g < FAITH, HOPE, AND CHARITY. r THE SUBSTANCE A SERMON PREACHED AT THE DEDICATION OF AT BRADFORD, IN THE COUNTY OF YORK, ON WEDNESDAY, JULY 17, 1826. . BY PETER AUGUSTINE BAINES, D D. BtSHOP OF SIGA, &c. LONDON .- PRINTED BY WILLIAM EUSEBIUS ANDREWS, 3, CHAPTERHOUSK-COURT, ST. TAUl'S-. A SERMON. We see now, through a glaa in a dark manner ; but then, face to face. Now 1 know in part ; but then I shall know, oven as I am known. And now there remain faith, hope, charity, these t/iret; but the greatst of these is charity. 1 Cor. xiii. 12, 13- IN these words, my Christian brethren, the apostle speaks of the natural blindness of man respecting religion. He teaches, that whilst we live in this lower world, encompassed with clouds and darkness, we see faintly and obscurely the things that are above ; that the re- velations made to us respecting a future world, are often wholly above our comprehension, and generally full of mystery and difficulty ; that we shall never be able fully to compre- hend them, 'till the veil is drawn aside by death, and we behold God face to face ; in whom, as in a clear mirror, all truth and all knowledge will be found. In the mean time, there remain for our exercise three virtues, faith, hope, and charity, which united, form an epitome of the whole duty of a Christian, each of which is command- ed and necessary ; but the first, the greatest, the most excellent and the most indispensible of which is charity. Faith serves as a remedy for our natural defects, and supplies the place of knowledge. It teaches us to believe, without doubting, doctrines which we cannot comprehend, on the testimony of God, who has taught them. It teaches us to put a restraint on the daring flights of reason, aqd to confine within its proper limits this noblest of our natural gifts ; to employ it in examining the grounds upon which revelation rests, but not in discussing the credibility of any subject which it discovers to have been revealed ; to wait with patience 'till our faculties are enlarged, and the obstacles to our knowledge removed, and in the meantime, with the humility and simplicity of children, to receive, venerate and love the hidden and mysterious truths taught us by the invisible and incomprehensible Deity. Hope teaches us to look forward with humble confidence to future happiness. It is an essential doctrine of revelation, that God really and truly desires the salvation of all man- kind ; that he created all for this end ; that with this view, Jesus Christ, his eternal Son, died upon the cross, and established the Church with all necessary helps to salvation ; that consequently, if we do our best endeavours, we shall be saved, not indeed by our natural strength, for with this alone we can do nothing, but by the help of grace, which God is ever ready and desirous to impart to those who employ the proper means for obtaining it ; that consequently, if any one is lost, his perdition is from himself alone, and that if any one des- pair or cease to hope, it must either be, that he refuses to do his best, or that he violates the doctrines of faith, and accuses God of injustice. Hope gives peace to the mind, not by im- parting a certainty of future happiness, which even the apostle himself declares he did not possess, but by inspiring a firm yet humble confidence in the promises, the mercy, and the merits of Christ. But what is Charity, that first, that greatest, that most essential of all the Christian vir- tues ? Is it synonymous with benevolence to the poor ? Does it consist merely in relieving the distressed, comforting the sorrowful, clothing the naked, and similar works of brotherly kindness ? No, for St. Paal says, " If I dutribute my goods to the poor, and give my body to thejlames, and have not charity, it proftteth me nothing." (1 Cor. xiii. 3.) Charity, then, is something more than benevolence, What is it f It is a virtue which regards God as well as man. It would be a partial and imperfect virtue, indeed, if it excluded God, the most perfect, the most amiable, the only adorable being, the first of benefactors, the best of friends, the most tender and loving of parents. It teaches us to love God above all things, to prefer his law and will before every consideration, to make them the rule, guide and criterion of oar thoughts, our words, and our conduct. It prepares us at any moment to sacrifice whatever we ralue most in life, rather than violate the allegiance we owe to our sovereign Lord. It teaches us to worship him in the manner he requires, and consequently to follow the reli- gion which we sincerely believe to have been established by Him. For should any man ay to God," I love thee, O God, but I will not worship thee in the manner which thouhast commanded, but in a manner which I consider as good or better," would he not offer an affront to God ? Would he not be considered as a rebel against the Divine majesty ? Would not bis lelfiih homage be rejected with disdain ? And here, my brethren, it follows, as an immediate consequence, that human governments stacK Annex 5 ' 3 33* 6ught not to interfere between God and his creatures, and compel, by pains and penalties a form of worship which the conscience of mau does not approve. Not that man is always justified who follows his conscience. That conscience may be, and often is, wilfully perver- ted, and, in this case, it becomes a perverse and deceitful guide. But, though man is 'not always justified in following his conscience, he can never be justified in acting against it ; and as God alone knows the secrets of the human heart, it is not for man to force his own conviction upon others, and compel them to follow his conscience instead of their own. Surely, if liberty is ever valuable, ever sacred, ever an inalienable right, it is in the inter- course of man with God, who requires not the officious aid of tyrants to render to every one according to his works; who can well distinguish the hypocrite from the sincere adorer ; who alone can determine how far ignorance may excuse error, or sincerity supply the place of truth. Hence it follows that all those civil enactments which compel the conscience in its quiet and simple intercourse with God, by whomsoever or against whomsoever directed, are equally repugnant to l|ie law of nature and to the virtue of Christian charity. This sacred virtue teaches us, in the next place, to love every neighbour as ourselves, in thought, in word and in deed. It forbids us to think unkindly, or to judge rashly of any human being ; it commands us to put the best construction on his conduct, to excuse it when we can, and palliate it when it will not admit of excuse, and this, even though our judgments be confined to the secrets of our own breasts. Still more does it require that our words be regulated by the same principles ; that nothing escape our lips, which can injure our neighbour's reputation, or disturb his peace of mind ; that when occasion offers, we undertake his defence, excuse his defects, extenuate his er- rors, and proclaim his merits. It teaches us to assist him in his distress, comfort him in his sorrows, advise him in his doubts, correct his errors, and as far as lies in our power, promote all his temporal and spiritual interests. And here, my Christian brethren, I cannot refrain from offering a few remarks, upon what is usually called proselytism. This word is become odious, and all men seem eager to disclaim its import, as if it were a crime. Yet what is meant by proselytism ? If it means converting others to the true religion, what were the apostles themselves but the makers- of proselytes ? What did Jesus Christ give them in charge to do when he bad them " go and teach all nations,? (Matt, xxviii. 19.) but every where to make proselytes ? For what were the apostles persecuted, put to death, and crowned with the glory of martyrdom, but for making proselytes? What successor of the apostles would do his duty, if he did not labour, like them, to make proselytes? What Christian could lay claim to the rewards of charity, who convinced of the truth of his religion, and of the inestimable blessings it im- parts, refused or neglected to make others partakers of it; concealed his treasure from the objects of distress, and covered " under a bushel," the light which was wanted to guide the steps of his benighted fellow-traveller? But, if, by proselytism is meant the seducing of men from truth to error, or what we be- lieve to be such ; if it imply the use of any means that are unfair, unhandsome, dishonour- able, or uncharitable; of violence, bribery, false arguments, or any other means whatsoever, than such as are dictated by the strictest truth and animated by pure benevolence, then, in- deed, is proselytism as odious as it i* unchristian : then, far be its practice from every Ca- tholic and from every Christian. Be it hated and detested by every lover of honesty, of truth and of charity. Such is that virtue of charity which the apostle declares to be the first, the best, the most essential of Christian virtues. I rejoice, my Christian brethren, that it is so ; foritis'tlw one respecting which we are all happily agreed. However we may differ on other pointe, on this there is no difference amongst us. Would to God the agreement between us was as ^ perfect on all points, which the apostle pronounces necessary for our future welfare; bit as differences do exist, I am glad that they regard the less, rather than the greater vir- ' tue. I am plad that the virtue which makes mun most like to God, without which all other virtues can be of no avail, with which every necessary virtue may be hoped for, should be common, my Christian brethren of all religious persuasions, to you, to me, and to us all. It is not, I grant, a perfect union, but can that union be deemed unimportant which is ce- mented by the ties of love, even such a love as he who died for kve brought from heaven, and bequeathed as the greatest of blessings to man? Charity, then, is an universal virtue. It admits of no exception. It extends to God and to our fellow-creatures of every country, of every colour, of every disposition, of every opinion, of every sect. The man who should exclude from his universal charity one single child of Adam, be hii countJy, hi conduct, his religion whatever it may, traitresses this tkuf iht diving commands, and " becomes guilty of M." (Jaraei, it. x.) With wen ( blood and the workers of iniquity will be his portion. But some of you may object that St. John, .the apostle of Charity, himself admits an ex- ception, when he tells us that if a man conic to us, who brings with him certain errors of doctrine, we are ndt " to receive him into our houses, nor say to him, God speed you ; for he that saith unto him God speed you, communicateth with his wicked works" (2 John, i. 10, 11.) I acknowledge that such are the words of the apostle, and that the passage is liable to misconstruction ; and therefore, in many of the Catholic translations of the Scripture, a note is added, informing the reader, that the intention of St. John is merely to caution the faith- ful against the danger which may arise from a familiarity with those who have prevaricated from the true faith, and become the teachers of false doctrine ; but that he does not mean to restrain the limits of fraternal chnrity, which requires us to wish well and pray for all, even our enemies. Indeed every one may perceive that cases may occur, in which charity re- quires us to discountenance the teachers of error, and the seducers of the people. Thus, if in the midst of a united and peaceful flock an innovator should start up, broaching new doctrines, seducing the people from their faith, and causing divisions, it might be a duty of charity to shew our abhorrence of his conduct, by shunning all familiarity with him, and keeping him at a distance. But should even he be in temporal or spiritual distress, the same charity, which before bad us to shun him, now commands us to fly to his aid, and for- getting his errors and his crimes, judge of him mildly, speak of him kindly, and afford him. every temporal and spiritual assistance in our power. This I am taught by the Catholic church, and this I believe to be the undoubted meaning of the apostle. Thus the lovely virtue of charity remains unrestrained by a single exception, and embraces every human being for whom the Redeemer of all shed his sacred blood. But methinks I hear yon reply, " ITiat tome of the doctrines of Catholics are of so absurd tmd pernicious a character, as to stamp their professors at the enemies of God and men." Truly, my Christian brethren, when I consider the misrepresentations of the Catholic reli- gion, which so universally prevail in this country, I am filled with astonishment, and had I not a precedent in the first three centuries of Christianity, I should be at a loss to account for to extraordinary a fact. During those primitive ages, the religion of Christ is admitted by all to have been in its greatest practical purity ; yet we find that at no period wag it ever more calumniated. There is no aburdity, which was not charged upon its doc- trines ; no atrocity, which was not imputed to its morality. The most degrading idola- try, the most unnatural crimes, even murder itself, were asserted to be sanctioned by the holy religion of Christ. In their public assemblies, his sainted followers were ac- cused of offering infants in sacrifice, and feasting upon the flesh and blood of their inno- cent victims! Did not these marvellous calumnies against the primitive Christians stand recorded in the undoubted page of history, I should almost disbelieve my senses, when they testify to me the existence of a similar combination, prevailing so long and so exten- sively against the same religion in this country. Where is the book, from the paltry penny tract to the learned and costly volume ; where the pulpit, from the meeting-house to the cathedral, that has not misrepresented as cruelly, as unjustly, and as unaccountably, the ancient religion of this country ? Oh ! did the Catholic religion even distantly resemble the hideous portraits drawn of it by our adversaries; were its tenets even remotely like those which are ascribed to if, there is no one here who would hate and abhor it more than myself! 1 would fly from it as a pestilence. I would not continue a member of it a sin. gle day. Let us, my brethren, in a few instances, compare the portraits with the originals. I shall not now attempt to demonstrate the Catholic doctrines, hut merely to state them ; my present object being not to convince you that these doctrines are true, but merely that tbej furnish no ground for excluding Catholics from a share in the common charities of Christians. What are the leading doctrines of the Catholic Church ? In the first place, the Catholic Church holds, as the foundation of all religion, that there is but one supreme, self-existent, eternal Deity, infinite in power, in wisdom, in goodness, in every perfection ; by whom all things were made, in whom all that exist " live, move, and have their being." (Acts, xvii. 28.) It teaches that our first duty is, to love God, and adore him alone ; that the worst of treasons and the greatest of crimes is, to give his homage to any creature whatsoever. It teaches that in this one God, there aw three divine persons, perfectly distinct in personality, per- fectly one in nature; that the second person descended fiom heaven, became man, and died upon a cross for the salvation of all mankind : lhat through his blood all may be saved and that 'here is " no other name under heaven given to men, in which any one can" obtain salvation : (Acts, iv. 12.) that all spiritual graces and blessings actually bestowed in this 5 life, or hoped for in the next, must b dented originally from the sufferings and merrts of the divine Redeemer alone. So far, my dissenting brethren, I trust that all or most of-you agree with the Catholic Church. You are, therefore, agreed with her not only in charity, but in the profession of the primary and most essential doctrines of faith. Beyond these primary articles, you are not, I believe, very rigid in exacting agreement from each other. Other points you con- sider as of smaller moment, and allow on them a great latitude of opinions. Allow the same privilege to your Catholic brethren, which you allow to each other. This is just, and this, I think, I have a right to claim at your hands. But you have been told that " Catholics worship images, as did the pagans of old ; and that, like them, they give the glory of the eternal God to the works of men's hands." I know how common these accusations are, and how otherwise respectable are the sources from whence they spring, or I should fear to insult your understandings by supposing that any of you are capable of believing them. For is it possible, that in an age and country, which claims to be so learned and so enlightened, men should be found capable of believing that the ma- jority of the Christian world, the great, the good, the learned of almost every civilized na- tion under heaven, are so ignorant, so debased, so stupid, so wicked as to give divine ho- nours to a lifeless and senseless image ? Is it possible that any of you should persuade yourselves that the most ignorant Catholic here present should be capable of adoring, for instance, the ivory image, which you see upon that altar ? " But why, if the image is not worshipped, is it there ?" Ah ! my Christian brethren, look at that image, and tell me what impression does it make on your minds ? It represents your Redeemer nailed to the cross, and dying for your sins. Can you behold such an object un- moved ? Can you fix upon it a vacant eye ? Can you gaze upon it, and not reflect how great was his goodness, who thus suffered ; how criminal those sins which caused such suf- ferings; how sincere ought to be your sorrow in having participated in the commission of them ? It is to excite such emotions that the image is placed there, and let me ask you, coulil a more appropriate object stand upon the Christian altar, or be placed before the eyes of a Christian assembly, when they meet to pay their worship to their divine Redeemer, when every mind should be impressed, and every heart penetrated with the remembrance of his sufferings, the source of all our happiness and all our hope? Really, my Christian brethren, I blush to think it should be necessary to say that Catho- lics, as well as you, know the folly, and detest, as much as you, the impiety of giving divine honours to a lifeless piece of wood or ivory, however skilfully the sculptor may have fashioned it, or whatever object it may present to the imagination. " But do we not worship and pray to the saints ?" We worship no creature whatever, and therefore not the saints. " But at least we pray to them ?" Ves, my Christian brethren, just as St. Paul prayed to his own converts, or I pray to you. I say to you, and with all sincerity I say it, " pray for me, my brethren ; obtain for me from God, those blessings which I may myself be unable or unworthy to obtain." I say the same to the blessed Mo- ther of Jesus Christ, to St. Peter, St. Paul, St. Augustin, St. Jerom, or any other of those holy persons, whose acknowledged sanctity has procured for them, through the grace and merits of Christ, the friendship of God and the happiness of heaven. Surely there is no- nothing wrong or unreasonable in this. The earthly trials of these holy persons are past, the veil of mortality is removed from their eyes, they behold God face to face, and enjoy without reserve, his friendship and his love. May I not reasonably hope that their prayers will be more efficacious than my own or Chose of my friends ? Under this persuasion, I say to them, as I just now said to you, " holy Mary, holy I'eter, holy Paul, pray for me." What is there in reason or revelation to forbid me to do so ? A child has been deprived by death of a parent, who, through life, offered for him the most fervent supplications, la it likely that the anxiety of a parent for the welfare of a beloved child wholly ceases in death ? should the child think not, and under this persuasion say, " Oh ! my parent, think of me, love me, pray for me still. Forget not in your happy country your exile child." Would this be impiety ? Would this be robbing God of his glory, or Christ of his mediation ? Would this be transferring to creatures, the honours and privileges due to God alone ? Would this justify you in judging harshly, speaking contemptuously, or acting unkindly towards your Catholic brother? I shall then merely add in the words of St. Paul, in conformity with the repeated decisions of the Catholic Church, and in unison with the voice ol every Catholic in the world, " Anathema to the man who worships an image as God, or gives to it divine ho- nours, or believes it to possess any portion of divine power or virtue, or places his trust in it, or prays to it, or believes it to be any thing mere trwn a lifeless, senseless lump of matter. 6 Anathema t (lie man who worships the saints as gods, attributes to them any divine poxver believes them to be any more than mere creatures, wholly dependant upon God for every blessing which they possess themselves or obtain for others ; who prays to them witli any other view than that of obtaining their prayers, and as one creature may lawfully pray to another. Anathema to the nuin who gives the divine honour to any creature, whether in heaven above or in the earth beneath, or who adores as God, any but the one only true liv- ing and eternal God. And, my brethren, 1 will add without hesitation or fear, Anathema to myself, if the doctrine I have here explained to you is not the true and universally received doctrine of the Catholic Church." You have heard " that the Catholic Priesthood usurps the divine power of forgiving sins; that for a sum of money any offender may obtain from the Priest pardon Jor the past, and permission for future crimes ; that by this doctrine morality is relaxed, and the commission of. every enormity encouraged." I blush to mention such accusations, and to suppose that any of you can have harboured, for a moment, such gross, such senseless, such incredible calumnies against the great majority of the Christian world. What is the real Catholic doctrine on this head ? Simply this: Before his ascension into heaven, Christ breathed on his apostles, and said to them, " Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained." (John, xx. 23.) He had before said to the same apostles," Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, it shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose on earth, tt shall be loosed also in heaven:" (Matt, xviii. 18.) and to St. Peter he had said, that he gave to him " the keys of the kingdom of heaven." (Matt. xvi. J9.) Now from these texts we conclude, that Christ gave to his apostles and their successors in the ministry, the com- mission to remit, under certain conditions, the sins of his people. What are these condi- tions? In the first place, sincere sorrow for the offence committed, and a firm determina- tion of mind never to commit it again. Witliout this condition, it is the doctrine of the Catholic Church, universally received as an article of her faith, that neither Priest, nor Bi- shop, nor Pope, nor the whole Church together, has power to forgive any sin whatever ; and that should any Priest, or Bishop, or Pope presume to grant absolution to any sinner, who was not from his heart sorry for his sins, and fully determined not to commit them again, such absolution could have no effect, but to augment the sinner's guilt, and involve iu a participation of it, the rash minister who had presumed to absolve him. And here, my brethren of various persuasions, let me ask what conditions do you require for the sinner's forgiveness ? If he is truly sorry for his sins ; if lie is resolved to commit them no more ; if he is determined to begin a new life, do you not believe that under such circumstances God forgives him his sins ? So far, then, yon agree with the Catholic Church in the conditions for divine forgiveness. But these conditions, though all that most of you require, are not all that are required by the Catholic Church. She requires that the sinner confess his guilt to the minister of religion, in order that the latter may ascertain whether his penitent possesses the requisite dis- positions, and that he may be enabled to prescribe the necessary reparations for the past, and precautions against future transgressions. Unless a sinner is ready to make this full aud undisguised acknowledgment of his offences, however painful, however humbling it niny b, the Catholic Church teaches, that her ministers have no authority to grant an ab- solution ai d that should they presume to grant it, it would be of itself null and void. Nor is even this all. The sinner must, moreover, submit to make such atonement to his offended God, by prayer, by fasting, by works of self-denial, and the like, as may be re- quired of him, and if lie has injured any neighbour in his good name, his property, or his per on, lie must, to the utmost of his ability, resolve to make full and ample satisfaction. Without sncb a resolution, no Catholic Priest in the world could or would consider him- self authorized to give absolution to any penitent, and if he did presume to give it, his re- ligion teaches, as an article of faith, that his absolution could be of no avail in the sight of God, but to add to the guilt both of the giver and the receiver. New, let me ask, is ihis a doctrine which relaxes the Christian morality, which encourages guilt, and facilitates the commission of crime? What, then, must those doctrines be, which admit the sinner to reconciliation, upon the simple condition of repentance and a confession made to God alout ? JJut how can man forgive sins? Who "can forgive sins but God alone ?" I might refer you to the answer which Jesus Christ himself gave to this question, when he cured the man ey:k of the palsy. (Matt. ix. 6.) ask, do not most of you acknowledge that sii: is forgiven in baptism, through the gency of m an ? Now if the pouring of water and the invocation of the adorable Trinity - by the minister of Christ, occasion the forgiveness of sin, (John, iii. 5) why may not the words of absolution pronounced by the same minister, in the name and by the authority of the same adorable Trinity, equally occasion it? In other words, if God can enable his mi- nisters to forgive sins by baptism, why not by penance and absolution ? On this point, in- deed, the Church of England agrees with us, as appears by the directions given in the common prayer-book for the visitation of the sick. And who will limit the divine power, and say that whilst an earthly monarch can grant to a viceroy or a general the exercise of the royal prerogative of mercy, the King of heaven cannot grant the same prerogative to the ministers and rulers of his spiritual kingdom on earth? And on the supposition that he wished to grant it, what plainer, stronger, or les equivocal words could he employ than these, " Whose sins you shall forgive, they are for- iven and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained." (John, xx. 23.) At all events, if any of you, my dissenting brethren, think yourselves at liberty to give some figurative interpretation of your own to these plain words of Scripture, surely you will not refuse to your Catholic brethren the privilege of understanding them, with the great body of Chris- tians in every age, in their literal and obvious sense ? Why should not we be allowed U explain Scripture for ourselves as well as you ? As to the charge of forgiving sins for money, or allowing the commission of Future sitw on any condition whatever, it is a simple calumny. The Catholic Church expressly forbids her Clergy to receive money for absolution from sin, and would condemn as guilty of si- mony any Priest who committed such a crime. Accounts to the contrary, with which the sermons and tracts of this country abound, will always be found to be given without the names of persons or places, and, like other similar charges, are fabricated for purposes best Jtnown to the authors. " But do not Catholics believe that there is a place called Purgatory, and that the Priest can liberate souls from it, upon payment of a sum of money ?" Again, my Christian bre- thren, I oughtjto apologize to you for answering an objection which, though often made in the gross way I have stated it, your own good sense must convince you is an incredible misrepresentation. Can you possibly suppose that the wise, the learned, and the good of so many polished nations, should be capable of upholding a superstition so gross as is here imputed ? Do you really think, that it requires essentially a Protestant intellect to discover that such a power, as is here ascribed to the Priest, is unfounded equally in religion and reason ? A simple explanation of the Catholic doctrine will satisfy you on this head. It is the belief of the Catholic Church, and the same, I presume, is yours, that all sins are not equal in malice and guilt ; that a passing angry feeling is not so great a crime as mur- der, nor an idle word as blasphemy. Hence we believe that God does not punish all sins equally, but " renders to every one according to his works :" (Matt. xvi. 27,) that whilst he punishes the wilful, deliberate and mortal offender with the extremity of severity, eveu with everlasting fire, he inflict.* upon the minor and more venial sinner chastisements less srere, and of limited duration. Is this belief unreasonable ? Let us consult human laws, which claim reason for their basis. The laws of England, for instance, are justly deemed a reasonable code. It is indeed generally thought that these laws are of rather too sangui- nary u character; that they too often inflict the punishment of death. Still even the laws of England do not punish all offences with death. There are in them gradations of punish- ment, corresponding with the gradations of crime. There is banishment for life, for fourteen years, for seven years ; there is imprisonment for different periods of time ; there are fines of various amounts. We should call the law unjust, or the king a tjrant, who punished equally with death the child who had pilfered an apple and the wretch who had murdered his father. Are the Jaws of God alone unjust ? Has he alone the privilege of punishing without discrimination? The Scripture expressly declares, that before the divine tribunal " men sliall give an account of every idle word." (Matt. xii. 36.) Let us, then, make a sup- position. A child arrived at the full use of reason, and knowing that every lie is a sin, to escape punishment, tells an untruth in a matter of trivial moment. There is not a doubt that a sin has been committed. Before the child has time to repent, an accident deprives him of life. What reception shall he meet with at the bar of eternal justice ? Will he be sen- tenced with the paricide to eternal flames? I need not give the answer. Reason revolts at the idea. He must then be punished for a time, and when he has atoned for his fault, be admitted to reconciliation. Such is the belief of the Catholic Church. But if a temporary state of punishment be admitted, prayer for the dead must follow of course; as on the other hand, if heavrn nncl hc-11 nrc hclii-vod to- he the only alternative* ia (tie moment of death, prayer for the dead U vain: for iti heaven relief is not wanted, and, "from hell there is no redemption." Hence, when our friends are taken from us by death* and we have reason to hope (and when will not affection hope?) that tbese offences way not deserve the extremity of eternal punishment, we entreat the divine Goodness to shorten or alleviate their sufferings. Is this unreasonable ? Is this superstitious ? Is this unscriptural ? I am sure it is not uncharitable, and charity is the first of virtues. But let us again make a supposition. An affectionate child has just been deprived by death of a be- loved parent. That parent had not been without his faults : though virtuous, his virtues had not been unaccompanied by imperfections ; he had sinned, but not grieviously. At all events, the afflicted orphan trusts that this was the case. If in such moments, and under such impressions, he pours forth his fervent prayer, "O God, have mercy on the soul of my beloved parent, and if he be doomed to suffer, and those sufferings admit of alleviation, for the sake of Jesus Christ, hear my prayer ; alleviate and shorten his pains." Is he guilty of impiety, superstition, or folly ? Against what precept does he offend? What text of Scripture forbids the act? But what do I say ? The act required no sanction of revela- tion } it was dictated by nature ; the prayer came spontaneously to his lips ; it appears to me it must have come so to your own. Tell me, if it had, would you have thought your- selves bound to repress it? Would you have rebuked the voice of nature, and said, 'Tempt me not, I cannot utter a prayer for my parent; he is already either in hell or in heaven ; it is in vain, it is unlawful, it is criminal to pray for him." I thank God that such ore not the doctrines of the Catholic church ; for I should find it difficult to believe them, and still more painful to practise them. " But the Scripture does not command us to pray for the dead." Neither does it forbid us : why, then, may not the voice of nature, the dictates of reason, and the usages of antiquity be allowed to govern our conduct ? Is nothing lawful but what Scripture expressly com- mands or expressly prescribes ? Then why bury your dead in consecrated ground ? Why read passages from the Scripture, and, strangely enough, pray over their graves for every one but them ? My Christian brethren, when I read the'history of these religious changes, and find that prayer for the dead was not condemned in England, till the rapacious minis- ters of Edward the Sixth had seized upon the rich foundations, which our pious forefathers had established, to obtain the prayers of the living, I cannot persuade myself that reason or Scripture had any thing to do with forbidding such prayers : 1 feel convinced that if reason and Scripture had alone been consulted, you would have felt as litUe scruple as I lo in praying for the souls of our departed friends. At all events, if the Catholic do not think the practice repugnant to Scripture, as he certainly does not, why should you condemn him ? Has not he as much right as you to judge of the meaning of Scripture ? And if his interpretation be fortified by the constant belief of the Catholic church, by the practice of all his ancestors, by the dictates of nature, and the best feelings of the human heart, is he not abundantly justified hi preferring his own firm persuasion to your opinion? With respect to the assertion so often made by the enemies of the Catholic religion, " That, for a sum of money, its ministers claim the power of releasing souls from Purgatory," ' I need not, I am sure, add, that it is another of those strange misrepresentations which, though a thousand times proved to be groundless, is as often repeated. The Catholic Priest claims no authority or jurisdiction over the dead. All he can do is to apply to the mercy of God in their behalf; but, like other men, he must ever remain uncertain respect- ing the efficacy of his prayers. He has, indeed, one advantage peculiar to the Priesthood. He can offer sacrifice; and sacrifice under the new law, as well as under the old, has always been considered the most powerful means of moving God to mercy. Hence, if any one, in addition to his own private prayers, wish to have sacrifice offered for the souls of his departed friends, there is no doubt he must apply to the ministry of the Priests; and if " They who serve the altar are entitled to live by the altar," (1 Cor. ix. 13,) no one, I pre- sume, will deny that the Priest is entitled to a remuneration for the expense he incurs and the labour he performs in complying with the pious wishes of others. Every day he is obliged to pray, without remuneration, for the souls of the departed in general, and on certain days he is obliged to offer, for all, the holy sacrifice, equally, without remuneration ; and there is no Priest charged with the care of souls, who fails to comply with this duty of charity. But if not content with these general prayers and sacrifices, individuals wish for their friends special and peculiar services, surely, he who performs them may, without reproach? receive a remuneration. Do not those who make the above-mentioned charges against the Catholic church, themselves receive fees for the burial service which they perform for the 4cad ; nay wen for the adrainistratioa of baptism and lor preaching the Gospel ? Would ft Catholic be justified in saying, on this account, that, for a sum of money, these clergymen claim a power of remitting sin, and opening to their followers the gates of life ? I fear to exhaust your patience with these explanations, but as you are about to assist at the holy saorifice of the new law, and as there is no subject more misrepresented than this, I must add upon it a few words. The mass, (to use a phrase of the Church of Eng- land), is the communion service of the Catholic church. In it, the bread and wine are so- lemnly consecrated, and when so consecrated, solemnly offered to God in the way of ob- lation or sacrifice, and for the various ends for which, from the beginning of the world, sacrifice has been offered. But what are the consecrated bread and wine ? How often, my Protestant brethren, have not you been told that the doctrine of the Catholic" church, on this head, is the height of absurdity, folly and impiety ? How often have you been told that Catholics, like the Jews of Caphernaum, understand the words of Christ in a gross and carnal sense : that they believe his sacred body to be present in the sacrament, in a crude, natural and mortal state? Now, were such really the doctrine of the Catholic church, there would be some ground for the outcries of her adversaries ; for surely our senses tes- tify clearly enough that, in such a state, the body of Christ is not present. What, then, is the real doctrine of the Catholic church ? She teaches, that by the words of conse- cration, a real change is wrought in the bread and wine, not, indeed, in;external properties, but in internal substance: that now the body and blood of Christ are, in substance, truly tmd really present, though not perceptible to our senses. This is her doctrine. With res- pect to the manner or state, in which Christ is present, she has not decided any thing, ex- cept that, (as our senses testify) he is not present in the gross, natural state of a mortal body, but in some supernatural and ineffable manner suited to the object of his presence, (See Cone. Trident. Sess. xxii. cap. 1 and 2.) Ntnv, my brethren, what is the absurdity or impiety of this doctrine ? Is it absurd to believe that a body may be truly, really and substantially present, though not in its usual natural state ? or that the same body may be present in different states ? I grant that in mere mortal bodies these things are not naturally possible ; but the question is here not of a mere mortal, but of a glorified body, and not of the glorified body of a me re man, but of a man God. May not such a Being be present in more states than one ? '' Consult the Scriptures," and you will find that he has been present in several. Behold him now pre- sent as an infant in the stable, now as a malefactor on the cross ; now, risen from the dead, he assumes the united properties of a spirit and a body. He enters the room when the doors are shut, and is found solid and tangible to the hands of Thomas ; to Mngdalene he appears as a gardener, to two of his disciples as a stranger ; now he eats with them as a mortal body, now he vanishes, and becomes invisible as a pure spirit. (Luke, xxiv. 31.) For every varying purpose he assumes a varied form, and is present, as occasion requires, in a different state. Did he exhaust his powers ? Are there no other states than these, in which he can be present ? If it be his pleasure to perpetuate, in an unbloody manner, the sacrifice of the cross, and become our daily victim, and our daily spiritual food, can he not accom- plish his pleasure ? Will any one dare thus to circumscribe Omnipotence, and say," So far thou canst go, but no farther ? Thou canst not be present, all glorified and immortal as thou art, but I must behold thee ; thou canst not communicate thyself to me, but I must taste thee." He must be an ignorant, as well as a presumptuous man who argues thus. The question, then, is not whether Jesus Christ can, but whether he has performed for us these prodigies. The Catholic Church believes that he has, and, as far as I can judge, for the most powerful reasons. " This is my body, this is my blood," (Matt. xxvi. 26 ; Mark, xiv. 22; Luke, xxii. 19) are the unqualified assertions of three evangelists : the fourth as- serts, " Unless you cat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall have no life in you ; for my ffesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed." (John, vi. 54.) St. Paul repeats the declaration of the three evengelists, " This is my body, this is my blood," (1 Cor. xi. 24,) and concludes from it, that " He who eateth, and drinketh unworthily, eatcth and drlnketh judgment to himself , not discerning the body of the Lord." (Ibid. 29.) The belief of the Catholic Church, spread throughout the world, is unanimous on this head, and has ever been so from the earliest ages. The same is the belief of the various divisions of the Greek Church, separated as she has been from the Catholic Church, for a thousand years; the same is the belief of the remnants of some smaller Oriental sects, which left the communion of the Catholic Church at a still earlier period. If the belief is an error, at what period, by whom, and in what manner, was it introduced ? Was the faith of 'the whole church corrupted before the schisms of Eutychcs and Ncsto- vius? How short, then, was the reign of truth? How early did the Redeemer and 10 tin- promised spirit of truth forsate the Church ! Was the alteration made after the esta- blishment of the Eutychean and Nestorian heresies r 1 Then how came they to adopt a change in union with the Church they had forsaken ? What general infatuation seized mankind, that all should unite, the orthodox and the heterodox, the Catholics and the sectaries, in abjuring the same truth and adopting the same error. And ah ! my brethren, how mysterious, indeed, must the providence of God have been, to suffer the original truth to be banished from the world for a thousand years, and then discover it at last in the six- teenth century to a few Englishmen and Germans ! But I am unintentionally entering into controversy, where explanation is my object. I trust, I have said sufficient on this subject to convince you that the Catholic faith has been grievously misrepresented to you; that jf , Jike the doctrine of the Trinity and the Incarnation, it is mysterious and incomprehensible, it is not on that account to be rejected, much less blasphemed : that whether you believe it or not, you ought to respect it as the sincere and conscientious belief of the great majority of the Christian world ; that neither your belief nor mine alters the mystery which Christ lias established, at which you are about to assist, and to which as the institution of Christ I request your respectful attendance. But why is it performed in an unknown tongue ? and why all this parade of richly-attired priests and attendants at the altar > The former, you have been told, is to keep the people in ignorance, the latter to impose upon the senses. How severe, my brethren, is your treatment of your mother Church ! The reasons why, in the celebration of the mass, the Latin language is used, are simply these : First, the Latin and Greek were the languages most generally used, and almost the only written languages in the principal countries where the Christian religion was first promulgated. In these languages, therefore, the liturgy of the Church was originally composed, nearly in its present form. When several centuries afterwards, the language* of modern Europe began to be formed, the Church did not think proper to alter the languages she has ever used in celebration of the holy sacri- fice. For if, on the one band, these languages, by becoming dead, ceased to be understood by the unlearned, on the other, they became, like a body raised from death, immortal and unchangeable ; and on this account the better adapted for preserving unaltered the awful doctrines and mysteries committed to their care. Would prudence have justified the setting aside the pure, the dignified, the immutable languages of the primitive Church, languages which, though no longer spoken by the unlettered, were still, as they are to this day, the universal languages of the learned in every country, and the adoption in their stead of the numberless barbarous, half-formed and daily changing languages of modern Europe ? Would it have been respectful, would it have been secure, would it have been practicable to commit to these rude and uncertain vehicles the sacred deposit of the faith and hope of Christians ? For the use of the people, translations have been made, and abound in every Catholic country : but at the altar the priest continues to commune with God in the original languages, reciting the more sacred parts of the sacrificial rite in a low voice, which breaks not the awful silence, nor disturb the deep recollections of the sur- rounding adorers. Had the Catholic Church wished to keep the people in ignorance, she would have com- manded the clergy to give instructions and to preach in unknown languages : I should not now have been explaining to you in the plainest English I can command, the doctrines of the Catholic religion; but I should have been exciting your just ridicule by the delivering of a Latin oration. With respect to ceremonies and vestments, they should be viewed with the eye of anti- quity. They are the venerable relics of primitive times, and, though ill adapted to the youthful religions of modern times, well become that hoary religion, which bears the weight of so many ages. The ceremonies employed in the Christian sacrifice, as well as the sacer- dtal vestments, have their model in the book of Leviticus, and, as nearly as the difference of the old and new laws permits, closely resemble those instituted by God himself. The Catholic Church deems them useful. They give a peculiar dignity to the sacred mysteries of religion ; they raise the mind of the beholder to heavenly things by their various and ap- propriate import ; they instruct the ignorant and keep alive attention ; they give the minis- ters of religion a respect for themselves, and for the awful rites in which they officiate : but neither the ceremonies nor the vestments belong to the essence of religion. The Church established them in the first ages. She could, if she deemed it advisable, set them aside jiny day, and the sacrifice would he equally holy, though not equally impressive, if offered by the priest in a plain surplice, or the ordinary costume of the day. I shall detain .you no longer on the explanation of the doctrines and practices of the Ca- 11 Iholic Church. 1 irusl I hnve satisfied you that they are not what they have been usually represented to you, and that they are at least deserving of your respect. Still many of yon will say," Why adhere to them with such pertinacity in a country, where the great majority of the nation has abjured them, and where they are obnoxious to the people, and punishable by the lavs ?" I grant that if man were as justifiable before God, as he is before men, in choos- ing his religion, as he does his house or his coat, the objection would be unanswerable ; for to adhere to the Catholic religion in England, the laws of God permitting us to forsake it, would be folly indeed. But it is the firm conviction of all Catholic?, that however numer- ous may be the religions which men institute or adopt, and however little right one man may have to interfere with another in the choice of his faith, there is only one religion in- stituted by Christ, only one system of doctrines taught by the eternal truth ; only one sheepfold appointed by the one shepherd ; only one society inheriting the powers and pro- mises which the Redeemer of the world received from his Father, and left to his apostles and their successors. Hence, without presuming to decide upon the future acceptance of those, who have lived in ignorance of the truth, aud who, labouring with sincerity and ear- nestness to find it, have failed in their endeavours, the Catholic firmly believes that for him- self, who has been blessed with a knowledge of the truth, who is conscientiously convinced that his religion is the one religion established by Christ, there is no choice left. To him- self he believes that the words of Christ are strictly applicable, " He that shall deny me be- fore men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven:" (Matt. x. 32.) and those of St. Paul, " It is impossible for those, who were once enlightened, have tasted also the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, have moreover tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, and are fallen away, to be renewed again unto penance, crucifying to themselves the Son of God, and making a mockery of him.' (Heb. vi. 4;5, 6.) To state all the reasons which Catholics have for this conviction, would far exceed the limits of a discourse ; to state a few of the principal ones will require little time. WHEN the divine Author of the Christian religion had given all necessary instructions to his apostles, and communicated to them the Holy Spirit, to assist and direct them, he assem- bled them together on Mount Olivet, and thus addressed them : " All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore ( and teach all nations : baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son. and of the Holy Ghost : teaching them to observe all things whatsoever 1 have commanded you : and, behold, 1 am with you all days, even to the consum- mation (f the world." (Matt, xviii. 18, 19, 20.) In another of the Gospels, the same com- mission is given in some what different terms : " Go ye into the whole world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved : but he that bc- lieveth not, shall be condemned." (Mark, xvi. 15, 16.) In your version, my Protestant brethren, the words are " he who believeth not shall be damned." On another occasion, Christ had said to Peter, " Thou art Peter," (which name signifies a rock) " and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it : and I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven,