presence against Calvin 
 and Zuinglius ; he defied them, as I have defied my friend, to 
 disprove that doctrine by arguments drawn from scripture ; he 
 describes them as differing from all the churches in the world, 
 and tVom the Lutheran churches in particular. 
 
 ]My friend has introduced the marriage at Cana in Gallilee, to 
 show that there the transubstantiation was made palpable to the 
 senses. I am sorry to perceive, that he is unable to distinguish 
 between the nature of a mystery and a miracle. Because Christ 
 perlbrmed a miracle, of which the senses were able to judge, of 
 course it follows, that the senses are able to pronounce upon a 
 mystery. Oh! profound argument — oh! noble logician. Do 
 the doctrines of the Trinity and of the Incarnation fall under the 
 judgment of the senses ? If Christ performed miracles to con- 
 vert the Jews and Pagans, it must therefore follow, according to 
 Mr. Pope, that all mysteries are false. If the Incarnation and 
 the Trinity are to be brought under the cognizance of the senses, 
 then the doctrine of original sin must be rejected, for it never 
 can be understood by man, nor can the senses reconcile it with 
 the divine goodness and mercy. I introduced the marriage at 
 Cana, to show that it is not incompatible with Chris fs power to 
 work the miracle of transubstantiation, because, in one of his first 
 miracles, he changed water into wine, which was purely a tran- 
 substantiation. But I never introduced that miracle directly to 
 prove that he instituted the mystery of transubstantiation at his 
 last supper. 
 
 It is a principle in logics that comparisons are not to hold 
 throughout all their bearings. As to the passage from Gelasius, 
 It remains for Mr. Pope to prove it genuine. Hawarden has 
 already answered, that it is doubted amongst critics whether this 
 .work was written by Pope Gelasius, or by Gelasius Cyzinicus, 
 the author of a book " De duabus Christi Naturis." The writer 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 231 
 
 of this book, whoever he was, observes, that because appear- 
 ances or accidents continue after consecration, we must carefully 
 distinguish between the appearances and the reality, viz. — the 
 body and blood of Christ. His words are — 
 
 " Et tamen esse non desinit substanta vel natura panis et vini." 
 
 " And yet the substance or nature of bread and wine does not cease." 
 
 Those words are quite reconcileable with orthodox doctrine, 
 for the substance or nature of bread and wine remains after con- 
 secration, as far as the senses are concerned. And that this was 
 the meaning of Pope Gelasius, (supposing him to have been the 
 author) is pretty clear, from his using the disjunctive preposition 
 »* vel," *' or," which certainly qualifies the apparent harshness 
 of the sentence. The words substance and nature are not always 
 used to express the essential properties of a subject — substance 
 is one thing — and the nature of a substance another. Thus a 
 stone is a substance, and so is iron but the hardness of the stone 
 and the hardness of iron is the nature of the substance. Let 
 any man examine the work itself, and he will find that there is 
 nothing in those words inconsistent with the doctrine of transub- 
 otantiation. 
 
 My opponent has accused me of misquoting. Tt shall appear 
 ^o the world which of us has been convicted of misquotations. 
 As soon as this discussion has terminated, and the report of it 
 is published, I shall certainly go to Manchester library, and con- 
 sult the editions of the Fathers preserved there. Although my 
 friend has Trinity College at his back, with all its fellows to 
 assist him, it shall then be made manifest, who was the more 
 correct in quoting from the Fathers. This gentleman would 
 make transubstantiation appear a foolish doctrine, because Christ 
 should be present in so many places at once. My opponent is 
 truly a wonderful philosopher. May I ask him, can he describe 
 the properties of a spiritualized and purified body ? The body 
 of our Saviour, after his resurrection passed through the pores 
 of a door. Is not that inexplicable 1 I should be happy to hear 
 Mr. Pope describe the properties of a body spiritualized and of 
 a spirit. The Devil himself can be present in many places at 
 once — otherwise he could not tempt mankind. According t€ 
 my principles, and those of every Catholic, it is blasphemy to 
 call in doubt the omnipresence of Christ. And will those who 
 pretend to venerate the Saviour so much, presume to call it in 
 question 1 If Christ's humanity be hypostatically united to his 
 divinity, does not he who circumscribes the one, by implication 
 circumscribe the other ? My friend doubts the passages which 
 I have quoted from Luther, 1 have here 600 passages more from 
 him, which i espect for the present assembly prevents me from 
 
232 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 quoting now — T have the book here — I can prove the authenti- 
 city and genuineness of the text — I will publish my quotations 
 in the report of the present proceedings — then let the fellows of 
 Trinity College convict me, if they can, of false quotations.. 
 My friend has quoted the words " Do this in remembrance of 
 me." The following is the language of the Latin Yulgate : 
 
 " Hoc facile in meam commemoration em." " Do this in remembrance 
 of me." 
 
 St. Paul in the 11th chapter of his first epistle to the Corin- 
 thians, explains the above thus : 
 
 " Gluoties cunque enim, manducabitis panem hunc et calicem bibetis mor- 
 tem domini anunciabitis, donee veniat" — " For as often as you shall eat this 
 bread, and drink this chalice, you shall show forth the death of the Lord until 
 he come." 
 
 St. Paul clearly explains what our Lord meant by the words, 
 ** Do this in remembrance of me," — that is, as often as you do 
 this, you will commemorate my death and passion. The reality, 
 therefore, of Christ's presence in th€ sacrament of the altar, by 
 no means excludes the idea of a commemoration, for although 
 the present sacrifice be truly a sacrifice, yet as it is not a bloody 
 sacrifice, it may be justly entitled a commemoration of the bloody 
 one on the cross. The unbloody sacrifice of the mass is the 
 remembrance of the death and passion of Christ, and as often 
 as it is celebrated the death and passion of our Lord are shown 
 forth until he come. Christ, therefore, was justified in calling it 
 in that sense a remembrance, though in the other sense he is 
 really present, and is really offereo up. But my friend has 
 endeavoured to confuse with figurative expressions the immu- 
 table words of scripture. He would leave nothing clear or 
 certain in the Bible. Every thing according to him is to be 
 taken in a metaphorical sense. Should I attempt to do so, he 
 would insist on holding me to the precise terms of the text, and 
 when I endeavour to confine him to the strict meaning, he has 
 recourse to tropes and metaphors. It is impossible in such a 
 way, to prove the falsehood of a doctrine which has been held in 
 the church for 1800 years. The Arian^, the Manicheans, the 
 Eutychians, and all such noted heretics, never denied the real 
 presence of Christ in the sacrament of the altar. 
 
 My friend has quoted the liturgies. I have them here as 
 translated by Dr. Brett, a Protestant, and no friend to the Cath- 
 olics, and they all prove transubstantiation. Mr. Pope has called 
 the Lord's passover the type of Christ. It is admitted on all 
 hands, that it was the type of Christ's body. Ought not the 
 thing typified exceed in substance and reality the type 1 There 
 was real blood in the passover. The blood of the lamb was 
 spilled at the doors, and it was a type of the blood of Christ. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSLTJBSTANTIATION. 233 
 
 If the type was the real blood of the animal, of course that is 
 more important which is the antitype — namely, the real blood of 
 Christ — the type is itself the confirmation of the thing typified. 
 
 The Jews were told, " eat not blood." I ask any man pos- 
 sessed of common sense, if the eating of that which is apparently 
 bread and wine, is to be considered in the same light as the 
 eating of animal blood '? The Apostle has been quoted, and 1 
 FAever heard a more wilful misinterpretation of scripture. The 
 command of the Apostles applied to that only which had all the 
 natural appearances of blood. They gave an express com- 
 mandment not to eat it, and I therefore called on Mr. Pope to 
 show by what authority he was permitted to take gravy. I called 
 upon him to prove from the Bible by what authority the sign of 
 the cross is made in baptism — to prove from the Bible the pro- 
 cession of the Holy Ghost — to show why he neglected to wash 
 his neighbor's feet, in contradiction to our Saviour's command, 
 and why he did not observe the Jewish sabbath. From a notice 
 of all those questions he has prudently abstained. You, gentle- 
 men, will estimate the value of such prudence. 
 
 But Mr. Pope says, that the body of Christ will never see 
 corruption. He should prove, that when the species begin to 
 decay, Christ could not extricate himself and ascended to his 
 heavenly Father. Are the rays of the sun polluted by passing 
 through an unclean medium 1 If that be so in the natural world 
 It is foolish to think that Christ could be contaminated by contact 
 with corruptible matter. Mr. Pope has quite established the 
 Socinian system by his arguments. The Socinian admits no 
 principle but reason as his guide — neither does Mr. Pope. The 
 Socinian will only interpret the sacred scriptures according to 
 his private judgment. Mr Pope coincides with him fully on 
 that point. The Socinian rejects transubstantiation, and all 
 mysteries, as contrary to reason. Will Mr. Pope go that length ? 
 His arguments certainly tend thereto. Now, I can prove that 
 the doctrine of the real presence was not alone retained by 
 Luther, but that the doctrine was retained in the church of Eng- 
 land until she became Calvinistical. Mr. Pope's arguments 
 would go to show that no preparation was necessary for the 
 receiving of the sacrament in the church of England — that no 
 moral change was required, and that only a bit of bread and 
 wine, instead of the body of Christ, were received in the com- 
 munion. Bishop Andrews, in the time of James the first, in 
 his answer to Bellarmine, admits that Chrst is present in the 
 sacrament of the altar ; and he adds : 
 
 " I also with St. Ambrose adore the flesh of Christ in the mysteries." 
 
 Bishop Forbes, De Eucharistia, Lib. ii. Cap. 2, has the 
 following remarkable passage : 
 
 20* 
 
254 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 ^* The sounder Protestants make no doubt of adoring Christ in the Eu- 
 charist." 
 
 And, 
 
 " It is a monstrous error," says he, " of the rigid Protestants (Calvinists) 
 who deny that Christ is to be adored in the Eucharist, except only with 
 an inward adoration of the mind, but not with any outward act of adoration, 
 as kneehng, or other hke posture of the body. These people commonly 
 haTe not a right belief of Christ in the sacrament, in which he is present after 
 a wonderful but real manner." 
 
 Thorndyke says, in lib. iii, cap. 30, page 360 — 
 
 " I suppose the body and blood of Christ may be adored wheresoever they 
 are ; and muit be adored by a good Christian, where the custom of the church 
 which a Christian is obliged to communicate with, requires it. And is not 
 the presence thereof in the sacrament of the Eucharist, a just occasion pre 
 Bently to express, by that bodily act of adoration, that inward honour, which 
 wc always carry towards our Lord Christ as God ?" 
 
 And, 
 
 " Not to baulk that freedom, (says he) which hath carried me to publish all 
 this, I do believe, that it was so practised and done in the ancient church, 
 and in the symbols before receiving." 
 
 Dr. Cosin, in stating the doctrines of the church of England, 
 says : 
 
 " That God's omnipotency can change one substance into another, none 
 will deny ; and we see it done by Christ in the town of Galiilee, when he 
 changed the water into wine, and it was a true and proper transubstantiation. 
 We do not say that God is not able to make the body of Christ present, and 
 truly give it in the sacrament, whilst the substance of the bread remains. 
 We believe a presence and union of Christ with our soul and body, which 
 we know not how to call better than sacramental ; that is effected by eating ; 
 that while we eat and drink the consecrated bread and wine, we eat and drink 
 therewithal the body and blood of Christ, not in a corporeal manner, but some 
 other way, incomprehensible, known only to God, which we call spiritual. 
 We confess with the Fathers that this manner of presence is unaccountable 
 and past finding out ; not to be searched and pried into by reason, but be- 
 lieved by faith. For it is more acceptable to God, with an humble simplicity 
 of faith to reverence and embrace the words of Christ (this is my body,) than 
 to wrest them violently to a strange and improper sense, or to determine what 
 exceeds the capacity of men and angels. We do not find fault with a general 
 explication of the manner. We confess the necessity of a supernatural and 
 heavenly change, and that the signs cannot become sacraments but by the 
 infinite power of God. The bread, as I have often said, does not only repre- 
 sent the body of our Lord, but also, being received, we are truly made parta- 
 kers of that precious body ; for so saith St. Jerome, * the body and blood of 
 Christ is made at the prayer of the priest ; that is, the elements so qualified, 
 that being received, it becomes the communion of the body and blood of 
 Christ, which it could not without the nreceding prayers. And if it seem 
 impossible that the flesh of Christ should descend, and come to be our food 
 through so great a distance, we must remember how much the power of the 
 Holy Spirit exceeds our sense and our apprehensions, and how absurd it would 
 be to undertake to measure his immensity by our weakness and narrow capa- 
 city, and so make our lUith to conceive and believe what our reason cannot 
 comprehend. Yet our faith doth not cause, or make that presence, but appre- 
 hends it as most truly and really effected by the word of Christ. The faith 
 whereby we are said to eat the flesh of Christ, is not that only whereby we 
 b«!ieve that he died for our sina, for this faith is required and supposed to 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 235 
 
 precede the sacramental manducation ; but more properly that whereby we 
 oelieve those words of Christ, 'this is my body.' For in this mystical eating 
 by the wonderful power of the Holy Ghost, we do invisibly receive the 
 substance of ChrisVs body and blood, as much as if we should eat and drink 
 them both visibly. It remains that we should with faith and humility admire 
 this high and sacred mystery, which our tongue cannot sufficiently explain, 
 nor our heart conceive. The presence of Christ in this mystery is not opposed 
 to distance but to absence, which only could deprive us of the benefit and 
 fruition of the object. As the body and blood of Christ are conveyed by thig 
 sacrament to the v/orthy receiver, so they are offered by it to all, that is truly 
 really, and substantially." — {See Dr. Cosines History of Transubstantiation 
 Anno. 1676, pages 117, 55, 2, 44, 34, et alibi passim.) 
 
 What says the Book of Common Prayer, sanctioned by Queen 
 Elizabeth, on this subject — 
 
 " Grant us so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink 
 liis blood, that our sinful bpdies may be made clean by his body." 
 
 And, in giving the sacrament : — 
 
 " The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve 
 thy body and soul unto everlasting life. The bloodof our Lord Jesus Christ, 
 which was shed for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life." 
 
 Mr. Pope. — Mr. Maguire, in several of his arguments, has 
 taken it for granted, that I allowed the doctrine of transubstan- 
 tiation to be revealed in the sacred volume. I need scarcely 
 remark, that I have made no such concession. Inasmuch as the 
 mystery of the Trinity does not come under the cognizance of 
 our senses, they being incapable of exercising their powers upon 
 the nature of the Deity, no parallel can be instituted between it 
 and transubstantiation. Strange to say, my friend has observed, 
 that I have become a Socinian. My letter is before the pubHc 
 containing proofs of the essential Godhead of Christ. I fling 
 from me, therefore, such a charge — shall I say, with indignation. 
 
 Mr. Maguire has observed, that if transubstantiation be a 
 mystery, its being opposed to the evidence of our senses should 
 not stand in the way of its reception. The observation which I 
 made in the commencement of this speech, will meet this posi- 
 tion. Transubstantiation, if revealed, would indeed be a mys- 
 tery ; but I beg to assert, that it is not revealed ; it is opposed 
 to sense and reason, and is repugnant to the entire tenour of 
 scripture. 
 
 My friend has observed, that the senses sometimes contradict 
 themselves, and instanced the cases of Joshua, and of the woman 
 at the sepulchre, who supposed that the angels who appeared to 
 them, were men. The onus is on Mr. Maguire to prove, that 
 the angels presented themselves clothed with all the effulgence 
 of celestial glory. No — they came in the habit and form of 
 men ; and the senses so far gave a correct testimony. 
 
 Mr. Maguire has spoken of a stick appearing crooked in 
 
)836 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION, 
 
 water. I reply that the sense of touch would rectify that fala 
 testimony, as that sense would discover the stick to be straight 
 Mr. Maguire has justly observed, that the senses convey the\ 
 testimony to the mind and judgment. That testimony, I beg tt 
 observe, directly refutes the doctrine of transubstantiation. Tht 
 senses bearing witness that the bread is bread, and the wine h 
 wine, the judgment pronounces correctly that the bread is breau 
 and the wine is wine. Permit me also to add, that it scarcely 
 ever happens, that all the senses are deceived at the same time ; 
 one sense may be deceived, but that is soon corrected by the 
 exercise of some other. 
 
 Mr. Maguire reminds us, that " faith cometh by hearing." 
 Faith cometh by reading too. How am I to know, that the words, 
 " this is my body," are in the scriptures, if I do not exercise my 
 senses ? But ii^ I am not to exercise my senses upon the 
 elements, perhaps my senses altogether deceive me, when they 
 inform me that the words, " this is my body," are contained in 
 the sjxcred records ! The doctrines of the Trinity and of the 
 Incarnation are above sen?e. Man is incompetent to discover 
 the modus of God's existence, or to explain hoio the Deity took 
 upon him human flesh ; but the senses of the wise men did not 
 deceive them, when they saw an infant lying in the stable at 
 Bethlehem. 
 
 My friend has rung changes on the priesthood of Melchise 
 dech. He was a priest — but I have shown that he did not offer 
 up bread and wine to God, but brought it forth for the refresh" 
 merit of Abraham and his follov)ers ; — his blessing Abraham 
 marked out his sacerdotal character. In the 7th chapter of 
 Hebrews, Douay Bible, there is no mention made of Melchise- 
 dech having brought out bread and wine ; it is simply said, that 
 " he blessed Abraham." 
 
 My friend informed us, that he thought nothing of the scrip- 
 tures in the original tongues ; yet he has told us, that his church 
 will allow them to be read in the originals. Must every old 
 woman and every child apply themselves to the study of Greek 
 and Hebrew ? Mr. Maguire has observed, that the Italian Bible 
 is more perfect than the Vulgate. The Trent doctors ought to 
 be much obliged to him for this discovery. Bellarmine indeed 
 informs us, that the Fathers teach every where, that the Latin edi- 
 tion of the gospel is to be called back to the Greek fountains, and 
 that the Latin edition of the Old Testament is to be amended by 
 the Hebrew. Some, 'tis true, asserted, when they saw the Latin 
 vulgate printed between the Greek and Hebrew, on the same 
 page, that the position of the Latin resembled that of the Saviour, 
 when he was crucified between two thieves. — {Simon Grit, t. Vt 
 lib. 2, 14.) 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 237 
 
 But T must not forget that Berengarius, according to Mr 
 Maguire, was the first who denied the doctrine of transubstanti- 
 ation. We shall see whether this assertion is correct. My 
 opponent informs us, that even the heretics believed in the doc- 
 trine of transubstantiation. I go farther — T imagine that tran- 
 substantiation is of heretical origin, and I now trace it up to 
 Eutyches. In the second Dialogue of Theodoret, between an 
 orthodox Christian, under the name of Orthodoxus, and a heretici 
 under the name of Eranistes ; the latter maintaining, that the 
 humanity of Christ was changed into the substance of the 
 Divinity, thus illustrates the matter : — 
 
 " As (says Eranistes) the symbols of the Lord's body and blood are one 
 thing hefore the invocation of the priest, but after the invocation, are changed 
 and become another thing, so the body of our Lord, after his ascension, ia 
 changed into the divine substance." 
 
 Such was the opinion of Eutyches and his followers. I shall 
 not mutilate the passage in reply, though I admit, that the language 
 in the latter part of it is strong. 
 
 " Thou art (says Orthodoxus) caught in thine own net ; because the mys- 
 tical symbols after consecration do not pass out op their own nature, 
 
 FOR THEY remain IN THEIR FORMER SUBSTANCE, FIGURE, AND APPEAR- 
 ANCE, and may be seen and handled, even as before consecration ; but they 
 are understood to be what they become, and they are venerated as being those 
 things, which they are believed to be. Compare, therefore, the image with 
 •the archetype, and you will perceive the resemblance^ for the type must needs 
 be similar to the truth."— (Dial. 2, Oper. vol. iv, p. 84, 85, Lutet. Paris, 1642.) 
 
 I ask, did not Theodoret oppose the doctrine of transubstan- 
 tiation, when he calls the Sacrament an image ? He lived in 
 ^c fifth century. Again, Pope Gelasius, as you have seen, also 
 iviote a work, which Mr. Maguire asserts, is spurious, against 
 the Eutychian heresy, which seems to have aimed at the intro- 
 duction of the doctrine of transubstantiation. 
 
 Did not Ephrem of Antioch, about the middle of the sixth 
 century, oppose the doctrine of transubstantiation, when he 
 says : 
 
 " No man of common sense will assert that the nature of things palpable 
 and impalpable, visible and invisible, is the same — thus the body of Christ 
 
 WHICH IS received BY THE FAITHFUL, DOES NOT DEPART FROM ITS OWN 
 
 sensible SUBSTANCE, though by virtue of consecration it is united to a spir- 
 itual grace ; and thus baptism, though a spiritual thing itself, yet preserves 
 the water which is the property of its sensible substance ; it loses not what it 
 was before." — ^Ephrem Antioch. Cont Eutych. A pud Phot. Cod. 229. 
 
 Facundus, in the 6th century, says : 
 
 " The sacrament of adoption may be called adoption, just as the sacrament 
 of the body and blood of Christ, lohich is the consecrated bread and wine, we 
 are wont to call his body and blood. Jfot indeed that the bread it properly hit 
 bcdy, or that the wine is properly his blood, but because they corZain the mys- 
 tery of his body and blood within themselves j hence it wa? that our Lord 
 
2SS THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTI ATION. 
 
 denominated the consecrated bread and wine which he dcHvered to his disci- 
 ples, in his own body and blood." — (Facund. Defens. Concil. Chalcsd.Hb. ix, 
 c 4, oper. p. 144.) 
 
 Was not Facund us, in the sixth century, opposed to the 
 doctrine of transubstantiation? 
 
 Further — Rabanus Maurus, archbishop of Mentz, about the 
 year 847, reciting the very words of Paschasius Radbert, of 
 Corby, in which he broached the doctrine of transubstantiation, 
 has this remarkable passage. Before, however, I read the 
 quotation, permit me to remark, that Bellarmine and Sirmondua 
 allow, that Paschasius was the first who wrote a regular treatise 
 upon transub&tantiation. Bellarmine says, 
 
 "This author was the first who had seriously and copiously written con- 
 cerning the *xuth of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist"— (De Scriptor 
 Eccles.) 
 
 Sirmondus thus — 
 
 " He so first explained the genuine sense of the Catholic church, that he 
 opened the way to the rest, who afterwards in great numbers wrote upon the 
 same argument,"— (In vita Paschasii.) 
 
 The archbishop of Mentz, in the ninth century, writes, 
 
 " Some (says he) of late, ndt having a right opinion concerning the sacra- 
 ment of the body and blood of our Lord, have said that this is the body and 
 blood of our Lord, which was born of the Virgin Mary, and in which our 
 Lord suffered upon the cross and ros& from the dead ; which error (says 
 he) we have opposed with all our might." — (Epist. ad Heribaldum, c. 33.) 
 
 Transubstantiation was also opposed by Heribaldus, Bishop 
 of Auxerres in France, by John Scotus Erigena, (which means 
 an Irishman) and Bertram of Corby. Bertram tells us in his 
 preface, that 
 
 " They who according to their several opinions talked of the difficulties 
 about Christ's body and blood, were divided with no small schism." 
 
 My friend has seen that Eutyches, the heretic, believed in 
 transubstantiation, and that the doctrine was opposed by several 
 writers, without any ecclesiastical fulmination having been 
 directed against them. Even the second council of Nice, as 
 has been already observed, declared, as one reason for worship- 
 ing the image of Christ, that he is not sensibly present on earth, 
 and anathematized all who asserted, that Christ was not circum- 
 scribed as to his humanity. Several Roman Catholic writers 
 virtually admit the modern origin of transubstantiation. Scotus 
 allows, that the doctrine was not always considered as necessary 
 to be believed, but that the necessity of believing it was conse- 
 quent to the declaration of the church made in the council of 
 Lateran, under Pope Innocent III. — In sent. L. 4, Dist 
 11, Q. 3. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 239 
 
 Durandus frankly discovers his inclination, 
 
 " To have believed the contrary, if the church had not by that determina- 
 lion obliged men to believe it." — In sent. L. 4, Dist. 11, Gl. 1, N. 15. 
 
 Tonstal, Bishop of Durham, also admits, that 
 
 " Before the fourth Lateran council, men were at liberty as to the manner 
 of Christ's presence in the sacrament." — De Euchar. lib. i, p. 146. 
 
 Erasmus, who lived and died in the Roman church, and than 
 whom no man was better acquainted with the ancient Fathers, 
 confesses that it was 
 
 " Late before the church defined tran substantiation, unknown to the ancients 
 both name and thing-." — 1 Epist. ad Corinth, c. 7, Citante etiam Salmerone, 
 torn. 9, tract 16, p. i68. 
 
 Alphonsus a Castro says, that 
 
 " Concerning the tran substantiation of the bread into the body of Christ, 
 there is seldom any mention in the ancient writers." — De Haeres.lib. 8. 
 
 In connection with this subject, I meet the strange position of 
 my friend relative to the Waldenses, namely, that they believed 
 in transubstantiation, by a quotation from JVLilner^s End of Con^ 
 trover sy : 
 
 " It is incontestible, and carried to the highest degree of moral evidence, 
 that all Christians, of all the nations of the world, Greeks as well as Latins, 
 Africans as well as Europeans, except Protestants, and a handful of Vau- 
 Dois peasants, have in all ages believed, and still believe in the Real Presence 
 and Transubstantiation." — London, 1S24, 5th edit. p. 273. 
 
 Here Milner distinctly admits, that the Yaudois or Waldenses 
 did not believe in transubstantiation. 
 
 The following is an extract from their Confession of Faith, 
 which was read publicly before Francis I, of France : 
 
 " We believe, that the holy sacrament of our Lord Jesus Christ's table is 
 a sacred memorial and aii act of thanksgivings for the benefits which we have 
 received by the death of Christ ; and that it ought to be celebrated in the 
 assembly of the saints, in faith and charity, and by an inward experience of 
 Christ's merits. It is thus, by partaking of the bread and wine, we have 
 communion with the body and blood of Christ, as we read in the holy 
 scriptures." 
 
 Again, we read in the Confession of Faith of 1120. — Leger's 
 History, p. 92. 
 
 " We believe, that after this life there are only two places, one for the saved, 
 which is called Paradise, and one for the damned, which is called Hell, utterly 
 denying that feigned purgatoryof Antichrist, invented in opposition to truth." 
 
 " We believe that the sacraments are signs or the visible forms of holy 
 things." 
 
 Did they offer masses for souls in purgatory, when they did 
 not believe in its existence? I have referred to their standard 
 formularies ; and any one who will examine their history, as 
 given by Mr. Gillie, will find additional proofs that they protested 
 against the sacrifice of the mass. 
 
240 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 Luther, Mr. Maguire says, is on his side. This is the first 
 time in which I have heard, that consubstantiation is the same 
 with transubstantiation. I confess, I am somewhat surprised, 
 that most of the early reformers were enabled so easily to throw 
 offm toto a doctrine which so closely adheres to persons brought 
 up in the pale of the church of Rome. I do not justify the lan- 
 guage \^hich Luther employed when condemning those who 
 wrote against his principles. Mr. Maguii e has stated, that it is 
 a spiritual body which is offered up in the mass. Does this 
 opinion agree with the council of Trent ? The council informs 
 us that — 
 
 *^Jn the sacrifice of the mass, the same Christ is contained and unblooilily im- 
 molatedf who once offered himself bloodily on the cross," Sess. 22. ch. 2. 
 
 Was it a spiritual body that suffered on Calvary ? I deny 
 that the. devil is omnipresent. His influence is extended by the 
 agency of innumerable spirits who are under his control. I did 
 not circumscribe the presence of Christ. I believe, that, where 
 two or three meet together in his name, He is in the midst of 
 them. But, though he be present through the universe in his 
 divinity, yet the heavens will receive his manhood till the time 
 of the restitution of all things. — Acts, iii, 21. I have here the 
 book of Sir Edwin Sandys. Mr. Maguire did not accept my 
 offer, that a Protestant and a Roman Catholic should examine 
 the work. Let them compare mine with Mr. Maguire's edition, 
 and they will find mine to be the original volume. 
 
 My friend has talked of my having Trinity college at my 
 back : it was not handsome to speak is this style. When Mr. 
 Maguire expressed a wish to obtain access to a public library, 
 I requested a friend to introduce him at Marsh's library ; and 
 I informed Mr. Maguire, that my friend was ready to accom- 
 pany him thither. Did this circumstance look as if I wished to 
 take any unfair advantage of Mr. Maguire ? The passover, my 
 opponent obs-erves, was a type of Christ. The Lamb in the 
 passover was indeed a type of the Saviour, not in transub- 
 stantiation, but of the body on Calvary. The passover was 
 perhaps typical of the feast of the eucharist, which God's people 
 celebrate in commemoration of their dying, risen, and glorified 
 Redeemer. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — I have caught my friend, Mr. Pope, in the 
 act of using garbled quotations. I have already asserted that 
 he took his quotations obstetricanie manu^ and I now insist that 
 I have detected him in making a false quotation. Before I 
 shall expose either his disingenuity, or, what I rather suspect, 
 his want of industry, I shall for a moment recur to the work as- 
 cribed to Gelasius, and give you the reasons which are assigned. 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 241 
 
 to prove that it is not genuine. Pope Gelasius's work against 
 Eutyches, is described by Genadius, lib. de. viris illust. cap. 14» 
 as " Grande et prmclarum voiumen.^^ Now, in the first place, 
 the present work is in no wise deservin^j of such a character. 
 Secondly, in his CathoUcorum Testimonia Magistrorum, he 
 every where praises the Arians, and is profoundly silent about 
 the orthodox Fathers. These considerations amount to a strong 
 suspicion, that it could not have proceeded from the pen of Pope 
 <xelasius, and it is therefore rationally considered as the produc- 
 tion of Gelasius Cyzinicus. 
 
 I will now read to you the dialogue of Theodoret, who has 
 been introduced as opposed to the doctrine of transubstantiation : 
 let the following serve as a preface. He says, 
 
 "Christ at his last supper showed the true original of which this Paschal 
 Lamb was a type; opened the gates of the holy sacrament; and gave his 
 most precious body and blood, not only to the eleven Apostles, but also to the 
 traitor Judas. These words, " He shall be guilty of the body and blood of the 
 Lord," mean this, that as Judas betrayed him, and the Jews insulted him, so 
 they offer him a very great affront who take his most holy body with unclean 
 hands and put it into a defiled mouth." — In 1 Cor. cap. 11. 
 
 There is not any thing surely there contrary to the doctrine 
 of transubstantiation. He proceeds to say, in his second dia- 
 logue, immediately after the words quoted by Mr. Pope — '*The 
 elements, after consecration, are to be adored,''^ But Mr. Pope 
 took good care to foist upon us the word venerate for the word 
 adore, as if Theodoret had said, the elements after consecration 
 are to be venerated, whereas he e:?.pressly says, they are to be 
 adored. Mr. Pope, in his version, has substituted the word 
 " venerated^^ for the word " adored " I charge him with a griev- 
 ous mangling of the text. Adond is the word, as will be found 
 by a reference to the original. If Theodoret denied transub- 
 stantiation, would he say that .ne elements of bread and wine 
 after consecration are to be adored? Surely he would not tell 
 us to adore a piece of bread and a drop of wine. Mr. Pope 
 therefore should consign to execration the author by whom he 
 was misled, for I am unwilling to believe that he would himself 
 so distort the original, and seek to palm upon an unsuspecting 
 pubUc a text so monstrously garbled. 
 
 Theodoret in his dialogue, introduces Orthodoxus (a Catholic) 
 and Eranistes (a heretic) disputing u;,on the Eucharist. Hav- 
 ing previously disputed about the Eutychian heresy, concerning 
 the two natures of Christ, (the Eutychians contending that the 
 humanity was absorbed in the divinity,) Eranistes puts the fol- 
 lowing questions to Orthodoxus : — 
 
 "Eranistes, — How do you call these (the elements) after consecration I 
 Orthodoxus, — Th*. \ody and blood of Christ. 
 
 21 
 
242 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSU BSTANTI ATION. 
 
 Er. — Do you believe that you perceive tiie body and blood of Christ 1 
 
 Or. — I do believe it. 
 
 Er. — Why are the names changed ? 
 
 Or. — The reason is evident to those who understand the mystery ; foi 
 Christ would not have us regard the nature of what we see, but as the namea 
 of the elements are changed, so to apprehend by faith the change which is 
 made in them by grace. The mystical symbols after consecration do not 
 depart from their own nature, but they are understood to be the things which 
 they are made, and so they are believed^ and they are adored as being the ihings 
 which they are believed.''^ 
 
 Thus, it must be said, that Theodoret urged the idolatroug 
 adoration of mere bread and wine, or that he believed and taught 
 the doctrine of transubstantiation. 
 
 What are the things to be believed when the body and bloo«' 
 are adored! Is it to be beUeved that they remain bread ana 
 wine 1 What a wonderful effort of faith truly ! But Ortho- 
 doxus tells us, that the things believed are to be adored. 
 
 The Fathers all agree in the doctrine of transubstantiation, 
 and anathematize all those who controvert that doctrine. With 
 regard to the parallel between Transubstantiation and the Trin- 
 ity, my friend denies its existence, but I call upon him to prove 
 that transubstantiation is not a mystery, as Theodoret calls it. 
 He denies that transubstantiation is founded upon scripture. 
 Christ, the eternal Son of a good and gracious God, made a 
 wonderful promise in the sixth chapter of St. John, shall we 
 say, after reading that solemn and divine promise, that he left 
 nothing to us but a mere bit of bread and wine ! Is it not evi- 
 dent, that he intended to leave with us a grand and noble gift 
 worthy of the Testator, and in accordance with his omnipotence? 
 Yet, if we are led by the Calvinistic doctrines, propounded by. 
 Mr. Pope, we must believe that he intended only to bequeath to 
 us a mere bit of bread, and a drop wine ! Would that be wor- 
 thy of the Deity] Can such a belief be reconciled with the 
 facts recorded in scripture ? There we find that he raised the 
 expectations of his disciples to the highest pitch, and that many 
 of them went away shocked at his expressions. He did not 
 correct their error, if such it were. When he came to his last 
 supper, what did he say? There, while solemnly seated with 
 liis apostles, he raised his eyes to heaven, he took bread in his 
 hands, blessed it, and broke it saying, " Take ye and eat— 
 THIS IS MY BODY." 
 
 It is not my custom to lose my temper, and to indulge in harsh 
 and angry expressions — I will not say, that I fling back with 
 indignation any of the charges brought forward by my opponent. 
 I have been taught to exercise a self-control, and I know that 
 uui Saviour tells us — " Love your enemies ; do good to thera 
 that hate you ; bless them that curse you, and pray for them that 
 calumniate you ! And to him that striketh thee on one cheek, 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 243 
 
 offer also the other." This is the practical part of Christianity. 
 It accords not with the suggestions of flesh and blood, nor with 
 the maxims of modern gospel liberty. Mnega teipsum is the 
 precept of the gospel, though it may form no portion of Mr. 
 Pope's moral creed, By my forbearance upon this occasion, 
 I shall furnish Mr. Pope with, at least, one instance of Christian 
 humility. I may here remark, that one of the newspapers has, 
 in the report of a former day's discussion, represented me as 
 appropriating to m.yself, that which I quoted as the language of 
 our Saviour — " Learn of me, because I am meek and humble 
 of heart." 
 
 With regard to the senses, my friend has said, that they can- 
 not all contradict themselves. But a portion may, and I made 
 an exception for the sense of hearing. I referred in support of 
 that portion to St. Paul — " Faith cometh by hearings and hear- 
 ing by the words of Christ." — (Rom. x, 17.) Hearing then is 
 the only sense constituted as a judge of mysteries. But I ask, 
 did not all the senses contradict themselves, when our Saviour 
 walked upon the waters, and it is recorded of his disciples — 
 " Putaverent Phanlasma esse.^^ Did not the senses here deceive 
 the Apostles, as they did others, in several cases in the Old Tes- 
 tament ? They did not contradict themselves in the strict sense 
 of the word. The matters which they related were not founded 
 on fact, but they reiated what appeared to themselves. So far 
 their relation was correct. My friend says, that the mistake 
 into which the sense of sight falls as to the stick in the water, 
 may be corrected by the sense of touch. But if one sense con- 
 tradicts another in rebus naiur alihus, how much more likely to 
 do so in things of a supernatural order? 
 
 He asks me how do I know that Christ spoke the words, 
 " This is my body" — which he has unsuccessfully endeavoured 
 to explain away. I answer, that I depend here upon the au- 
 thority of the church of Christ. Mr. Pope depends on the trans- 
 lators of the Bible in the reign of James 1. I place my reliance 
 upon an authority to which our divine Redeemer expressly pro- 
 mised infallibility. Mr. Pope believes in no church, but relies 
 upon his own private judgment. I called upon him to show how 
 a Protestant could, according to his principles, make an act of 
 faith. Has he ever answered the question 1 
 
 He recurs to Melchisedech. But here I have him caught in 
 his own net, as in the instance of Theodoret. He says that 
 Melchisedech made no offering — I proved that he made an offer- 
 ing of bread and wine. St. Jerome maintains the same opinion, 
 and St. Paul evidently alludes to it when he speaks of our 
 Saviour being " a priest for ever according to the order of Mel- 
 chisedech." Mr. Pope talks of my admission, that there ts no 
 
244 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIAT. ON. 
 
 prohibition to the reading of the scriptures in the three sacred 
 languages, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, because portions of scrip- 
 tare have been published in each of them. In respect to the 
 vulgar tongues, the church never prohibited the reading of the 
 sciptures in them. She restricted the right where she though 
 it would be abused ; she restricted it in order to prevent the 
 multiplication of heresies, and the generation of sects, such ass 
 the Anabaptists, the Muggletonians, and hundreds of others, who, 
 like a swarm of locusts, or the ten plagues of Egypt, infest the 
 country, distract the community, and rend asunder the Protes- 
 tant churches. It was to guard against such evils that the 
 Catholic church wisely forbade the indiscriminate reading of the 
 scriptures. Mr. Pope has accused our translation of the Bible 
 as being filled with various errors, Yet when the "saints" travel 
 through the country, they would persuade the poor people that 
 there is no difference between our Bible and theirs. But when 
 they come to speak to scholars on the subject, they will have it 
 that thousands of errors exist in our Bible. They then openly 
 tell rank falsehoods to promote their cause — I do not accuse 
 Mr. Pope of rank falsehood. But is it not evident from this, 
 that there is neither honour nor veracity amongst the generality 
 of the " saints "? He says, that by reason of the admissions 
 which I have made, I would be called to an account if an inqui- 
 sition existed in this country ; and that moreover I would be 
 excruciated for my heterodoxy. But Protestants are in general 
 very little acquainted with our religion. They have through 
 their ignorance transformed our faith into an hideous caricature. 
 
 He says that the Italian version was admitted by me to be 
 superior to the Latin Vulgate. I deny the assertion. I said, 
 that the Italian version was admitted to be the purest copy of the 
 Bible extant — it was for that reason that St. Jerome, as he ad- 
 mits in his preface, followed the Italian version, and upon it laid 
 the foundation of the Latin Vulgate. Where is the contradic- 
 tion now? 
 
 Mr. Pope quoted a Catholic writer to prove that Christ was 
 not sensibly present in the sacrament. I never said that Christ 
 was sensibly present in the sacrament. Let Mr. Pope remein- 
 oer that Scotus, the author from whom he quotes, was condem- 
 ned by the Catholic church for many of his positions, which are 
 far from being deemed orthodox. As to Erasmus, there are 
 some of his opinions not very orthodox, though he, like Henry 
 VIII, thought it safest to die in the Catholic church. — Like 
 many of the present day, who, in the enjoyment of youth and 
 riches, cast their derisions at Popery, and yet are glad, when 
 their end approaches, to return to the mother church. 
 
 Mr. Pooo ntroduces Durandus. It is true he held oomions 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 245 
 
 contrary to those of the church, till the definition of the church 
 was declared. Then he yielded as he ought to the authority of 
 the Cathohc church, as the illustrious Fenelon did in later days. 
 I asserted that the first of the Waldenses preserved the sacrifice 
 of the mass. But their followers changed their principles, as 
 those of Luther and Calvin did ; the Lutherans preaching one 
 doctrine and the Calvinists another. Here, for instance, Mr. 
 Pope admits only eighteen out of the thirty-nine articles of the 
 church of England — others will be found to deny them alto- 
 gether, and more will reject the Anthanasian creed. Such are 
 the multiplied gradations produced by evangelical liberty and 
 private judgment. It is found necessary by Mr. Pope to con- 
 nect himself with with the Waldenses (perhaps the maddes^ of 
 all heretics.) I would beg leave to ask him, had the Walden- 
 ses a church, a ministry, a liturgy, or any other mark of the true 
 church of Christ, or indeed of any church at all, and if not, from 
 whom did he receive the scriptures? I must here remark, that 
 his obtrusive connexion with the Waldenses cannot add respect- 
 ability to his origin. The Waldenses were one rotten branch 
 lopped from the parent trunk by the Catholic church. I regret 
 extremely I did not bring the ecclesiastical tree along with me. 
 [Here Mi\ Pope ha^uled to Mr. Maguire Dr. J\lilner''s " End of Controversy," 
 containing the ecclesiastical tree.] 
 
 Oh ! I perceive, gentlemen, to my great surprise, that this 
 tree, instead of exhibiting a naked trunk, is weighed down by 
 those branches which I thought had been cut off, but which 
 seem determined to cling with desperation to that parent stock 
 upon which alone their vitality depends, but from which they can 
 never moi^ receive sap or nutriment, by means of that moral 
 separation which originated with themselves. Here are Cerinthus, 
 Arius, Montanus, ApolUnaris, Manicheus, Eutyches, Pelagius, 
 Socinus, Huss, Wickliffe, Waldo, Luther, Cranmer, struggling 
 to connect themselves with the Catholic church, and claiming, 
 upon some occasions, a sympathetic relationship with each other. 
 How, now, Mr. Pope, will you or the present Protestant church 
 be able to stitch yourselves to those various heretics 1 Were 
 they, I demand, or were they not, more different from the prin- 
 ciples of the present reformers than they were from the Catholic 
 church ; and would not the ancient heretics anathematize Mr. 
 Pope and his doctrines as jealously as the Catholic church 
 herself? 
 
 Before I conclude, I will give you a few additional quotations 
 from the Fathers, touching the faith of the primitive church. 
 8t. Cyril of Alexandria, commenting on John, torn, iv, p. 252, 
 after quoting the words of St. John, " I am the Tiving bread that 
 came down from heaven," — (vi, 51,) 
 
 21* 
 
246 THE DOCTRIiVE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 "The manna was the type, the shadow, and the image. *I am the liv ng 
 bread, if any one shall eat of this bread, he shall live for ever.' They t'nat 
 eat of the manna are dead, because it gave not life; he that eats this bread, 
 that is me, or my flesh, shall live for ever. Our Lord Jesus, by his own ilesh, 
 gives life to us, and his blood is not that of any common man, but the natural 
 blood of life itself. * For he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth 
 in me and I in him.' — (John, vi, 56.) As he that joins wax to wax forms of 
 them one body, so it seems to me, he that eats the flesh of our Saviour, and 
 drinks his precious blood, as himself savs, becomes one with him. Let these 
 verbose and absurd men tell us with whose body the sheep of the church are 
 fed, or from what springs her children are refreshed. For if the body of God 
 is delivered, thus God is the true God, Christ the Lord, not a mere man, nor 
 an angel, as some pretend. And if it be the blood of God, the cup of God, 
 this God is not purely God, one of the adorable Trinity, the Son of Goa but 
 the Word ofOmt made man. But if the body of Christ be our food, and the 
 blood of Chriai mji drink, and this Christ be a mere man, how is eternal life 
 promised to those who approach the holy table ? And how again shall this 
 body be di\ ided here, and in many places, and not be diminished ? A mere 
 body cannot impart life to those who receive it. Wherefore let us receive the 
 body of life itself; that life which for us has dwelt in our body : and let us 
 drink his sacred blood for the remission of our sins, and so partake of th;it 
 immortality which is in him ; believing Christ to be the priest and the victim, 
 him that offers, and he that is offered." 
 
 St. John Chrysostom, Horn, ii, ad Pop. Antioch, I. i, p. 37 — 
 
 "Elias left his garment to his disciple : but the Son of God left us his own 
 flesh. The prophet, indeed, threw off* his covering, but Christ ascending, 
 took with him his body and left it also for us. Let us not therefore repine, 
 nor fear any difliiculties, for he who refused not to shed his blood for all, and 
 communicated to us his body and blood, what will he not do for our salvation ?" 
 
 And, Horn, ii, in cap. 14. Matt, i, 7. — 
 
 " Let us then touch the hem of his garment, or rather let us, if we be so 
 t^isposed, possess him entire, for his body now lies before us, not to be touched 
 only, but to be eaten and to satiate us. And if they who touched his garment 
 drew so much virtue from it, how much more shall we draw who possess him 
 whole? When, therefore, thou seest the priest presenting the body to thee, 
 think not that it is his hand, but the hand of Christ that is stretched towards 
 thee." 
 
 So, gentlemen, that objection of Mr. Pope is here fully 
 answered, viz, — that the priest made his God — for here St. 
 Chrysostom declares, that the action is not performed by man, 
 but by Christ himself — which agrees with St. Cyril, that Christ 
 is both the priest and the victim. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — My friend has drawn a strange distinction between 
 outward appearances and species. The schoolmen, borrowing 
 from Aristotle, introduced a curious fancy ; they supposed, that 
 the universe consisted of a mass of matter, invested by certain 
 forms and qualities which possess a real and substantial being. 
 This was a very fortunate discovery for the school divines ; it 
 served to explain the bodily presence of Christ in the sacrament; 
 the substance of the bread and wine, said they, is converted into 
 his body and blood ; but the absolute accidents, the substantial 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 247 
 
 forms of both remain as before ; hence the term transubstantia- 
 tion. Now surely it is most ridiculous to assert, that that which 
 has all the properties of bread, should not be bread ; and that 
 that which has none of the properties of flesh, should be flesh. 
 I am not quite so certain that the gravy is the blood of the 
 animal ; however, I congratulate Mr. Maguire upon the strict 
 observance of the washing of feet in the church of Rome. Upon 
 a certain day, I am informed that a golden ewer is prepared, and 
 the Pope washes the feet of some mendicants. I wish to know, 
 does Mr. Maguire follow the example of his holiness at Rome! 
 My friend observes, that Christ can extricate himself from the 
 elements, if likely to corrupt. Let us examine the Roman 
 Missal upon this head. 
 
 " If through negligence any part of the blood of Christ should fall upon the 
 ground or upon the table, let it be licked up, and let the place be sufficiently 
 scraped, ana the scrapings burned, but let the ashes be buried in holy ground. 
 But if it should fall upon the stone of the altar, let the priest drink up the drop, 
 and let the place be well washed, and the washing thrown into holy ground. 
 If the drop should reach the first, second, and third linen-cloth, let the cloths 
 be three times washed where the drop fell, the chalice having been placed 
 under, and let the water of ablution be thrown into holy ground. But if it 
 should fall only on the sacerdotal vestments themselves, they ought in the 
 same manner be washed, and the washing thrown into holy ground. If it 
 should fall upon the cloth or the carpet placed underneath the feet, let it be 
 well washed as before. If it should happen, that all the blood should be 
 poured forth after consecration, if indeed any, even a little, shall remain, let 
 that be taken, and let that which has been mentioned be done with the 
 remainder of the blood. But if none shall remain, let the priest place wine 
 in the chalice again, and let him consecrate it from that place 'likewise after 
 supper ;' the oblation, however, of the chalice having been made as before. 
 If the priest should disgorge the eucharist, if the s^/ccies should appear entire, 
 let them be reverently taken, if nausea does not prevent; in that case, let 
 the consecrated species be cautiously separated, and laid up in some secret 
 place, until they become corrupted ; and afterwards let them be thrown into 
 holy ground. But if the species do not appear, let that be burned which has 
 been disgorged, and the ashes thrown into holy ground. If the consecrated 
 host, or any part of it, fall upon the ground, let it be reverently taken up, and 
 the place where it fell, cleansed, and a little scraped, and let the dust, or 
 scrapings of that nature, be thrown into holy ground. If it should fall with- 
 out the corporal upon the napkin or in any manner upon any cloth, let the 
 napkin or cloth be carefully washed, and let the washing itself be poured out 
 upon holy ground." — De defect, circ. Miss. occ. Miss, Rom. 1822, Dubl. 
 
 Pardon me for having read so much, and excuse me for not 
 reading the whole. I wonder, why such a process should be 
 enjoined, if the Saviour's body is supposed not to he present 
 afler the decomposition of the elements I 
 
 I have already proved, that the difficulty of convincing the 
 Socinian, is greater on the part of Mr. Maguire than on mhie. 
 I observed, that I could argue on the scriptures, as acknowledged 
 by the Socinian, while my friend would refer him to the U7iiversal 
 consent of mankind. Now we have shown, that Arianism at one 
 
248 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 period prevailed in the church of Rome ; the Sociniun will, 
 therefore, reply, that he too has tradition on his side ; he will 
 therefore wish Mr. Maguire good morning, when he introduces 
 the infallibility and authority of his church. If my friend's 
 quotations from Protestant bishops be correct, I can only say, 
 that they were not true to their principles, for the articles of the 
 established church, emphatically assert, that the elements should 
 not be adored. We are told, that there is a difference between 
 a mystery and a miracle. Let the opinion go forth, and stand 
 as a ruled case, that there is no miracle in transubstantiation. 
 Some of the Fathers, I allow, used strong expressions respect- 
 mg the eucharist. If Theodoret believed in transubstantiation, 
 he could not have met, in the way in which he does, the argu- 
 ment of Eutyches. He spoke of a moral, but not a physical 
 change, and conceived that the moral change, which, he believed, 
 took place, entitled the elements to respect and veneration. 
 Mr. Maguire asks, did Christ leave behind him nothing but 
 bread and winel Yes; he has bequeathed to his people the 
 records of inspiration, which bear witness to his glorious v/ork 
 on Calvary, when he bowed his head and gave up the ghost. I 
 asked Mr. Maguire, how he knew that the words, " this is my 
 body," are to be found in the Bible. I am told, by the authority 
 of his church. Now^ the examination of the proofs of that 
 authority, demands the exercise of sense ; and if so, why should 
 not the same exercise of sense be admitted upon transubstantia- 
 tion ? I employed strong language, 'tis true, in refutation of the 
 charge which Mr. Maguire brought against me — but believe me, 
 I did not speak under the impulse of passion. Mr. Maguire 
 has directed me to himself as an example of humility. I appeal 
 to the present meeting, whether we have not had a singular 
 exhibition of effrontery on his part, in defiance of common sense 
 and rational argumentation 1 My friend has referred us to the 
 instance of the Saviour having been taken for a spirit ; but he 
 should remember, that at the moment the Apostles did not dis- 
 tinctly see him ; but as soon as they heard his voice, they cried 
 out, "it is the Lord." As to an act of faith being made by a 
 Protestant, I shall not go over the same ground so often travelled 
 before. Mr. Maguire observes, that St. Paul applies the term 
 priest to Melchisedech : but this circumstance does not prove 
 the bread and wine to have been a sacrifice. The truth of this 
 observation can be seen, as I have already said, by corsulting 
 the Old Testament. I called upon Mr. Maguire to prove, that 
 the term isQsvg, a sacrificing priest, was ever applied to the min- 
 isters of Christ in the new dispensation ; he has not met that 
 question. I again assert, that there is no isQsvg on earth, pos- 
 i?essing any authority under the Christian dispensation. The 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANl lAl ION. 249 
 
 priesthood of Christ is unchangeable, and therefore not to be 
 transferred ; that of the Jews was changeable, because they were 
 subject to death. The priesthood is now concentrated in him,, 
 who sits for ever on the right hand of the Majesty in the Hea« 
 vens. My friend has remarked, that Protestants assert, that 
 there is no difference between the Roman Catholic and Protes- 
 tant Bible ; the Douay version, I admit, though corrupted, still 
 retains fundamental truths. You shall hear Dr. Doyle's opinion 
 of the Protestant translation : — 
 
 *'Ct. Do you consider the authorized translation of the church of England 
 as of a sufficiently perverse quality, to merit the description, (given in the 
 encyclical letter of the Pope, dated Rome, May 3, 1824, — that by a perverse 
 interpretation, the gospel of Christ may be turned into a human gospel, or 
 what is worse, into the gospel of the devil ?) 
 
 '* A. As I said before, God forbid I should so consider it ; for though it has 
 many errors, / consider it one of the noblest translations that ever has been pro- 
 duced; this, I say, while looking upon it, as abounding with inaccuracies, 
 and having many errors." — •^pp. to Report for Com. on Education in Ireland^ 
 p. 791. 
 
 In the opinion of Dr. Doyle, we perceive, that the authorized 
 version is one of the noblest translations that ever has been pro- 
 duced. I still insist, that, in several instances, the translations 
 in the authorized version, regarded by Ward as erroneous, have 
 been adopted by Dr. Murray, in his edition of the Douay Bible 
 lately published. (See Hamilton's Letters to the Roman 
 Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, on the State of the present 
 English R. C. Bible.) 
 
 Mr. Maguire persists in saying, that the Waldenses believed 
 in transubstantiation. In refutation of the assertion, I have 
 read to you extracts from their creeds, and a passage from Dr. 
 Milner's End of Controversy. You have heard much of the 
 Apostolic tree in Dr. Milner. You will find, upon examination, 
 however, that the mention of some Popes is altogether omitted. 
 To change the metaphor — I should hke to know, when the links 
 were broken in the Apostolic chain, for instance, at the time of 
 the council of Constance, by what process the spiritual Vulcan 
 was able to join them together again? My friend has talked of 
 the Waldenses being heretics. I have already referred you to 
 the commendation of Lewis XII, and the report of his commis- 
 sioners, which prove that the Waldenses held the truths of the 
 blessed gospel. As to Mr. Maguire's quotation from Luther, ] 
 can prove that that which Mr. Maguire says, was a literal con- 
 versation with the devil, is merely figurative. Sagittarius proves, 
 that Justus Jonas, Luther's colleague, who translated this piece 
 of Luther's writings into Latin, left out many words, particularly 
 the following passage : 
 
 "Meo corde^ multas enim noctea mihi acerbas fecit" 
 
250 THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 
 
 TVhich ought immediately to follow the first sentence— 
 
 "Satan mecum coupit ejusmodi disputationem." 
 
 So that in English the translation should be : 
 " Satan began with me in my heart the following. disputation." 
 
 As to the quotations from the works of other reformers, whicVi 
 Mr. Maguire adduced, the places where they may be found, not 
 having been stated by him, I may truly say that they are so 
 absurd as to carry their own refutation upon their very face. 
 
 With respect to the doctrine of transubstantiation : I have 
 shown that our Saviour did not always speak literally — that he 
 frequently employed figurative language — that there is a figure 
 in the very context — that the Syriac language possesses no word 
 meaning to signify, and that therefore our Lord was under the 
 necessity of using the auxiliary verb. I observed that, if tran- 
 substantiation be true, we can have no proof of the resurrection 
 of Christ — that it destroys the nature of a sacrament, and con- 
 tradicts the scripture which asserts, that the body of Christ shall 
 not see corruption. I have appealed to the Fathers ; let our 
 quotations be confronted. There is a suspicion that the Fathers 
 have been corrupted by the church of Rome ; but the Protes- 
 tants possess no index expurgaiorius, I would ask, what is the 
 use of the doctrine of transubstantiation ? Can the body and 
 blood of Christ, literally received into the body, benefit the soul? 
 Christ suffered in his body on the cross, and in that respect his 
 flesh has profited, from its union with the Godhead. But did I 
 submit to be a cannibal, I should yet have to learn, by what 
 process an immaterial spirit can be benefited by a m.aterial sub- 
 stance. I appeal to your judgments ; which is most in accord- 
 ance with common sense, reason, scripture, and the character of 
 God, — the doctrine which holds that a man eats his Redeemer, 
 or that which teaches, that the soul is fed, not by eating the 
 symbols of the body and blood of Christ, but by the truths con- 
 tained in the word of God ? If the early Christians beheved 
 such a doctrine, I ask, would it not have been brought forward 
 as a charge against them by anti-Christian writers? — (Iren. 
 Fragm. ap. CEcum. in 1 Pet. ii, 12.) Yet such a charge was 
 never made. 
 
 My friend has accused me of not being under the influence 
 of moral principle. Let our lives be contrasted, and then will 
 it be seen which of the 'wo is most influenced by Christian prin- 
 ciple. If Mr. Maguii 3 would read the works of Luther, he 
 would find, that although Lutner would lay no other foimdation 
 tnan that which has been laid, which is Christ Jesus the Lord, 
 yet he delighted to erect upon that basis such a moral edifice aa 
 should be to the praise and the glory of the most high God. I 
 
THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION. 251 
 
 »naintain that in the New Testament isQsvg is never apphed to 
 Christian ministers ; and I argue against the Roman CathoUc 
 priesthood as St. Paul argued against that of the Jews. — Heb. x. 
 
 '•The law having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image 
 of the things, by the self-same sacrifices, which they offer continually every 
 year, can never make the comers thereunto perfect. Because the worshippers 
 once cleansed should have no conscience of sin any longer. But in them 
 there is made a commemoration of sins every year ; for it is impossible that 
 virith the blood of oxen and goats sin should be taken away." 
 
 Again, 
 
 "And every priest, indeed, standeth daily ministering and often offer- 
 ing the same sacrifices which can never take away sins; but this man 
 offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth at the right hand of God, from 
 hen'^eforth expecting until his enemies be made his footstool, for by one obla- 
 tion he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. And the Holy Ghost 
 also doth testify this to us, for after that he said, ' this is the Testament which 
 I will make unto them after those days, saith the Lord, I will give my lawa 
 in their hearts, and on their minds will I write them, and their sins and ini- 
 quities I will remember no more. Now, when there is a remission of these, 
 there is no more an oblation for sin." 
 
 In the same manner I argue, that the daring repetition of the 
 sacrifice of Christ impUes, that the great atonement on the cross 
 was not all-sufficient — this is an important subject. St. Paul 
 plainly observes, that in the repetition of the Jewish sacrifices 
 there was a public acknowledgment made that sin remained 
 unpardoned. The Jewish priests ofiered often the same sacri- 
 fices, which can never take away sin. The Roman Catholic 
 priesthood, in the daring attempt to offer a sacrifice, first pro- 
 claim the sacrifice of Christ as insufficient ; and secondly, 
 acknowledge their own as insufficient, by repeating it. Mark^ 
 the contrast — 
 
 " The Priest stood daily ministering, and often offering the same sacrifices, 
 which can never take away sin : but this man offering one sacrifice for sins 
 for ever sitteth on the right hand of God, from henceforth expecting, until his 
 enemies be made his footstool." 
 
 Why does the Saviour not repeat his sacrifice? Because **by 
 ONE oblation he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." 
 Wherefore, after the announcement of the new covenant the 
 Apostle adds : 
 
 "Where there is a remission of these, THERE IS NO MORE AN 
 OBLATION FOR SIN." 
 
 The Church of Rome must hold that the remission is either 
 perfect or imperfect. The latter I bring in direct opposition to 
 the sacred scriptures, 
 
 " Their sins and iniquities I will remember no moi'eJ^ 
 
 Again, it is written, 
 
 "Nor yet that he should offer himself o//cn, as the high priest entereth into 
 tjie holiest every year with the blood of others ; for then he ought to hava 
 
25Z THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 suffered often from the beginning of the world ; but now once at the end 
 of ages, he hath appeared for the destruction of sin by the sacrifice of himself j 
 and as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after that the judgment, so 
 also Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many." — (Heb. ix, 24.) 
 
 There are other passages to the same effect, which show that 
 there is but one priest, Christ Jesus, God over all, blessed for 
 ever. Therefore they who pretend to offer sacrifice, intrude 
 upoti his office, and attempt to rob him of his priesthood. But 
 he remains eternally and immutably the great High Priest of his 
 people. 
 
 Sixth Day — Wednesday, April 25. 
 
 SUBJECT. — *' The Protestant Churches do not profess that 
 Unity which forms the Distinctive Mark of the True Church 
 of Christ:' 
 
 Admiral Oliver and Thomas Wyse, Esq., in the Chair. 
 
 Mr. Maguire rose, and called upon Mr. Pope, for proofs of 
 the existence of that unity in the Protestant churches, which 
 forms the distinctive mark of the true church of Christ. 
 
 Mr. Pope rose, and said — Gentlemen, I shall preface my 
 observations this day, with the following remarks : If I yester- 
 day spoke in a manner apparently bordering upon warmth, I beg 
 to assure you, that it arose from excessive bodily exhaustion, 
 which obliged me, in order to give utterance to my thoughts, 
 unduly to strain and exert my physical powers. 
 
 Mr. Maguire has called upon me for proofs of that unity 
 which he asserts to be a distinctive mark of the true church. I 
 admit that no single Protestant communion constitutes of itself 
 the church of Christ, but that the members of the Saviour's 
 mystical body are scattered through the various communities of 
 professing Christians. This, my opinion of the meaning of " the 
 the church of Christ," coincides with authorities which my friend 
 esteems. St. Augustin says of the church, 
 
 "That house consists in vessels of gold and silver, in precious stones, and 
 incorruptible wood ; and it is to that St. Paul says, * bear with one another in 
 V>ve, keeping the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace;* and again, *the 
 tei. nle of God is holy, which temple ye are.' It consists in the good, in tht 
 faithful, in the holy servants of God spread every where, joined together in a 
 spiritual unity by the communion of the same sacraments, whether they know 
 one ariother by sight or whether they do not. But as for the others, they are 
 so in the hoiue as not at all to belong to the structure of the house, and tliey 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 263 
 
 tre not in that society that is faithful in peace and righteousness. They are 
 as chaff amid the good corn ; and we cannot deny that they are in the house, 
 since the Apostle says, 'that there are in the house not only vessels of gold 
 and silver, but vessels also of vi^ood and earth — but one to honor, the other to 
 dishonor." — August, de Baptis. Contra. Donat. lib. vii, cap. 51. 
 
 You have a.ready perceived that the quotations which I brought 
 forward on ha first day of the meeting, coincide with this view 
 of ^e word Church. Clemens of Alexandria says : 
 
 "The ancient Catholic church is but one only, which assembles m th« 
 unity of one only faith, by the will of one only God, and the ministry of rne 
 only Lord — all those who are before obtained, that is to say, whoni God has 
 predestinated to be just, having known them before the foundation of the 
 world." — Clem. Alex. Strom, hb. vii. 
 
 Origen says, in explaining these words, " Thou art Peter, and 
 upon this rock will I build my church." — 
 
 " The church consists of all those who are perfect, and are full of those 
 words, thoughts, and actions which lead to blessedness." 
 
 In Matt, xvi, St. Ambrose says, 
 
 "God called his tabernacle Bethlehem, because the church of the righteous 
 is his tabernacle ; and there is a mystery in it ; for Bethlehem is situated 
 upon the sea of Gallilee, on the east side, which signifies to us that every soul 
 that is worthy to be called the temple of God, or the church, may be built 
 upon the waves of this world, but can never be drowned ; it may be encoun- 
 tered, but can never be overthrown, because it depresses and calms the wild 
 impetuousness of sufferings. It looks upon the shipwrecks of others, while 
 itself is safe from danger, always ready to receive the illumination of Jesus 
 Christ, and to rejoice under his rays." — De Abrah. Patr. Lib. 1,2. cap. 3. 
 
 And further, elsewhere, he says expressly : 
 
 " That as the saints are the members of Jesus Christ, so the wicked are 
 the members of the devil." — In Psalm xxxv. 
 
 St. Jerome says : 
 
 ** The church, ivhich is the assembly of all the saints, is called in the scripture 
 the pillar and ground of truth, because she has in Jesus Christ an eternal 
 firmne& i," — In. Job cap. xxvi. 
 
 Again, in the exposition of the Canticles, he says : 
 
 '* That the church is the assembly of all the saints, and that she is brought in 
 speaking in the Canticles, as if all the saints were but one person." — ^Cant 
 Horn, 1. 
 
 And even the author of the Commentary on tha Psalms, 
 ascribed to St. Jerome, explaining these words of the prophet, 
 " I will drive away from the city of the Lord all workers of 
 iniquity," says : 
 
 " The city of the Lord is the church of the saints, the congregation of th£ 
 hist." — In Paal. ci. 
 
 You will perceive from the quotations, whether Mr. Maguire'a 
 view of the word " church" coincides with that entertained by 
 Christian xntiqufty. 
 
 221 
 
254 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 Permit me to observe, that unity, abstractedly considered, is 
 not a distinctive feature of the church of Christ. There may be 
 unity in error, as well as unity in truth. The unity which is to 
 distinguish the church of Christ, consists in holding the essen- 
 tials of sound doctrine. In order to explain my meaning, permit 
 lie to read part, of the 2d psalm : 
 
 "The kings of the earth stood up, and the princes met together against 
 the Lord, and against his Christ." — v. 2. 
 
 Here we read of unity ; but need I say, that it was unity 
 founded on error. If mere unity be the essential characteristic 
 of the true church, the Jewish church will boast that it possesses 
 this mark : she will say, ' Christians are divided into many sects 
 and parties : there is the church of Rome, with her Dominicans 
 and Franciscans, her Jesuits and Jansenists ; there are the 
 Protestant communions, differing on points of external disci- 
 pline — the Episcopahans, Presbyterians, Independents, and 
 l«<iptists. Christians cannot, therefore, constitute the true church. 
 ^\e are united; hence we are the true church.' Again: the 
 Mahomedan, looking at those who possess the sacred scriptures, 
 perceives that the Jews receive but a portion of them, and that 
 Christians receive the New Testament in addition, and that both 
 differ on various points ; he will conclude, that, if unity be a 
 mark of the true church, the Jews and C-hristians cannot con- 
 stitute it : " my church," he will say, " is united, therefore it is 
 the true church." Again : may not the Hindoo, on this princi 
 pie, when he sees the Jews receiving only the Old Testament, 
 the Christians both Testaments, and the Mahomedan, though 
 acknowledging Christ to be a prophet sent by heaven, denying 
 his divinity — declare, "if unity be the mark of the true church, 
 their's is not the true church, but mine is." The Infidel, too, 
 may congratulate himself, when he perceives that those who 
 profess to believe in revealed religion differ so widely. May 
 he not say, " if unity be a mark of the true church, believers in 
 what they call a revelation do not possess that mark ; therefore 
 they are not the true church ; but we are united : therefore we 
 are the true church." And lastly, the Atheist may step forward 
 and observe, 'here are Jews, Christians, Mahomedans, Hindoos, 
 and Infidels, all professing to believe in a preternatural power, 
 and yet widely differing from each other : if unity, therefore, be 
 tin essential mark of the true church, the Atheistical church is 
 tbat church." 
 
 You perceive, that mere unity is not the distinctive mark of 
 the true church ; but unity in sound doctrine. Here the whole 
 argument turns ; and I boldly assert, that whatever unity is to 
 be found in the church of Rome, is i unity, not of sound doc^ 
 trine, but of erroneous doctrinis. 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 255 
 
 Hear the Fathers upon this point, that real unity consists in 
 iiound doctrine : 
 
 " They do not," says Ambrose, "possess the inheritance of Peter, who d# 
 not hold the faith of Peter." — De Poenit. cap. 6. 
 
 Tertullian observes, 
 
 "True unity is the consa iguinity of faith and doctrine." — De Praescript, 
 adv. Haer. cap. 33.. 
 
 Mr. Maguire asserted, that the church of Rome did differ upon 
 matters not essential, but that its unity consisted in essential 
 doctrines. — Now I think essential and fundamental doctrines are 
 synonymous terms. What is the opinion of Delahogue upon this 
 distinction between fundamental and non-fundamental articles ? 
 
 " Jam manifestum est distinctionem articulorum fundamentaliura et nor 
 fundamentalium merum esse commentum, scripturis evidentur repugnans, 
 toti tradition! ignotum, et in desperatae causae praesidium a JurioBO excogita- 
 tum."— P. 16. 
 
 " It is now manifest, that the distinction between fundamental and non- 
 fundamental articles is a mere comment, evidently opposed to scripture, 
 unknown to tradition altogether, and invented by Juriaeus, as the last re- 
 source of a desperate cause." 
 
 I wonder whether Mr. Maguire is at unity with Delahogue on 
 this subject ; and we know that Delahogue is the class-book of 
 Maynooth. We assert, as a positive matter of fact, that all the 
 great Protestant communions in their published confessions, are 
 agreed on the essential truths of the Christian system. First, 
 as to the head of the church — they hold that Christ is head over 
 all things to his church, God over all, blessed for ever. They 
 are agreed upon the standard of faith — the Bible, and the Biblo. 
 alone, is the religion of Protestants. 
 
 I hold in my hand a book entitled " Corpus et Suntagma 
 Confessionum," &c. A Body and Collation of the Confessions 
 of Faith, which were authenticated, and edited in the name of 
 the Churches in different kingdoms and nations, published in 
 the most famous convention, and approved of by public autho- 
 rity," &c. 1512. 
 
 Any gentleman who pleases may examine the work ; he shall 
 ^lave it for the purpose. From it he will discover, that the great 
 Protestant communions coincide on the canon of scripture, in 
 their views of the guilt and natural depravity of man, and on 
 that great fundamental truth, that the sinner is justified by faith 
 only, in the atonement of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, — 
 that they harmonize on the doctrine of the necessity of a change 
 of heart, ere the soul 'can be admitted into the kingdom of 
 glory — that they accord in the scriptural truth, that the faith of 
 the gospel opens the affections, purifies the inmost recesses of 
 the soul, emancipates the believer from the overwhelming influ- 
 ence of the world, binds him by the strongest moral obligations^ 
 
250 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 in a word, consecrates him to be a vessel meet for his rnaster'a 
 use. These are the great essential truths on which all real 
 Protestants agree. In support of these fundamental tenets^, I 
 appeal to that blessed volume in w^hich, to use the words of 
 Bellarmine, 
 
 " All things necessary for all are written by the Apostles." 
 " Dico ilia omnia scripta esse ab Apostolis quae sunt omnibus necessaria, 
 &:." — De Verho non Scripto, Lib. iv, c, 11. 
 
 To the Apostolic records I appeal, in support of these doc- 
 li iiies ; and to the printed confessions of faith, in demonstration 
 that on essential doctrines Protestant communions are found to 
 accord. Having made these few observations on the unity 
 subsisting between the Protestant communions, I throw back 
 upon my friend the charge of want of unity in his own church. 
 1 assert that his church has not unity in reference to the standard 
 of faith, in reference to doctrine, and various other points — to 
 which I shall presently take the liberty of calling your attention* 
 
 My friend will tell you, doubtless, that his church possesses 
 one head, as the source and centre of unity — that the Pope, as 
 successor to St. Peter, is supreme. But it will devolve on him 
 to prove, that Peter was the supreme Apostle, and that the Popes 
 are his successors. I shall assign my reasons for the opinion, 
 that Peter did not possess jurisdiction over the other Apostles. 
 Peter was specially the Apostle of the Jews, and was not 
 appointed to watch over the Gentile church. Paul was the 
 Apostle of the Gentiles, and if any on that ground could lay 
 claim to supremacy, the Apostle Paul was the individual. Mark 
 the absurdity into which this doctrine of Peter's^upremacy would 
 lead us. St. John survived Peter about twenty years. If this 
 prerogative therefore belongs to the bishop of Rome, we should 
 nave an uninspired man, whether Linus, or Clement exercising 
 jurisdiction over an inspired Apostle? 
 
 The Apostles, permit me to add, never recognized Peter as 
 supreme. At the last supper we find them disputing which of 
 them should be the greatest. Had they conceived that the 
 Saviour, in the passage, " Thou art Peter," &c, had conferred 
 superiority upon him, is it likely that such a dispute could have 
 arisen amongst them ? And if the Saviour had conferred any 
 such authority upon Peter, would he not have referred the 
 Apostles to his previous decision, in order to terminate the dis- 
 putation : but he simply inculcates upon them a lesson of humility 
 (Luke, xxii, 24.) When the Apostles had found that Samaria 
 had received the Word of God, "they sent unto them Peter and 
 John."— (Acts, viii, 14.) The inferior confessedly is sent by 
 the superior, and therefore neither Peter nor John were tibove 
 the other Apostles At the first assembly in Jerusalem, though 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 257 
 
 Peter and James both delivered their opinions, yet the opinion 
 of James, and not that of Peter, was received by the assembly. 
 (Acts, XV, li.) And in the letter which was subsequently 
 written, ther^ is no mention whatever made of Peter. The 
 decree thus commences, 
 
 "The Apostles and ancient br~ »iren, to the brethren of the Gentiles."— 
 vi. 33. 
 
 The Apostle Paul talks ol schisms — 
 
 " Every one of you saith, I am of Paul, I of Apollos, and I of Cephas." — 
 1 Cor. i, 12. 
 
 True, you will say, it was wrong to assert that they were 
 under Paul or Apollos : but, I ask, what think you of " I am of 
 Cephas or Peter 1" / ask, if Peter was the supreme apostle, 
 would Paul have condemned the Corinthian Christians for putting 
 themselves under the standard of the supreme head? Further — if 
 to have one earthly head be the essential characteristic of the 
 true Church, the Church in the primitive times did not possess 
 this centre of unity. No bishop assumed the title of supreme 
 until Boniface III, in tho year 606. Nay — this centre of unity 
 has been the pregnant source of divisions in the church of Rome. 
 We read of more than twenty schisms arising from the Popedom. 
 At one period we find Pope fulminating against Pope for a series 
 of years. Stephen VI, abrogated the decrees of Pope Formosus, 
 his predecessor, drew his body out of his sepulchre, cut off his 
 fingers, because they had been used in ordination, and threw 
 them into the Tiber ; alleging as a reason, that he obtained 
 Peter's chair by perjury. Romanus, the. next Pope, abrogated 
 all the decrees of his predecessor, Stephen ; and as Platina 
 observes, this quarrel had such an injurious influence, that every 
 following Pope infringed, or wholly abrogated the acts of the 
 foregoing. 
 
 Again — the church of Rome is split on the subject of the tem- 
 poral power of the Popes, also on infallibility. What shall we 
 say of the heretical heads which have presided over the church 
 of Rome. Pope Honorius was deposed for heresy by a general 
 council. It is, indeed, a daring assumption on the part of man, 
 to take on him an office which is the exclusive prerogative of the 
 Lord Jesus Christ, which no earthhj being, however extensive 
 his information, correct his principles, and mighty his intellectual 
 powers may be, should dare to assume, an office which no combi* 
 nation of talents, howev-er exalted, could qualify him to discharge. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — You have heard, gentlemen, perhaps the 
 best defence which could possibly be set up for tne Protestant 
 churches As to unity, I contend, that it is required by scrip- 
 ture as a mark of that peace which Christ bequeathed to his 
 
 22* 
 
258 THE Vant of unity of 
 
 followers — " My peace I leave with you — my peace I give 
 you," — and as a token of that holiness which our Lord intended 
 should, mtil the consummation of ages, characterize the true 
 church upon earth. You have heard the most ingenious defence 
 which could be offered for the absence of all unity ; and you 
 cannot have failed to observe that Mr. Pope has employed his 
 usual tact on this occasion. I had put him on his defence as 
 to a certain point of doctrine. I had left the ground clear for 
 him. But, instead of confining himself to the maintenance of 
 his own principles on this particular point, and to an anticipation 
 of my objections, he turns upon me, and, as has been his inva- 
 riable practice, puts me upon my defence. In that respect Mr. 
 Pope deserves much credit for his ingenuity. I had hoped thai 
 the discussion would terminate this day with good humour and 
 good feeling. Some expressions dropped from my opponent 
 yesterday, which might as well have been spared. In stating 
 my arguments as to Mr. Pope's principles, I confined myself to 
 the proof their inconsistency with the moral precepts of the 
 gospel. Though I took care that my arguments as to morality 
 should be confined to the principles, and not addressed to the 
 individual, my opponent has in return made personal allusions 
 to my moral character. This I will say, that the comparison 
 which my friend, Mr. Pope, has drawn between his moral char- 
 acter and mine, was not provoked by any observation that had 
 fallen from me. I would not, however, shrink from such an 
 investigation at any time, that it might be shown to be calculated 
 to serve any good or useful purpose. I have endeavoured 
 through life, though, indeed, I cannot lay claim to the title of 
 ** saint," to square my conduct agreeably to the maxims of the 
 gospel; and I believe I may say, that in the habits of social 
 intercourse, neither my Protestant nor Catholic friends have had 
 any thing to complain of on my part. Mr. Pope has told me, 
 and he laid great stress on the observation, that there is no such 
 expression in the New Testament as legsug, signifying a sacri- 
 ficing priest. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — What I said was, that it remains to be proved, 
 that the word le^evg is employed in the New Testament, to de- 
 signate a minister of the New Testament. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — I beg to refer you to the fifth chapter of the 
 Apocalypse of St. John. Here the Apostle describes a book 
 which he saw lying at the right hand of him, who sat upon the 
 throne, sealed with seven seals — he also saw a mighty an)0[ol 
 «vho exclaimed with a loud voice — 
 
 " Who is worthy to open the book and to break the seals ?" 
 
THE PROTECTANT CHURCHES. 259 
 
 And no person could be found either in heaven or on earth, 
 6, under the earth, to open the book, or look into it. The 
 e^^ngelist then proceeds to say that he wept much, because 
 there was none found worthy, ehher to open the book, or to 
 look at it. And one of the elders said to him — 
 
 " Weep not, behold the Lion of the tribe of Juda and the root of David, 
 prevaileth to open the book and to break its seven seals." 
 
 In the 8th verse, he says — that when the Lion of the tribe of 
 Juda, (meaning Christ) had opened the book, the four animals 
 and the four and twenty elders prostrated themselves before the 
 Lamb, saying — 
 
 " Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive the book, and to break its seals, 
 because thou hast been slain, and hast redeemed us unto God in thy biood, 
 of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation, and thou hast made us a 
 kingdom and priests and we will reign upon the earth." 
 
 I now wish it to be remarked, that the persons who are pre- 
 \iously styled IlQBa^vTSQoi, — Presbyters — are in the tenth verse 
 styled l6Qet>, translated by St. Jerome, Sacerdotes — the Vulgate 
 translation of the tenth verse is — " Et fecisti nos Deo nostro 
 regnum et Sacerdotes ; et regnabimus super terram." Here the 
 four and twenty elders, who are called in the fourth verse of the 
 foregoing chapter, IIqbo^vibqoi^ and who are said to have been 
 clothed in white vestments, give glory to God that he had made 
 them priests, as St. Jerome renders it, and that they will reign 
 upon the earth. Now if these had not been priests of the new 
 law how could they say, " we will reign upon the earth." But, 
 as priests of the new law, the expression was reasonable, as they 
 had ruled and are still ruling by their representative successors. 
 It is admitted that i^eoevg is applied to them, and I have shown 
 that they must have been priests of the new law. 
 
 Mr. Pope laid much stress on the fact that our Lord spoke to 
 his disciples at Capernaum in the Syriac language, and that, as 
 there is no word in that language tantamount to " represent," 
 the verb " w" is employed to convey the meaning of represent, 
 I beg to remind my friend Mr. Pope, that he has fallen into a 
 notable error on this point — he should have borne in his recol- 
 lection, that although our Lord (who never wrote any) then 
 spohe in the Syriac tongue, the evangelist wrote his gospel in the 
 Greek language, which is not deficient in a word signifying " io 
 represent,''^ Whatever question then may be raised relative to 
 the language in which our Saviour spoke, his words have been 
 transcribed into Greek, and I suppose Mr. Pope will not accuse 
 the evangelists of misrepresenting J esws Christ. Mr. Pope also 
 formed an argument touching the ancient liturgies in the Syriac 
 tongue. What is the fact 1 Every day in the year at St. Peter's 
 in Rome, mass is celebrated in the Syriac, but the words of the 
 
260 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 institution of the sacrament are retained in the original Gretk — 
 such was their great respect and awfui veneration for the worda 
 of the institution. 
 
 I shall endeavour to follow Mr. Pope through the various 
 observations in which he has indulged. I have taken my proofs 
 from scripture and from the Fathers of the third, fourth, and fifth 
 ages of the church. I have sustained no doctrine which I have 
 not clearly proved to be founded on scripture. You will not 
 fail to remark that Mr. Pope has appealed but to very few texts, 
 and whether those which he has quoted, be equally strong and 
 clear, and equally apphcable as those adduced by me, I shall 
 leave to you and to the world to decide. In the tenth chapter 
 of St, John, verse 16, we read : 
 
 " And other sheep I have that are not of this fold : them also I must bring, 
 and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be made one fold and one shepherd.'''* 
 
 It is plain that the idea of one fold signifies that all the sheep 
 arc to be kept under the control of one shepherd. Perhaps, 
 this may not be the interpretation put upon the passage by Mr. 
 Pope's private judgment, but it is in my opinion the clear and 
 obvious meaning of the text. In the seventeenth chapter of 
 *^ohn, verse 20, 21, our Saviour says ; 
 
 " And not for them only do I pray, but for those also who through their 
 word shall beheve in me ; that they may all be one as thou. Father, in me, 
 and I in thee, that they also may be one in us j that tlie world may believe 
 that thou hast sent me." 
 
 If the unity which Christ conferred upon his church be com- 
 pared, as it here is, by Christ himself, to the unity which exists 
 between him and his heavenly Father, it evidently follows that 
 such unity can scarcely be exceeded. In Romans, xv, 6 and 6, 
 "WG read, 
 
 "Now the God of patience and of comfort grant you to be of one mind, ont 
 towards another, according to Jesus Christ ; that with one mind, and with 
 wne mouth, you may glorify God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." 
 
 In the same chapter, verses 16 and 17, we read, 
 
 " Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who cause dissensions, and 
 offend contrary to the doctrine which you have learned ; and to avoid them." 
 
 In the 1st Corinthians, 1st chapter, 10th Terse, we read, 
 
 "Now I beseech, you, brethren, that you all speak the same thing, and 
 that there be no schisms among you ; but that you be perfect in the smnu 
 mind, and in the same judgments." 
 
 You will observe that the Apostle makes no distincticen be- 
 tween schism in doctrine, and schisms in discipline. 
 
 "Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace — one body, 
 and one spirit; as you are all called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, 
 one faith, one baptism. One God, and Father of all, who is above all, and 
 through all, and in us all." — Ephes. iv, 31, 5, 6. 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 261 
 
 ' Let us, therefore, as many as are perfect, be thus minded ; nevertheless 
 ^hereunto we are already arrived, thst we be of the same mind ; let us also 
 continue in the same rule." — Phil, iii, 15, 16. 
 
 Mark the following words of the great Apostle of the Gen- 
 tiles, in his epistle to Titus iii, 10 — 
 
 " A man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition, avoid ; 
 knowing that he, that is such an one, is subverted and sinneth, being con- 
 demned by his private judgment — proprio judicio condemnatus." 
 
 " But if any man seem to be contentious^ we have no such custom, nor the 
 church of God."— 1 Cor. xi, 15. 
 
 Again, 
 
 "Follow peace with all men, without which no man shall see God." — 
 Heb. xii, 14. 
 
 I have now laid before you direct and positive texts of scrip- 
 ture on the subject of unity, and I shall leave them for the pre- 
 sent, without any commentary, to make the due impression upon 
 the judgments of the candid and the impartial. 
 
 I shall now proceed to the testimonies of the Fathers on the 
 subject. I shall commence at the earliest era, with Saints 
 Ignatius and Clement ; the latter was'^a disciple and coadjutor 
 of the Apostles, as he is styled by St. Paul to the Phillippians 
 (iv, 3.) Ignatius, whom I shall first quote, was the second 
 bishop of Antioch, after St. Peter, and governed that church for 
 forty years, and died a martyr, under the emperor Trajan. St. 
 Ignatius, in his epistle to the people of Magnesia, having recom- 
 mended them to preserve concord among themselves, and to 
 submit to their superiors, as he does indeed in all his epistles, 
 proceeds to say, 
 
 " Avoiding heterodox opinions and useless fables, labour to be strengthened 
 in the doctrines of the Lord and of the Apostles, in order that you may pros- 
 per in all things, in body and spirit, in faith and charity ; together with your 
 respectable bishops, the united college of priests, and the holy deacons. Be 
 submissive to the bishops and to one another, as Jesus Christ, according to the 
 fleshy was to his Father, and the Apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and 
 the Holy Spirit; that your union be in body and spirit." — Ep, ad Magnes. inter 
 P. P. Apost. tome ii, p. 21. Ed. Amsteladami^ 1724. 
 
 Again, 
 
 " 1 conjure you to use only Christian food, and to refrain from/oreig^i xveed, 
 which is heresy. Guard yourselves from such, which you will do, if you be 
 not puffed up, but remain inseparably united to Jesus Christ, and your bishop, 
 and the ordinances of the Apostles. He who is within the altar is clean ; but 
 he who is without, that is without the bishop^ and the priests, and the deacons. 
 is not clean." — {Ep. ad Trallian'os, p. 23.) 
 
 Again, 
 
 " He who corrupts the faith of God, for which Christ suflfered, the samo 
 Deing defiled, shall go into unquenchable fire, as shall he that heareth him." — • 
 Ep. ad Ephes. p. 15. 
 
 "As children of light and truth avoid the divisions of unity, and the bad 
 doctrines of heretics. Where the shepherd is, do you, like sheep follow."— 
 Ep.a'Philad.^. 31. 
 
ThE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 St. Clement, the disciple of St. John the evangelist, and coad- 
 jutor of the Apostle Paul, in his first epistle to the Corinthians, 
 chapter 46, (Inter P. P. Apostolicos, tonne i, page 174, Edit. 
 Amstelosdami, 1724,) has the following pertinent remarks : 
 
 " Why are these contentions and schisms among you? Have we not one 
 God and one Christ? And one spirit and one calling in Christ ? Why do 
 we divide and sever the members of Christ, and raise sedition among the 
 body ? Your schisms pervert many ; it has cast many into dejection ; many 
 it has caused to doubt, and afflicted us all. Notwithstanding this, you 
 desist not." 
 
 St. Clement, you will also observe, makes no distinction what- 
 ever between schism in doctrine and in discipline, but bestows 
 indiscriminate reprobation upon schism of every description. 
 
 Hegisippus, who was a native of Palestine, and belonged to 
 the church of Jerusalem, and resided near tw^enty years, at Rome, 
 and of whom St. Jerome says, that he lived near to the Apos- 
 tolic times, and compiled a history in five books, of jill that had 
 passed from the death of our Lord to his own days, (a few frag- 
 ments of which are preserved by Eusebius,) and who died about 
 the year 180, has the following passages, as preserved by Euse- 
 bius in his History, (I shall give the words of the historian him- 
 self, as they are related of Hegisippus) — 
 
 "In the books which have come down to us, Hegisippus relates of himself, 
 that as he went to Rome, he visited many bishops, and heard from all, one 
 and the same doctrine. They called the church (says he) a virgin, because 
 as yet she had not been corrupted by vain opinions. From the heretics who 
 then rose, came false Christs, false prophets, and false Apostles; and these, 
 introducing counterfeit doctrine against God, and against his Christ, severed 
 the unity of the church." — ApuaEuseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. iv, c. 22, p. 16L 
 Ed. Cantabrig. 1720. 
 
 IrensBus, 
 
 " The church extended to the boundaries of the earth, received her faith 
 from the Apostles, and their disciple«. Having received it ; she carefuKy 
 retains it, as if dwelling in one house, as possessing one love, and one heart*, 
 the same faith she delivers and teaches with one accord, and as if giflted.with 
 one tongue. For though in the world there be various modes of speech, the 
 tradition of doctrine is one and the same. In the churches of Germany, in 
 those of Spain and Gaul, in those of the East, of Egypt, and of Africa, and 
 in the middle regions, is the same belief^— the same teaching. For as the 
 world is enlightened by one sim, so does the preaching of one faith enlighten 
 all men that are willing to come to the knowledge of truth. Nor among the 
 pastors of the church does he that is eloquent deliver other doctrine, for no 
 one is above his master — nor he that is weak in speech, diminish the truths 
 of tradition. Faith being one, cannot be effected by the power or the want 
 of utterance." — Adv. Heres. lib. i, c. ii, iii, p. 45, 46. Ed. Oxon. 1702. 
 
 And, 
 
 "God placed in his church, Apostles, prophets, doctors : and the whole 
 operation of the spirit of which they do not partake, who are not united to the 
 church; but by their own bad designs and actions, they deprive themselves 
 of life. For where the church is, there is the Spirit of God ; and where this 
 Spirit is, there is the church and all grace ; the Spirit is truth." — Ibidem, lib, 
 iii, c. 40, p. 266. See also Lib. iv, c. 62. 
 
YIIE PROTESTANT CIIURCIIEa 265 
 
 In the days of Irenaeus commenced the Quarto Deciman dis- 
 pute. The question regarded the time of celebrating the feast 
 of Easter, and was finally decided against the churches of Asia 
 Minor, by the council of Nice. This serious controversy ex- 
 torted from the holy Father the pathetic and anxious language 
 quoted above, by which he besought them to maintain not only 
 unity in faith, but unity of disciphne also. It further proves the 
 solicitude of the church to maintain uniformity of practice. 
 
 Tertuilian, De Prescrip. c. xx, p. 234. — 
 
 " The Apostles having received the promised assistance of the Holy Spirit 
 first preached the faith in Judaea, and planted churches, whence, going into 
 the whole world, they proclaimed the same doctrine to the nations, and foun- 
 ded churches. Therefore these, so many and so great churches, are one from 
 that one of the Apostles, from which are all. And thus all are Apostolic, 
 while all maintain the same unity." 
 
 And, 
 
 " There is one faith to the Apostles and to us— one God — one Christ — one 
 hope — the same sacraments. Let me say it in one word, we are all onn 
 church. Whatever belongs to any among us, is also our own. Hoc nostrum 
 est quodcumque nostrorum est." — De Virg. Veland, p. 309. 
 
 St. Clement of Alexandria, lib. vii, Stromat. No. 17, p. 899, 
 900— 
 
 " From what has been said, I thin)t it manifest that there is only one true 
 church, which is alone ^ndani^ to \\h\ch n\\X\\Q just properly belong. This 
 church, which is one, is formed into one nature, which unity it is the endea- 
 vour of heretics to sever into many. Therefore we say, that the ancient 
 and Catholic church alone is one in essence, in opinion, in origin, and in 
 excellence, one in faith — Of this church, the eminence as well as the principle 
 of its construction, arises from unity ; by this surpassing all other things, 
 and knowing nothing like or equal to itself. The doctrine of all the Apos- 
 tles was one, as was one all that they delivered." 
 
 He elsewhere defines the church to be — 
 
 *' A people collected into one faith from the Jev/s and Gentiles." 
 
 And afterwards adds — 
 
 " Thus they both arrive at the unity of faith."— Ibid, vi, p. 736, 793. 
 
 Hear the emphatic Origen — 
 
 " As they shall not possess the kingdom of God, who have been defiled by 
 ^ fornication, other impurities, and the worship of idols, so neither shall heretics." 
 * Horn, in ep. ad Tit. apud Pamphylum Apol. t. i, p. 481. Edit. Genebradi. 
 
 " Should any one be found not hastening, not betaking himself to the walled 
 cities, that is, shall not have entered inttF the churches of God, but hava 
 remained without, he si all perish in the hands of the enemy." — Hom. v, in 
 Jerem. t. iii, p. 161. Edit. Paris, 1733. 
 
 " Let no one persuade, no one deceive himself ; out of this house, that is, 
 out of the church, is no salvation. He that shall go out, becomes guilty ot 
 his own death." — Hom. iv, in Josue, t ii, p. 404. 
 
 St. Cyprian, the Martyr, who. wrote an elaborate work, pro- 
 fessedly upon the absolute necessity of Ecclesiastical Unity, as 
 may be seen in his book, passim, De Unitato Ecclesiae, p 108 
 KdU. Oxon. 16S2. et alibi- bus expresses himself: 
 
264 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 " The church is one, widely extended by its fecundity ; as theie are many 
 rays of light, but one sun ; many branches of a tree, but one root deeply 
 fixed ; many streams of water, but one source. Take a ray from the sun j 
 the unity of light allows not division. Break a branch from the tree, the 
 branch cannot germinate. Cut off the stream from its source, the stream dries 
 up. So the church sends forth her rays over the whole earth ; yet is the light 
 one, and its unity is undivided. 
 
 " He that does not hold this unity of the church, can he think that he holds 
 the faith ? He that opposes and withstands the church, can he trust that he 
 is in the church ? When the blessed Paul teaches the same thing, and shows 
 the sacred character of unity, saying, (Ephes. iv, 4, 5, 6,) mie body and out 
 spirit, &c ; which unity, it 'vs our duty firmly to hold and to vindicate." 
 
 ** Whosoever is separated from the church, is joined to an adulteress: is 
 cut off from the promises of the church. Who deserts the church of Christ, 
 obtains not the rewards of Christ. He is an alien ; he is profane ; he is an 
 enemy. He cannot have God for a Father, who has not the church for his 
 mother. If excluded from the ark of Noah, any one might have escaped ; so 
 may he, if out of the church. The Lord admonishes, and says, * he that is 
 not tvith me is against me.''^ — (Mark, xii, 30.) Who violates the peace of 
 Christ and concord, is against him." 
 
 " The Lord says, * / and the Father are one,'' (John, x, 30.) — And again, of 
 the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, it is written, * and these three are one,^ 
 (,Tohn, i, 7.) He who holds not this unity, holds not the law of God, noi 
 the faith of the Father and the Son, nor the truth that is unto salvation." — 
 Ibid. p. 109. 
 
 And after proving that by the seamless garment of Christ the 
 unity of the church was represented, the holy Martyr adds — 
 
 " Who is so wicked and perfidious, who so transported by the rage of 
 discord, as to think, that the unity of God, the vesture of the Lord, the church 
 of Christ may be severed ? Christ tells us in his gospel, * there shall be one 
 Hock, and one shepherd.* — (John, x, 16.) Does any one then imagine, that 
 in the same place may be many shepherds and many flocks ? 
 
 " The Apostle also, urging the same unity, entreats and admonishes, say- 
 ing — * Jfow I beseech you brethren, by the name of the Lord Jesus Chnst, that 
 you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schism among yoiC — Ibid, 
 p. 110. 
 
 " God is one, and Christ is one, and his Church is one, and faith is one, and 
 his people connected by one solid bond, is one. Unity cannot be severed nor 
 the one body by laceration be divided. Whatever is separated from the stock 
 cannot live; cannot breathe apart; it loses the substance of fife." — Ibid. 119. 
 
 Dionysius of Alexandria, who was a catechist of the church 
 of Alexandria, as St. Clement had been, and succeeded to that 
 see about the year 247, and is much spoken of by the early 
 ecclesiastical writers, as highly illustrious for the learning and 
 zeal with which he defended the Catholic cause, and who died 
 about the year 264, thus addresses the schismatic Novatian : 
 
 " You ought rather to have suffered all things than to have raised a schism 
 in the church. To die in defence of its unity would be as glorious as laying 
 down our life rather than sacrifice to idols ; and in my opinion more glorious ; 
 because here the safety of the whole church is consulted. If you bring your 
 brethren to union, this will overbalance your fault, which will be forgotten 
 and you will receive commendation. If you cannot gain others, at least save 
 your own souls." — Apud. Eusebii Hist. Eccles. lib. vi, c. 45, 318, Edit. Can' 
 tab. 1720. 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES 265 
 
 Laetantius, who was called the Christian Cicero, in the 4th 
 Book of his Institutions, c. xxx, p. 232, Cambridge Edition, 
 1685, has the following nervous language on the subject • 
 
 " The Catholic church alone retains the true worship. This is the source 
 of truth, this is the dwelhng of faith, this is the temple of God, into which 
 he that enters not, and from which he that goes out, forfeits the hope of life, 
 and of eternal salvation." 
 
 Alexander, patriarch of Alexandria, who vigorously opposed 
 the heresy of Arius from its very birth, and excommunicated 
 its author and abettors, and who assisted at the first council of 
 Nice, anno 325, writes to his " fellow-ministers of the Catholic 
 church," as follows : 
 
 " As the body of the Catholic churcn is one, and the scriptures command, 
 that we maintain the bond of peace and concord, it is proper, that in regard 
 to all things that are done amon^ us, we should condole or rejoice with one 
 another." — Apud Socratem. lib. i, c. 6, p. 10. Edit. Cantab. 1720. 
 
 And speaking of the Arians, he says : 
 
 " That seamless garment which the murderers of Christ would not divide, 
 these men (the Arians) have dared to rip asunder." — Apud Theodoret, Lib. 
 i, c. 4, p. 9. Edit. Cantab. 1720. 
 
 The council of Nice, the first general council, held in the 
 year 325, three hundred and eighteen bishops present — (as is 
 generally admitted) — and held at a period too, when, by the 
 confession of all Protestants, the church exhibited undoubted 
 proofs of primitive purity, thus declared, 
 
 "But as to those persons who are found not to have declined to any schism, 
 and to have kept themselves uncontaminated within the Catholic and Apos- 
 tolic church, they have a right to ordain." — Gen. Con. t. ii, p. 250. Ed. Paris, 
 1671. 
 
 I have also Eusehius, Hist. Eccles. lib. v, c. 11, p. 212. 
 Edit. Cant. 1720. St. Athanasius, whom the.Protestants have 
 borrowed from us, and adopted as their patron saint, and whose 
 truth they so peremptorily insist upon, (I know not whether he 
 be a favourite with the lay church of Mr. Pope,) thus expresses 
 himself, in his epistle De Decret. Nicaen. t. i, p. 211 : 
 
 " The Gentiles who disagree among themselves, are deprived of the true 
 doctrine ; but the saints, and they, who are the preachers of truth, arc nna,ii- 
 inous. — They lived, indeed, at different times, but the object of all was the 
 same ; for they were the prophets of one God, and they announced, with one 
 consent, the same word of truth." 
 
 St. Basil,— 
 
 " We indeed, ourselves, are of little value ; but, by the grace of God, we 
 reniain ever the same, unaffected by the common change of things. Our 
 Delief is not one at Seleucia, and another at Constantinople ; one at Lampas- 
 chus, and another at Rome : and so different from what was in former timea, 
 Dut always one and the same." — Ep, 250 ad Evczcinos, t. iii, p. 386. EdiU 
 Bened . Parisiis, 1 72 1 . 
 
 23 
 
266 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 "As many as hope in Christ, are one people, and they, who are of Chn«l 
 form one church, though it may be named in many places." — Ep. 161, oJ 
 •Smphil. t. iii, p. 252. " 
 
 Again — Ep. 204, ad JVeocces. t. iii, p. 307. 
 
 " It is morejust to judge of our concerns, not from this or that man, who 
 walk not in truth, but from the number of bishops who, in all regions, are 
 united to us. Let the cities of Asia, the sound part of Egypt, and of Syria, 
 be interrogated. These by letter communicate with us, and we with them. 
 From these you may learn, that we are all unanimous ; all think the same 
 thing. Wherefore, he who dechnes our communion, may be considered by 
 you, as separated from the universal church. It is better we should lose ouf 
 lives, and that the churches should remain unanimous, than ihit on account 
 of our childish feuds, the faithful should be so much injured, 
 
 St. Cyril of Jerusalem. 
 
 **UphoId the faith, and that faith alone, which is now delivered to thee by 
 the church, confirmed as it is by all the scriptures." — Cat. v, INo. 7, p. 75. 
 
 " We declare the ways of error, that we may proceed on one royal road."— 
 Cat. xvi. No. 6, p. 226. 
 
 " As far as our time of instruction would allow, we have spoken to you of 
 that holv and Apostolic faith which was delivered to you." — Cat.*xviii. Na 
 7, p. 274. 
 
 Ephrem of Edessa, 
 
 " Blessed is the man, who has chosen the Catholic rhurch. They shall be 
 deemed deserving of punishment, who think of sowing the seeds of separa- 
 tion in the breast of men. Gluit not then the Catholic faith, nor fall from it, 
 »nouId any question or schism arise." — In Testam. t. iii, p. 296. Edit. Bossil. 
 
 Again — Sermo 24, adv, Herer, p. 493, J. W. Bit. Quirini. 
 
 " The assembly of the good detest those appellations, which are derived 
 from men ; M'herefore, the Sabellians and Arians, and sectaries, displeased 
 with the names which their respective authors have given them, craftily endea- 
 vour to decorate themselves with the name of our church, and to please her. 
 They are aware, who they are, whom she loves, and that she rests wholly on 
 Christ Have they not read how the Apostle blamed those, who said they 
 were the followers of Paul, or of Apollos, or of Cephas ? But a more bitter 
 course of grief has assailed us, since some of our own standing have given 
 tiieir names to their followers. Blessed be that name wherein we were called. 
 Consider, therefore, on which side is the doctrine of the Apostles. They 
 gave no names ; and where it is done, there is a departure from their rule. 
 On the other hand we declare, that truth will be found with those, who are 
 known by the name of Christ alone." 
 
 St. Ambrose, the meridian sun of the Latin church, comment- 
 ing on the words of the apostles to the Ephesians, chap, iv, v. 4. 
 •* One body and one spirit, as you are called in one hope of 
 your calling," says, 
 
 " To promote peace and concord, Paul added this — that as the church is 
 one body, so the people should cultivate union ; for the object of our belief is 
 one, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all." 
 
 Again, he commands unity, that, 
 
 " As all are called to unity, we should differ in nothing. For if there be 
 one Lord, that is, one Christ ; one faith and one baptism, one God and Father 
 of all, the mind also should be one, and the heart of the people one, since ail 
 the things that he enumerates are examples of unity \ for they agree in all 
 things."— Comment in Cap. iv. Ep. ad Ephes. t. iii, p '^OS. Ed. Parii, 1614* 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 267 
 
 On the death of his brother Satyrus, having related his escape 
 from a storm, and the desire he felt to return solemn thanks to 
 God, St. Ambrose adds : 
 
 " When we got to land, he sent for the bishop of the place ; but aware that 
 true faith alone was acceptable to heaven, he inquired of him was he in 
 communion with the Catholic bishops, tffat is with the Roman Bishops (utrum- 
 nam cum Episcopis Catholicis, hoc est, cum Romana Ecclesia, Convenient?) 
 For the country he knew was infected with schism. The bishop at the time 
 had withdrawn himself from our communion : and though he was in banish- 
 ment for his faith, yet in schism there could be no true faith. He had faith 
 towards God, but not towards the church, whose members he permitted to be 
 torn asunder. For since Christ died for the church, and the church is the 
 body of Christ, they, by whom his passion is made void, and his body is torn 
 asunder, cannot hold his faith. How desirous soever therefore my brother 
 might be to express publicly his gratitude, he chose to defer it ; because he 
 knew that true faith was necessary for its due accomplishment." — De Obitu 
 Fratris Satyri, t. iv, p. 316. 
 
 I have mentioned this one fact, because it shows more than 
 any reasoning on the subject of union could do, how great was 
 the horror then entertained of schism, or of departing from the 
 faith or discipline of the church. 
 
 I have also Optatus, Jerome, Chrysostom, Augustin, Theo- 
 doret, the council of Chalcedon, &c, here, and they are all 
 unanimous in their interpretation of the sacred Scriptures on 
 this subject, and they are equally strong in holding the absolute 
 necessity of unity in the church. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — Gentlemen, having spoken on the moral influ- 
 ence of that gospel, which proclaims acceptance to the guilty 
 by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, I shall not again return to the 
 subject. I have been referred to the 5th chap, of the Apoca- 
 lypse, in evidence that the word isQevg is applied to the minis- 
 ters of the New Testament. I reply, that the passage speaks 
 of heaven, where the four-and-twenty elders are represented as 
 singing to the praise of the Lamb : but it still remains for my 
 friend to prove that the word legevg is applied to the ministers of 
 Christ on earth, so distinguish them from the laity. I turn to the 
 first chap, of the Apocalypse, and the 6th verse, and I read, 
 " Who hath made us a kingdom, and priests to God and his Father." 
 Here we find the Apostle, in reference to heaven, including 
 laics, as well as ecclesiastics, in the general appellation of kings 
 and priests. In the 1st of Peter, 2d ch. and 5th ver. believers 
 on earth, generally, are called " ^aoiXeioy LSQaTsv^a ," " a royal 
 priesthood ;" it being evident from the opening verse of the epis- 
 tle, that it is addressed not to ministers alone, or to the learned 
 exclusively, but generally to the strangers scattered through the 
 countries, of which the Apostle speaks. The expression isgetg 
 13, therefore, bestowed on the people of God at large, and is not 
 
26S THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 P. peculiar designatioa of the ministers of the New Testament. 
 My friend says, that Peter calls himself a priest. I turn to the 
 passage referred to, 1st of Peter, 5th chapter, and 1st verse, and 
 I find the expression 'is " avfunQsa^viFgog,^^ " fellow-elder," not 
 legevg. In the Douay version, I find that there also Peter in 
 the passage is called, " an ancient," not a priest : 
 
 "The ancients, therefore, that are among you, I beseech, who am myself 
 also an ancient, and a witness of the sufferings of Chilst." 
 
 The term legevg is not even applied specially to the Apostles 
 themselves. Mr. Maguire referred us to John : let him have the 
 kindness to mention the passage to which he calls our attention, 
 and you will be convinced that te^evg is not the term employed. 
 
 [Mr. Maguire. — I spoke of Revelations 5th chapter, and 
 ICth verse.] 
 
 Mr. Pope. — I was under the impression that you also referred 
 to some other passage. But, to bring the point to an issue : I 
 maintain, that the word leQsvg is not applied exclusively to the 
 ministers of the New Testament, or even to the Apostles them 
 selves. I here assert, that it is not so applied. Christ spoke 
 in Syriac ; and there being no word in the language signifying 
 " to represent," he was obliged to employ the auxihary verb. 
 But the Apostle Paul wrote in Greek, which furnishes a word 
 meaning " to represent ;" yet he says, in 1st Cor. 10th chapter, 
 
 " That rock was Christ." ' rj irerpa rjv o Ifipiarog, 
 
 Again, he says, Galatians, 4th chap, and 24th verse, 
 
 " The one from Mount Sinai engendering into bondage, wliich is Agar." 
 "oo-TiS eariv A.yap.^^ 
 
 Here the auxiliary verb is employed as denoting to represent. 
 
 In the quotations made by Mr. Maguire throughout the 
 discussion, he has taken it for granted, that the church of Rome 
 is the church of Christ ; but I appeal to your judgments, whether 
 he has been able to prove the assumption. I admit that unity 
 should exist amongst the disciples of Christ ; but it should not 
 bo a mere external and superficial unity : it should be a union 
 of affection and of doctrine in every essential point. This unity 
 1 have shown to exist in the Protestant churches. Let the creeds 
 of the English, Scotch, Helvetic, and other Protestant com- 
 munions, be examined. As to the passage, " one fold and one 
 shepherd ;" I hold, that the Saviour spoke of Jew and Gentile 
 being joined together in one church. St. Paul says^ 
 
 " He has broken down the middle wall of partition, and hath made of twain 
 one new man." — Ephes. ii, 14, 15. 
 
 When the Saviour prays that they all might be one, he speaka 
 I admit, of his church : but does Mr. M^gnre mean to say 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 269 
 
 that the Pope is the shepherd. I have shown that the Pope ia 
 incompetent to disciarge the duties of the office. Christ is thai 
 shepherd; as the Apostle Peter says, who calls him 
 
 "The shepherd and bishop of the soul." — 1 Pet. ii, 25. 
 llr. Maguire refers us to the words of the Saviour's prayer foi 
 his disciples, 
 
 " That they may be Dne, as thou Father art in me, and 1 in thee." 
 Now I would ask, is the union existing between the Father 
 and the Son a sensible, a tangible, a visible union 1 Is it not 
 evidently spiritual in its character 1 A spiritual bond does 
 subsist amongst the people of God in the Protestant commu- 
 nions. The supplication of our Lord and of Paul, that they ma^ 
 be of " the same mind," will be more and more fulfilled in the 
 real and spiritual union of the people of God. I trust, we shall 
 see them in heart and hand still more cordially united together, 
 evidencing that there does exist amongst them a kindred spirit- 
 ual affection, *' where there is neither Jew, nor Greek, Barba- 
 rian, Scythian, bond nor free, but Christ is all in all." — Coloss. 
 lii, 11. These holy bonds will never be dissolved : they survive 
 the stroke of death — they exist throughout eternity ; and as the 
 ages of immortality shall roll along, will they be more and more 
 consolidated, and more closely linked together. Myfriend quotes 
 Romans, xvi, 17. 
 
 " Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who make dissensions and 
 offences, contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and to avoid them." 
 
 Mark, it is doctrine of which he speaks — now it is in exact 
 compliance with this command, that we separate from the church 
 of Rome ; because she errs in doctrine, and teaches the inven- 
 tions of men, instead of the commandments of God. Perhaps 
 Mr. Maguire would like to hear a quotation from Augustin, in 
 illustration of this observation. Many gave up the scriptures 
 in the time of persecution, and were in consequence called 
 Traditors. It was urged on St. Augustin to leave the commu- 
 nion of the Traditors. St, Augustin then replies, 
 
 " Is it that the Traditors have instituted some new sacraments, or some 
 new baptism ? Is it that they have composed books to teach others to do or 
 imitate the action of the Traditors, or that they have recommended those books 
 to posterity, or that we hold and follow that doctrine ? If they had done so, 
 and suffered no person to have been in their communion, but those who would 
 read their books and approve that doctrine, I say, that they would have sepa- 
 rated themselves from the unity of the church: and if you saw me in their 
 schism, you would then have reason to say, that I were in the church of thd 
 Traditors." — Augustin Contr. Ciescon. lib. iii, cap. 38. 
 
 Now the Church of Rome has introduced new sacraments 
 and uncanonical books, which she has recommended to posterity 
 us divine. She suffers none in her communion who do not hold 
 
 23* 
 
270 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 her peculiar opi lions, and therefore separates herself from the 
 unity of the ehur<;h : and consequently, according to St. Augustin, 
 they who are in the church of Rome, are in the church of the 
 schismatics. 
 
 Mr. Maguire has asked, as it respects unity, what difference 
 is there between discipline and doctrine ? Mr. Maguire himself 
 told us, that while in essential matters the members of the church 
 of Rome agreed, they do not accord in matters of discipline — 
 and that men are at liberty to exercise their judgments upon the 
 notes attached to the Douay Bible. 
 
 As to the passage relative to keeping the unity of the spirit, 
 you plainly perceive that it speaks of a spiritual unity. 
 
 " Careful to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, one body and 
 one spirit, as you are called in one hope of your calling, one Lord, one faith, 
 one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, 
 and in us all." — Eph. iv, 3, 6. 
 
 The passage clearly refers, not to unity founded on non- 
 essential points, but to unity founded on the great leading truths 
 of Christianity. In the Protestant authorized confessions of 
 faith, we can see that there exists an accordance on the funda- 
 mental principles of revelation. 
 
 Again, Mr. Maguire quoted from Philippians, 
 " Let us also continue in the same rule." 
 
 But I beg your attention to the preceding verse, — 
 
 "If in any thing you be otherwise minded, this also God will reveal to you.** 
 — iii, 16. 
 
 This passage shows, that at that time some differences of 
 opinion probably existed amongst them, and that the Apostles 
 did not excommunicate them for entertaining those differences ; 
 but assured them at the same time that God would reveal to 
 them the truth on the particular points concerning which differ- 
 ences existed. Mr. Maguire has also quoted, 
 
 " If any be contentious we have no such custom." — 1 Cor. xi, 16. 
 
 Mr. Maguire and J. K. L. appear to have fallen into a similar 
 misapprehension of the meaning of this passage. — " No such 
 custom," refers not to contentions, but to women sitting with 
 the head uncovered in the assemblies of the saints. I find that 
 certain differences existed and were allowed, even in the church 
 at Rome. We read that one man believed that he might eat all 
 things, another that he should eat herbs. — (Rom. xiv, 2.) — that 
 one man esteemed one day above another, while another esteemed 
 everiy day alike. — (5th v.) But what says the Apostle? 
 
 *' Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." — (5th v.) 
 
 Or as the Douay version has it — 
 
 " Let every man abound in his own sense." 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 271 
 
 Mr. Maguire has informed us, that the primitive Aurch cast 
 out heretics. Every Protestant church, also, has a right to 
 exclude from its communion, if it pleases. I admit that the 
 Fathers spoke of one church ; but that one church was the mys- 
 tical body of Christ, not confined to one external communion, 
 portions of it belonging to the various Christian congregations. 
 My friend has referred us to the passago of Cyprian, " he has 
 not God for his Father, who has not the church for his mother," 
 and has twice quoted it. Now I say, that Cyprian, in a letter 
 m which he reprehends Pope Stephen, once employed that pas- 
 sage in reference to Stephen himself, because he introduced 
 divisions into the church. 
 
 Mr. Maguire observes, that the church was not confined to 
 ihe diocess of Rome ; that the Cathohc church in primitive times 
 was not the church of Rome — this is precisely the same language 
 which he employed before. St. Firmilian, addressing Pope 
 Stephen says : 
 
 " Do not deceive yourself; you have cut yourself off from the church ; foi 
 he is truly a schismatic who has made himself an apostate from the commu- 
 nion of ecclesiastical unity : for while you think you can excommunicate all 
 Dther churches from you, you have only excommunicated yourself from them." 
 Cyp. Ep. 75, p. 228,— Edit. Oxon. 
 
 St. Gregory the Great remarks : 
 
 " If the church come to depend upon one, it must certainly fall.** 
 
 And St. Cyprian says : 
 
 " That therefore Christ made the college of bishops numerous, that if one 
 should fall or turn heretical, the rest might interfere for the saving of the 
 flock," 
 
 For he says : 
 
 " There is but one flock, and one episcopate, of which every bishop has 
 the whole in partnership with the rest." 
 
 " Episcopatus unus est, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur." 
 
 The historian Socrates, who carried on Eusebius's Ecclesias- 
 tical History from the year 329, to the year 440, informs us, 
 that a great diversity existed among the different churches in 
 respect to ceremonies and discipline, especially with "espcct to the 
 marriage of persons in holy orders. He remarks, that the Apostle 
 did not give any directions about holy days, their only design 
 being to teach faith and virtue. He also says, that ther*^ were 
 scarcely two churches which exactly agreed on the subject of 
 prayers ; and concludes by observing, that to give a catalogue 
 of all the rites and customs in use among Christians in all cities 
 and countries, would be very difficult, if not impossible. — (L. 
 V, c. 22.) St. Irenseus notices, in terms rather of commenda- 
 tion than censure, the diversity of fasts among his contemporary 
 brethren. — Ap. Euseb, 1, v, c. 22. Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, 
 
272 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 and Anicetus, Bishop of Rome, held irreconcilably opposite 
 opinions respecting the time of celebrating Easter ; yet they 
 did not violate Christian unity, as their less worthy successors 
 have done on the same custom — the latter, as Eusebius states 
 having permitted the former to administer the eucharist in his 
 church. With regard to the re -baptizing those who had been 
 baptized by heretics, the church of Africa, adopting the imme- 
 morial usage of the ancient churches of Cappadocia, Cilicia, 
 and Galatia, differed from that of Rome ; yet this difTe fence 
 occasioned no schism between them. St. Cyprian, some will 
 be surprised to learn, held washing the feet to be a sacrament : 
 and St. Augustin differed from St. Jerome, respecting the intro- 
 duction of Jewish rites and usages into the Christian church ; 
 but they did not depart from Christian charity. From the writings 
 of St. Irenaeus, St. Firmilian, and Justin Martyr, we learn, that 
 they who required conformity in matters, not evidently funda- 
 mental on scriptural grounds, were regarded as violators of 
 Christian unity. — (Iren. Ap. Euseb. 1. v, c. 24. Firm. Ap. 
 Cyp. ep. 75, J. Mart. Dial, cum Tryph.) 
 
 Hear the sentiment laid down in the Maynooth class book, 
 p. 17: 
 
 *' Schismatics, even those who should not err in doctrine, by the act of 
 Bchism alone are excluded from the church, and are without the way o 
 salvation." 
 
 Or in other words, those, however correct their doctrines, who 
 separate from the church of Rome, are excluded from the church 
 of Christ, and are without the way of salvation !' I assert that 
 the unity subsisting in the church of Rome is a unity without 
 examination. Since the commencement of the discussion, I 
 received a letter from London, as did Mr. Maguire also (t^or the 
 letter to me states that a duplicate was sent to Mr. Maguire.) 
 It is signed " An Inquirer after Truth." The writer remarks, 
 that before the discussions took place in Ireland, his mind was 
 not troubled with doubts — but that since these were held, he has 
 been reading the scriptures under the direction of the Roman 
 Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, and finds many difficulties 
 raised in his mind in reference to the sacred volume. The unity 
 of the church of Rome is, in truth, a unity that will not bear 
 the test of examination. 
 
 We have heard of the faith of the collier commended by 
 Cardinal Bellarmine. The collier, when asked what it was he 
 believed, answered : " I believe what the church believes." 
 The other rejoined — " What then does the church believe ?" 
 He replied readily — " The church believes what I believe." 
 The other anxious to bring him to the point, once more resumed 
 his inquiry : " Tell me then, I pray you, what it is which you 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 27J 
 
 and the church believe V^ The only answer the collier could 
 give, was — " Why, truly, Sir, the church and I, both believe the 
 same thing." — See Bellarmine de arte bene moriendi, lib. ii, ch. 9. 
 Hear a schoolman. Gabriel Byel maintains that, 
 
 *' If he who implicitly believes the church, should think, misled by natural 
 reason, that the Father is greater than the Son, and existed before him, or that 
 the three Persons are things locally distant from one another, or the like, he 
 is not a heretic, nor sins, provided he do not defend this error pertinaciously, 
 for he believes what he does believe, because he thinks that the church believes 
 sa subjecting his opinion to the faith of the church. For though his opinion 
 b„- 3rioneous, his opinion is not his faith, nay his faith in contradiction to his 
 opmions, is the faith of the church. What is still more, this implicit faith not 
 only defends from heresy and sin, but even constitutes merit in heterodoxy 
 itself, and preserves in that merit one who forms a most heterodox opinion, 
 because he thinks the church believes so." — Dr. CampbeWs Lectures on EccL 
 His. vol. ii, p. 259. 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — With respect to the 5th chapter of St. John, 
 I do assert, and I beg the public to bear it in mind, that the 
 expression legevg is applied to the twenty- four who sat around 
 the throne, and were called neither more nor less than Presby- 
 ters. I am satisfied to let the passage be examined by any 
 learned man ; I here offer to submit the question to the adjudi- 
 cation of any two individuals. — Let Mr. Pope select on^ and I 
 shall select another, and then let them examine the contcA Mr, 
 Pope has recurred to the quibble about the difference bt veen 
 the church of Rome and the Catholic church. I appeal to our- 
 selves if I have not quoted upwards of twenty Fathers in refu- 
 tation of the idle argument which Mr. Pope endeavours to 
 construct on this matter. Have I not amply shown that the term 
 " Catholic," was applied to all the churches in Asia, in Africa, 
 in Spain, in Gaul, &c, &c, holding communion with the See of 
 Rome 1 I have proved that the holy Fathers all agreed in this 
 interpretation of the words " Catholic church." It is a mere 
 play upon words with which my opponent has amused you. I 
 have laid before you abundant evidence that before the Reform- 
 ation, there existed no other church which claimed to itself the 
 title of " Catholic," but the church of Rome. With regard to 
 the doctrine which Mr. Pope has broached, on the subject of 
 unity, I will only say, that all sects in the world are in the spirit 
 of inion, according to Mr. Pope. But our Saviour has com- 
 pared the unity of his church to the union subsisting between 
 him and his heavenly Father ; therefore, that union must be of 
 a most intimate nature, and the church must endeavour to imitate 
 the wonderful union existing between God the Father, and God 
 'the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. With regard to the differ- 
 ences of which Mr. Pope spoke, as existing in the Catholic 
 church, they involve not principles, and that is a sufficient answei 
 
274 THE WA^XT OF UNITY OF 
 
 to his very silly objection relative to the Dominicans, the Fran- 
 ciscans, and the Jesuils. Mr. Pope has also introduced the 
 Jansenists — they were long since condemned b) the Catholic 
 church in the bull Unigenitus. As to St. Ambrose, 1 have already 
 quoted at length his opinions on the necessity of unity. With 
 respect to texts of scripture, I fearlessly appeal to every gentle- 
 man who hears me, whether I have not brought forward more 
 texts of scripture than Mr. Pope — whether my texts have not 
 been clearly and decisively in support of the doctrine which I 
 maintain — and whether Mr. Pope has not offered violence to the 
 meaning of scripture, by the strange and far-fetched interpreta- 
 tions which he has sought to impose upon this learned assembly ? 
 I ask any candid man here, whether Mr. Pope's explanations of 
 some texts have not been more difficult and abstruse than the texts 
 themselves? If such be not the fact, I know nothing of scrip- 
 ture. What right has Mr. Pope to set up his private judgment 
 in preference to the opinions of the Apostles who were inspired? 
 He quoted the royal prophet as to the eastern kings who had 
 combined against God ; and he introduced this as an argument 
 against the existence of unity in the Catholic church ! Was 
 there a church established then? If there were, he must then, 
 to sustnm his arguments, prove that it was lawful for the eastern 
 king ! to divide themselves from that church, and to become 
 sch matics. 
 
 i there were not a church government then existing, his 
 argument falls to the ground. I have laid before you this day, 
 plain and obvious texts of scripture, regarding the necessity of 
 unity in the church of Christ. The doctrine which I advocate, 
 I have shown to be distinctly founded upon scripture. I have 
 defied Mr. Pope to show, that in regard to unity, there is any 
 distinctior^ made between essentials and non-essentials in scrip- 
 ture. The texts which have been quoted equally refer to matters 
 of discipline, and of doctrine. If men will not be united- -if 
 divisions, no matter how they originate, will exist; if people 
 become split into sects and parties, and endeavour to tear their 
 common parent asunder, surely the evil is not to be laid at the 
 door of the Catholic church. She is not to be held accountable 
 for those of her children who may disobey her — who violate 
 charity, and disturb that peace which our Lord bequeathed to 
 his church — 
 
 " My peace I leave you — my peace I give you ; not as the world giveth do 
 I give you." 
 
 No plea — no pretext can ever justify a departure from that 
 Christian harmony, of which our Saviour set an example, th** 
 necessity of which we find recommended from his sacred lips, 
 and which he bequeathed to his church, io bo observed and 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 275 
 
 nr«,aintained without condition or alteration, unto the end of the 
 world — 
 
 " My feact 1 leave you — iny peace I give you ; not as the world giveth do 
 I give you." — John, xiv, 27. 
 
 Mr. Pope quotes the holy Fathers ; it is rather extraordinary, 
 indeed, that the Fathers should be quoted to show that unity in 
 the church is not necessary. They affirm that there is no having 
 the inheritance of Peter without the faith of Peter. So I believe. 
 There can be no inheritance possessed without faith ; and there 
 can be no real faith, according to scripture, where there is not 
 charity and Christian union. I have proved that the unity which 
 is commanded by our Saviour, which was preached by the 
 Apostles, and which was taught by their disciples in the first 
 ages of Christianity, exists alone in the Catholic church. Mr 
 Pope says that the unity which exists among Protestants is suf 
 ficient. I call upon him to prove his position upon the authority 
 of the word of God. He has quoted the church of Rome with 
 regard to councils, &c, to show that she had not unity. But 
 since the Reformation, it is admitted by Protestants, that they 
 have no such unity. The illustrious Grotius lamented the 
 schisms which existed among Protestants in his days ; and he 
 said it would be almost better to return to Popery than to remain 
 divided as they were. Luther himself threatened to return to 
 Popery if their divisions increased. When he saw Calvin 
 denying openly the real presence of Christ in the eucharist, he 
 lamented that he had ever quitted Popery. 
 
 With regard to councils, the assertions of Mr. Pope are mere 
 assumptions, and it is a well known rule in logic, that ' quod 
 gratis asseritur, gratis negari debet.' I again challenge Mr. 
 Pope to show from scripture the distinction between essentials 
 and non-essentials. I call upon him to prove that there is a 
 distinction drawn in scripture between doctrine and discipline. 
 He must prove that there is a difference upon an article of faith 
 or that there exists a distinct breach of communion in the Cath- 
 olic church, in order to establish his position, that she does not 
 possess unity. Differences as to private opinions amongst pri- 
 vate individuals tie may prove, but these individuals did not 
 disturb that peace, and concord, and unity, which Christ left to 
 his church, and which form some of the noblest marks — the 
 most powerful arguments of her divine origin. 
 
 He may show the existence of differences, not relating to 
 matters of faith or discipline in the church, but they are not dif- 
 ferences of opinion which place those who entertain them out 
 of the church. He may prove the existence of such differences, 
 but a breach of communion hie canijot establish. He asks for 
 proofs that Peter was appointed the head of the church. I think 
 
276 THE WANl OF UMTY OF 
 
 1 have furnished ample proofs of the fact. He asserts that it wi 
 robbing Christ of his rights. This is a mere play upon words. 
 There is no doubt that Christ in heaven is the sole and invisible 
 head of the church — but knowing the frailties of man, our Lord 
 deemed it necessary, in order to preserve the principle of unity, 
 to appoint a visible head of his church to act as his instrument 
 and agent upon earth. Is there ought in this derogatory from 
 the majesty of God 1 Is not the king the visible head of the 
 established church of England ? His majesty, no doubt, will 
 be highly pleased with Mr. Pope for denying his spiritual supe- 
 riority. I always imagined that his majesty was the head of the 
 Protestant church in these countries — the centre and bond of 
 connection to keep it together. He is to preserve the homilies 
 and the thirty-nine articles, and not to allow even the slightest 
 deviation to be made from them. They contain certain rules 
 respecting faith and discipline in the Protestant church, and the 
 king is bound by oath not to suffer the slightest deviation from 
 them. The king swears to support the establishment, and the 
 test act excludes all from situations unless they take oaths which 
 bind as to certain forms and rules of faith. The elements of 
 union have been scattered in the Protestant churches, and they 
 can never again be brought into combination. I should be glad 
 to know from Mr. Pope, what did our Saviour mean when he 
 said to Peter : 
 
 " Simon Barjona, lovest thou me more than these ; he saith to him, dear 
 Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him, Feed my Lambs," 
 John, xxi, 17. 
 
 Our Saviour repeated the interrogatory ; Peter made a similar 
 reply, and our Saviour again said ; '* Feed my Lambs." But 
 when he repeated the question a third time, Peter became 
 troubled, and exclaimed ; " Lord thou knowest all things — 
 Thou knowest that I love thee." Our Saviour then said to 
 him : " Feed my sheep." 
 
 Now, I defy the ingenuity of my friend to explain away these 
 words. This address was not made to the other Apostles, but 
 personally and individually to Peter. There is nothing in the 
 fold of Christ but sheep and lambs (clergy and laity) ; ovei 
 them Peter was appointed supreme pastor, and invested with the 
 authority of government. Our Lord afterwards says to Peter : 
 
 " I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever 
 tliou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever 
 tliou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." 
 
 Could Mr. Pope quote any text of scripture against me equally 
 as plain and obvious as the foregoing ? Was he able to adduce 
 any direct text in support of his private interpretation — while on 
 the other hand I proved all my doctrines by manifest texts of 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 277 
 
 scripture, and upon the words of Christ and his Apostles. Mr. 
 Pope endeavours to show that Peter could not be the successor 
 of Christ, as this evil would follow that the successor of Peter 
 would be a greater man than St. John the evangelist, who lived 
 after the death of Peter. To such straights has my opponent 
 been reduced. He cannot deny that Peter had a successor. 
 Why not prove that some difference on matters of faith arose 
 between him and St. John? But the successors of Peter were 
 blessed with humility, charity, and divine faith — the first thirty- 
 four of them suffered martydom. If they had happened to have 
 a difference, they would have recurred to St. John for his advice 
 and guidance — but that would not be denying their right to suc- 
 ceed Peter, as the visible head of the church on earth. 
 
 "If I then," said our Saviour, "being Lord and Master, have washed your 
 feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet." 
 
 That act, I affirm, with the Catholic church, to be an act of 
 humility, not a precept — but it is, to all appearance, a positive 
 precept, and I repeatedly called on my friend to show by what 
 authority he neglected to observe it. He drew a distinction 
 indeed between hot and cold climates, and the greater necessity 
 which exists for washing the feet in the former than in the latter. 
 But no such distinction is drawn in the text — the commandment 
 of the Saviour is not to be regulated by hot and cold countries. 
 He talks of the council of Jerusalem, and of Peter having 
 spoken first — if Peter had spoken last what would that be to the 
 argument? St. James gave a good advice, which was inspired 
 by the Holy Ghost, and because it was adopted by Peter, there- 
 fore Peter could not be the head of the Church ! This conclu- 
 sion is certainly not agreeable to the premises — He says that 
 no Pope claimed the title of ecumenical pastor until the year 
 600 — why there was no such word as ecumenical in existence 
 till that period. The word ' consubstantiality' is not in scrip- 
 ture, and does not occur till 300 years after the Apostles, when 
 we find it in the Athanasian creed, and the decrees of the coun- 
 cil of Nice. If Mr. Pope's argument then on this head be valid 
 against the supremacy of the Pope, it is equally valid against 
 the Athanasian creed, and he should deny both. I admit the 
 fact of Stephen throwing the body of the Pope into the Tyber, 
 and the greater scoundrel he was, I affirm, for so doing. I 
 admit there were some bad characters among the Popes. But 
 I have already drawn a distinction between infallibility and im- 
 peccability. Besides, I never said that the infallibility of the 
 Pope formed a portion of my creed. Christ promised his 
 church that she would never fail in the faith, but that promise 
 never implied, that her children should be incapable of sin. As 
 I have already told you. ^he^e were eleven monstrous bad Popea 
 
 24 
 
278 THE WANT OF UNITT OF 
 
 out of nearly three hundred good and virtuous characters whicb 
 adorned the chair of Peter. Surely that is a vast majority to 
 counterbalance the few bad names. Honorius was not a heretic. 
 It was not for heresy that he was deposed, but because he had 
 been put into the chair by temporal power. He was suspected 
 of being favourable to the Monotholites ; but I deny that it was 
 ever proved that he was a Monotholite himself. I venture to 
 affirm, that Mr. Pope will be called to an account for having 
 denied the king's supremacy ; and it will be necessary, perhaps, 
 for some of his friends to intercede for him with his majesty, 
 lest, like Chancellor Moore and Bishop Fisher, he be, without 
 further ceremony, committed to the tower. In that case he 
 may, for once, have to acknowledge the efficacy of the inierces- 
 sion of saints. I maintain, that isqevg is applied in the New Tes- 
 tament to the Apostles. But whether it be, or not, does not 
 much matter for the argument. There is no sacrificing priest 
 in the strict sense of the term, but Christ himself, who is at once 
 th(; priest and victim, who is offered up as a perpetual sacrifice 
 to fulfill the prophecy of Malachy, that in all parts of the world 
 a sacrifice shall be offered to the Lord. 
 
 " P'or f.oni tlie rising of the sun to the going down of the same, my name 
 is great among the Gentiles ; and in every place a sacrifice is made, and a 
 clean oblation offered to my name ; because my name is great among the 
 Gentiles, saith the Lord of Hosts." 
 
 If there had been only a single sacrifice offered up in Jeru- 
 salem, according to Mr. Pope, then this prophecy of Malachy 
 would not have been fulfilled. Mr. Pope has, by weak and idle 
 arguments, endeavoured to show that there could have been no 
 successor to Christ. If Christ left a sacrifice and appointed a 
 successor in his church, neither blasphemy nor wickedness can 
 be imputed to those who believe the fact. — Christ promised that 
 his church would never fail, and that he would remain with her 
 in spirit, till the consummation of ages. But Mr. Pope, to sus- 
 tain his argument, must prove that the whole church was for the 
 space of 900 years buried in darkness and error. Let those 
 who will, believe it — I want not to make the Pope greater than 
 other men. He is, like myself, a man, liable to the frailties of hu- 
 nian nature. The infallibility of the Pope is no doctrine of mine. 
 
 Mr. Pope says, that he does not differ on essentials with the 
 church of England, and yet he denies more than one half of her 
 articles of faith. Either he holds them essential or he does not. 
 In the latter case his separation is unjustifiable, and he evidently 
 shows that he misunderstands the maxims of the gospel : he rends 
 <he seamless garment of Christ without cause. He should not 
 for trifling reasons disturb that harmony which Christ ordained 
 should subsist between the members of his church — he should 
 
THE 'PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 279 
 
 continue to hold communion with the bishops of the estahhshed 
 church, and not set up a conventicle of his own. He should not 
 break communion ne in minima pariicula. The holy Fathers 
 held schism and disunion to be mortal sins. Mr. Pope spoke 
 of a letter which he had received from London, and which he 
 would have us suppose came from a reformed Catholic, another 
 Blanco White. But latet anguis in herha, I got a copy of the 
 same too. I suspect that it came from the opposite party, and 
 was intended to frighten me from this discussion. It was proba- 
 bly a ruse employed to make me retreat, that my friend then, 
 instead of suffering a defeat, might raise the shout of victory. 
 
 Mr. Pope. — As to the word leqevg in the 5th of the apoca- 
 lypse, the term in that passage is clearly bestowed upon pres- 
 byters in heaven. My friend has appealed to any learned men 
 on the subject. He may prefer an ecclesiastic ; I therefore 
 nominate Mr. Singer ; let Mr. Maguire name his referee. [JVlr. 
 Clynch ivas then named by JVfr. JWaguire,'] Mr. Maguire has 
 not answered my quotation from the Psalms, on the ground in 
 which I made it. I brought it forward merely as evidence, that 
 unity, abstractedly considered, is not a proof of the true church. 
 As to the distinction of essentials and non-essentials, I have 
 shown that it was recognized by St. Paul, in the differences 
 which existed in the church of Rome in his day, and which he 
 allowed to continue. The scriptures, therefore, does make this 
 distinction. The sacred volume, Mr. Maguire asserts, requires 
 an agreement in discipline as well as in matters of faith ; and 
 yet he before informed us that the church of Rome agrees, not 
 in matters of discipline, but in matters of faith, and has therefore 
 contradicted himself. I have already entered into the question 
 of the apocryphal books, and shall not now reconsider it. Ac- 
 cording to Mr. Maguire, the church has two heads — Christ and 
 the Pope : so it appears that Mr. Maguire thereby makes the 
 church of Christ a monster. He refers me to the Saviour's 
 address to Peter; "Feed my sheep.'' — Augustine, (De Agone 
 Christ, c. 30) and Ambrose, (De Dign. Sacred, p. 336) as I 
 have already shown, declare it as their opinion, that Christ gave 
 this privilege not to Peter only, but to all pastors. As Peter 
 had denied the Saviour, our Lord saw it necessary to re-instate 
 him in the apostolic office ; thrice did he address him in doing 
 so, in reference to his threefold denial. Here observe, that 
 Irenceus informs us, that Peter was not the only founder of the 
 church of Rome, but Paul also : 
 
 " Fundantes igitur et instuentes beati apostoli (Petrus et Paiilus,) ecclesiam 
 (Romanan) Lino episcopatum administrandae ecclesiee tradiderunt. Suc- 
 cedit auternei Anacletus. Post eum tertio loco ab apostolis episcopatura 
 sortitur Clemens." 
 
£80 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 "The blessed Apostles, therefore, (Peter and Paul,) founding and arrang- 
 ing the (Roman) church, deUvcred the episcopate for governing the church to 
 Linus. But Anacletus succeeds to him: after him, in the third place, from 
 the apostlesy Clement obtains the episcopate." 
 
 My friend has said, if Cnrist appointed the Popes as supreme, 
 the exercise of their office would not be an assumption — but the 
 appointment is the very matter at issue. We have no ground 
 either from reason or scripture to prove, that the Pope should 
 be regarded as supreme bishop. As to the supremacy of Peter: 
 if Peter was bishop of Rome, is it not remarkable, that Paul, in 
 writing to the church of Rome, should not mention the name of 
 Peter ? and after Paul had gone to that city, is it not strange 
 that he should make no mention of Peter in his epistles written 
 from that city to several churches. In the 4th of Colossians, 
 10th and 11th verse, he says, that only Aristachus, and Mark, 
 and Justus, were his helpers in the kingdom of God : if Peter 
 had been at Rome, would he not mention him as a fellow-helper? 
 On his trial all fled, — (2 Timothy, iv, 16.) Are we to suppose 
 that Peter forsook him in the hour of his extremity. If Peter 
 . were really the bishop of Rome, I think you will agree with me, 
 that he was at least non-resident. I am told by Mr. Maguire 
 that there were at least eleven bad Popes. This is a great 
 acknowledgment. Genebrard, a Roman Catholic writer, how- 
 ever, informs us, that 
 
 "Per annos fere 150, Pontifice circiter 50, a Jonanne scilicet octavo usque 
 ad Leonem IX, a virtute majorem prorsus defecerunt, apostatici potius quam 
 apostolici." ^^ For nearly 150 years, about fifty Popes, namely, from John the 
 8th to Leo the 9th, revolted altogether from the virtue of their predecessors, being 
 rather apostate than apostolic,''* 
 
 So that we have about 50 bad Popes instead of 11. A proof 
 that Pope Honorius was a Monotholite heretic, shall appear in 
 the printed report.* 
 
 My friend has admitted, that there is no such officer 
 
 IN THE church OF ChRIST AS A SACRIFICING PRIEST. Mr. 
 
 Maguire has quoted a passage from the book of Malachy. I 
 hold that the oblation there spoken of, is the sacrifice of praise 
 and thanksgiving, and spiritual service : the repitition of the 
 sacrifice of Christ would imply, that the sacrifice on Calvary 
 was insufficient. 
 
 ♦The following passage from Dupin, a Roman Catholic historian, is given in proof 
 of the above statement : 
 
 *' The Roman church has so plainly acknowledged that Pope Honorius did advance 
 the error of the Monotholites, that, in the ancient breviary, she declares that he was 
 condemned with the other Monotholites, tor maintaining the doctrine of one will. 
 * * ******* 
 
 It is more just and rational, to give credit to the one general council, where matters 
 are examined to the bottom, than to sentiments of some private men, who judge of 
 this fact according to their own interest oi prejudices. This will stand for certain, 
 Chen, that Honorius was condemned, and justlytoo, as an heretic by the 6th council. 
 — Dupin's Eccles. Hist. vol. ii, page 16, 3d ed'tion, Dublin, 1723. 
 
THE PROIESTANT CHURCHES. 281 
 
 **I beseech you by the mercies of God, (saith the apostle) that ye present 
 Vcur bodies a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable unto God, which is your 
 reasonable service." — (Rom. xii. 1.) 
 
 I called your attention to a letter which I had received. It ia 
 strange that the same idea should have occurred to my mind, 
 relative to the writer. I imagined, that it came from a friend 
 of Mr. Maguire's. I here solemnly declare, that I know not 
 the author, or any thing whatever of the matter, save, that the 
 letter came through the post-office to me. I will now show you 
 that divisions have existed in the church of Rome. The Fran- 
 ciscans held the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, the 
 Dominicans denied it. We read of the battles between the 
 Dominicans and Jesuits in two popedoms — the Dominicans 
 urging the doctrine of unconditional degrees. The Jesuits and 
 Jansenists maintained a warfare from 1642 to 1705. As the 
 members of the church at Corinth were censured by the Apostles 
 ^or saying, "I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas ;" 
 h">w can these parties escape a similar censure, by their prefer- 
 ence for one person as their peculiar general — one saying I am 
 of Benedict — another, I am of Francis — and another, 1 am of 
 Dominick. In the controversy between the Jesuite and Janse- 
 nists, there appeared from the press, the " Torch of St. Augus- 
 tin,'' "Snuffers for St. Augustin's Torch,'' and lastly, "A Gag 
 for the Jansenists." Soon after the Bull Unigenitus was issued, 
 i!.nd by this document the purest part of the church of Rome was 
 put down — witness the demolition of Port Royal. 
 
 " The Bull Unigenitus," says that most learned Roman Catholic, Doctor 
 O'Connor, "was condemned by the Sorbonne immediately after the death of 
 Louis ; and the Jesuit Le Tellier, the Monarch's confessor, was banished to 
 La Fleche, loaded with public execration. The condemnation of the ninety- 
 first proposition, by Us enforcing obedience to unjust censures, ivas felt to be 
 repugnant to moral obligations. The refusal of the sacraments to those who 
 would not subscribe the bull, disturbed the tranquillity of private life, and 
 caused an insurrection of the magistracy, so that those who persisted in the 
 refusal, were banished the kingdom. Benedict the fourteenth, fearful of the 
 storm which thickened every day, issued a brief, declaring that, since he 
 could not condemn the bulls of his predecessors, the bull should be registered, 
 but that those who rejected it, ought to have the sacraments at their own risk. 
 
 I wonder, under such circumstances, what priest would have 
 administered the sacraments 1 
 
 " This political middle course was called the law of silence, and caused the 
 greatest scandal of all. The Parliaments, disgusted rather than edified by 
 this pohtical middle course in matters of rehgioji, protested against it, and 
 utterly suppressed the bull, as repugnant to the liberties of the Gallican 
 Church." — Columbanus, 6, xx. 
 
 My friend has told us, that the Jesuits and Jansenists, the 
 Franciscans and Dominicans, never broke the bond of Chris- 
 tian charity. It is notorious that the Jesuits, and the secular oi 
 
 24* 
 
282 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 parish priests, are not on the most amicable terms, the lattei 
 being jealous of their interference. We shall see how thejF 
 acted. Parsons, the Jesuit, writing agiinst tlie secular priests, 
 thus describes them : — 
 
 •*They be mad heads, a^.ditious libellers, notorious caluminators, factious, 
 turbulent, of scandalous l: res, writing egregious, malicious untruths ; impu- 
 dent, factious, wicked slanderers; they are rebels to, and betrayers of the 
 Catholic cause." — Parson^s *Bpologue, chap, iv, p. 8. 
 
 On the other side, the Seculars called the Jesuits ** Schisma- 
 tics, Donatists, Arians ; who make religion a mere political 
 Atheistical. devi(;e." And Watson calls Parsons 
 
 "An Atheal strategemitor (page 160, Gtuodlibets ;) a bastardly vicar of 
 hell ; a judge paramount on earth under the devil ; a Wolsey in ambition, 
 Midas in immundicity, a traitor in action." 
 
 And again, he says of all the Jesuits in England, that 
 " They surfeited sorer than Heliogabalus ; that they were taught by their 
 Arch-Rabbis to maintain (with their equivocations) dissimulation, detraction, 
 sedition ; that they were busied in making strife between kings and kings, 
 states and states, priests and priests, raising rebellions, murdering princes, 
 stirring uproars every where ; men unworthy to be called religious or Catholic, 
 or Christian ; for, however they may boast of their perfection, their holiness, 
 their meditation, and their exercises, yet their plots are heathenish and satani- 
 cal, fit to set Machiavel, Lucian ; yea, Don Lucifer himself to school. 
 Wretched Jesuits, who would have all Catholics depend on the arch-priest, 
 when the arch-priest depended on John Garnet, Garnet upon Parsons, and 
 Parsons on the devil." 
 
 Mr. Maguire says, that there is no sacrificing priest; and 
 yesterday, in accordance with the doctrine of his church, he 
 observed, that the sacrifice of the Eucharist is offered in an 
 unbloody manner. I beg to remind him that the Bible says, 
 
 "WITHOUT SHEDDING OF BLOOD THERE IS NO REMISiSION." 
 
 (Heb. ix, 22.) With respect to transubstantiation, I beg to 
 read you an extract from Gage's Survey of the W^est Indies. 
 Lon. 1655, page 197 ; formerly a priest of the church of Rome. 
 
 " One day, saving mass in the chief church, after the consecration of the 
 bread, being with my eyes shut at that mental prayer, which the church of 
 Rome calleth the Memento for their dead, there came from behind the altar 
 a mouse, which running about, came to the very bread or wafer-god of the 
 Papists, and taking it in his mouth ran away with it ; not being perceived by 
 any of the people who were at mass, for that the altar was high by reason of 
 the steps going up to it, and the people far beneath. But as soon as I opened 
 my eyes to go on with my mass, and perceived my God stolen away, I looked 
 about the altar and saw the mouse running away with it ; which on a sudden 
 did so stupify me, that I knew not well what to do or say ; and caUing my 
 wits together, I thought that if I should take no notice of the mischance, and 
 any body else in the church should, I might justly be questioned by the In- 
 quisition ; but if I should call on the people to look for the sacrament, then I 
 might be but chid and rebuked for my carelessness, which, of the two, 1 
 thought would be more easily borne than the rigour of the Inquisition. — 
 Whereupon, not knowing what the people had seen, I turned myself unto 
 them, and called thorn nntf the altar, and told them plainly, that whil;it I was 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 28? 
 
 in my memmto prayers and meditations, a mouse had carried away the- 
 sacrament; and that I knew not what to do, unless tbey would help me to 
 find it out again. The people called a priest that was alt hand, who presently 
 brought in more of his coat; and, as if their God by this had been eaten up, 
 they presently prepared to find out the thief, as if they would eat up the 
 mouse that had so assaulted and abused their God. '1 hey lighted candles 
 and torches to find out the malefactor in his secret and hidden places of the 
 wall ; and after much searching and enquiry for the sacrilegious beast, they 
 found at last in a hole of the wall, the sacrament, half eaten up, which, with 
 great joy, they took out ; and, as if the ark had been brought again from tlie 
 Philistines to the Israelites, so they rejoiced for their new-found God, whom, 
 with many people now resorted to the church, with many lights of candles 
 and torches, with joyful and solemn music they carried about the church in 
 procession. Myself was present upon my knees, shaking and quivering for 
 what might be done unto me, and expecting my doom and judgment ; and 
 as the sacrament passed by me, i observed in it the marks and signs of the 
 teeth of the mouse, as they are to be seen in a piece of cheese gnawn an^i 
 eaten by it. 
 
 " This struck me with such horror, that I cared not at that present moment 
 whether I had been torn in a thousand pieces, for denying pubhcly that 
 mouse-eaten God ; I called to my best memory all philosophy concernina 
 substance and accident, and resolved within myself that what i saw gnawn, 
 was not an accident, but some real substance, eaten and devoured by that 
 vermin, which certainly was fed and nourished by what it had eaten ; and 
 philosophy well teacheth, "substantia cibi (non accidentis) convertitur in 
 substantiam aliti:" the substance {not the accident of the food or meat) is con- 
 verted 01 turned into the substance of the thing fed by it and alimented. Now, 
 here I knew that this mouse had fed upon some substance, or else how couk. 
 the marks of the teeth so plainly appear ? But no Papist will be willing tc 
 answer that it fed on the substance of Christ's body — ergo, by good conse- 
 quence it follows, that it fed upon the substance of bread ; and so transub- 
 stantiation here, in my judgment, was confuted by a mouse; which mean 
 and base creature God chose to convince me of my former errors, and made 
 me now resolve upon what many years before I had doubted, that certainly 
 the point of transubstantiation, taught by the church of Rome, is most dam- 
 nable and erroneous ; for, besides what before, I observed, it contradicteth 
 the philosophical axiom teaching that "duo contradictoria non possint simul 
 et semel de eodem verificari," tioo contradictories cannot at once and at the self 
 same time be said and ve^-ijied of the same thing; but here it was so ; for here 
 in Rome's judgment and opinion, Christ's body was gnawn and eaten, and 
 at the same time the same body, in another place, and upon another altar, in 
 the hands of another priest, was not eaten and gnawn ; therefore here are 
 two contradictories verified of the same body of Christ — to wit, it was eaten 
 and gnawn, and it was not eaten and gnawn. These impressions at that 
 time were so great in me, that I resolved within myself that bread really and 
 truly was eaten upon that altai, and by no means Christ's glorious body 
 which is in heaven, and cannot be upon earth subject to the hunger or vio 
 lence of a creature." 
 
 From the circumstance which I now read, we can clearly see 
 that transubstantiation has no foundation in fact. 
 
 In the next place, permit me to remark, if a church be an^ 
 swerable for all who break from her communion, then is the 
 church of Rome answerable, upon her own showing, for the 
 various heresies which have from time to time existed. She 
 will not perhaps assent to this doctrine ; why therefore should 
 ehe charg ; c.rj Protestant communion with the faults of thosa 
 
.i84 THE WANT OF UNITY OP 
 
 , who depart out of it ? If the mother be not anuwerable fot the 
 brood which leave her, then no Protestant church is answerable 
 but for those within its pale. 
 
 Upon the authority of J. K. L. it is evident that there are 
 differences in the church of Rome. Scarcely had he entered a 
 foreign univernity for the completion of his studies, when he 
 himself informs us, that he — 
 
 "Found himself surrounded by the disciples or admirers of D'Alembert, 
 Rosseau, and Voltaire ; that he frequently traversed in company with them 
 the halls of the Inquisition, and discussed in the area of the holy office those 
 arguments and sophisms, for the suppression of which this awful tribunal was 
 ostensibly employed ; and that at that time, the ardour of youth, the genius of 
 the place, the spirit of the times, as well as the examples of his companions, 
 prompted him to inquire into all things, and to deliberate, whether he should 
 take his station among the infidels, or remain attached to Christianity." 
 Letters on the State of Ireland, by J. K. L. 1825, p. 55. 
 
 Such is the authority from J. K. L. I assert, that the church 
 of Rome is divided as to a standard Bible. The council of 
 Trent gave its opinion, and pronounced its imprimatur, on an 
 edition of the Vulgate, before it was pubhshed ! " Quam emen- 
 datissime imprimatur," are the words of the council. The 
 expression, " quam emendatissime," " as correct as possible^'''' 
 implies the inability of the church of Rome to furnish an infalli- 
 ble edition. I asserted that the Sixtine and Clementine editions 
 differed in two thousand places. Mr. Maguire says that he has 
 a copy of the Sixtine Bible. I again call upon him to produce 
 it. I shall now read to you an extract, in order to show that he 
 will find great difficulty in producing a copy : 
 
 "Biblia Sacra, Vulgata Edit. Sixti r,*jussu reco^nita atque edita Roijn, 
 typis Vatic, fol. This is the remarkable edition of Sixtus V, suppressed by 
 his successor Clement VIII, who reprinted it in 1592 more correctly. This 
 has corrections pasted over it in great abundance : and nothing but its great 
 rarity makes it bring any price. This celebrated and scarce edition of the 
 Bible is called Sixtus the Fifth's, having been translated and printed under 
 the direction of that pontiff. As soon as it appeared, it made a considerable 
 noise in the church ; but on account of the many alterations from the ordi- 
 nary text, it was suppressed and proscribed after the death of Sixtus. The 
 Duke of Grafton purchased one on large paper, at Mr. Paris's sale, for 64/. 
 5s. Od. — (Dr. Adam Clarke's Bibliographical Dictionary, vol. i, p. 202.) 
 
 Let Mr. Maguire now produce his Sixtine Bible. 
 
 Divisions exist in the church of Rome, as to the extent of 
 the temporal power of the Pope. On this subject Bellarmine 
 tells us — 
 
 " There are three opinions. First, that the Pope, by divine right, has an 
 unlimited power (plenissnnam potestatem; over the whole world in political 
 as well as ecclesiastical matters. A second opinion (which he calls a heresy, 
 rather than an opinion) is in the opposite extreme ; that tlie Pope has not by 
 divine right, any temporal power ; nor can in any way command secular 
 princes, much less depose them, even though they may deserve to be other- 
 wise deposed : nay, that it is contrary to the law of God that the spiritual 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 285 
 
 and temporal swords be both committed to the same hand. The third 
 opinion lies between the two former, and is commonly held by Catholic divines; 
 namely, that the Pope, as Pope, has not directly and immediately any tem- 
 poral, but only a spiritual power; nevertheless, that by reason of the spiritual^ 
 he has at least indirectly, a certain power, and that supreme in temporals.'''' — Da 
 Rom. Pont. 1. iv, c. 5. § 15. 
 
 The council of Lyons maintained the right of the Pope to 
 depose princes. If I were a Roman Catholic, and were anxious 
 to know whether the Pope possessed that right, although if a 
 Trans-alpine, I must believe the doctrine, how can I reconcile 
 it with the declaration of the Apostle : 
 
 " He that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God ; and they 
 that resist, purchase to themselves damnation ; for princes are not a terror to 
 the good work but to the evil." — Rom. xiii, 1, 2, 3. 
 
 Delahogue endeavours to get out of difficulties of this nature, 
 by saying, 
 
 " The church wished to define nothing concerning the celebrated contro- 
 versy between the French and Italian churches, as is evident from those 
 things which were done in the council of Trent, and from what we shall 
 mention in the article concerning the prerogatives of the Roman pontiff 
 Therefore neither of these definitions is sufficiently clear to demand assent : 
 hence different opinions concerning this question do not militate against unity 
 of doctrine, which consists in this, that all doctrines are assented to, which 
 have been clearly defined by a council assuredly general." — p. 51. certo 
 cecumenica. 
 
 So that a man is left in doubt on such momentous points, by 
 an infallible church, she not having defined the matter with 
 sufficient clearness : a man therefore may maintain opinions 
 different from those of others without any breach of unity. 
 Upon the authority of Dr. Doyle, there is no standard as to 
 doctrine in the church of Rome. In his examination on oath 
 before the House of Lords, p. 502, he observes, 
 
 " Besides the articles enumerated in the creed of Pius IV, there are others 
 to be received as of faith. These are defined in the sacred canons of which 
 iojue are received entire, some in part, and of which no account can be obtained 
 from the formularies to which the Roman Catholic bishops have referred as 
 authentic." 
 
 Dr. Doyle here states that some of the sacred canons are to 
 be received entire, some in part. Who then is to decide, what 
 canons are to be received, and what rejected? How, I would 
 ask, is the ignorant peasant to decide] Is he to go to his priest? 
 The matter, in truth, resolves itself into this, that the priest is 
 the infallible organ of the church in the estimation of the people. 
 The differences in the church of Rome are also great as tQ 
 councils. The French church receives the council of Con- 
 stance in toiOj others do not. Bellarmine gives us the varieties 
 of opinion as to general councils. He furnishes a list of general 
 councils, partly confirmed and partly rejected ; (De Concilii^ 
 J- i, c. G.) and (in c. v. and de Rom. Pont. 1. iv, c. 11,) he sajs 
 
286 THE WANT OF UNITY JP 
 
 that those councils allowed to be general were njurcd by tha 
 interpolations of heretics. The council of Basil once oecume- 
 nical, afterwards became, we are told, a schismatical conventi- 
 cle. — (Bellarmine de Eccl. Mil. c. 16.) Is there then any 
 standard of faith to be found in that church in which such doubts 
 exist, as to its councils and canons. 
 
 The council of Constance, the Pope's legate concuning, 
 decreed that a council was above the Pope. — (Bellarm. de Rom. 
 Pont. 1. ii, c. 11.) That of Constance deposed three Popes, 
 and set up another ; while the council of Florence and Trent 
 decreed, that the Pope is above a council. Here we have 
 council against council. He has not informed us, what are the 
 characteristics of a general council. Is it the orthodoxy of jhe 
 doctrine which is to characterize a council, or is it the council 
 which is to characterize the doctrine ? If the former, why should 
 the council of Tyre be rejected, which was summoned by the 
 same authority as that of Nice 1 If the latter, who is to decid« 
 upon the characteristics of a general council 1 
 
 Thus I have gone in some degree over the same ground of 
 argument that I traversed the second day ; by which I showed 
 you that infallibility does not exist in the church of Rome. 
 Some of the arguments which destroy its claim to infallibility, 
 it is plain, overturn its pretensions to unity. The first councii 
 of Lyons has been doubted by some. The fifth Lateran by 
 others. The fifth council, assembled at Constantinople, was 
 held in defiance of Pope Vigilius ; yet it has been received by 
 his successors ; and in fine throughout " the church" as ai 
 oecumenical council. Vide Baron, in Justiniano et Vigilio 
 tom. 7, et Sirmund. Praefat. in Secund. 
 
 Let Mr. Maguire come to the point — let him, if he please, 
 bring forward his catalogue of sects, and his stories about fana- 
 ticism ; but let him also answer my questions, why councils 
 have been against councils ? and how his church can escape the 
 anathema, which the council of Ephesus pronounced on any 
 who should add to .the Nicene confession of faith ? 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — I called upon my friend Mr. Pope to prove 
 that there is a distinction drawn in scripture between essentials 
 and non-essentials. What he has adduced from St. Paul to the 
 Corinthians makes against him. St. Paul rebukes the Corin- 
 thians because some amongst them said they were of Paul, 
 others of Cephas, others of Apollos, and others of Christ ; and 
 he condemns their indulging in such frivolous contests. But 
 faith, morality, and discipline had not been violated, and it is 
 very foolish to bring this text forward as a proof that difl^erences 
 i-ere allowed to exist. St. Paul on all occasions insisted upoa 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 28'^ 
 
 the necessity of charity ; he tells us himself, that if he possessed 
 faith sufficient to move mountains — that is, a faith of the strongest 
 description — and had not charity, it would profit him nothing. 
 In this instance the Corinthians were guilty of a breach of charity, 
 not of faith or discipline ; they were making contentions and 
 divisions as to the superior preaching of Paul or of Cephas, and 
 St. Paul calls upon them equally to give up such frivolous con- 
 tentions, and to Uve in charity. This text, though quoted by 
 Mr. Pope, obviously makes against him, for here we iind the 
 Corinthians condemned for differences which did not involve 
 matters of faith, morality, or discipline. 
 
 The arguments adduced by Mr. Pope against my church, are 
 founded upon a great misconception of her doctrines. He has 
 throughout manifested a surprising ignorance of her real tenets. 
 He has resorted to a negative argument to prove a positive fact. 
 Because St. Paul, in his epistle to the Romans does not speak 
 of Peter, therefore Peter was never at Rome. Because St. 
 Paul wrote an epistle to the Romans relative to the discharge 
 of their moral and spiritual duties, and helped Peter in his mis- 
 . sion, therefore St. Peter was not the successor of Jesus Christ 
 upon earth. — A notable conclusion truly ! 
 
 I affirm that our Saviour appointing a visible head for his 
 church upon earth, acted in nowise derogatory to his heavenly 
 character, but did that which was worthy of divine wisdom. 
 My friend, by negative arguments, seeks to deprive us of a 
 visible head — now Catholics acknowledge the Pope to be the 
 successor of St. Peter, the visible head of the church on earth, 
 and the agent and instrument of the invisible head, Jesus Christ, 
 who is hoayen. You are to decide whether you will believe the 
 holy Fathers, or my friend Mr. Pope — you must reject either 
 one or other, tor they are directly opposed. Mr. Pope has 
 made a quotation from Genebrardus. 1 affirm that if the context 
 of the author be examined, it will not be found to prove any 
 thing against Catholic doctrine. Mr. Pope seeks to establish 
 the fact of disunion in the church by a reference to the battles 
 amongst the Jesuits and Dominicans on the subject of the Con- 
 ception. With regard to every thing which has not been defined 
 by the Catholic church, every Catholic is at liberty to entertain 
 his private opinions ; tne church has not thought proper to define 
 any thing but what is necessary for the preservation of the de- 
 posit of faith. Mr. Pope recurs to the argument relative to the 
 sacrificing prieste I have already said, that taking the words in 
 the strict and rigorous sense, Christ can alone be called the 
 sacrificing priest. He is the Assistans Pontifex futurorum 
 bonorum. Christ himself is both the priest and the victim, or 
 ti^ St Augustin has it, he is the priest himself offering, and 
 
288 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 himself the victim. The priest pronounces the words : Christ 
 performs the action, therefore the priest himself does not tran- 
 substantiate. With regard to Columbanus, I deny that he is to 
 be quoted on this subject as an authority against the Catholic 
 church. His lucubrations on this subject have not been ap- 
 proved of. It is remarkable, that Mr. Pope quotes as* Catholic 
 historians those only who have risen in opposition to the recog- 
 nised and lawful authority of the church. 
 
 I now come to the man who was converted by the mouse. 
 What a powerful argument against the doctrine of transubstan- 
 tiation ! Mr. Pope imagines that he has caught me in a mouse- 
 trap, but I will show that I can squeeze myself out of it. I 
 worship a Saviour, who suffered himself to be spat upon and to 
 be scoffed at. In his divine humility he endured all, and would 
 not retaliate upon his enemies. He was treated as a common 
 malefactor — he was crucified on the cross between two thieves — 
 he was covered with every species of indignity and contumely, 
 yet he prayed to his heavenly Father to forgive his enemies, for 
 they knew not what they did. He was a scandal to the Jews, 
 and a folly to the Gentiles. The indignities which our Saviour 
 suffered from the Jews, should be an argument, according to 
 the principles of Mr. Pope, against the divinity of the Redeemer 
 — an argument which has been plausibly put forward, both by 
 Jews and Gentiles. He says, the church of Rome is answera- 
 ble for all heretics. They had been her adopted children, no 
 doubt, but they abused their right — they rejected her authority, 
 and she banished them from her on account of their scandalous 
 conduct, as rebellious and unnatural children. They are gone 
 out from her. He who left the ark of Noah was drowned in 
 the deluge. 
 
 I defy my friend to point out any substantive error in the Six- 
 tine edition of the Bible, or to prove that any material alterations 
 were made in the Clementine edition. The council of Trent 
 commanded that a copy should be made out guam emendaiissime. 
 Though there was nothing substantially erroneous in the edition 
 then extant, yet it required many verbal emendations : accord- 
 ingly, as he ought, Clement had a pure and correct copy of the 
 Bible made out. Mr. Pope has recurred to the question of infal- 
 libility, but I shall not be drawn by such a manoeuvre from the 
 subject before us. The doctrine of the priest may be infallibly 
 true, although he himself may be very fallible. The priest is the 
 organ of infallibility, as long as he teaches the true doctrine of 
 the Catholic church ; and I here publicly assure you, that if a 
 priest broached any doctrine contrary to that church, when preach- 
 ing from his altar, the people would close their ears against th-e 
 new doctrine, and either turn him out of the chattel or retire 
 
THE PROTESTAPtT CHURCHES. 289 
 
 themselves. Mr. Pope has again alluded to the general coun- 
 cils, and has endeavoured to raise some cavilUng objectior s with 
 respect to the council of Basil. Though that council had been 
 lawfully convened, yet, when eighty-nine Arian bishops were 
 introduced by the Emperor, the Catholic bishops left the assem- 
 bly, and refused to sit in council with the heretics. This is the 
 council, forsooth, which Mr. Pope quotes against me ! I already 
 told you, that in the .commencement the council was regularly 
 convened, and therefore legitimate. Here lies the quibble of 
 my ingenious friend. But the junta of Arian bishops created 
 disgust and alarm in the minds of the orthodox bishops, and they 
 accordingly quitted the heretical assembly. I have here a list 
 which T shall now read to you, containing an enumeration of the 
 various Protestant sectarians : 
 
 " Lutherans, Calvinists, Agricolists, Anabaptists, Re-baptizers, Storkitee, 
 Carlostadians, the three latter banished from Wittemberg by Luther for heresy, 
 Muncer (executed for rebelhon ; 7000 Anabaptists killed :) Adamites, A.po9- 
 lolics, Tacitums, Perfects, Innocents, Libertines, Sabattarians, Clancularians, 
 Manifestarians, Weepers, Rejoicers, Indifferents, Sanguinarians, Antima- 
 rians (a sect of Anabaptists;) Anidronicans, Antitrinitarians, Bacularians 
 (a sect of Anabaptists, who deemed it a crime to have any other weapon 
 than a staff;) Puritans, (a sect of rigid Calvinists, that indulged in various 
 absurdities ; some have killed cats for-xjatching mice on a Sunday, but scru- 
 pulously deferred the execution till Monday ; others have knocked out the 
 heads of their barrels of beer for working on a Sunday, &c, &c, ;) Ctuakers, 
 Rustics, Insurrectionists, Sandemanians, by John Glass — Kiss-of-charity 
 boys, Love-feasts, Seceders, Shakers, Socinians, Southcottians, Swedenbor- 
 gians, or New Jerusalemites, Theophilanthropists, headed by Tom Paine, 
 Universalists, or Salvation every where, Ubiquitarians, Zuinglians, Muggle- 
 tonians, New-hghts, Seekers, Armenians, David-Georgians, their author pro- 
 claimed himself the Messiah, Tunkers (not Tinkers,) they deny eternal 
 punishment. Episcopalians, Famihsts, or Family of Love, their author held 
 himself above Christ, Fifth-monarchy-men, Illuminati, Inspired boys, Inde- 
 pendents, Infernalians, held Jesus went to hell and was tormented there, 
 Johnsonians, denjr the Trinity and pre-existence of Christ, Jumpers, Groan- 
 ers, Laughers, Latitudinarians, Methodists, Robinsonians,Brownists, Ranters, 
 Baptists, Pedobaptists, cum multus aliis." 
 
 Here we find tinkers and cobblers, and other such persons, 
 setting up as the preachers of the word of God. Every one of 
 those sects contends bitterly against the principles of the others 
 and all of them differ more from each other than we do from the 
 church of England. 
 
 Mr. Pope has retailed to you a blasphemous story relative to 
 the blessed Eucharist, upon the credit of an apostate priest. I 
 think it quite unworthy of a foTmal reply. I shall merely give 
 you the following story by way of antithesis — it describes pretty 
 accurarely the frantic fits produced by the imaginary workings 
 of a certain spirit upon the imagination, highly sublimated with 
 the pride and self-importance cf private judgment The story 
 IS related of a pious Puritan, who, in the presence of our tra\ eller, 
 
 25 
 
290 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 had executed holy justice on his favourite cat for an irnp'ouE 
 violation of the Sabbath — 
 
 Veni Banbury, oh ! profanum ! 
 Ubi vide Puritanurr* 
 Felem facientera fiirem 
 duia Sabbato stravit murem. 
 Arrived at Banbury, oh ! profane ! 
 I there beheld a Puritan, 
 In pious rage hang up torn cat 
 For catching on Lord's day a rat 
 
 I shall now read to you an extract from Dudithius, a learned 
 Protestant divine, in his epistle to Beza : 
 
 " What sort of people are our Protestants, struggling to and fro, and carriea 
 about with every wind of doctrine, sometimes to this side, sometimes to that 7 
 You may, perhaps, know what their sentiments in matters of religion are to- 
 day ; but you can never certainly tell what they will be to-morrow. In what 
 article of religion do these churches agree which have cast off the bishop of 
 Rome ? Examine all from top to bottom, and you will scarce find one thing 
 affirmed by one, which was not immediately condemned by another for 
 wicked doctrine." 
 
 The same confusion of opinions was described by an English 
 Protestant, the learned Dr. Walton, about the middle of last 
 century, in his preface to his Polyglott, where he says — 
 
 " Aristarchus heretofore could scarce find seven wise men in Greece ; but 
 with us, scarce are to be found so many idiots. For all are doctors, all are 
 divinely learned ; there is not so much as the meanest fanatic or jackpudding, 
 who does not give you his own dreams for the word of God. The bottomless 
 pit seems to have been set open, from whence a smoke has arisen which has 
 darkened the heavens and the stars, and locusts have come out with stings, a 
 numerous race of sectaries and heretics, who have renewed all the ancient 
 heresies, and invented many monstrous opinions of their own. These have 
 filled our cities, villages, camps, houses, nay, our pulpits too, and lead the 
 poor deluded people with them to the pit of perdition." 
 
 Such is the opinion of Dr. Walton, who will not be considered 
 a light authority on the subject. I can also produce another ex- 
 cellent Protestant authority to the same effect: — no less than that 
 of Baxter, the great oracle and organ of the sect of Puritans : — 
 
 " He who is out of the church is without the teaching, the holy worship, 
 the prayers and discipline of the church ; and is out of the way where the 
 spirit doth come ; and out of the society which Christ is related to. For he 
 is the Saviour of the body ; and if once we leave his hospital, we cannot 
 expect the presence and help of the physician. Nor will he be pilot to them 
 that leave his ship ; nor captain to them that separate from his army. Out 
 of the ark there is nothing but a deluge ; and no place of rest, or safety for 
 his soul." 
 
 In 1645, the collected body of ministers protested solemnly 
 against the toleration of sects : and in their remonstrance they 
 say, 
 
 " We detest and abhor the so-much-endeavoured toleration." 
 
 And in a provincial assembly, they denominate schism a 
 " soul poison," 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. Wl 
 
 111 another provincial meeting they call it : 
 
 " A sword in a madman's hand ; a cup of poison in the hands of a child ; 
 a city of refuge in men's consciences for the devil to fly to." 
 
 In short, this, compressed into one word, was the general senti- 
 ment ; therefore the general language of these men w^as, that 
 
 " Schism is a damnable sin, and whatsoever is contrary to the gospel can 
 have no right, and therefore should have no liberty." 
 
 Again, I have the authority of the learned Bayle for the 
 destructive and ruinous consequences of schism : 
 
 " I do not know (says he) where one could possibly find out a more grie- 
 vous sin than is that of rending the mystical body of Jesus Christ ; of that 
 spouse which he has purchased at the expense of his own blood ; of that 
 mother whom he has begotten in God ; who feeds us with that milk of under- 
 standing, which is devoid of fraud: and conducts us in the path which leads to 
 eternal happiness. What crime can indeed be possibly greater than to rise 
 up against such a parent ; to defame her through the world ; and to make 
 her children, when they can do it, rebel against her ; tear them by thousands 
 from her womb, in order to drag them to eternal flames ; and not only them, 
 but their posterity forever. Where does there exist a crime of high treason 
 against God, if it be not here ? A husband who loves his wife, and is at the 
 satne time assured of her virtue, considers himself more mortally wounded 
 by the calumnies and libels that would make her pass for a prostitute, than 
 he would by any injuries proclaimed and published against himself. Amidst 
 all the crimes into which a subject can fall, there is not any one more grieviouB 
 than that of rebelling against his lawful sovereign, and endeavouring at the 
 same time to excite as many provinces as he can to dethrone him. Now 
 precisely in the same proportion as supernatural interests exceed all temporal 
 mterests, just so does the church of Christ surpass all civil societies. And the 
 consequence, therefore, is, that schism in the church exceeds in the greatness 
 of its criminality, the guilt of all other acts of sedition." 
 
 " Schism, (says Mr. Wix,) does not prevail merely out of the church. It 
 abounds within it. And among those who profess themselves its members, 
 very little attachment to it is to4)e found. It is, moreover, most seriously to 
 be lamented, that very many of those, who boast the warmest attachment to 
 her docirines, have arrogated to themselves the knowledge of the gospel, in 
 a sense, which excludes all others from a due conception of it, whose opin- 
 ions, or feelings, accord not with their own. In consequence of this, we 
 observe much spiritual disorder ; a variety of opinions of faith, and discipline 
 both in the church, and out of the church. And thus the greatest injury is 
 inflicted on the unity of the gospel of Jesus Christ." 
 
 Such, too, is the language of many other writers of the 
 establishment. 
 
 " The establishment, (said one of its most eloquent prelates) is a tree, that 
 \a shivering to pieces with wedges made out of itself." 
 
 Dr. Daubeney, a Protestant divine, speaking of the Methodists, 
 
 says, 
 
 " They are a set of ignorant, self-sufl3cient enthusiasts, industriously push- 
 mg themselves into every parish, creeping into houses, and leading captive 
 those silly persons who are weak enough to be led by them. They are, 
 many of them, of so low a description, as to be obliged to substitute their 
 marks for their names." 
 
 " In this country (observes M. Stykes) vast sums of money are gained by 
 schism ; and prodigious collections are annually made for the support of its 
 r^ nisters. Inferior persons, assuming the situation of teachery, are leaders 
 
292 THE WANT OF UlNITY OF 
 
 of the multitude — Thus in the worship of calves, (1 Kings, jji, 33) thepriesta 
 were made of th 3 lowest of the people. It would now seem, havmg preach- 
 ers of all sorts, as if we had Moses' wish ; and all the people were propheta 
 —(Num. xi, 28.) 
 
 Dr. Daubeney informs us, that there was a seminary in Bath 
 
 " In which boys are trained for preaching ; and at about twelve or thirteen 
 years of age, when considered qualified for public exhibition, are sent to 
 undertake the services of religion." 
 
 Speaking of the tiny heroes of the pulpit, Dr. Valpy tells us, 
 that one of them, 
 
 " A lad twelve years old, went about the country preaching extempore. 
 He became popular, and was much admired and patronised." 
 
 This accounts, at once, both for the multitude of our preach- 
 ers, and for the confusion which they generate ; — preaching is 
 now a very profitable^ and a very lazy trade. 
 
 " Each pious 'prentice freely may dispense 
 
 Salvation ; licensed now for eighteen pence : 
 
 And should devotion tempt him from his awl. 
 
 He'll get his orders, if he gets his call." — Religio Clerici. 
 
 I could adduce a number of other Protestant authorities, all 
 condemning in the most positive terms the disunion which exists 
 in the Protestant churches. It is unanimously admitted by all, 
 that they have no fixed and common principle to direct them. 
 Mr. Pope set up his private judgment, and would have everj? 
 man worship it as an idol. He contends that all have a right to 
 exercise their private judgment, and to choose what religion they 
 please. According to his principles, that book which is inspired 
 of God, will be made to dictate 160 different religions — the spirit 
 of truth will be changed into the spirit of error. Every wild 
 fanatic will appeal to private interpretation, and internal illumin- 
 ation. The book of God will be produced to support the most 
 abominable blasphemies, and real religion will be utterly 
 destroyed. It was that devastating principle which superinduced 
 the ruin of the Protestant religion in the Protestant churches of 
 Germany and France. It was by such a principle that the 
 Episcopal church of Scotland was pulled down ; and the same 
 principle will effect shortly similar results in Ireland, in regard 
 to the established church, if it meet with the encouragement it 
 has hitherto received. I call upon the bishops of the established 
 church to step into the breach, and to save their church from 
 utter destruction. If they do not oppose this principle — if the 
 Catholics do not step forward and perform their duty in counter- 
 acting such a destructive principle, the bishops and parsons of 
 the established church must soon give way to the low, ignorant, 
 pettifogging, self-sufficient preachers of " the word." This 
 language may appear strange in my mouth : but I should rather 
 Bce the Protestant established church contir lue, than that it should 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES, 293 
 
 be overtarned by such men. Tenets have been faLely imputed 
 to the CathoHcs, wliich they have frequently and pubUcly denied. 
 Our articles of faith have been publicly defined by the church ; 
 and all persons who are willing to inquire, can easily learn what 
 those articles are. 
 
 Mr. Pope has ridiculed the honest man, of whom Bellarmine 
 speaks, and who, when asked what was his belief, replied, that 
 he believed what the church believed. That is my doctrine — 
 I believe what the church believes, and the church believes what 
 1 believe. I have been long looking for the particular opinions 
 which constitute the rule of faith professed by my friend — but 
 he has abstained from any thing of the kind. He could not 
 prove, that any three books of the Old or New Testament are 
 absolutely inspired, unless, indeed, we admit the authority of his 
 internal evidence. According to him, that internal evidence is a 
 meridian sun, which illuminates the sacred volume. If so — it 
 is strange, that though such a powerful light should be in exist- 
 ence, so many should be involved in darkness, and that there 
 should have been millions of Catholics, who, for 1800 years, 
 could never discover this light, which, according to Mr. Pope, 
 shines forth with such resplendent lusture. But it is but an airy 
 phantom — a wandering meteor which leads not to truth, but to 
 doubt and error. It is the production of heated and enthusiastic 
 imaginations. The ancient heretics laid no claim to internal 
 evidence — they denied its existence. They wanted that borrowed 
 light which illumines the Evangelizers of the present day. If 
 this internal evidence be so plain and discernable, as Mr. Pope 
 would have us believe, why was it not claimed by the ancient 
 heretics — why did so many millions remain so unconscious of its 
 existence, and why did it continue so long hidden and obscured, 
 as it were by a cloud, until the noon-day of evangelical reformation 
 had arrived ] How could all this happen, if this light shine forth 
 directing to that city, which is built upon a mountain, and which 
 can be seen by all men ] 
 
 Mr. Pope. — Gentlemen, t have already referred to the epistle 
 to the Romans, to prove the distinction between fundamental 
 and non-fundamental doctrines. I admit the evil of exalting one 
 man above another by saying' " I am of Paul, and I of Apollos," 
 and we charge the church of Rome with saying, " I am of 
 Cephas,'' or Peter, though forbidden by St. Paul. 
 
 " Whereas there is among you envying and contention, are you not carnal 
 and walk according to man ? For while one saith, I indeed am of Paul j and 
 another, I am of Apollos ; are you not men ? What then is Apollos, and 
 what is Paul ? The ministers of Him whom yoj have believed ; an:* iO 
 every one as the Lord hath given." — 1 Cor. iii, 3, 4 5. 
 
 25* 
 
294 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 In proof that Paul, as well as Peter, founded the church of 
 Rome, I referred to the testimony of Irengeus. Mr. Maguire 
 I am authorized to say, has full permission to consult the library 
 of Trinity college, in order to examine my quotations. As to 
 the argument about the Deists, I appeal to men of sense, whethe' 
 that objection has not been answered. The Roman Missal (ir 
 the Rubric de Defectibus, circ. Miss. Occurrentibus,) has .- 
 whole chapter on the accidents which may occur in the celebra 
 tion of the mass. I beg to call your most particular attention 
 to that part of said Rubric. As to the number of sects, I would 
 observe, that the Protestants reject many of them. The church 
 of Rome has done the same. Why are not real Protestants, as 
 well as the church of Rome, entitled to disclaim alliance with 
 those who are in error 1 We have council against council. 
 The council of Ephesus anathematizes any, who should add to 
 the Nicene creed. I ask, is not Pius TV, who has added thereto 
 so many articles, distinctly condemned, as well as all who make 
 use of this creed ? Yet that is the creed adopted by Roman 
 Catholics at this day. 
 
 The second council of Nice assigns, as one reason for 
 worshipping the image of Christ, that he is not sensibly present 
 on earth, but only in his divinity. — Act. 4, p. 305. It also 
 anathematizes all who assert that Christ was not circumscribed 
 as to his human nature. Is not this the church of one age 
 against the church of another 1 
 
 As to the doctrine of intention, " saltem faciendi quod facit 
 ecclesia," — (Trent Cone. Sess. v. can. 11.) I have heard a 
 diiference of opinion expressed — (so much for unity.) At the 
 discussion at Carlow, a Roman Catholic priest, under the juris- 
 diction of Dr. Doyle, asserted that the doctrine of intention was 
 merely a probable opinion among divines. 
 
 The rubric of the Missal says, 
 
 " If any priest should have before him eleven hosts and should intend to 
 consecrate only ten, not determining which ten he intends, in these cases he 
 does not consecrate, because intention is required. It is otherwise, if 
 thinking indeed that there are ten, he should wish however to consecrate all 
 the hosts before him ; for then all will be consecrated, and therefore the priest 
 ought always to have such intention, namely, of consecrating all those which 
 are placed before him for consecration." — Roman Missal, Dublin, Richard 
 Coyne, 1822, Rubric de Defect, p. 53. 
 
 And here permit me to inquire, as transubstantiation depends 
 on the intention of the priest, how is an individual to know 
 whether the priest has the intention? Can he enter into his 
 heart ? In cases where there is no transubstantiation, is there 
 not direct idolatry in worshipping that which, by the acknow- 
 ledgment of the church of Rome, is not God ? and how can any 
 individual, according to such a principle, be sure that he is not 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 295 
 
 guilty of idolatry, the intention of the priest being necessary to 
 transubstantiation 1 The people, therefore, cannot know, even 
 according to their own principles, whether they worship God or 
 not. I shall be told that it is not the fault of the people, for 
 they do not mean to worship that which is not consecrated, but 
 to worship God. So say idolaters — we only worship God through 
 the image. Hence, this mode of arguing would justify idolatry 
 generally. Again ; bear in mind, that this doctrine of intention 
 is not confined to the eucharist ; it runs through the whole sys- 
 tem. Plow v-loes Mr. Maguire know whether Popes and Bish- 
 ops, at ordinations, have always intended to ordain ? How does 
 Mr. Maguire know whether he is a priest or not ? He is not 
 certain that the bishop who ordained him, intended to ordain him. 
 Neither does he know whether he is baptized or not ; for unless 
 the officiating priest had intention, the outward ceremony failed : 
 marriage also according to the church of Rome, is null and void, 
 unless intention accompanies the performance of the ceremony 
 on the part of the priest. See, then, the awful results of this 
 pernicious doctrine ! 
 
 My friend took hold of an expression in an extract from Theo- 
 doret, which I quoted yesterday. I again say, that his argument 
 would fail if he believed in transubstantiation. The change in 
 which he behoved, was a moral change. I admit his language 
 is strong. I shall read to you another passage : — 
 
 " Jacob, (says Orthodoxus,) called the blood of the Saviour the blood of 
 the grape. For, if the Lord be denominated a vine, and if the fruit of the 
 vine be called wine, and if from the side of the Lord fountains of blood 
 and water, circulating through the rest of his 'jody passed to the lower 
 parts ; well and seasonably did the patriarch say, He washed his garments 
 m wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes. As we then call the mystic 
 fruit of the vine after its consecration, the blood of the Lord, so he called the 
 blood of the true vine, the blood of the grape. — Our Saviour indeed, changed 
 the names ; for to his body he gave the name of the symbol, while to the 
 symbol he gave the name of his blood ; and, having called himself a vine, 
 he thence consistently applied the appellation of his blood to the symbol. 
 But the scope of such language is perfectly familiar to those who have been 
 initiated into the mysteries. For our Lord required that they who partake of 
 the divine mysteries, should not regard the nature of the things which they 
 see ; but that in the change of names they should believe that change which 
 is wrought by grace. Inasmuch as he who called his own natural body 
 wheat and bread, and who further bestowed upon himself the appellation of 
 a vine ; he also honoured the visible sympols with the name of his body and 
 
 blood, NOT CHANGING THEIR NATURE, BUT ADDING GRACE TC NATURE."— 
 
 Jjjj^d. Dial, i, oper. vol. iv, p. 17, 18. 
 
 As to Pope Gelasius, it does not much matter whether the 
 work from which I quoted, was written by him or by Gelasius 
 Cyzinicus ; it proves that opposition was made to transubstan- 
 tiation, a doctrine which was growing at that time. 
 
 The council of Chalcedon decreed, that equal honour should 
 
296 THE WANT OF UNITY OP 
 
 be paid to the bishops of Rome and Constantinople. On the 
 contrary, the Pope is now call-ed God's supreme vicar With 
 respect to general councils, Gregory Nazianzen, wr ting to 
 Procopius, says, 
 
 •* To tell you plainly, I am determined to fly all conventions of bishops. 
 For I never yet saw a council that ended happily. Instead of lessening, they 
 inyariably augment this evil." 
 
 Here is the opinion of a man respecting councils, who had 
 himself been present at the second general council. 
 
 The Marquess of Pescara, Panan, who was present at the 
 council of Trent, as the charge d'affairs of the Spanish ambas- 
 sador, used often to say, that 
 
 "//c deserved much credit for being a Christian^ after having been present at 
 tioo elections of Popes, and at one council," — See Literary Life of Don Joaquin 
 Lorenzo De Villanueva, 2d vol. Append. Lo sucecido en el councilio de 
 Trento desde 1561 hasta que se acabo, written by Don Pedro Gonzalez de 
 INIendoza, bishop of Salamanca. 
 
 Fiom the testimony of a Roman Catholic, you may judge of 
 the purity and principles by which the Fathers of the council of 
 Trent were actuated. Mr. Maguire talks of infallibility being 
 calculated to end divisions. The Inquisition itself cannot sup- 
 press the inward feelings of the heart. The church of Rome 
 may succeed in putting down outward dissensions. But such 
 peace is like that of the dogs of Scylla, who howled and barked 
 at each other, and then retreated into the unity of her cavernous 
 womb. 
 
 The church of Rome, even in her boasted uniformity of wor- 
 ship and ordinances is not agreed. For instance, the church of 
 Abyssinia offered about 200 years ago, to adopt the Pope as 
 the supreme head of the church. On that occasion the court of 
 Rome did not require that the Abyssinian ceremonies, which were 
 quite different from those of Rome, should be changed. The 
 Pope received the ambassador from the emperor of Abyssinia ; 
 and the pope's secretary declared, that the said emperor should 
 always be considered as the true son of his holiness. Never- 
 theless, the Abysinians at that time were Eutychians — they cir- 
 cumcised their children ; they observed the Jewish sabbath ; 
 they communicated under two kinds — they did not believe in 
 ihe absolute necessity of baptism, and rejected the seven sacra- 
 ments. — " Francis Alvarez, his description of Ethiopia." 
 
 The Maronites were also united to the church of Rome, 
 because they acknowledged the Pope's supremacy ; still they 
 retained all their own ceremonies, which they performed in their 
 &wn language. — (See the observations subjoined by Rich. Simon, 
 D his French translation of the Italian Jesuit Dandiai's Voyage 
 o Mount Libanus, published in 12mo. at Paris. See also Euseb 
 Renaudot, Historia Patriarch, Alexand. p. 548.) 
 
THE PROTESTANY CHURCHES. 297 
 
 ±< urther ; I charge Mr. Maguire himself, with holding prin- 
 ciples contrary to his own church. First, he says, that Protes- 
 tants are not heretics. I reply, that his church describes all 
 who are out of her pale, as "infidels, heretics, and excommuni- 
 cated persons." Dr. French, a Roman Catholic bishop of 
 Ferns, in his " Doleful Fall of Andrew Sail," says, that the 
 church of England, both priests and people, as well secundum 
 prcesentem as secundum futuram justitiam, are out of the mystical 
 ark of Christ. Dr. O'Reilly, in his catechism, says, that it is 
 necesary for the soul, on pain of damnation, to be obedient to 
 the see of Rome. Does Mr. Maguire, by opposing this doc- 
 trine, exemplify the unity of the system 1 Mr. Maguire has 
 this day contradicted the principle which he laid down before — 
 namely, that it was sufficient for the churches in communion with 
 Rome to agree in essentials, though not in non-essentials : and 
 we are now informed, that there is no such distinction. The 
 church of Rome holds that the scriptures are to be interpreted 
 ** secundum sensum quem tenet ecclesia, et unanimem consen- 
 sum patrum," according to the opinion of the church, and the 
 unanimous consent of the Fathers, in matters of faith and 
 morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine "in 
 rebus fidei et morum ad Christianse doctrinse jedificationewf 
 pertinentibus." 
 
 As to the anathema being annexed to none but to articles c 
 faith, I refer to the 4th session of the council of Trent : 
 
 " It shall be lawful for none to print, or cause to be printed, any books on 
 sacred subjects, without the name of the author, or for the future to sell them, 
 or even to keep them, except they be first examined and approved of by the 
 Ordinary, under pain of an anathema," 
 
 I should like to know, was the matter thus prohibited an arti- 
 cle of faith ? Again, in the 27th canon of the 3d council of La 
 teran, it is said, 
 
 " Therefore, we are resolved to subject to anathema all who shall presum* 
 to receive or shelter in their houses or lands those who are called Puritans, 
 Patrins, or Publicans." 
 
 I should like to know, whether this injunction related to a 
 matter of faith? My friend, in the distinction which he has 
 drawn, has contradicted the assembly of Jerusalem, which Mr. 
 Maguire called the great exemplar of councils. That assembly 
 made no decree on matters offatth, as may be seen by consulting 
 the 15th of Acts. Mr. Maguire has referred to some cases of 
 fanaticism. You have doubtless heard of the revelations of 
 Sister Nativite. I shall give you one of her revelations. A 
 message with which, she said, she was charged from heaven to 
 deliver, \*ds, that her sister nuns should leave off wearing linen 
 chemisesi and w«ar flannel ones again, in conformity to the 
 
298 THE WANT OF UNITY OP 
 
 rule of their order ! These revelations are the production of 
 which Dr. Milner said, 
 
 " I cannot speak too highly of the sublimity and affe^jtin^ piety of these 
 revelations in general." — See Revelations de la ScBur INativite. Paris, 1817. 
 
 This is the work of which an English Jesuit of our own day 
 has observed, that if the whole scriptures were lost, all their 
 most valuable moral, doctrinal, and theological science might 
 be recovered here, and with interest ! ! 
 
 Did Mr. Maguire never read of the Feast of the Ass, that 
 was celebrated in several churches and cathedrals in France, in 
 the 15th century] The gross absurdities then practised would 
 exceed belief, were they not recorded by faithful witnesses. A 
 young woman richly dressed, with an infant in her arms, was 
 placed on an ass, and led in great ceremony to the altar, where 
 high mass was performed ; and a hymn, replete with blasphemy, 
 was sung in his praise by the whole congregation : and what is 
 still more remarkable for its folly and profanation, the priest 
 used at the conclusion of the ceremony, as a substitution of the 
 words with which he dismissed the people, to bray three times 
 like an ass, which was answered by three simular brays by all 
 the people. We have heard a good deal about Johanna South- 
 cote. Did Mr. Maguire never hear that the founder of the 
 order of preaching friars, founded also, in 12 C6, an order ot 
 preaching sisters. There is, however, this great distinction 
 between the Protestants and the Roman Catholic church, — Pro- 
 testants reject all such fanatics as Johanna Southcote ; the 
 church of Rome does not. Has Mr. Maguire not heard of St. 
 Teresa de Jesus? There is a collection of sermons written in 
 Spanish, by Francis Fernando De Lara y Villamayor, of the 
 order of our Lady of Mount Carmel : and this book is approved 
 of by the general of his order, and also by the doctors of the 
 university of Alcala, and by his bishop, and by the king of 
 Spain's secretary ; in which there are three sermons in eulogy 
 of the seraphic mother St. Teresa. In one of the discourses 
 ihe preacher informs us, how this blessed woman became the 
 only female doctor that ever was in the Catholic church ; and 
 in order that she might obtain that honour, and as the doctors 
 of Salamanca hesitated about admitting a female to the honour 
 of the doctorate, he relates that her chin was endowed with a 
 long beard, and that the learned men of that university, seeing 
 this phenomenon, no longer hesitated to give her the degree. 
 
 "And thus, (says the preacher,) though by nature she was a woman, yet 
 in prowess and by virtue of^her beard she was a man, and that one of the 
 most bearded man that ever graduated in that seat of learning." 
 
 The learned preacher then goes on to prove from sciipture* 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 299 
 
 that Solomon had St. Teresa in his contemplation in the 31st 
 chapter of Proverbs, " who can find a virtuous vi^oman." 
 
 " Mulierem fortem quis inveniet — quien hallara una muger fuerte, Val- 
 gameDios! tan dificil es hallar una muger fuerte? Si; que no es muger 
 fuerte como querra de la que habla la letra — seno una muger que siendo 
 fuerte, fuesse santa, y buena, Mulierem bonam, leyo el Caldeo — Mulierem 
 omni virtute cumulatam, leyeron otras, una muger con todas las vertudes 
 adornada — Mulierem audacem ad res genendas, leyo Baino una, muger 
 audaz para todas las impresas — Mulierem heroinam Leyeron otros, una mu- 
 ger heroo excellentessimo. Mulierem virilem, leyeron los Setenta: una 
 muger varon en lo varonil mulierem masculam, leyo Vatablo una muger 
 Macho que explica mas que varon porque explica hombre mui barbado. 
 Gssa es la mu^er que pregunta Solomon ? pues mui bien dice, que quien la 
 lallara ? quis mveniet porque muger y con tantas prendas es mui dificil de 
 encontrar, Mulierem fortem quis inveniet." 
 
 The preacher then goes on to ask in an animated style, 
 who is this woman that Solomon has foretold should be found 
 in the church 1 
 
 "I will tell you, (says he,) since I know what answer heaven has given 
 to the question : for on a certain day while the canonization of the Senora 
 doctress was pending, as one of the sisters of our lady of Mount Carmel was 
 wrapt in contemplation of all the praises the church had lavished on this its 
 glorious saint, and as she looked up to heaven she saw a piece of writing fall 
 from the skies at her feet ; and taking it up, she read therein, * Christ has 
 formed for himself a brave woman.' Then the daughter of our lady of Mount 
 Carmel cried out,* O sisters, our holy mother is the stout mother of the church. 
 O lady and doctress, it well becomes you; our Mount Carmel indeed en- 
 joys the riches of possessing a mother of such prowess — the university of 
 Salamanca enjoys the glory of having you as a graduated doctress in its 
 schools ; our own Spain rejoices in having a Spanish woman such a Spanish 
 man in prowess ; and the whole church glories in having a woman with a 
 beard. — Mulierem Virilem, Mulierem Masculam.' " 
 
 You shall now have a specimen of the divinity of St. Anthony. 
 On the text Matt, xi, " Take my yoke upon you, &c," he 
 begins his sermon with this question — "What! are the Apos- 
 tles then oxen ?" And the most of his discourse is to show, 
 that the Apostles were oxen ; for seven reasons, some of which 
 are these, — 
 
 " Because the Apostles were sent by pairs, like oxen. Acts 13, * Sep- 
 arate to me Saul and Barnabas,' &c. 2. Because an ox is a strong and 
 laborious animal ; so St. Paul says, * He laboured more abundantly than 
 they all.' 3. An ox spends little, though it labours much ; and one of the 
 Apostles says, I Tim. 6, 'Having food and raiment, let us therewith be con- 
 tent:' but some prelates m our time are palfreys, that spend much, and labour 
 little. 4. Because an ox has two horns ; and that which answers in the 
 Apostles to these two horns, is doctrine and life. Hence that preacher is 
 an unicorn, who has but one of these ; with this horn preachers ought to 
 blow, that is, with good doctrine in preaching ; which yet often profits little, 
 unless it be accompanied with the other horn, that is, good life. Another 
 reason is, because there is nothing in an ox unprofitable; so neither in the 
 life of the Apostles.— Of the hide of the one, shoes are made, and from the 
 conversation of the Apostles, an example is taken, which fortifies the affec- 
 tions, as a shoe does the feet : Cant. 7, * How beautiful are thy goings in 
 wioe^.' "— Ccrni. ^. de A post p. 428 
 
300 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 In the concluding passage are expressions, which I canno* 
 read. 
 
 My friend knows something of the Breviary of his church. 
 It contains some most extravagant narratives, For instance, 
 we read of St. Cecilia, a martyr, that when the axe was em- 
 ployed, the executioner in vain endeavoured to sever the deli- 
 cate neck of his victim ; which, being but half divided, allowed 
 her to live for three days, at the end of which she died ! 
 
 Again — His holiness travelling to Corinth, and being in want 
 of a safe horse, borrowed one which the lady of a certain noble- 
 man used to ride. The animal carried the Pope with the great- 
 est gentleness, and when the journey was finished, was sent 
 back to his mistress : but in vain did the lady attempt to enjoy 
 the wonted services of her favourite steed. The horse had 
 become unmanageable, and gave the lady many an indecorous 
 fall, " as if (says the Breviary,) feeling indignant at having to 
 carry a woman, since the vicar of Christ had been on his back." 
 The horse was in consequence presented to the Pope, worthy 
 only of such a rider. Brev. Rom. die 27 Maii. 
 
 This, gentlemen, is the Breviary of the Roman Catholic 
 church, compiled in obedience to a decree of the council of 
 Trent. Pope Pius V, having ordered a number of learned and 
 able men to prepare it, sanctioned it by his bull quod a nobis, 
 July 1566, and commanded the clergy of the Roman Catholic 
 church all over the world to make use of it. I could also read 
 an account of a strange composition, called the Eternal Gospel, 
 ** EvangeHum iEternum ;" but time does not permit. 
 
 In the conclusion of this important discussion, I beg to remind 
 my friend about the passage from Sir Edwin Sandys, and the 
 application of the term tegevg in the New Testament. A gen- 
 ileman seemed to insinuate, that I received assistance in this 
 meeting — I can truly deny the charge. Can I say the same for 
 my opponent 1 He on the first day was not able to take notes, 
 but notes were taken for him. Hear me, gentlemen ; I hold in 
 my hand the document. Thereon is written, 
 
 7th. As to the the Editions of the Scriptures. What Bible am I to take 
 as authentic ? 
 
 Obs. — How this acts powerfully in proof of the necessity of a lining ex- 
 positor to check all typographical errors as well as others. 
 
 9th. As to the Salt of the earth — denies the chemistry — immaterial. 
 
 10th. The Lord is the one shepherd. 
 
 Obs. — On this what a disjointed fold — and — Obs. — The phrase is, One 
 fold, and one Shepherd. 
 
 " Litera Scripta manet." When I was going away, I hap- 
 pened to find this document left on the table, and put it amongst 
 my papers, and afterwards discovered that it contained the hinta 
 which I have noticed. Will my opponent say, that he has re 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 801 
 
 ceived no assistance in this very room, when a gentleman, who 
 shall be here nameless, furnished such suggestions to him. His 
 remark about the salt was, perhaps, the strongest point which he 
 made, and this presents itself in the notes before us. 
 
 He says he quoted a passage, by which my ignorance of 
 scripture was exposed. Pardon me for here remarking that I 
 nave read at least the Douay Testament with some attention, 
 for the purpose of making a comparison between it and the 
 authorized version. The passage to which Mr. Maguire has 
 • refered is — 
 
 "No man knoweth whether he be worthy of love or hatred." Eoclesi- 
 astes, ix, 1. 
 
 The Protestant version reads, 
 
 " No man knoweth either hate or love." 
 
 I asK any man to compare this Douay translation with the 
 Protestant version, and he will discover the difference to be so 
 great, as considerably to change the sense. Let both be com- 
 pared with the original, and I will venture to say that the Pro- 
 testant version is correct. 
 
 Mr. Maguire called upon Mr. Pope to read the rest of the 
 passage. 
 
 Mr. Pope observed, I cannot occupy my time in doing so. 
 
 We are drawing to the termination of the discussion. T have 
 brought forward fair and undeniable facts, showing that the 
 church of Rome is often opposed to the church of Rome, doctor 
 against doctor, Pope against Pope, in proof that the unity, boas- 
 ted of, does not exist, and that the church of Rome is not infal- 
 ible. If, as I have proved, the church of Rome contradicts 
 herself, inasmuch as two contradictions cannot be true — the 
 church of Rome cannot be infalUble. Her infallibility there- 
 fore goes to the ground, and all the superstructure raised upon 
 it. Nor is this all. This pretension to infallibility is the mill- 
 stone about her neck, which, though, " she sit as a queen upon 
 the waters," will sink her into the abyss. Her doctrine must 
 be brought to the test of revelation, and the right of private 
 judgment must be recognized. My friend has himself departed 
 from the system of the church of Rome, and has brought her 
 principles to the bar of private judgment, and thereby given a 
 practical proof of the unity which exists in the church of Rome. 
 
 I received yesterday evening a letter from the Rev. Prince 
 Crawford, Curate of St. Mary's, Donnybrook ; permit me to 
 read it : 
 
 "Dear Sir.— Having read in the public papers a report of the controversy 
 at present pending between you and Mr M aguire, in which he in a most 
 
 26 
 
302 THE WANT OF UNITY OF 
 
 decided mtnner denies that he uttered any thing at the Carrick meeting 
 which could be considered as a challenge, I beg to stale that through acci- 
 dental circumstances I met the gentleman who reported the proceedings of 
 that meeting, that he expressed considerable surprise at IVlr. Maguire's denial, 
 and in the most unequivocal manner, declared, that after the meeting wag 
 over, he (the reporter) retired to the hotel, for the purpose of arranging his 
 notes ; that while so engaged, Mr. Maguire entered the room, when the 
 reporter observed to him, that he had now brought Mr. Pope on his back, as 
 he had given a direct challenge to him, and that a meeting was unavoidable. 
 That then the reporter read his notes as they have appeared in print, when 
 Mr. Maguire acknowledged them to be a faithful statement of his words, and 
 added that what he had said he would stand to, and that though all the sons 
 of Adam were congregateii against him, he would not fear them. The re- 
 porter's name is -. And as I am an advocate for truth, you have every 
 
 permission to use this document as you may think proper. 
 
 I remain, dear Sir, your's very faithfully 
 •* Privce Crawford, Curate of St Mary's Donnybrook." 
 
 My correspondent mentions the name of the reporter. I feel 
 it unnecessary to give it on this public occasion. My friends, 
 you can determine whether a system, which has recourse to such 
 expedients to support itself, can be from God. And here I beg 
 leave to notice an assertion of Mr. Eneas McDonnell, made to 
 two gentlemen, whose names can be given — "that at Ballinas- 
 loe, after a policeman had run his bayonet into M'DonnelPs leg, 
 I cheered him to go on." The whole is false. I did not stir 
 from my place, and would willingly have prevented, as far as 
 my ability might have enabled me, the police from doing an 
 injury to any Roman Catholic, if such had been intended. In 
 reference to Cavan, you have read in the public prints the 
 various contradictions of statements put forward by ecclesiastics 
 of the church of Rome. Now I ask you as honest men, can 
 that system have proceeded from the God of truth, which has 
 recourse to such manoeuvring, and adopts principles of action 
 so contradictory to the tenor of the holy writ 1 
 
 Mr. Maguire. — I imagined after Mr. Pope had apologized 
 for the intolerable language which he made use of yesterday — I 
 thought that after apologizing in the presence of that God whose 
 name he so often invokes, he would not have indulged in similar 
 irascibility, and that we should not have had from him another 
 display of the spleen. I appeal to the meeting, to say whether 
 I have not conducted myself with good temper towards Mr. 
 Pope during this discussion — I appeal to the meeting, if I have 
 betrayed the same irascibility towards him. Mr. Pope brought 
 forward a document to prove that I had received assistance 
 durir>g this discussion, and that suggestions were handed to me 
 by a gentleman ^\hom it was unnecessary for him to name. A 
 single observation will set you right on the subject. I neglected 
 f^ the first day of this discussion to take notes- I thought my 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 303 
 
 memory would preserve the heads of the arguments advanced. 
 Some notes were taken for me by Mr. O'Connell — but I declare 
 solemnly that I never saw a line or syllable of the document 
 now produced by Mr. Pope. I never got a hint about the 
 argument on the salt of the earth. Though I do not imagine 
 myself a great scholar, I do not think there are many at this 
 meeting who knew more of that particular point than I did 
 myself. Mr. Pope has acknowledged that it was one of the 
 best hits which I made against him. It was he himself who 
 introduced the subject. I am sorry that Mr. Pope will not allow 
 this meeting to pass over with the regularity which distinguished 
 it from the commencement, but that a drop of the poisoned 
 chalice must be infused into our good humour. With regard 
 to the reporter of the meeting at Carrick-on-Shannon, I repeat 
 what I have already publicly stated in the newspapers, and I am 
 satisfied to abide the result, that I never authorized the report in 
 question, and that I had no communication with the person who 
 reported the proceedings of that meeting. I knew when I made 
 this statement at the commencement of this discussion, that 
 there were many persons in Carrick-on-Shannon, who would be 
 glad to detect me in stating what was not the fact. I now 
 appeal, with confidence, to the Protestants who were present at 
 the meeting in Carrick-on-Shannon, whether my statement be 
 not correct. The fact is, that save during that meeting, I have 
 never seen the reporter, except when coming to Dublin on the 
 outside of the Longford coach. And I here declare that, in the 
 presence of four Protestants the challenge of Mr. Pope was put 
 into my hands. I now return to the subject of our discussion ; 
 1 repeatedly called upon Mr. Pope to show from scripture a 
 distinction between essentials and non-essentials. I have already 
 proved to you, that in the passage quoted from St. Paul, there 
 was no difference made between doctrine and discipline, but 
 that the disputes amongst the people relative to the superiority 
 of their preachers, formed a breach of charity which the Apostle 
 would not tolerate. Mr. Pope says that Peter denied Christ, 
 and upon this fact he argues tL d Peter could not be infallible ; 
 but he makes no distinction between the commission of sin, and 
 a breach of divine faith. Christ says to Peter — 
 
 " Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift 
 you as wheat. But 1 have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not ; and thou 
 being once converted, confirm thy brethren." 
 
 That is when converted from the sin which he had committed, 
 he was to confirm his brethren. Here our Saviour tells us that 
 the faith of Peter should not fail. Now, either Peter's faith 
 failed, or it did not — if it failed, we must suppose that the prayer 
 of our Saviour to his heavenly Father was inefficacious. My 
 
304 THE WANT OF UNITY OP 
 
 friend has reminded me of Theodoret. I re-assert, that in the 
 quotation* read by Mr. Pope from Theodoret, the word '* vene- 
 rate" is substituted for the word " adore" — what is the fact 1 
 Theodoret wrote four books against the Eutychians, who denied • 
 the reaUty of the human nature in Christ, in which he introduces 
 two persons under the names of Orthodoxus and Erranistes, 
 who mutually discuss the subject — the first is the Catholic 
 believer — the second the Eutychian advocate. In the first 
 dialogue the reality of Christ's presence in the Eucharist, other- 
 wise the doctrine of transubstantiation, had been estabhshed ; 
 but in the second the subject is resumed, and the change of the 
 bread and wine distinctly pointed out — the first question is put 
 by Orthodoxus. He asks Erranistes : — 
 
 Orthodox. — " Tell me now ; the mystical symbols which are offered to 
 God by the priests of what are they the symbols ?" 
 
 Erranistes. — "Of the body and blood of the Lord." 
 
 Or.—" Of his true body or not?" 
 
 Err.— "Of his true body." 
 
 Or. — " Very well ; for every image must have its original." 
 
 Err. — *' I am happy you have mentioned the divine mysteries : tell me, 
 therefore, what you do call the gift that is offered before the Priest's invo- 
 cation ?" 
 
 Or. — " This must not be said openly, for some may be present who are not 
 initiated." 
 
 Err. — " Answer then in hidden terms." 
 
 Or. — " We call it an aliment of certain grains." 
 
 Err. — " And how do you call the other symbols ?" 
 
 Or. — " We give it a name that denotes a certain beverage." 
 
 Err. — "And after the consecration what are they called ?" 
 
 Or.—" The body of Christ, and the blood of Christ." 
 
 Err. — " fiera 6eye rov aytaofiov. 
 
 Or. — " (rco/*a •)(^piaTov^ xai aifia ^piarov. 
 
 Err. — " And you believe that you partake of the body and blood of Christ !^* 
 
 Or.—" So I believe." 
 
 Err. — " As the symbols then of the body and blood of Christ were different 
 before the consecration of the Priest, and after that consecration are changed, 
 in the same manner we (Eutychians) say the body of Christ after his ascen- 
 sion was changed into the divine essence." 
 
 Or. — " Thou art taken in thine own net ; for afl;er the consecration tht 
 mystical symbols lose not their proper nature ; they remain in the former 
 substance, figure, and appearance, (or as some translate it, in the shape and 
 form of the former substance,) to be sejn and understood to be what they 
 have been made ; this they are believed to be ; and as such they are adored." 
 
 Thus Theodoret turned the comparison of Eutyches (who be- 
 lieved in transubstantiation) against himself— viz ; that as the 
 elements of bread and wine remained after consecration so as 
 to be seen and felt — that is, as far as the senses were con- 
 cerned ; so Christ's humanity did remain after its hypostatical 
 union with his divinity. 
 
 * Mr. Pope begs to say, with Mr. Maguire's concurrence, that he gave the passagi 
 from Theodoret, as he found it translated in Faber's ♦ Difficulties of Romanism."- 
 Lond. 18S0, p. 141. 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. S05 
 
 With resjiecl to the council of Ephesus having decreed, that 
 nothing should be added to what had been determined upon by 
 the council of Nice, I agree that it did so. But will it be said, 
 that when other articles, besides those noticed in the council of 
 Nice, happened to be denied by heretics, that such articles 
 should not be determined and explained by other and succeed- 
 ing councils] According to the same line of argument, as the 
 ^ord consubstantial was not mentioned at the council of Jeru- 
 salem, the Arians might have argued, that it should not be 
 'ntroduced at the council of Nice. The council of Ephesus 
 only meant that nothing was to be added to what had been com- 
 manded by our Saviour, and handed down to us by the Apostles. 
 Mr. Pope says, it would be direct idolatry in the Catholics to 
 adore the host, as it may happen not to be consecrated. I will 
 read to you the opinion of no less a man than the celebrated 
 Protestant divine. Dr. Thorndyke, on the subject : 
 
 " Will any Papist acknowledge that he honours the elements of the Eu- 
 charist for God ? Will common sense charge him with honouring that in 
 
 the sacrament which he does not believe to be there ? Those who say 
 
 that Papists, by worshipping the host, are guilty of idolatry, only lead Pro- 
 testants by the nosf?. 
 
 But when the ancient idolaters prayed to Baal and their idols, 
 {simulacra^ dumb things, as they are called in holy writ) prove 
 to me that they only intended to worship God, and not the idols 
 themselves, when they offered up adoration to them, and I shal 
 give up the argument. Let Mr. Pope show, if he can, by propei 
 documents, that I have contradicted Catholic doctrine, and let 
 him not stand up here to attack that which he does not under- 
 stand. I could quote thirty Protestant writers to disprove the 
 charge of idolatry against the Roman Catholic church, showing, 
 that even if the elements of the sacrament do not undergo a 
 transubstantiation. Catholics are not guilty of idolatry, as their 
 worship is directed to Christ, into whose body and blood they 
 believe the elements have been transubstantiated. I have here 
 the dialogue of Theodoret, and I shall repeat his words — 
 
 Orthodox. — " Tell me of what are the mystical symbols offered to God 
 by the Priest?" 
 Erranistes. — " Of the body and blood of the Lord." 
 Or.—" Of his true body or not ?" 
 Err.— « Of his true body." 
 
 Or. — " Very well ; for every image must have its original." 
 Err. — " And after the consecration what are they called ?" 
 Or.—" The body of Christ, and the blood of Christ" 
 
 Again, he asserts that I said, that the Catholics are agreed 
 only in essentials, and that I confined my statement to that. I 
 deny the assertion — I publicly said, that even in discipline they 
 are not allowed to disagree, for the smaller the cause of dispute 
 the greater would be the scandal, because the less justifiable. 
 
 26* 
 
306 THE WANT OF UNITY CF 
 
 Mr. Pope hay quoted Dr. Milner. When he can produce a 
 passage from the great Dr. Milner opposed to any point of 
 CathoUc doctrine, he will be an extraordinary man indeed. He 
 also gave us a quotation from a second Blanco White. I appeal 
 to this meeting whether it be fair to produce those men as wit- 
 nesses against the Catholic church, who have apostatized from 
 her communion, and who, in order to justify their apostasy, 
 endeavour to blacken the church which they have deserted, in 
 every possible way — men who endeavour to exhibit her as the 
 scarlet lady of the seven hills, and her visible head as anti-christ? 
 By-the-bye, the latter elegant phrases are not so much in vogue 
 at the present day, nor so frequently employed against the 
 Catholic church as they were in the days of the reformers. It 
 is wonderful to see how people will retrace their steps. In the 
 early English Protestant translations of the Bible, congregation 
 was used for the word church, and elder for bishop. But when 
 the Protestants got possession of the tithes and green acres, 
 church and bishop were restored in the Bible. Is it not very 
 foolish, to say the least of it, for Mr. Pope to go over all the 
 antiquated stories which he is enabled to collect from the 
 pamphlets of such men as Gideon Ousley, and to bring forward 
 such new-lights as authopities against the Catholic church 1 I 
 could have quoted a passage from the Rev. Sydney Smith, 
 worth all the arguments which he could produce, relative to the 
 persecutions which the Catholics suffered from the early re- 
 formers ; but I have not, throughout this discussion, made any 
 appeal to the feelings of my Catholic auditors, and I shall not 
 do so now. 
 
 Mr. Pope talked of St. Teresa, and related some wonderful 
 stories about her long beard. I suppose he would have us con- 
 clude, that because St. Teresa was long bearded, the Catholic 
 rehgion cannot be true. I deny the authority which he has 
 quoted. I refer him to the hfe of St. Teresa, as given in the 
 Lives of the Saints, by Alban Butler — he will not find recorded 
 there the ridiculous stories which he has retailed to us. He 
 acknowledges that he did not know that there was such a text 
 in the Douay Bible as ** No man knoweth whether he be worthy 
 of love or hatred." Did he not tell us that he had carefully 
 compared the two translations, and did he not describe the Vul- 
 gate as scaturientem erroribus ? 
 
 He now acknowledges his ignorance of the existence of this 
 text in the Douay Bible. Now the version given of this text in 
 the Douay Bible differs not materially nor substantially from that 
 given of It in the Protestant translation. It is there rendered, 
 
 "Man knoweth not love or hatred by all that is before him." 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 307 
 
 Hear the next verse — 
 
 " But all things are kept uncertain for the time to coJne, because all things 
 equally happen to the just and to the wicked, to the good and to the evil, to 
 the clean and to the unclean," &c. 
 
 There is I contend in these passages, no material differences 
 between the Protestant version and the Douay Bible. Mr. Pope 
 has showed his ignorance of the solemn expression always used 
 by a general council in defining articles of faith, and he con- 
 founds with it the formula of an excommunication. When an 
 article of faith is declared by a general council, it is solemnly 
 decreed, " Si quis dixerit ; if any one shall contradict this 
 anathema sit." But where that formulary is not employed, and 
 the mere excommunication pronounced, it does not regard mat- 
 ters of faith. Had Mr. Pope consulted Delahogue, with whose 
 work he pretends to be so intimately acquainted, he would find 
 the phrase, si quis dixerit^ is never employed by a general 
 council, but when an article of faith is defined. I should be 
 sorry that any personal differences should exist between me and 
 my friend, Mr. Pope. I declare that I have no feelings towards 
 him, but those of a Christian, a brother, and a gentleman ; and 
 that I shall never hear him spoken of disrespectfully without 
 defending his character. I trust that I shall never entertain any 
 other towards liim. I will say, and it is as far as I can go, that 
 no man ever maintained his opinions more ingeniously, or set 
 up a more plausible defence. It was to me a cause of regret 
 that the interrogatory system had not been adopted in this dis- 
 cussion, as I would then have ha^ an opportunity of taking Mr. 
 Pope's arguments seriatim, point by point, and of unravelling 
 his sophisms. Mr. Pope talked of the Catholic church having 
 fallen into error, and yet he admits that this erroneous church 
 has been suffered to exist for eighteen hundred years. This 
 gentleman really appears to have acquired more confidence 
 after his six or seven years preaching, than the whole Catholic 
 church for eighteen hundred years. It has long been the cus- 
 tom of the reformers, and of those who were gifted with internal 
 illumination, to talk of the scarlet lady, seated upon the seven 
 bills. How could a church have thus subsisted for eighteen 
 centuries, if error had formed its corner stone and foundation ? 
 Have we ever read or heard of any system either in politics, or 
 in religion, lasting for such a period of time, unless it was 
 founded upon the best principles 1 
 
 I may now mention that I put seven queries to Mr. Pope to 
 any one of which he has not returned even the semblance of an 
 answer. I asked him why he believed that all truths are con- 
 tained in the scripture ; I then inquired from him by wha* 
 authority the sign of the cross was employed in baptism 1 I 
 
308 THE WANT OF UNITY OP 
 
 asked him why he used blood — though, indeed, he had endea- 
 voured to draw a distinction between the red gravy which flows 
 from a shoulder of mutton, and the blood — (of the particles of 
 which that gravy is most unquestionably composed.) I confess 
 myself unable to understand his metaphysical distinction. Per- 
 haps he goes upon the maxim that odia sunt restringenda, 1 
 called upon him to show why he did not wash the feet of his 
 neighbours ; Peter, we know, said to Christ : " Lord, thou shalt 
 not wash my feet" — our Saviour replied : " If I wash thee not, 
 thou shalt have no part with me." I called upon Mr. Pope to 
 prove the procession of the Holy Ghost, from the scripture ? I 
 called upon him to show where the term " consuhstantiaV^ was 
 employed in scripture 1 I called upon him to show where the 
 baptism of infants was authorized by scripture. I demanded an 
 answer to these several queries. He has certainly evaded them. 
 Judge, candid and enlightened Protestants, if he has quoted as 
 many texts of scripture as I have. There is not an article of 
 my belief in support of which I did not adduce clear and most 
 manifest texts of scripture. Has Mr. Pope done so '? He has 
 quoted some texts of scripture against me, but not one to esta- 
 blish his own rule of faith. He thought proper to substitute for 
 the word of God, the faUible interpretation of man — to appeal 
 from the direct evidence of scripture, to the obscure and glim- 
 mering light of private judgment. Beware of following such an 
 ignis fatuus^ when the meridian sun is before you — it will lead 
 you into marshes and the habitations of error — it will never 
 conduct you to the fountain of truth. I have quoted the opin- 
 ions of the holy Fathers, and I am bold to say, that I prefer their 
 opinions to the single opinion of Mr. Pope. I have read to you 
 the opinion of St. Augustin, who declares that he " would not 
 believe the four gospels if the authority of the Catholic church 
 did not move him thereto. This recalls to my mind the saying 
 of St. Cyprian, that he has not God for his Father who has not 
 the Church for his mother. This Mr. Pope asserts was applied 
 to Pope Stephen. The work of Cyprian lies here on the table, 
 and I challenge Mr. Pope to read twenty lines of the page in 
 which this passage occurs, and then to maintain nis opinion as 
 before. The passage of St. Cyprian has been misrepresented 
 by my friend. Again, I called upon him to answer the objections 
 of the Socinian, without manifestly contradicting the principles 
 of private judgment. Reason is on the side of the Socinian ; 
 and mysteries being above reason^ he has a better right to exer- 
 cise his private judgment than Mr. Pope, of which be it observed, 
 Mr. Pope cannot claim a monopoly. I would answer the Soci- 
 nian by the authority of a church which has existed for eighteen 
 Jndred years. If he would not beheve in that authority, I, at 
 
THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES. 809 
 
 all events, would not contradict myself, as I would not concede 
 to h*.m the right of private judgment. Not so Mr. Pope. The 
 very fact of his pressmg his interpretation upon the Socinian 
 contradicts the principles of private judgment, as he thus endea- 
 vours to make a monopoly of that which he himself describes as 
 the gift of heaven. 
 
 I defied Mr. Pope to show how a Protestant according to his 
 principles could make an act of faith. He has not done so. I 
 admit the exercise of private judgment in discovering the marks 
 of the true church, but the moment the inquirer has made that 
 discovery, that instant all difficulties are cleared away — all 
 objections vanish — and he is enabled to laugh to scorn tlie 
 quibbles of the Atheist, the Deist, and the unbeliever. Talk 
 of internal evidence, indeed — why you might as well tell the 
 Pagan that 2 and 2 make 6 — he can never make the discovery. 
 I never could make the discovery. Millions upon millions of 
 Christians have lived and died without ever discovering this 
 internal illumination of which Mr. Pope has so confidently 
 spoken. The Catholic church rejects this ignus fatuus, and 
 with equal justice and wisdom she discards and condemns the 
 principle of private judgment. According to that principle, as 
 1 have already shown, it would be impossible to establish by 
 clear and unexceptionable argument, the authority, the integrity^ 
 and the inspiration of the sacred scriptures. 
 
 Here the Discussion ended. When Mr. Maguire had taken his seat Mr. 
 Pope rose and shook him by the hand, which was cordially returned by Mr. 
 Maguire. 
 
 Mr. Pope then stated to the meeting, that he had that moment been in- 
 formed by Admiral Oliver that the notes and suggestions of which he, Mr. 
 Pope, had spoken, though taken down, had not been seen by Mr. Maguire. 
 
 Counsellor Clinch declined to give an opinion touching the word upevs. 
 
 Mr. Pope added to the Report this note; — "I beg to say, in reference to 
 the statement concerning Stephen, that Cyprian strongly reprehends him as 
 * endeavouring to assert the cause of heretics against the church of God,' but 
 applies the words * he has not God,' &c. to the heretics of whom he speaks, 
 and not to him. Cyprian. — Oper. Ep. 74. ad Pompeium. Oxford, 1682. 
 
 "Richard T. P. Pope." 
 
 Mr. Maguire added the following : — " In the description of the council of 
 Basil, the Arians who disturbed the council of Rimini, are mentioned throagh 
 mistake. T. Maguirk." 
 
 THE END. 
 
vCV 
 
 a.e 
 
 Aa*